Braun or Lucroy?

[adambr2]

I think that 2016 has to be the year of evaluating young talent as much as possible.

 

The Brewers have some clear cornerstones: Braun and Lucroy. If Lucroy will accept an extension, great. If not, try to get what you can for him.

 

The real trade assets are: Khris Davis, Matt Garza, Adam Lind, and K-Rod.

 

Scooter Gennett and Jean Segura are somewhat lesser assets... or a decent 2B platoon (Gennett vs. RHP, Segura vs. LHP) in 2017.

 

My thinking for 2016 is that the Brewers need to find out which young/cheap OFs can do what, and the same goes for the starters.

 

For me, this is the ideal opening day 2016 lineup:

cf: Michael Reed

2b: Scooter Gennett

3b: Ryan Braun

1b: Adam Lind

c: Jon Lucroy

rf: Domingo Santana

lf: Victor Roache

ss: Jean Segura

pitcher

 

The ideal rotation:

Jungmann, Peralta, Nelson, Suter, Thornburg/Cravy/Wagner

 

I don't think an extension for Lucroy is in the cards or in the best interests of the club. If it was, they likely would have done it after 2014 when he inquired about it. Most likely he'll be moving on. Maybe not this winter, but eventually.

 

I'm not sure that any of the guys you described as trade assets are worth what you believe they may be.

 

Garza is not a trade asset, Garza is a liability. He's not going anywhere barring eating a substantial amount of future salary or a bad contract for bad contract deal. You'd think K Rod would be, but the fact that we didn't unload him in July is a pretty likely indicator that teams just aren't really buying into him or are too scared off by his domestic history.

 

Davis,...maybe. He's cost controlled and fairly productive. But I don't know that he brings back more than a top 75-100.

 

Lind is another interesting one, and another that you have to somewhat think we would have traded in July if teams were offering anything close to what we hoped.

[JohnBriggs12]

Assuming Lucroy won't be extended because he wasn't last year is kind of silly isn't it? That's up to Stearns and he spoke highly of Lucroy or did I dream that? If anything 2015 might have made extending him more likely.

 

The fact is there is no replacement for Lucroy in the Brewer system. None. Maldanado has proven he's not a starting catcher. Decent enough backup...sure, starter?? That's laughable. Deal Lucroy and this franchise could spend the next half dozen years trying to find a replacement. Frankly the parade of guys they had in the 2000's decade at that position held this franchise back: Blanco, Bako, Eddie Perez, Moeller, Miller, Estrada, Kendall. With no catcher on the horizon in the system, they'll be back chasing one and wasting resources trying to find one.

 

Stearns needs to make extending Lucroy priority #1 provided the concussion concerns are satisfied.. 4 years, $14-16 million per year is the going rate. That will take him through 2021, the year he turns 35. Lucroy provides veteran leadership that is crucial to development of a young pitching staff. His bat ebbed last year but the month before the concussion he was back raking.

 

They can have talent everywhere but if the catcher is below par, it will all be a waste. There's not a more key position on the entire field. The example of it has been right in front of them the last decade. Molina is the constant that made the Cardinals what they've been.

 

If they need to trade Braun to be able to afford Lucroy, they should do it.

[adambr2]

Assuming Lucroy won't be extended because he wasn't last year is kind of silly isn't it? That's up to Stearns and he spoke highly of Lucroy or did I dream that? If anything 2015 might have made extending him more likely.

 

The fact is there is no replacement for Lucroy in the Brewer system. None. Maldanado has proven he's not a starting catcher. Decent enough backup...sure, starter?? That's laughable. Deal Lucroy and this franchise could spend the next half dozen years trying to find a replacement. Frankly the parade of guys they had in the 2000's decade at that position held this franchise back: Blanco, Bako, Eddie Perez, Moeller, Miller, Estrada, Kendall. With no catcher on the horizon in the system, they'll be back chasing one and wasting resources trying to find one.

 

Stearns needs to make extending Lucroy priority #1 provided the concussion concerns are satisfied.. 4 years, $14-16 million per year is the going rate. That will take him through 2021, the year he turns 35. Lucroy provides veteran leadership that is crucial to development of a young pitching staff. His bat ebbed last year but the month before the concussion he was back raking.

 

They can have talent everywhere but if the catcher is below par, it will all be a waste. There's not a more key position on the entire field. The example of it has been right in front of them the last decade. Molina is the constant that made the Cardinals what they've been.

 

If they need to trade Braun to be able to afford Lucroy, they should do it.

 

Given that we are in the very early stages of a rebuild, I really will be disappointed if our new GMs #1 priority is a market extension for a 29 year old catcher who still has 2 years left on his contact. We have no idea what our farm system will look like in 3 years as far as catching prospects. We need to do what the Cubs did and worry about getting younger and stockpiling talent for the future. We do that, and everything else will take care of itself. We shouldn't be making our first priority in the new regime handing out big money to an existing vet just out of fear in 2015 of what the catching position will look like in 2018.

 

And no, assuming Lucroy won't get an extension now since he didn't get one last year isn't silly at all, given

 

1) He inquired to the Brewers about an extension after 2014

2) They weren't interested

3) He was coming off a much better year

4) They weren't rebuilding either

[MNBrew]

"Won't be offered an extension" and "isn't interested in an extension now" are two different things. And between Lucroy's 2015 dip and the unknown of Stearns' opinion/intentions, there's no real way no predict where this will go with any certainty whatsoever.

 

Baseball's certainly lacking overall depth of upper-tier catchers. The Brewers' system is sorely lacking in high-quality catching prospects. I strongly agree with Briggs that keeping Lucroy around both now and past the end of his current contract is the wise way to go, the typical vogue/trendy & seemingly stats-heavy logic of going Cubs/Astros-ish "all in, total teardown" on a rebuild notwithstanding.

[adambr2]

http://www.brewcrewball.com/2015/10/26/9614402/report-brewers-willing-to-listen-to-offers-on-anybody

 

I don't see any indication that a Lucroy extension is being considered at all. I think he's far more likely to be traded than extended.

 

Also I think the Cubs and Astros deserve more than an aside mention. Many would agree that these teams probably top the list of all MLB for teams set up to win the next 5+ years. It would not be unwise for us to follow their model.

[bill hAll Star]

"Won't be offered an extension" and "isn't interested in an extension now" are two different things. And between Lucroy's 2015 dip and the unknown of Stearns' opinion/intentions, there's no real way no predict where this will go with any certainty whatsoever.

 

Baseball's certainly lacking overall depth of upper-tier catchers. The Brewers' system is sorely lacking in high-quality catching prospects. I strongly agree with Briggs that keeping Lucroy around both now and past the end of his current contract is the wise way to go, the typical vogue/trendy & seemingly stats-heavy logic of going Cubs/Astros-ish "all in, total teardown" on a rebuild notwithstanding.

 

Chances are, if you keep him around past his contract, the system will still be void of a good catcher. Many catchers have fallen off a cliff lately at 31 or 32 years old, so now you'll have an old, declining, overpaid Luc AND no prospects in the pipeline.

[pacopete4]

Cut ties. Get as many good players with high upside as you can and thank Luc for his time as a Brewer. Give him the chance to win somewhere else because it is not happening here for at least a season, if not two or three.

[MNBrew]

Because we don't project to be contenders, we don't need a capable catcher?

 

That's how the "trade Lucroy" logic comes across. To carry that thought process further, does that mean it's not prudent to have any proven vets around until your young players show they're leading a team's ascent?

 

If they move Lucroy, the logic within the explanation at the time should seem fairly self-evident based on the return. But I don't think that means that holding on to Lucroy is definitively illogical. There's not *only* one way to do this rebuilding thing.

[bill hAll Star]

Because we don't project to be contenders, we don't need a capable catcher?

 

That's how the "trade Lucroy" logic comes across. To carry that thought process further, does that mean it's not prudent to have any proven vets around until your young players show they're leading a team's ascent?

 

If they move Lucroy, the logic within the explanation at the time should seem fairly self-evident based on the return. But I don't think that means that holding on to Lucroy is definitively illogical. There's not *only* one way to do this rebuilding thing.

 

It doesn't make the rebuild impossible, but I would imagine that the Twins lament the idea that they have a $23 million dollar "catcher" now playing first base for 3 more years as they are ascending on their rebuild. These contracts rarely work out...and it's not like we are going to say "eh, I'll take the risk 3 years down the road, we're contenders right now." We're not contenders right now.

 

Could Lucroy buck the trend and be a worthwhile catcher beyond the age of 31? Sure, maybe. I wouldn't bet on it, though.

 

I'd love to have a clean slate when we are on an ascension. If Luc signs an extension beyond this deal, there's about an 80-90% chance that he's not going to be worth it when the Brewers are good again. I'd rather trade for the current version of Lucroy somewhat similar to the Cubs getting Miguel Montero from somebody else in 2019 if we're still devoid of a catcher and has 2 years left on his deal.

[MrTPlush]

Because we don't project to be contenders, we don't need a capable catcher?

That's how the "trade Lucroy" logic comes across. To carry that thought process further, does that mean it's not prudent to have any proven vets around until your young players show they're leading a team's ascent?

 

If they move Lucroy, the logic within the explanation at the time should seem fairly self-evident based on the return. But I don't think that means that holding on to Lucroy is definitively illogical. There's not *only* one way to do this rebuilding thing.

 

Yup, that is exactly right. Jonathan Lucroy's value is largely part to his offense and that has zero value to this team the next two years and after that his offense won't even be that good. I would much prefer to take on a catcher who can work with the pitching staff and provide no offense for $3mil. We can figure out a real catcher down the road later if we want to spend big money.

 

There is NOT only one way to do this rebuilding thing, but I can count about [sarcasm]500[/sarcasm] that include trading Lucroy.

 

Do you think Lucroy is the only veteran? Braun, Davis, Peralta, Nelson, K-Rod, Smith? Not to mention we will have a bunch of guys making debuts in the next year or two that will be considered veterans by the time we get competitive again.

[BrewBalls]

I would even include Maldonado as a capable veteran catcher who could help to guide and develop our young pitching staff. He is a solid defensive catcher who simply cannot hit. I say trade Lucroy for the best package of prospects offered and go with a platoon of Maldy and a veteran like Dioner Navarro or Brayan Pena. No need to hold onto Lucroy while we are trying to rebuild. Trading him will actually speed up the rebuilding process similar to the Gomez trade.

[MNBrew]

MrTPlush, your position seems pretty obvious: No matter what other logic people present, it won't matter because you favor the total teardown approach and you believe trading Lucroy needs to happen this winter. That's fine. I understand the though process. I just disagree.

 

Per the topic, this thread isn't about trading Peralta, Nelson, K-Rod, or Smith, and more of the recent thread focus has shifted to Lucroy rather than Braun.

 

Defensively, Lucroy works well with the Brewers pitchers, is outstanding at blocking pitches in the dirt & at framing pitches, and he threw our runners at nearly a 30% rate. He may not be a Gold Glove contender but defensively he's pretty sound & solid. He's the sort of catcher who I'd trust to handle & lead a staff of mostly young pitchers. If you disagree -- and it appears you do -- then I won't be able to bring up anything to persuade you otherwise.

[logan82]

I trust Lucroy to handle our young pitchers. I just think we should trade him before he hits FA so we can add to our current bubble of talent. He will be old and overpaid or gone by the time we are good again.

[MrTPlush]

MrTPlush, your position seems pretty obvious: No matter what other logic people present, it won't matter because you favor the total teardown approach and you believe trading Lucroy needs to happen this winter. That's fine. I understand the though process. I just disagree.

 

Per the topic, this thread isn't about trading Peralta, Nelson, K-Rod, or Smith, and more of the recent thread focus has shifted to Lucroy rather than Braun.

 

Defensively, Lucroy works well with the Brewers pitchers, is outstanding at blocking pitches in the dirt & at framing pitches, and he threw our runners at nearly a 30% rate. He may not be a Gold Glove contender but defensively he's pretty sound & solid. He's the sort of catcher who I'd trust to handle & lead a staff of mostly young pitchers. If you disagree -- and it appears you do -- then I won't be able to bring up anything to persuade you otherwise.

 

1. I never said I support a total tear down.

2. I never said we have to trade him THIS winter.

3. The other players were brought up because apparently Lucroy is the only veteran on this team. They were used to show we have a lot more.

4. All you stated about his defense could easily be found else where.

 

My problem is not that I think we should trade every valuable piece. It is the fact we should trade players(most notably old) that simply won't be on the next winning team. An expensive Lucroy will not be valuable come 2018 and beyond...sorry that is just looking at it realistically. If he was 27 this would be a lot different. Maybe then it would make sense to keep him around.

 

You don't see me preaching to trade a Nelson/Peralta/Davis because those players could possibly be on the next competing team or their value could increase in the future. When you look at Lucroy odds are his value only goes down at this point. Maybe it goes up a bit with a good first half, but outside of that his value will be on the decline.

 

On the topic of defense a lot of those things don't help a pitcher in the grand scheme of things. When I think of helping a young pitcher it is working with him and calling the right pitches etc. Blocking a pitch or framing a pitch looks good for a stat line, but it won't really help a pitcher get better. Now I have no idea how good Lucroy is with pitchers and none of us really do. A lot of that stuff is behind the scenes.

[MNBrew]

Do you think Lucroy is the only veteran? Braun, Davis, Peralta, Nelson, K-Rod, Smith? Not to mention we will have a bunch of guys making debuts in the next year or two that will be considered veterans by the time we get competitive again.

Per the topic, this thread isn't about trading Peralta, Nelson, K-Rod, or Smith, and more of the recent thread focus has shifted to Lucroy rather than Braun.

3. The other players were brought up because apparently Lucroy is the only veteran on this team. They were used to show we have a lot more. . . .

You don't see me preaching to trade a Nelson/Peralta/Davis because those players could possibly be on the next competing team or their value could increase in the future.

I never put forth anything suggesting Lucroy is the only veteran (obviously that's inaccurate), and I don't get where that implication came from. Your first question to me seems to imply that that's what I thought (not the case).

 

My quote above, between yours, was in response to that direct question: Since this thread is titled "Braun or Lucroy?" and the vast majority of it has centered around those two, there wasn't much relevance to bringing those other guys up here.

 

A lot of your posts in multiple threads seem to emphasize trading valuable MLB-proven assets for more young players. My apologies for overgeneralizing that and mistaking your bias to be for a total teardown. There are certain things you favor and those do come across very heavily across many of your posts.

 

Lucroy may well not be as valuable 5 years hence as he is now. Obviously the odds favor that, though no one without a crystal ball can actually guarantee that will be the case with him. However, he still could prove to be the best available option for the Brewers even at a much higher salary (I'm not going to suggest I know what that salary will be). I guess I'm simply more willing to consider that option than some others are.

 

Anyone can say all they want that the Brewers could shell out huge dollars later if catcher's still a glaringly deficient position on the roster. However, we've learned many times that you can't guarantee a coveted FA will want to play here enough to sign here, or that another team's willing to accept the return you offer for their stud catcher if they're even motivated to listen to proposed deals in the first place. It takes two to tango. It well could happen. But there are no guarantees.

[MrTPlush]

There are certain things you favor and those do come across very heavily across many of your posts.

 

I definitely favor trading Lucroy. You see lots of positional players playing very well into their mid 30s, but when it comes to catcher that decline is almost a for sure thing. Come those extension years you are talking a 80 OPS+ catcher. That is probably pretty close to average, but is that really good enough to overpay him for ease of mind at the catcher position long term? Obviously there is an injury concern with Lucroy too. Always getting weird injuries and now has a bit of a concussion concern. Do the Brewers really want to keep that long term? Maybe you take a gamble at 3/$30mil and it works out fine in the end. I don't see Lucroy taking that and I don't see the Brewers giving him close to "market value".

[bill hAll Star]

It is probably unfair to lump several posters discussing multiple different positions together, but there seems to be mass hysteria/concern over 3B, 1B, and C in the future and the fact that we don't have a stud prospect in the wings for those positions causing a reaction that we need to overpay the current guy to stay, bring in some veteran retread to feel safe, or immediately trade a surplus position for one of these.

 

We just saw the Cubs and Astros come out of a rebuild. The Astros had a surplus (they thought) of OF, no 3B since Dominguez was a failure, and a shortstop that was maybe too far away to be ready to start the season.

 

What did the Astros do? They signed Rasmus to an affordable deal to platoon in the OF, shipped Fowler off for Valbuena who could platoon at 3B, brought in Lowrie to bridge the gap at 3B/SS, and eventually traded for Gomez when the OF didn't look as nice as they had thought.

 

The Cubs weren't sure Schwarber was ready to catch and they didn't have a stud CF ready...they also weren't totally confident in the OF guys just yet. Enter a Denorfia/Coghlan platoon and trading for Fowler to cover CF as well as acquiring Montero for a catcher platoon.

 

Point is, out of the 3-4 positions that we aren't positive about going forward (3B, 2B, 1B, C), probably 1-2 of those will be solved via the draft with a closer-to-ready prospect or will be covered in the Lind/K-Rod/Lucroy trades. In 3 years, if 3B is still a barren wasteland, if THEN we have a pitching surplus, we could deal one for a 3B. If not, we'll have a payroll of probably $60 million of players (if Stearns doesn't make silly long-term investments) and we can invest in a vet to fill in.

 

Panicking and thinking you have a surplus 2-3 years before these guys are ready or a deficit 2-3 years before you're supposed to contend will lead to losing a trade or blowing a ton of money on a washed up veteran before you need to. Just let it play out and fill the 1 or 2 holes in 2019 if they still exist when you know exactly where your surplus is and have plenty of money to spend on overpriced vets that you know will contribute in 2019.

[bill hAll Star]

To sum up what I had said, imagine in 2019 we have this outlook:

 

C - ?

1B - Braun

2B - Stud player acquired from Lucroy trade

SS - Arcia

3B - ?

OF - Santana, Phillips, Clark, and more in the pipeline

SP - An ace, 2-3 rotation guys, 2-3 young fringe guys, more in the pipeline

 

Now you have a payroll of $55 million. Go blow your money on a declining, still good, 33-year-old 3B for 3 years, @35 million and trade one of your pipeline arms for a good catcher. In 2021 when the filled in players all still look the same, you'll probably have a 3B ready to fill in for the old guy you picked up.

 

I wouldn't be angry if we wanted to flip an OF for a 3B prospect of equal value or something, but I would be annoyed if we dealt an OF for a lesser 3B prospect to "fill the hole," kept Lucroy around because we're nervous about catcher, or signed some retread 3B because we're terrified about the short and long term of 3B while we rebuild.

[reillymcshane]

It is probably unfair to lump several posters discussing multiple different positions together, but there seems to be mass hysteria/concern over 3B, 1B, and C in the future and the fact that we don't have a stud prospect in the wings for those positions causing a reaction that we need to overpay the current guy to stay, bring in some veteran retread to feel safe, or immediately trade a surplus position for one of these.

 

We just saw the Cubs and Astros come out of a rebuild. The Astros had a surplus (they thought) of OF, no 3B since Dominguez was a failure, and a shortstop that was maybe too far away to be ready to start the season.

 

What did the Astros do? They signed Rasmus to an affordable deal to platoon in the OF, shipped Fowler off for Valbuena who could platoon at 3B, brought in Lowrie to bridge the gap at 3B/SS, and eventually traded for Gomez when the OF didn't look as nice as they had thought.

 

The Cubs weren't sure Schwarber was ready to catch and they didn't have a stud CF ready...they also weren't totally confident in the OF guys just yet. Enter a Denorfia/Coghlan platoon and trading for Fowler to cover CF as well as acquiring Montero for a catcher platoon.

 

Point is, out of the 3-4 positions that we aren't positive about going forward (3B, 2B, 1B, C), probably 1-2 of those will be solved via the draft with a closer-to-ready prospect or will be covered in the Lind/K-Rod/Lucroy trades. In 3 years, if 3B is still a barren wasteland, if THEN we have a pitching surplus, we could deal one for a 3B. If not, we'll have a payroll of probably $60 million of players (if Stearns doesn't make silly long-term investments) and we can invest in a vet to fill in.

 

Panicking and thinking you have a surplus 2-3 years before these guys are ready or a deficit 2-3 years before you're supposed to contend will lead to losing a trade or blowing a ton of money on a washed up veteran before you need to. Just let it play out and fill the 1 or 2 holes in 2019 if they still exist when you know exactly where your surplus is and have plenty of money to spend on overpriced vets that you know will contribute in 2019.

 

I agree with you for the most part. We are several years away from being a contender. So much can happen between now and then, so I don't think getting our undies in a bundle over who the 'future of xyz position' is worth it. Right now, it's finding out who can play, who can't, building up the farm system, adding quality young talent when possible, keeping financial flexibility.

 

When the time comes where we do look like a contender, then you use your financial flexibility and minor league depth to fill slots as needed.

 

No plan is going to work perfect. Prospects fail - more times than not - and you need to adjust on the fly at times. I'm totally happy to add a good 3B prospect, but like what was said, not on an overpay so we can 'fill a slot' for the future. But if the opportunity comes up, all the better.

[adambr2]

Totally agree with the last 2 posters. Sorry, no, it doesn't matter who catches for us in a rebuild. Lucroy will be somewhere in the 32-35 range with a ton of wear on him by the time we are contending again. It's not worth paying market value to buy out those years now on the hopes that he will defy father time, simply to have a familiar catcher for our new pitchers to grow with (who will be gone by the time they hit their prime anyway).

 

The key virtue in a rebuild is patience, extending Lucroy now seems more like a panic move based on fear of the unknown. We've got years to figure out who the future is behind the plate. Just because we don't have the answer right now shouldn't cause us to deviate from the actions we need to take to put us back in position to build a long term winner. Not only that, but we also give up our most valuable trade chip for young pieces we desperately need.

 

We should be looking to get younger, not looking to build around existing vets. We're already committed to Braun through 2020, that's done and there's nothing we can do about that now. If nothing else, we already have a veteran for the rebuild with him. Let's not compound it by adding another big contract to it. Starting out our rebuild by building up our commitment to a pair of vets in their mid 30s in a few years to 30-40M a year just between the two of them seems like a really bad way to start a rebuild.