The 2017 MLB Draft Thread (#9 Pick + #34 & #46)

[adambr2]

Well, he named Encarnacion, Bautista, and Trumbo as potential targets.

 

Bautista doesn't make any sense to me, He plays the outfield where we already have a ton of young guys he'd be blocking, he's about to turn 36, and he already declined significantly this year. Trumbo is also an outfielder, and would basically be an older, more expensive Khris Davis. He'd cost a draft pick and a ton of money to basically be a carbon copy of a guy we just traded to free up our younger guys to play.

 

Encarnacion will be 34, is as much of a DH as he is a first baseman, and will probably be really expensive. I'd rather just keep a younger, cheaper Carter.

 

If we are looking close to contention in a couple years, I have no problem with us looking to fill a hole with free agency. But there's no need to sign one now just because we have money to burn and a good enough farm to afford losing a high draft pick.

[TigerUppercut]

I don't want to worry about a QO signing this winter

 

Why the concern with the QO signing There is no reason we should be signing anyone major in free agency.

 

At least we aren't the Phillies who despite having the worst run differential are sitting at #9.

 

Simple. We have the salary space to fit in a QO type of player. We've been claimed to have the #1 Prospect system. While not perfect, having added Susac. There's reason enough to see offense being above avg. Depending on the return on Braun. A SP addition of Urias or DeLeon to mix with Nelson, Davies, Guerra + a 5th SP (the QO or Garza/Peralta/Hader) You have the makings of believing you can win 81+games. At least the makings to believe you won't pick top 10 next season so getting a QO player at a 2nd round cost now makes more sense than doing so the next offseason when it costs your 1st rd choice.

 

So yes I have concern. 3 power bats I could envision worry on is Edwin Encarnacion, Jose Bautista, or Mark Trumbo. Don't really see a SP to be concerned about. But, trade Braun, replace with Puig/Trumbo or Bautista. Move Carter this offseason and you have space for Trumbo or Encarnacion.

 

 

Aside from the fact that Sterns wouldn't consider this and also Bautista being one of the most unlikable human beings alive, even if we were competing and I could be assured that we were only one piece away, I want no part of a guy that goes from 13 home runs in a season and a career high of 16 to a 54 home run season by "swinging earlier."

[reillymcshane]

I think we'd be nuts to consider signing any top tier free agents this year. We still have too much uncertainty. There's no point in adding a bat - even a good bat - when we might be lucky to reach .500. It's still time to let the young guys play.

 

After next season, you can assess where the team is at, and if we see ourselves in the playoff mix in 2018, then you can consider adding someone if needed. But even then, this team should really avoid long term commitments with older players.

[MrTPlush]

I want no part of a guy that goes from 13 home runs in a season and a career high of 16 to a 54 home run season by "swinging earlier."

 

Oh right it was PEDs. The magical drug that makes you triple your homerun total. How many did Braun hit in 2011? It was like 100 or so right?

[brewmann04]

They will not sign any Big Fa this offseason possible the following especiallya potential starter

[TooLiveBrew]

P.S. I feel like I always mess up whom vs who, so I apologize if I used them incorrectly.

Quick & easy rule of thumb on this... if you change the who/whom pronoun in your sentence to he/him, if you'd say "him", then you should use "whom" (the M at the end of the word being a good indicator)

 

So I believe these examples are accurate/useful

 

- He should be signed / Player X, who should be signed

- We should sign him / Player X, whom Stearns should sign

 

... back to your regularly scheduled programming

[TigerUppercut]

I want no part of a guy that goes from 13 home runs in a season and a career high of 16 to a 54 home run season by "swinging earlier."

 

Oh right it was PEDs. The magical drug that makes you triple your homerun total. How many did Braun hit in 2011? It was like 100 or so right?

 

I don't know, I'd have to double check. 2011 was the first year Braun ever used PED's, right?

[MrTPlush]

I want no part of a guy that goes from 13 home runs in a season and a career high of 16 to a 54 home run season by "swinging earlier."

 

Oh right it was PEDs. The magical drug that makes you triple your homerun total. How many did Braun hit in 2011? It was like 100 or so right?

 

I don't know, I'd have to double check. 2011 was the first year Braun ever used PED's, right?

 

That's right. He could have used the magical pixie dust a tad sooner.

[MKE81]

I want no part of a guy that goes from 13 home runs in a season and a career high of 16 to a 54 home run season by "swinging earlier."

 

Oh right it was PEDs. The magical drug that makes you triple your homerun total. How many did Braun hit in 2011? It was like 100 or so right?

Name another player in MLB history that didn't take PEDs that has a minor league track record of not being an elite power hitter (by far his best season was 24HR in AA at the age of 24), hits 22/16/23/22 over his first 4 MLB seasons (those numbers are after extrapolating his ABs to match his 54HR season and also include his first couple prime years) then increases his HR production by at least twofold through age 35. I'll be waiting...

 

Bonds, Sosa, McGwire, BRADY ANDERSON apparently didn't benefit one bit from drugs. There are different PEDs. Not all PEDs are steroids. Not all PEDs work equally in each sport. There are varying effects. I'm all for giving people the benefit of the doubt but defending Bautista as if he just magically put it together the past 5-6yrs is wishful thinking given his track record.

 

Assuming Braun is being truthful regarding using to stay on the field down the stretch and playoffs then of course it makes sense his numbers stay consistent with his track record. Same as Palmeiro. Again, not all drugs have the same effects. Not all players use the same amount over the same time frame.

[Greenleaf1]

Moved into the #9 slot as of last night's loss and Phillies win.

[And That]

If the Brewers wind up tied with the Phillies, the Brewers lose the tiebreaker due to the Phillies having a worse record last year.

[MrTPlush]

I'm not going to get into a stupid PED argument in the draft thread, but for him to suddenly increase his HRs like that due to PEDs he would be taking some special stuff. I am talking strong stuff maybe even HGH. You would see it in his body mass which just isn't the case. You see what Bonds/Sosa looked like after some drug use? Didn't look like Bautista.

 

The wishful thinking is you thinking PEDs made Bautista go from a sub 100 OPS+ to a 180 OPS+ season. Sorry drugs aren't that magical or else we could all be trotting out in the minors somewhere.

[adambr2]

If the Brewers wind up tied with the Phillies, the Brewers lose the tiebreaker due to the Phillies having a worse record last year.

 

So we'd lose tiebreaker to the Phillies and A's and win with the Rays or Angels.

 

Looks like our draft floor is about 10th and ceiling 7th. 4th if we really really hit a bad streak before the end of the season.

[And That]

So we'd lose tiebreaker to the Phillies and A's and win with the Rays or Angels.

I'm not 100% sure on this, but I believe the Brewers would win a tiebreaker with the A's because the A's had the same record as the Brewers in 2015, but had a better record than the Brewers in 2014.

 

Basically, anyone who picked ahead of the Brewers in the 2016 draft would win a tiebreaker with the Brewers for the 2017 draft. So, the Brewers would lose tiebreakers with the Phillies, Reds, Braves, and Rockies. They win the tiebreaker against everyone else.

[brewcrewdue80]

About Bautista, It was some kind of Eye PED. I recall when his season occurred, some story run by ESPN was on some new Eye training that led to hitters doing better. I don't remember if it was someone like David Ortiz or Manny Ramirez but I feel someone along them was also praising the eye training. Or PED eye training.

[MrTPlush]

We are currently in the #10 spot. Looking behind us the White Sox are only 2.5 games back. Play a double header today and still have 8 games after that.

[MrTPlush]

#8 Los Angeles Angels 69 86

#9 Philadelphia Phillies 70 85

#10 Milwaukee Brewers 70 85

 

Barring an extreme finish by us(bad or good) and a team above/below us doing the same we will pick in one of these three slots.

 

To pick #11 we would have to outplay the Rockies by three games and we play them in a three game series to end the season.

 

Currently the Phillies and their worse record in 2015 give them the upper hand in a tie. With the Angels we would win a tie breaker.

[And That]

The Brewers have been eliminated from contention for the #1 or #2 picks. A Brewer win or Diamondback or Reds loss today would eliminate them from the possibility of the #3 pick as well. The the Diamondbacks and Reds both lose today, the Brewers would also be eliminated from the #4 pick.

 

If the Diamondbacks, Reds, and Rays all lose today and the Brewers win, the highest the Brewers could pick would be #6.

[sveumrules]

No breaking news here but it looks like somewhere from 8-10 will be the pick in 2017.

 

Coming into the season if you asked me to name a three pick range where I saw us drafting I would've probably said something like 4-6 so I guess that means the Brewers exceeded my expectations this year. Yippee.

[Jose Cardenal1]

Yeah I didn't really see them winning 70+ games this year so they exceeded my expectations too. I kind of figured/hoping we would get 3 years ('16, '17, '18) of top 5 picks to go with whatever prospects we get in trades but that doesn't look like it will happen. Even with trading Braun this offseason, I feel like they will again win 72 games or so next year too.

 

Damn you David Stearns for finding useful players (Broxton, Villar, Guerra, Carter) instead of tanking.

[And That]

A Milwaukee win and San Diego or Oakland loss today would eliminate the Brewers from the #6 pick. If Milwaukee wins and both lose, the Brewers will be eliminated from the #7 pick as well.

 

On the other hand, thanks to the White Sox' 4 game win streak, the lowest the Brewers can pick in the first round is at #11. Remember, if the Brewers and Rockies wind up with the same record, the Rockies win the tiebreaker for the higher pick. The Brewers also lose the tiebreaker with the Phillies, but they win a tiebreaker with the Angels.

[CheezWizHed]

If the Rockies get that tie-breaker, we should get Carolina as our A+ affiliate then...

[MrTPlush]

With today's loss we are still alive for the #8 pick. If were to have won it would have taken an 0-3 finish plus a 3-1 or 4-0 finish by the Phillies to secure that pick.

[trwi7]

A's need to win out and the Brewers need to lose out otherwise we can't catch the A's.

 

Padres win out, Brewers go 1-2 or worse. Padres go 3-1, Brewers lose out.

 

Phillies go 2-2, Brewers get swept. Phillies go 3-1, Brewers go 1-2. Phillies go 4-0, Brewers go 2-1.

 

The Angels are now a game ahead of us in the standings. If we go 1-2 or worse, we automatically finish ahead of them.

 

We lose the tiebreaker to the Rockies but one more win in the Rockies final 4 games means that the Rockies can't pass the Brewers in the standings.

[ZBTMP]

I guess I missed the Rockies having the tie breaker when I looked at the standings. Every team around the Brewers lost yesterday so jumping Oakland is no longer possible.