What Should the Crew do this Offseason?

[FVBrewerFan]

4. Garza to the Dodgers for Crawford, Barnes, and Holmes with the Brewers taking on 90% of Crawford's salary or Garza for Ethier and Barnes with the Brewers taking on all of Ethier's salary.

 

And right after that, they can trade Logan Schafer to the Dodgers for either Greinke or Kershaw.

[reillymcshane]

Put every player on the trade block. This team from top to bottom isn't talented enough to not listen to offers on every player.

 

This. They need to be open to any deal at any time. None of this "wait to trade Lind when his value is higher" or "Braun is a team guy, he can't be traded."

 

They have no obvious long term solution at C,1B,2B, or 3B. More young depth for starting pitching than they've had in well...maybe forever. But no guarantees they're all set there, by a long-shot. Plus, this entire team is incredibly right handed.

 

So what does that mean? Be open to absolutely anything if it makes sense for a team to start competing (for real) in 2018. That means no Segura, Lucroy, Lind, Garza, KRod, Gennett and probably no Braun. Even Peralta can be dealt if the price is right.

 

I really do get they need to consider selling tickets, future TV contracts, etc. But a few years in a row of 75-87 won't exactly make people rush to buy season tickets. And that's exactly what will happen if they try to keep the team "competitive" instead of rebuilding.

This pretty much says it all. Be flexible, be aggressive, but recognize we aren't that good and need to build for the future. Pretty much anything should be on the table if it fits that goal.

 

I'm not saying to deal guys just to deal guys, but we should be open to talking with clubs, and making moves if we get a good offer. We're building for 2018 - to think we can make the playoffs next year is a longshot.

 

Regarding Lind - I would advocate moving him this off season. I don't think his value really can grow if you wait until mid-season. His numbers are about as good as you can expect and he's been healthy. He's an injury prone guy - and if his back flares up next May, we get a lot less (if anything). Also, there are a lot more teams that could use him this offseason rather than at the deadline next year. But if some of those teams are out of the playoff race next July, they won't want him - limiting our options. More teams, more competition for his services, (hopefully) brings a better return. Another thing is that if a team gets Lind now, they have the option to tender him a qualifying offer next year if he does well. While not a huge thing, it does offer the acquiring team an option that's not available if Lind were traded for mid-season.

[craigharmann]

Anyone not named Orlando Arcia is on the table. I'm listening to any and every offer. Depth, not only at the ML level, but quality depth is needed at every level. It's starting to grow, but there's a long way to go.

[reillymcshane]

Anyone not named Orlando Arcia is on the table. I'm listening to any and every offer. Depth, not only at the ML level, but quality depth is needed at every level. It's starting to grow, but there's a long way to go.

Quality depth. Excellent point. A few months ago a site (Grantland?) did a review of the Brewers from 2012-15 (I think those were the years) and found we gave 1/5 of all our at bats to sub-replacement level players. Yuni, Gonzalez, Francisco, Bianchi, etc., etc. We maxed ourselves out on payroll, then didn't produce enough young talent. When it came to filling in holes or replacing injured players, we were awful - and it may have cost us a playoff spot.

 

We talk about how the Cardinals keep winning - well look at them. They produce quality talent from their minors, make decent trades, and thus have money to extend key players or sign free agents when they need to.

 

I'm encouraged by the depth the Brewers' minor league system is developing. I think it will help out tremendously in the next few years.

[mrn1ceguy]

These are the priorities I would focus on for 2016:

 

1. Trades this off-season to acquire prospects with a focus on starting pitching or catching (in order of preference): Lind (95%), K-Rod (75%), Garza (75%), Segura (50%)

 

2. Trades this off-season to clear 40-man spots or release (i.e. trade for non-40 low A players, even if just filler): Goforth, Cesar Jimenez, Johnny Hellweg, Nevin Ashley, Juan Centeno, Matt Clark, Hernan Perez, Daniel Fields, Logan Schafer

 

3. Sign/Promote to 40-man roster: Orlando Arcia, Wei-Chung Wang, Brent Suter, Brooks Hall, Damien Magnifico, Jorge Ortega, Victor Roache, Adam Weisenburger

 

4. Sign one or two reclamation project third basemen to 1 year minor league deals (no guaranteed money), assume one makes the roster to start/platoon 3B.

 

If all trades/releases occur, 40-man roster will be at 38, allowing for 2 people from points 1. or 2. to still be on the team.

 

5. Depth Chart with approximate salary of 42 Million if all players are traded/released:

 

OF: Davis (0.5), Santana (0.5), Braun (20), Peterson (0.5), Reed (0.5)

3B/SS/2B: TBD (2?), Sardinas (0.5), Scooter (0.5), Yadiel Rivera (0.5), Herrera (0.5)

1B: Rogers (0.5)

C: Lucroy (4.5), Maldenado (1)

SP: Peralta (3), Nelson (0.5), Jungmann (0.5), Davies (0.5), Cravy (0.5)

RP: Jeffress (0.5), Smith (1.5), Blazek (0.5), Knebel (0.5), Pena (0.5), Strong (0.5), Thornburg (1)

 

6. Entertain trading Davis, Scooter and anyone not traded from line 1 at mid-season

 

7. Promote Phillips & Arcia at mid-season and top performing starting pitcher, probably Lopez.

 

2016 would be terrible, but cheap and sets us up well for 2017 between the youth, the prospects received in off-season trade, and massive salary flexibility for filling any remaining whole, probably still 3B.

[FVBrewerFan]

Trades this off-season to acquire prospects with a focus on starting pitching or catching (in order of preference)

 

Goal should be to the get the BEST talent, regardless of position. This team is not close to worrying about being too loaded at any one position. Look just a few months ago when it looked like they were loaded at SS. Instead, they have a legit star prospect (yet still a prospect) and a bunch of mediocre (at best) options in Segura, Sardinas, Rivera, etc.

 

If a year or two from now they have a problem with too many corner OFs or too many SS, you can take appropriate action then. I have seen way too many times, in all sports, where a team targets "need" instead of best talent.

[mrn1ceguy]

I don't think you can go too position blind because there has to be a spot in the Minors for them to play everyday. If you get a prospect that involves having to do a 4 man outfield rotation in AA or AAA or you have to move someone to 1B because that's the only everyday possition available to them, you are wasting opportunities for that individual to polish their defensive craft. It was hard enough finding playing time with Rivera and Arcia where on the same team, think if we also had another stud SS and a stud 2b on that team. Someone is either going to the bench or being very out of position (CF or 1B).

 

That doesn't mean ignoring certain positions, but the last thing you want to do is trade for 4 catchers who should be in AAA and then figure out where they play. If you keep the focus on what will provide the biggest net change, assuming you are trading for near MLB ready talent (think the Grienke trade), then positions do matter. If you are getting players who are A+ or lower, then definitely get best talent available.

[nate82]

4. Garza to the Dodgers for Crawford, Barnes, and Holmes with the Brewers taking on 90% of Crawford's salary or Garza for Ethier and Barnes with the Brewers taking on all of Ethier's salary.

 

And right after that, they can trade Logan Schafer to the Dodgers for either Greinke or Kershaw.

 

Well the Dodgers are looking to get under the luxury tax which trading Crawford's or Ethier's contract helps. Plus Crawford hasn't played a full season in forever the same with Ethier.

 

I would expect Garza to bounce back to his career norms next year more so than Crawford will. If anything this trade would be in the Dodgers favor as they are getting rid of a very bad contract and they are gaining money in terms of not having to pay the luxury tax with this trade so a plus plus for the Dodgers. The Brewers are taking on about $13m in salary here which is definitely worth the two added prospects from the Dodgers.

[Roderick]

4. Garza to the Dodgers for Crawford, Barnes, and Holmes with the Brewers taking on 90% of Crawford's salary or Garza for Ethier and Barnes with the Brewers taking on all of Ethier's salary.

 

And right after that, they can trade Logan Schafer to the Dodgers for either Greinke or Kershaw.

 

Well the Dodgers are looking to get under the luxury tax which trading Crawford's or Ethier's contract helps. Plus Crawford hasn't played a full season in forever the same with Ethier.

 

I would expect Garza to bounce back to his career norms next year more so than Crawford will. If anything this trade would be in the Dodgers favor as they are getting rid of a very bad contract and they are gaining money in terms of not having to pay the luxury tax with this trade so a plus plus for the Dodgers. The Brewers are taking on about $13m in salary here which is definitely worth the two added prospects from the Dodgers.

 

On your tangent, there is probably a team or two that are in a situation where they would want to clear salary and are willing to trade prospect(s) to do it. Didn't the Diamondbacks do that this spring with the Braves? The Brewers should try and find a partner, especially if the Brewers trade Lind. They could afford to pay someone for a year or two while we figure out the young pitching. It would really work out if someone has an overpaid 3B they don't want anymore. Just don't bring in a bad clubhouse guy.

[EauClaireNWL]

With how our young pitchers have done, unless they hope Garza can regain some of his value by pitching the first half next season or you move him to long relief out of the bullpen, I'd say if you can find a team that can give you a halfway decent prospect and will take on a portion of his salary, you pull the trigger. I can understand his frustration to an extent given how his contract is structured, but he doesn't need to be pulling a drama queen act in the clubhouse and moving him would send a message it's team first.

 

Unless Braun specifically requests to be traded, I don't see any reason not to keep him, although moving him to first base and trading Lind seems like a no brainer at this point. There's something to be said for veteran leadership and the guy is committed to the organization.

 

I'm 50/50 on Lucroy. While he has an injury history, if I felt in any way shape or form Moldonado was the long term answer there, I'd pull the trigger on a trade in a heart beat. Mold's is such an offensive black hole though and Lucroy has been the best C this team has had in ages in a position that has been a weakness in DM's tenure.

[monty57]

With how our young pitchers have done, unless they hope Garza can regain some of his value by pitching the first half next season or you move him to long relief out of the bullpen, I'd say if you can find a team that can give you a halfway decent prospect and will take on a portion of his salary, you pull the trigger. I can understand his frustration to an extent given how his contract is structured, but he doesn't need to be pulling a drama queen act in the clubhouse and moving him would send a message it's team first.

 

If they could find someone to take Garza, I'm sure they would jump at it. I don't believe they will find a trading partner, so they will put him in the rotation to start the season in hopes that he pitches well so they can trade him at the deadline. If he doesn't, then at some point they will cut him and eat the contract, but it's probably not worth it to eat that much right now just so someone like Cravy can be in the rotation. There is time to hope he rights the ship, and he has enough of a track record that a good couple of months to start next season could turn him into a decent trading chip.

 

I would expect Garza to bounce back to his career norms next year more so than Crawford will.

 

If that's the case, then why would you trade Garza? We can use a decent veteran starting pitcher a lot more than another corner OF.

 

I don't think you can go too position blind because there has to be a spot in the Minors for them to play everyday.

 

My opinion on this is that if the prospects are relatively equal, then you go with the position of greater need. If one of the prospects is far and away better than the other, you take him even if it is not necessarily a position of need.

[FVBrewerFan]

With how our young pitchers have done, unless they hope Garza can regain some of his value by pitching the first half next season or you move him to long relief out of the bullpen, I'd say if you can find a team that can give you a halfway decent prospect and will take on a portion of his salary, you pull the trigger.

 

If someone is willing to take a significant portion of his salary, I don't even care if you get a decent prospect back. He is the one guy on the roster I view as a salary dump. I don't know what it would take for me exactly, but if someone would take on 50% of his deal, I would probably do it.

[dacbrewers]

These are the priorities I would focus on for 2016:

 

1. Trades this off-season to acquire prospects with a focus on starting pitching or catching (in order of preference): Lind (95%), K-Rod (75%), Garza (75%), Segura (50%)

 

2. Trades this off-season to clear 40-man spots or release (i.e. trade for non-40 low A players, even if just filler): Goforth, Cesar Jimenez, Johnny Hellweg, Nevin Ashley, Juan Centeno, Matt Clark, Hernan Perez, Daniel Fields, Logan Schafer

 

3. Sign/Promote to 40-man roster: Orlando Arcia, Wei-Chung Wang, Brent Suter, Brooks Hall, Damien Magnifico, Jorge Ortega, Victor Roache, Adam Weisenburger

 

4. Sign one or two reclamation project third basemen to 1 year minor league deals (no guaranteed money), assume one makes the roster to start/platoon 3B.

 

If all trades/releases occur, 40-man roster will be at 38, allowing for 2 people from points 1. or 2. to still be on the team.

 

5. Depth Chart with approximate salary of 42 Million if all players are traded/released:

 

OF: Davis (0.5), Santana (0.5), Braun (20), Peterson (0.5), Reed (0.5)

3B/SS/2B: TBD (2?), Sardinas (0.5), Scooter (0.5), Yadiel Rivera (0.5), Herrera (0.5)

1B: Rogers (0.5)

C: Lucroy (4.5), Maldenado (1)

SP: Peralta (3), Nelson (0.5), Jungmann (0.5), Davies (0.5), Cravy (0.5)

RP: Jeffress (0.5), Smith (1.5), Blazek (0.5), Knebel (0.5), Pena (0.5), Strong (0.5), Thornburg (1)

 

6. Entertain trading Davis, Scooter and anyone not traded from line 1 at mid-season

 

7. Promote Phillips & Arcia at mid-season and top performing starting pitcher, probably Lopez.

 

2016 would be terrible, but cheap and sets us up well for 2017 between the youth, the prospects received in off-season trade, and massive salary flexibility for filling any remaining whole, probably still 3B.

 

There are a lot of quality guys on your list only making league minimum. Brewers losing games but making money. Think there is any chance trading a future starter for a quality bat? I would love to see someone picked up or developed to be a 3rd baseman. Having utility guys play 3rd isn't the ideal situation. I won't understand the Fields pickup if they are just going to release him.

[monty57]

There are a lot of quality guys on your list only making league minimum. Brewers losing games but making money.

 

That is going to be key. I Don't think attendance will fall much below 2M as long as the team is honest with the fans about their plans, but there will be a revenue dropoff, so the low payroll will allow for the team to get through the rebuild without worrying about losing money (and panicking into making bad FA signings to boost attendance).

 

Think there is any chance trading a future starter for a quality bat?

 

I hope not. They need to stockpile young starting pitchers, as many of them flame out or play their way into the bullpen. Plus, it's good to have "insurance" at the AAA level, as there are normally injuries to starting pitchers throughout the year, and it's not out of the question to see Peralta traded in the not-too-distant future as he's getting into his arby years and may not be around for the next playoff push. And then there's Garza, who is far from certain to play out his contract as a Brewer.

 

I would love to see someone picked up or developed to be a 3rd baseman. Having utility guys play 3rd isn't the ideal situation.

 

Me too. We have some more MLB players to trade, and could find our answer there. Long term we have some guys in the low minors who could transition to 3B, but not much in the short-term. Melvin tried getting a number of players and none have really stood out, but next year could well be a "throw a bunch of guys at the wall and see who sticks" scenario. I guess doing that with young guys in a rebuild year isn't the end of the world.

[Crash2303]

at first I felt we should wait to see if we're in contention in 2017 between unloading LuCroy, but now I feel that whatever competitive team that we'll have in 2017 will pale in comparison to top level prospects that we could receive by trading LuCroy before the start of 2017 that will set us up for big time contention beginning in 2018.

 

In addition, I now feel the same towards Wily Peralta, who becomes a free agent after the 2018 season unless resigned to a big extension. we have other pitchers of equal caliber who will be needing a roster spot (ie. Hader & Lopez). so packaged with LuCroy at least before the start of 2017 a contending team would receive 1+ year of LuCroy & 2+ years of Peralta. this should bring back quite a haul.

[Crash2303]

in fact, excluding this season, we have ten players who are free agents or not part of future plans before the beginning of the 2018 season when we are ready to seriously compete. assuming we trade them all instead of holding on to them there is no reason to think that between some package of these ten players & possible extra throw-ins, we shouldn't be able to trade for upper level young talent to fill our holes at 3B, C, & ace pitcher and then some. here is the list of the ten in order of their current subjective trade value that should not be on the team to begin the 2018 season:

 

1) Jonathan LuCroy (FA 2017) - trade either at the deadline next year or next offseason- gives him a little time to re-establish elite value & develop young pitchers.

2) Wily Peralta (FA 2018) - trade as soon as (if) he rebounds

3) Jean Segura (FA 2018) - give him at least one more half season- hope he rebounds- can't forsee him lowering his value more than it is now.

4) Scooter Gennett (FA 2019)- see Segura

5) Adam Lind (FA 2016) - trade this offseason for max. value- there is little to be gained by keeping him next year.

6) Matt Garza (FA 2018) - pray that he has a good start rebounding back to career norms, but regardless trade him by the deadline next year- not on team in 2017

7) Martin Maldonado (FA 2018) - keep until our young catching prospect we pick up in a trade is ready to take over, even if it means holding Maldy until end of 2018.

8) K-Rod (FA 2016) - trade this offseason! no place for him next year- do not pull a trevor Hoffman.

9) Logan Schafer (FA 2018) - anything you can get for him is a plus

10) Brandon Kintzler (FA 2017) - see Schafer

 

EXTRA TRADE ASSET VARIABLES:

1) Ryan Braun & Khris Davis- unless Braun moves to 1B before the start of 2017 season, there will be no place for one of them in the OF (due to Phillips/Santana). If Braun does move to 1B, then I am in favor of keeping both of them until they are being pushed out by someone behind them- otherwise, I see no need to trade either of them, as they both could prove to be important pieces of the 2018 & 2019 contending teams.

 

2) Jason Rogers, Shane Peterson, Hernan Perez- either of these guys might have opportunities next season to see ABs & have a good year, but none of them are part of the long-term plan and thus could net additional assets.

 

3) back of bullpen logjam- beginning in 2017 we'll have too many pitchers knocking down the MLB door than we have spots for and some of them will be additional trade assets to supplement the lower minors or help bring in key pieces.

[Crash2303]

another optimistic thought- in addition from all the young, upper level talent we should be able to acquire from the ten players mentioned above, that should launch us to contention in 2018, we should have good draft positions the next two years to supplement the lower levels with the already premier lower level prospects like Ponce, Kirby, Diplan, Clark, Harrison, Gatewood, Orimoloye, Lara, Mederios, Coulter that can be the next wave to come up around the 2020 season to replace some of the guys we'll be phasing out then and replenishing again.

 

It seems a quite realistic future that we should have a consistent six year contending window from at least 2018-2024. With this view- it feels good to be a Brewers fan

[FVBrewerFan]

so packaged with LuCroy at least before the start of 2017 a contending team would receive 1+ year of LuCroy & 2+ years of Peralta. this should bring back quite a haul.

 

It would have if they were coming off the seasons they had in 2014. But both struggled this year, and that will really hurt their trade value. I'm not saying it can't or shouldn't be done, it's just that the return may not be what you think it is.

[Crash2303]

perhaps, but I'd guess that that package should be at least as attractive as the Gomez/Fiers trade which netted Hader, Houser, Phillips, & Santana (three top 100 upper level prospects). and if LuCroy & Peralta can rebound to even a little of what they were last season, and really I think it is much more likely that they do- it could potentially be even more valuable.

 

Both have had injury riddled seasons, but nothing that would raise a red flag. Peralta will be entering into just his 4th pro season and his prime while LuCroy has already rebounded from his injuries earlier in the year with a great 2nd half .820 OPS.

[3and2Fastball]

They should move anyone not named Arcia or Phillips that brings legit value back. In particular, I think they have to move Luc. I don't see his value increasing as his contract time shrinks and he ages, likely playing for a bad team. I don't want to see pure salary dumps, but guys like Lind, Smith, Davis, etc. may surprise with what they'd bring back. I'd love to see Garza moved, even for a similar bad contract, but that is likely a pipe dream. Plug the holes in the lineup with make good type free agents on no more than a one year deal.

 

Pretty much nailed it so I didn't have to type as much. Agree 90% with everything above (except I would not sign any free agents)

 

I would add that I'd like to see younger players get lots of playing time. Would be awesome to trade Braun & Lucroy

 

I also hope they draft best players available and not be tied into organiztional needs

 

Finally, I'd love to see them go "all in" on international free agents, especially Dominican Republic players & Cuban players, with the $$$ saved from dealing Braun, Lucroy, Lind, Garza, Lohse

[tmwiese55]

perhaps, but I'd guess that that package should be at least as attractive as the Gomez/Fiers trade which netted Hader, Houser, Phillips, & Santana (three top 100 upper level prospects). and if LuCroy & Peralta can rebound to even a little of what they were last season, and really I think it is much more likely that they do- it could potentially be even more valuable.

 

Both have had injury riddled seasons, but nothing that would raise a red flag. Peralta will be entering into just his 4th pro season and his prime while LuCroy has already rebounded from his injuries earlier in the year with a great 2nd half .820 OPS.

 

While you're not wrong, why wouldn't we wait for them to rebound while playing for us and then sell higher a few months into the season? There is no contract situation that rushes us to trade them. Unless Lucroy demands a trade behind the scenes or something.

[monty57]

perhaps, but I'd guess that that package should be at least as attractive as the Gomez/Fiers trade which netted Hader, Houser, Phillips, & Santana (three top 100 upper level prospects). and if LuCroy & Peralta can rebound to even a little of what they were last season, and really I think it is much more likely that they do- it could potentially be even more valuable.

 

Both have had injury riddled seasons, but nothing that would raise a red flag. Peralta will be entering into just his 4th pro season and his prime while LuCroy has already rebounded from his injuries earlier in the year with a great 2nd half .820 OPS.

 

While you're not wrong. Why wouldn't we wait for them to rebound while playing for us and then sell higher a few months into the season? There is no contract situation that rushes us to trade them. Unless Lucroy demands a trade behind the scenes or something.

 

I would definitely shop Lucroy to see where his value sits. I think he has enough of a track record that this year probably didn't do too much to hurt his trade value. If I'm wrong and people aren't willing to give up value, then I'd hold on to him hoping for a good season in 2016 to bring that value back.

 

The reason I would look to trade him is risk vs. reward. Unless his trade value is really low right now, the only thing we gain by holding onto him is having a good player on a bad team. The risk is that he get injured or have another bad season, in which case his trade value would be diminished and potentially zero if it's a bad (career ending) injury. He just had a serious concussion, and that worries me. One more hit, and he could be forced to stop catching, and possibly retire.

 

As to the argument that has been made that he will help the young pitching staff, I agree. However, our backup is Maldonado, who should be just as good at helping the young staff. If we didn't have Maldonado, that argument would hold more weight.

[tmwiese55]

perhaps, but I'd guess that that package should be at least as attractive as the Gomez/Fiers trade which netted Hader, Houser, Phillips, & Santana (three top 100 upper level prospects). and if LuCroy & Peralta can rebound to even a little of what they were last season, and really I think it is much more likely that they do- it could potentially be even more valuable.

 

Both have had injury riddled seasons, but nothing that would raise a red flag. Peralta will be entering into just his 4th pro season and his prime while LuCroy has already rebounded from his injuries earlier in the year with a great 2nd half .820 OPS.

 

While you're not wrong. Why wouldn't we wait for them to rebound while playing for us and then sell higher a few months into the season? There is no contract situation that rushes us to trade them. Unless Lucroy demands a trade behind the scenes or something.

 

I would definitely shop Lucroy to see where his value sits. I think he has enough of a track record that this year probably didn't do too much to hurt his trade value. If I'm wrong and people aren't willing to give up value, then I'd hold on to him hoping for a good season in 2016 to bring that value back.

 

The reason I would look to trade him is risk vs. reward. Unless his trade value is really low right now, the only thing we gain by holding onto him is having a good player on a bad team. The risk is that he get injured or have another bad season, in which case his trade value would be diminished and potentially zero if it's a bad (career ending) injury. He just had a serious concussion, and that worries me. One more hit, and he could be forced to stop catching, and possibly retire.

 

As to the argument that has been made that he will help the young pitching staff, I agree. However, our backup is Maldonado, who should be just as good at helping the young staff. If we didn't have Maldonado, that argument would hold more weight.

 

I agree they have to look into it and see what's out there, but there is no rush. But if your logic is that he's for sure going to rebound, you might as well let him do that before trading. If he's hitting 285/355 with 12 HRs at the break while playing catcher, you should be able to clean someone out. Right now, everyone is probably a little skeptical and would like to see him play again so you likely won't get as much. If internally they have some worries about the concussion and his ability to catch and would rather move on now rather than risk it, so be it.

[ewitkows]

perhaps, but I'd guess that that package should be at least as attractive as the Gomez/Fiers trade which netted Hader, Houser, Phillips, & Santana (three top 100 upper level prospects). and if LuCroy & Peralta can rebound to even a little of what they were last season, and really I think it is much more likely that they do- it could potentially be even more valuable.

 

Both have had injury riddled seasons, but nothing that would raise a red flag. Peralta will be entering into just his 4th pro season and his prime while LuCroy has already rebounded from his injuries earlier in the year with a great 2nd half .820 OPS.

 

While you're not wrong. Why wouldn't we wait for them to rebound while playing for us and then sell higher a few months into the season? There is no contract situation that rushes us to trade them. Unless Lucroy demands a trade behind the scenes or something.

 

I would definitely shop Lucroy to see where his value sits. I think he has enough of a track record that this year probably didn't do too much to hurt his trade value. If I'm wrong and people aren't willing to give up value, then I'd hold on to him hoping for a good season in 2016 to bring that value back.

 

The reason I would look to trade him is risk vs. reward. Unless his trade value is really low right now, the only thing we gain by holding onto him is having a good player on a bad team. The risk is that he get injured or have another bad season, in which case his trade value would be diminished and potentially zero if it's a bad (career ending) injury. He just had a serious concussion, and that worries me. One more hit, and he could be forced to stop catching, and possibly retire.

 

As to the argument that has been made that he will help the young pitching staff, I agree. However, our backup is Maldonado, who should be just as good at helping the young staff. If we didn't have Maldonado, that argument would hold more weight.

 

You have a much higher opinion of Maldonado than I do. I think he's a back up at best. Black hole with his bat. With SS/2B and 3B already below avg you can put another crap bat in the line up

[FVBrewerFan]

perhaps, but I'd guess that that package should be at least as attractive as the Gomez/Fiers trade which netted Hader, Houser, Phillips, & Santana (three top 100 upper level prospects). and if LuCroy & Peralta can rebound to even a little of what they were last season, and really I think it is much more likely that they do- it could potentially be even more valuable.

 

Both have had injury riddled seasons, but nothing that would raise a red flag. Peralta will be entering into just his 4th pro season and his prime while LuCroy has already rebounded from his injuries earlier in the year with a great 2nd half .820 OPS.

 

I don't think they get a deal like that during the off-season. In fact, I can't believe they got that haul for Fiers/Gomez. (Since our new GM was involved in that, it scares me, but that's OT.)

 

That trade was done at the deadline with a team that needed juice for the end of the year/ playoffs. Lucroy is starting to get up in age, and it's unclear if he had a bad year, or if it is closer to a trend. Peralta has the stuff to be a very good SP, but he struggled this year. Was it injury or something else? Either way, I just don't see anyone delivering several top shelf prospects for them.

 

I know I could be dead wrong, and if they could get a return like that I would take it in a heartbeat.