Matt Wieters sign and flip?

[TURBO]

Tommy Stokke of FanRag Sports reports that the Brewers "have emerged as a potential suitor" for Matt Wieters.

 

Wieters' asking price both in years and dollars seems to have dropped at this point, which opens up more potential landing spots like Milwaukee. The Brewers acquired Jett Bandy from the Angels earlier this winter, but Wieters would obviously be an upgrade and his power would certainly play well at Miller Park. The Angels, Nationals and Braves are also reportedly keeping an eye on the veteran catcher's market.

 

Source: FanRagSports.comJan 27 - 4:32 PM

[adambr2]

Move would make a lot of sense if it were 2019 and we were looking at contending. I don't know how much sense it makes right now. Susac needs a full season behind the plate so we can determine if he is a viable option for us going forward or not.

[DHonks]

I guess I just don't get the reluctance. Weiters would improve our catching position, cost us less than his salary (with regard to tax savings by lowering profitability), and likely be able to garner 1-2 prospects with a solid bounce back campaign (can be expected in Miller Park the farther he gets from TJ surgery)

[adambr2]

, cost us less than his salary (with regard to tax savings by lowering profitability)

 

I'm an accountant by trade, but I do not understand what you are saying.

[pacopete4]

Move would make a lot of sense if it were 2019 and we were looking at contending.

 

But he'll be even older by then. We have to get him now and sign him to a long term deal.

[Outlander]

, cost us less than his salary (with regard to tax savings by lowering profitability)

 

I'm an accountant by trade, but I do not understand what you are saying.

Probably that you pay less in taxes the more salary you take in. If you use a 40% rate and say he gets paid 8 million then taxes are reduced by 3.2 million. However, it is still 4.8 miilion more than they were spending before and no matter how low the payroll you still want return on investment and IMHO Susac will provide as much value as Wieters for much less. I won't be upset if they make the deal but would rather they not.

[nate82]

This would have made sense before Thames signed but now not so much. The Brewers could have had Wieters play the majority of his games at 1B and also be the 3rd catcher on the team.

 

 

Thames can play corner OF too. Lots of flexibility on the roster.

 

There just is not enough playing time for both Thames and Wieters. Are you going to play Thames over Braun or Santana? The only way you are getting more playing time is if Braun is traded and you put Thames in LF and have Wieters play 1B. That is probably the only situation where you will have enough flexibility on the roster and enough playing time to play both Thames and Wieters. There just is not enough playing time available to add Wieters to the roster right now.

[CheeseheadInQC]

I guess I just don't get the reluctance. Weiters would improve our catching position, cost us less than his salary (with regard to tax savings by lowering profitability), and likely be able to garner 1-2 prospects with a solid bounce back campaign (can be expected in Miller Park the farther he gets from TJ surgery)

 

Unless they have some reason to believe, other than park factor, to think he's going to suddenly going to be a better hitter than he's been the past few seasons, I'm not sure I'm seeing it. Chances are, his defense is unlikely to bounce back to where it was back in that 2010-2012 stretch, and the pitch framing concerns that are likely giving some teams pause probably aren't going to go away either.

 

The "changing catchers in midseason" thing we heard about last year might not have hurt the Brewers much with Lucroy, but he was probably the best in the game and had an extra year of relatively inexpensive control. Unless Wieters suddenly becomes significantly better than the average catcher he's been lately, I wouldn't expect the return to be much more than what the Brewers got for Maldonado.

 

Basically Wieters would increase the Brewers' floor in a season when they shouldn't be worrying about floor without increasing their ceiling enough to justify putting off finding out what they have with the in-house options. This isn't like Feliz where Knebel and Barnes will still get their chances to pitch, and likely in some higher-leverage situations. If Wieters is catching, that means the other guys aren't, and I don't think that is worth whatever benefit there might be.

[trwi7]

Weiters would improve our catching position

 

Will he? He had an 87 OPS+ last year. Don't get the reluctance with going with Susac who was a well regarded prospect who was blocked by Posey. We had a hard enough time trading Lucroy last year who was cheaper, signed an extra year and overall just much better than Wieters yet we're expecting Wieters to be flipped for a prospect or two? What's the quality of these prospects?

 

Just start Susac and stop with this signing veteran garbage in hopes of flipping him. We're rebuilding and we have an option that's younger, cheaper and could possibly be a starter for many years. I get more pissed off the more I read about us being interested in Wieters.

[MillerParkSouth]

Fwiw Haudricourt doesn't think there's anything to this and doesn't see us making another major league signing before ST.

[adambr2]

, cost us less than his salary (with regard to tax savings by lowering profitability)

 

I'm an accountant by trade, but I do not understand what you are saying.

Probably that you pay less in taxes the more salary you take in. If you use a 40% rate and say he gets paid 8 million then taxes are reduced by 3.2 million. However, it is still 4.8 miilion more than they were spending before and no matter how low the payroll you still want return on investment and IMHO Susac will provide as much value as Wieters for much less. I won't be upset if they make the deal but would rather they not.

 

But that would apply equally to any acquisition. It's no reason to go after one specific guy.

 

I agree that Susac is being underrated. I wonder how many are aware that as a prospect he was more highly rated than Lucroy ever was. He needs a shot.

[Bnowell4evr]

This would have made sense before Thames signed but now not so much. The Brewers could have had Wieters play the majority of his games at 1B and also be the 3rd catcher on the team.

 

 

Thames can play corner OF too. Lots of flexibility on the roster.

 

There just is not enough playing time for both Thames and Wieters. Are you going to play Thames over Braun or Santana? The only way you are getting more playing time is if Braun is traded and you put Thames in LF and have Wieters play 1B. That is probably the only situation where you will have enough flexibility on the roster and enough playing time to play both Thames and Wieters. There just is not enough playing time available to add Wieters to the roster right now.

 

You gotta figure that Braun is gonna miss about 30 games next year. That opens up significant playing time alone..

[DHonks]

, cost us less than his salary (with regard to tax savings by lowering profitability)

 

I'm an accountant by trade, but I do not understand what you are saying.

 

Adam, I'm saying that if the Brewers were projected to show a $30M profit this year, but they sign Weiters for $6 million, he would cost them $6 million. But by lowering the club's profits to around $24.5 million, they'd save on roughly $1.5-2M in taxes, thus making the actual cost of adding Weiters more like $4-4.5 instead of 6.

 

Still, no need to sign him if we like who we've got. I just don't see a downside to signing Weiters. His OBP has diminished from it's best years, his OPS+ has been fine to good, and he has tremendous power potential. Given his work at throwing out runners, I would guess he's decent behind the dish as well.

[patrickgpe]

I took a 180 on this, susac and Bradley are only 26, I'd rather let them compete and play than give wieters the every day job at 30 who only batted 242 last season.

[Ennder]

We already traded our best catching option for this year this offseason. Wieters is exactly the type of guy who can give you sneaky value like a Hill did. His WAR the last 2 years have been 1.7 and 1.9 and that has heavily been defense oriented. He has a good pedigree that suggests you can catch lightning in a bottle with him and he plays a position of heavy need come trade deadline. Nothing about his previous years is going to heavily influence his value if he is having a good year.

 

I mean I'm fine seeing what Susac can do but this is not a bad move if we make it.

[Mass Haas]

AUDIO via WTMJ Sat. 1/28: Tommy Stokke from FanRag Sports joined Matt Pauley on Wisconsin Sports Weekend to look at the possibility of the Brewers signing Matt Wieters

[JohnBriggs12]

We already traded our best catching option for this year this offseason. Wieters is exactly the type of guy who can give you sneaky value like a Hill did. His WAR the last 2 years have been 1.7 and 1.9 and that has heavily been defense oriented. He has a good pedigree that suggests you can catch lightning in a bottle with him and he plays a position of heavy need come trade deadline. Nothing about his previous years is going to heavily influence his value if he is having a good year.

 

I mean I'm fine seeing what Susac can do but this is not a bad move if we make it.

 

Susac's likely to get his most extensive major league action regardless if Wieters is signed or not. If Brewers did sign him, I'm sure they'd be convinced he can still catch. There'd be zero negative impact on rebuild. But it would give them a solid veteran who's played on winning teams. There's not a lot of those guys on the Brewer roster.

[brewcrewdue80]

, cost us less than his salary (with regard to tax savings by lowering profitability)

 

I'm an accountant by trade, but I do not understand what you are saying.

 

Adam, I'm saying that if the Brewers were projected to show a $30M profit this year, but they sign Weiters for $6 million, he would cost them $6 million. But by lowering the club's profits to around $24.5 million, they'd save on roughly $1.5-2M in taxes, thus making the actual cost of adding Weiters more like $4-4.5 instead of 6.

 

Still, no need to sign him if we like who we've got. I just don't see a downside to signing Weiters. His OBP has diminished from it's best years, his OPS+ has been fine to good, and he has tremendous power potential. Given his work at throwing out runners, I would guess he's decent behind the dish as well.

 

They do have this Concession project around 20million dollars to write off towards the profit/taxes. But certainly having forgot this by now

[monty57]

I'm fine if Stearns isn't sold on the guys he has and thinks Weiters is a significant enough upgrade that getting him at a reduced price on a "bounceback" deal makes sense.

 

I'm fine if Stearns thinks that Susac would progress better by getting 1/3 of the starts behind Weiters before becoming the full time guy next year, with Bandy getting full-time duty in AAA.

 

I'm fine if Boras is just spreading this rumor to build up his client's value, and our plan is to go into the season with the guys we have.

 

I just hope it isn't another time where Boras goes around the GM and calls Attanasio directly and convinces him to sign his client.

[JohnBriggs12]

Wieters' options are drying up. It could come down to Brewers and Angels with White Sox a long shot too if they also see a sign and flip opportunity. For Boras the contract size isn't as important as finding a spot where he can put up numbers that will generate more interest a year from now.

[adambr2]

I just hope it isn't another time where Boras goes around the GM and calls Attanasio directly and convinces him to sign his client.

 

I think Mark A is a more seasoned, mature owner than he was 5-10 years ago. I think now he would say, 'You have Dave's number, Scott.'

[monty57]

I just hope it isn't another time where Boras goes around the GM and calls Attanasio directly and convinces him to sign his client.

 

I think Mark A is a more seasoned, mature owner than he was 5-10 years ago. I think now he would say, 'You have Dave's number, Scott.'

 

I think so too. He seems to have had a revelation after the collapse a few years ago followed up by the horrendous start to the next season. But, if anyone could get him to fall back into his old ways, I'd say Boras is the guy.

[JohnBriggs12]

I just hope it isn't another time where Boras goes around the GM and calls Attanasio directly and convinces him to sign his client.

 

I think Mark A is a more seasoned, mature owner than he was 5-10 years ago. I think now he would say, 'You have Dave's number, Scott.'

 

I think so too. He seems to have had a revelation after the collapse a few years ago followed up by the horrendous start to the next season. But, if anyone could get him to fall back into his old ways, I'd say Boras is the guy.

 

Totally different situations. Attanasio would be cutting off his nose to spite his face if he ruled out a one year deal for Wieters assuming it's a reasonable amount because of what happened with Lohse. The possibility that Lohse at some point would have negative value was predictable. If you can get Wieters for a song, he's more likely than not to be able to be traded for something of real value, and at worst, you play 2017 with a proven starting major league catcher handling your young pitching. They don't have one now.

[adambr2]

 

Totally different situations. Attanasio would be cutting off his nose to spite his face if he ruled out a one year deal for Wieters assuming it's a reasonable amount because of what happened with Lohse. The possibility that Lohse at some point would have negative value was predictable. If you can get Wieters for a song, he's more likely than not to be able to be traded for something of real value, and at worst, you play 2017 with a proven starting major league catcher handling your young pitching. They don't have one now.

 

The point is that an owner shouldn't go over a GM's head to sign a guy, regardless of the situation.

[CheeseheadInQC]

Totally different situations. Attanasio would be cutting off his nose to spite his face if he ruled out a one year deal for Wieters assuming it's a reasonable amount because of what happened with Lohse. The possibility that Lohse at some point would have negative value was predictable. If you can get Wieters for a song, he's more likely than not to be able to be traded for something of real value, and at worst, you play 2017 with a proven starting major league catcher handling your young pitching. They don't have one now.

I'm not sure how much the veteran catcher thing is going to come into play. While Nelson and Davies aren't exactly veterans, they both have a season-plus under their belts, and there is a chance in this scenario that by the time guys such as Hader and Woodruff get called up, Wieters would be dealt.