The Future of Jon Lucroy

[clancyphile]

One comment from the Parra thread drew my attention and got me thinking:

Citing an article from April of this year, Lucroy has the most "stolen" strikes in MLB over the past 5 seasons. It's over 1,000, which Baseball Prospectus equates to 18 wins. Teams are willing to pay a hefty price for 3.6 extra wins per season; particularly, for a player who only costs $4 mil next season. Citing a couple of stats you quickly glanced at off of Lucroy's ESPN profile page isn't an accurate method to assess his value in the trade market. Additionally, the other catchers in baseball who excel at pitch framing have OPS in the 500s. Lucroy's a god send. His return on the open market would be/should be substantial.

 

My thinking is that with a wealth of young talent in the minors (Arcia, Santana, Reed, Phillips, Roache...), maybe the Brewers should view Jon Lucroy and Ryan Braun as their veteran core for the 2017-2021 timeframe. Braun for obvious reasons, but Lucroy may be more valuable on the Brewers roster than as trade-bait.

 

Lucroy's ability to frame pitches may make the young starters in the Brewers system (Cravy, Suter, Wagner, Davies, Hader, Johnson, Kirby, Meideros, etc.) that much better. If that is the case, then it might make more sense to pay Lucroy, and just cycle through younger pitchers - and being open to trading some of the young pitchers as they reach their arby years, so the Brewers could afford to give Lucroy a suitable extension.

 

So here's the question: Should the Brewers keep Lucroy, and pay him appropriately, and surround him and Braun with young players in 2017-2020, or should they trade him?

[JohnBriggs12]

He's having a horrible offensive year. There's no sugar coating it. Now's the time to take advantage of it and extend him for a more reasonable amount.

[NYChez]

After not receiving future catching help from the trades, and also because the Brewers will likely (hopefully) not need to open the checkbook for starting pitchers in upcoming years, I became convinced that Lucroy will be kept around beyond his current deal. Am I correct that his current deal runs through 2017 (including the team option)?

[JohnBriggs12]

After not receiving future catching help from the trades, and also because the Brewers will likely (hopefully) not need to open the checkbook for starting pitchers in upcoming years, I became convinced that Lucroy will be kept around beyond his current deal. Am I correct that his current deal runs through 2017 (including the team option)?

 

He'll be 31 when his contract runs out, and unless he has a major comeback with the bat, I don't see him getting a deal that would break the bank. Will come down to if he wants to stay. Brewers will probably be willing to extend him through 2020 when the timing is right.

[502 to Right]

Is he going by Jon now instead of Jonathan?

[pacopete4]

Let him play out his contract and see where we stand and see if he's still standing. Right now I wouldn't give him a dime extra. He's been bad and he's not really all too durable and only getting older.

[DHonks]

The replies in this thread make me laugh and it's one thing I just don't get with people on here...they often assume that with one bad year a player is done. They assume Lohse simply cannot improve, felt trading for Prince would have been awful since he's washed up and done, Josh Hamilton can't contribute, etc.

 

Seriously, Luc wants to be a lifetime Brewet and we need to pursue it. His offense will be better than this and his defense will likely continue to be strong for many years

[Thundercat32]

clancy,

 

You bring up a good question. I'm reading into it that when the Brewers declined his long-term contract proposal in January that they don't have the intention of keeping him past his arbitration eligible years. It's a reasonable assumption given how they've dealt with past players, like Prince, in this situation. Nonetheless, we're setting that likelihood aside and just looking at should they or shouldn't they?

 

The case for:

 

It shouldn't have to be said, but there's already been a half-dozen responses like this. To those "He's a light-hitting catcher. He's deteriorated & won't be the the same again." folks. Catchers have more value for their defense and game-calling abilities than their offense will ever bring them. That goes for any catcher in the game not named Buster Posey. Also cited this in the other thread, but Lucroy's peripherals and component stats suggest he's been unlucky this year and will rebound next year & beyond. So, let's please stop sounding like a broken record and saying the same, uneducated, things over & over.

 

Now that that's out of the way. The case for keeping Lucory is that you just don't find a catcher like him very often. It could be 40 years before the Brewers have another catcher as impactful on the pitching staff as Lucory has been. He'll be 30 next year, not 35. It also seems that he wants to be here, which is a huge plus for this team. Prince certainly didn't want to be here; regardless of what he told the press. If the Brewers wanted to retain him for when the young core has matured and is ready to compete for a title, Lucroy still projects to be within his arch as an impact catcher (although, he'll be on the downswing of that arch).

 

The case against:

 

You said "a wealth of young talent". I'd tap the brakes a little there. Wealth is a little strong. The Brewers started out the season as the 19th best farm system in baseball, according to Baseball America. An SB Nation affiliate, minorleaguebaseball.com, has the Brewers with only 4 prospects in the top 75 in their midseason adjusted rankings: Arcia (11), Phillips (29), Hader (67), Coulter (73). The Gomez return, coupled with Davies and the 2015 draft class, probably moves us up in the 10-13 range, which is respectable, but not a "Here come the Brewers!" group ala the way people in baseball have been bullish on the Astros or Cubs young core of talent these past few years. The underlying problem with these prospect rankings is the lack of potential front of the rotation pitching depth. The Brewers won the Gomez trade, everyone agrees with that. On the other hand, returning Zack Wheeler would have given the Brewers a strong chance at a front of the rotation starter--which is a MUST have if you're even going to contemplate a serious run at the title. (That said, doesn't appear that Wheeler would of been happy in Milwaukee or really anywhere but New York).

 

You could argue that the lack of pitching depth only bolsters the need for Lucroy in the future. In the quote you highlighted, the ESPN article cited Yasmani Grandal and Mike Zunino who both said they study Lucroy on film to help improve their own pitch framing skills. They both marveled at how he's able to get so low behind the plate and contort his body to earn those extra called strikes. But what do we see with Lucroy this year in the health department? Missed time due to lower back strains. That's not promising. The body only goes in one direction, downhill. So by the time a young crop of starting pitchers take the mound at Miller Park, will Jonathan Lucroy still have the strength left in his lower back to maneuver the way he needs to, in order to be worth those extra 3.6 wins per year behind the plate?

 

That's the million dollar question. The great unknown. Personally, I'd take the approach of trading Lucroy for a Gomez-like return and boost the core of young talent into a group that could truly be called a "wealth of young talent" ala the Cubs and Astros, and then see how that group plays itself out.

 

In reality, it'll come down to what offers are put on the table. Whatever the benchmark is, whether that be something like a Zack Wheeler type + a top 100 prospect level bat (preferably a corner infielder) or a larger pool of players further away from their major league debuts but with more upside, the correct decision will be whether that benchmark is met or not. If it is, I think they should pull the trigger. If they can't get the value they need from dealing Lucroy, then there's nothing wrong with keeping him.

 

All of that said, they convinced the Astros to overpay for Carlos Gomez and his bum hip. They should be able to find a taker for Jonathan Lucroy. There are baseball minds who feel he is, or at least was, on par with Mike Trout in terms of WAR. Also, Ryan Braun needs to go. There's a team out there who will take on his salary, at least the majority of it. The Los Angeles Angels signed Josh Hamilton to a ridiculous contract. They've probably learned their lesson after also putting pen to paper on the Pujols signing. But their cross town rivals don't have any shortage of funds, and they took on Carl Crawford, which would make acquiring Braun look like the second coming of Babe Ruth.

[Thundercat32]

Just to elaborate a bit on the point of having a group of young talent hit the big show without a potential Ace in the mix. See: the Kansas City Royals. That's what happened to them in 2013. They realized their team was now ready to compete, but they looked around for their Ace, and they had nothing but two empty pockets turned inside out. They were forced to severely overpay for James Shields, who they were only able to keep for one season.

 

Contrast that to the Mets, who flipped R.A. Dickey when he was at his height for Noah Syndergaard, Travis D'Arnaud, and 2 other players. That's the type of move I'd like to see the Brewers make with Lucroy. Both teams, the Royals & the Mets, have a young core of talent poised to compete for the next 3-5 years; but I'd rather be the Mets than the Royals.

[Thundercat32]

Is something like this out of the question?

 

The Dodgers are missing a big right-handed bat in their lineup/organization. Their best is Puig, and they've been rumored to be at the end of their rope with him. Howie Kendrick is 32 and declining. Scott Van Slyke is strictly a platoon hitter; at least, that's how they've been using him (although, I think he could be more). Alex Guerrero is young & unproven, but does come with a nice pedigree. Then you have Jose Peraza in AAA, and outside of that no quality right-handed bats in the organization above A ball.

 

If they plan to flip Puig, could you move Braun and have them take on $15 mil of his salary, and come back with a package similar to Yimi Garcia, Grant Holmes (22nd pick in last year's draft, high school RHP valued only below Tyler Kolek among high school righties from that draft), and Cody Bellinger (Dodgers' 9th organizational prospect, 1b hits for average with some pop, great hands, speed and agility for 1b; plus defender)?

 

I don't see a lot of teams willing to take on Braun's contract, outside of LAD. The Yankees might, but don't have the same need. Boston has smartened up and now they're playing small ball with Napoli/Victorino/Sandoval types. Maybe (emphasis on maybe)... Maybe a team like the Blue Jays, Nationals, Orioles, even the Rangers (though, they can't really take on any more salary, but they do have the need for a RHB)...

 

Don't really know if any of that's very realistic. Just trying to do some initial research into what the market would bare for Braun, and who the targets should be.

[paul253]

The Brewers need to decide in the next year what they want to do with him. If they want him to be a lifetime brewer then offer him a contract while his numbers are down. If they don't then figure out when to trade him. None of this waiting til the last second when it's too late to trade him and either too expensive or not worth resigning him and therefore losing him for nothing. This is what I mean when I say they need a long term plan. Look more than a season down the road to see what direction you want to go. Personally I'd be fine giving him another two years at $10-$12 million a year. But decide soon.

[LouisEly]

Rip up his current deal, give him 6/$82M so that he's signed only through age 35, front-load the deal so that in case he regresses or can't catch full-time in the latter years they aren't stuck with an albatross of a contract. He's earned far more than he's been paid the last few years so they owe him something. That's not too much that he can't still be traded.

 

2016 - $17M, 2017 - $15M, 2018 - $15M, 2019 - $13M, 2020 - $12M, 2021 - $10M. I believe league rules are that you cannot reduce a player's salary by more than 20% from one year to the next, so that should fit within the rules. Because it's front-loaded, that's more net present value to Lucroy than a backloaded deal. Molina's getting ~$14M/year so it's in line with market rate.

[MrTPlush]

Rip up his current deal, give him 6/$82M so that he's signed only through age 35, front-load the deal so that in case he regresses or can't catch full-time in the latter years they aren't stuck with an albatross of a contract. He's earned far more than he's been paid the last few years so they owe him something. That's not too much that he can't still be traded.

 

2016 - $17M, 2017 - $15M, 2018 - $15M, 2019 - $13M, 2020 - $12M, 2021 - $10M. I believe league rules are that you cannot reduce a player's salary by more than 20% from one year to the next, so that should fit within the rules. Because it's front-loaded, that's more net present value to Lucroy than a backloaded deal. Molina's getting ~$14M/year so it's in line with market rate.

 

-The Brewers owe him nothing...nothing at all.

 

-Front loading a Lucroy contract is about the only good idea I have seen related to a Lucroy extension.

 

-Lucroy is not Yadier Molina...and should not be paid accordingly.

 

On the subject of Molina he happened to sharply decline offensively when he hit 31 and Mauer also declined greatly starting at age 31. The same age a Lucroy extension would start. I want nothing to do with a Lucroy extension. This is a time where you be happy for the bargain contract and punch out when the value is maxxed out. If I was forced to offer him an extension it would be for 4/$40mil or so and no more. $80mil for Lucroy is almost assured to go badly.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Are there any recent examples of front loaded contracts like that? Does anyone actually do that?

 

I see posters suggest it quite often, but I just don't remember seeing anyone recently that's actually done it.

[MrTPlush]

Are there any recent examples of front loaded contracts like that? Does anyone actually do that?

 

I see posters suggest it quite often, but I just don't remember seeing anyone recently that's actually done it.

 

Typically no. Most teams like having players making low money when they are good so they can pile more talent when that player is at his best. They also consider inflation when handing out deals of this nature. So typically a contract is going to be backloaded if anything.

 

Johnny Peralta has a front loaded contract as did A-Rod's 10 year deal with the Yankees.

[PilprinBuddha]

I'd like to keep him.

 

What MA needs to determine is who will replace Melvin and how much $ he will allocate for him to spend in FA. This team will have a bunch of cash. Can they make some solid deals that allow the team to remain competative while some of the youngsters develop?

 

They almost have no choice due to the Braun deal.

[umphrey]

There is no reason to ever front load a contract as long as there is no salary cap. It's always better for the team to defer the money as long as possible. I would imagine the front loaded contracts that do exist only happened because the player or agent negotiated for it.

[danzig6767]

He may not even want to be here long term. Luc made it clear in that interview how badly he wants to win sooner than later and with the team rebuilding, he very well could prefer getting traded to a contender vs signing an extension.

 

If a team made a good offer for Luc, i'd trade him.

[SRB]

Lucroy is a good catcher. But if another team values him like an MVP catcher based on 2014 (or he values himself like an MVP catcher in contract negotiations), he needs to go sooner rather than later.

[bill hAll Star]

I'd trade him next offseason or trade deadline, assuming his value jumps back up a bit.

 

I'm assuming what will happen is that Mark will sign him to a 5-year, $85 million extension at the end of his age 31-32 season and we'll have this type of guy as our first baseman starting in about 2019.

[monty57]

I think he should be (and will be) traded. I'd guess the Brewers will put on a face of still being competitive next year, will hold on for a bit to see if they can catch fire early in the 2016 season, expecting to trade him next deadline. They will hope he will sell some tickets early in the season, and help the young pitchers continue to adjust to the majors, but they can't pass up on the potential package of young talent they will receive by trading him.

 

Right now, the Brewers look to have two potential star players in the minors in Arcia and Phillips, a few who could be good players, and a decent number who should help out at the MLB level. This is much better than things looked a year or so ago. If they trade Lucroy, they could have a group that could form a nice core of young talent for a long time. Forget extending Lucroy into his decline years for a lot of money... trade him for a few talented youngsters and extend them early to contracts like Lucroy is currently under.

[tmwiese55]

I'm in the trade him next year if rebounds offensively, which I expect him to. He's been hitting well the last month or so. I think their plan is to trade him but they were in no rush this year with his value being hurt by being hurt and not hitting well.

 

Someone suggested having him play out the last two years and see how he does before deciding, I don't see that as good course. First, it risks that you get nothing back for him. Second, he would be very unhappy with that situation which isn't good for team morale and to have the young players treat a player like that so they won't be as inclined to show any loyalty to us in signing future team friendly deals. Though I don't feel we 'owe him' because he signed a bad deal, it was his choice to sign it. I do feel like you should try to do right by guys in a re-build situation like this one. If you want him around to help out with the rebuild give him the peace of mind of putting 30-40mil in the bank. If you don't, trade him by next deadline so he can play for a winner and try to earn a good contract from that team. Other players notice this type of thing and view you as a professional organization and that reputations gets out to the league, rather than being viewed as bush league like Miami or others.

[monty57]

I think their plan is to trade him but they were in no rush this year with his value being hurt by being hurt and not hitting well.

 

That's possible, but his value is still very high and any increase in value due to a good year would be offset by less team control. I think it's more that they don't want to give the impression of completely giving up on the next year or two for fear it would hurt ticket sales. They probably figure Lucroy's value will still be plenty high next year and the additional tickets sold by still having a face people recognize will be worth waiting a year to trade him.

[tmwiese55]

I think their plan is to trade him but they were in no rush this year with his value being hurt by being hurt and not hitting well.

 

That's possible, but his value is still very high and any increase in value due to a good year would be offset by less team control. I think it's more that they don't want to give the impression of completely giving up on the next year or two for fear it would hurt ticket sales. They probably figure Lucroy's value will still be plenty high next year and the additional tickets sold by still having a face people recognize will be worth waiting a year to trade him.

 

I don't think they do what they just did if they were worried about ticket sales. They are expecting to get crushed to finish this season out which is going to kill ticket sales for next year. I believe they felt they were not getting the value they should for him consider how good he'd been the last few years. Also, off the top of my head only a few contending teams needing catching help. In the offseason, every team is on the table.

[brewcrewdue80]

I'm guessing whatever team friendly deal to remain a Brewer he brought to the FO in the offseason wasn't what they considered team friendly. Now, Lucroy is having the type of season he's having. So, let's say Lucroy said 5/65 extension. Team didn't want to do that. In no way at this juncture is he more valuable than what Lucroy asked for in the off-season. So now maybe the deal becomes 5/50. That's what I'm looking at. Lucroy's side wont want any part of that and take it FA.

 

How about, whatever happens to Segura, gives us the real idea of what's going to happen to Lucroy as Segura's side BLEW the extension Milw offered him and I believe Milw instead is learning from that near mistake.

 

Now, the rumors were drummed up of teams talking about Lucroy. I believe he'll get traded. I'm not sure it'll happen this offseason, but rather next Trade Deadline making more sense. Of course Lucroy needs to remain healthy, hopefully is above .750 OPS and has kept the value we see him as having today.

 

Catchers aren't ranked that highly via MLB.com Jorge Alfaro who just went to Philly in the Hamels trade is the only one Not within the NL Central division ranked in the top 4. None of them below rate above a 50 Overall or top 100 prospect. Which either adds to needing to keep Lucroy. Or adds to the assumption of Lucroy's value is immense and he'll come with a high price tag in prospects.

 

Personally, my feelings have been lowered on Catchers due to sitting games and the real risk of injury and affecting level of play. One year it's .270 the next it's .225 followed with .266 the third. That middle year had a nagging injury dealt with all season long. So with that in mind, I hope we look away from Catcher in return and go after the highest talent possible. Colorado would be fun to deal with this offseason now. Gray or Hoffman are ace type SPs that nabbing one of them to fill a big need at Catcher... One can wish.