Which prospects do you want/not want the Brewers to trade?

[LouisEly]

Before anyone answers "none" to the "want to trade" list, the reality is that they have at least eight legitimate major league and minor league OFs 25 or younger - Santana, Brinson, Phillips, Cordell, Ray, Clark, Harrison, and Stokes, plus Lutz and at least three international players in the last two years have been given significant signing bonuses. Not to mention long-shots Tyrone Taylor, Clint Coulter, and Demi Orimoloye. Some are going to have to get moved.

 

Who is a no-trade, who is a "must be for young pitching", and who would you like to see moved because you think they will have less value in the future? (The reality is that everyone is available if you're blown away; this is assuming the deal is fair.)

 

No-trade: Hader, Woodruff, Burnes, Erceg

 

Must be for young pitching with multiple years of control: Brinson, Phillips, Ortiz, Peralta

 

Like to trade: Ray, Orimoloye, Medeiros, Lara

[3and2Fastball]

Kiura and Dubon are the only ones I don't want to be traded.

 

I think Hader could be similar to Andrew Miller, so I'd only want to trade him for a very good controllable starting pitcher (like Quintana, or Stroman).

 

I'd prefer to keep Woodruff, too

 

I'd want to make sure to keep at least one of Brinson, Ray, Phillips

[docduany]

No-trade: Woodruff, Burnes, Monte Harrison

 

Must be for young pitching with multiple years of control: Brinson, Ortiz, Peralta, Hader, Isan Diaz, Trent C

 

Like to trade: Ray, , Medeiros, Lara, Maverick Philips,

[Humans Need Water]

Based on present day....and yes, I'd be open to trading anyone depending on the actual trade

 

No-Trade: Brinson, Hader, Woodruff, Phillips, Ortiz, Burnes, Diaz, Bickford, Hiura [prefer not to trade Peralta, T.Williams (pen), Kodi (pen)]

 

Must trade for young pitching with control: don't have a definitive list because it depends on certain variables and I'd also use MLB players too

 

Like to trade: Lopez, Diplan, Ponce, Gatewood, Harrison, Coulter, Demi, McClanahan, Lara

[bigred]

I'll post my list at a later time. I'm curious though, as to how much trade value Nathan Kirby holds at this time? Maybe just a risk/reward prospect now because of his injury history? If so, then obviously some teams might not be interested, so the Brewers would probably better off keeping him then.

[Lathund]

Generally I don't want to give up too much in the way of pitching prospects to aquire a pitcher, as that to me is just treading water. Trade the high-minors pitching prospects away and when the next rotation need opens up we don't have them there to try out, but have to trade again. Other than that there aren't too many hard "no"'s. If the deal is right, then pretty much everyone is expendable. But that's where the problem is: These midseason pitching trades just forces us to give up too much.

 

wrt the outfielder situation: Yes, we obviously can't keep them all. But there's no real rush here either. Most of them aren't on the 40-man, and won't be for a while. Those who are still have option years remaining. And not all highly rated prospects reach the majors, let alone become productive players at that level. So I'd like to wait and see a bit. If it looks like we have 6 future productive big-league OFs in the minors, by all means work out a trade or two. But if some fall along the wayside, and likely some will, in their climb up the levels, then having kept more of them increases the chances of getting production out of it.

 

Now for an unpopular opinion. He's not a prospect anymore, but Domingo Santana. I like him, and I think he's going to be a very productive major leaguer. But there's a potential mismatch in valuation here to exploit. Namely that while he's a valuable player to us, he's a poor defender at a NL club that has a great deal of outfield talent waiting in the wings. Compare that to an AL team (i.e DH) that also lacks outfield prospects, and he'd be even more valuable to them. Probably more of an offseason trade, but worth at least exploring.

 

Hard to make a definitive list, but there are a couple of groups of players I'd be reluctant to trade:

- ML-ready or almost ML-ready pitching: Hader, Woodruff, Burnes, Ortiz etc. Finding a solid starter among them lessens the risk of having to trade the farm for a pitcher next time the need arises.

 

- High-ceiling up the middle talent: Brinson, Ray, Dubon, Diaz, Phillips, Hiura, Feliciano, Clark, maybe others. Some of these guys have both a high ceiling and a low floor. Which means that all the way until they look to have "made it", their trade value won't be high. And these are the kinds of players who if they make it, are extremely valuable at premium positions. There's always a risk that they don't make it, and we'd sit there wishing we'd made the trade. But I'd much rather do that than watch them have success rising through another system. So I'd give all of them more time.

 

So that leaves who I'm not as picky about giving up.

- Corner infielders/outfielders. Especially the bat-first or "bat-only" varieties.

 

- Pitching prospects more likely to become relievers than starters.

[MrTPlush]

Anyone is available in trades if you ask me. Only untouchable guy is probably Brinson who I might open up for a Quintana trade...but probably not.

 

Some of the obvious candidates are some of the OFers who don't really project to be all that great. I'd be surprised if a Clint Coulter or Ryan Cordell aren't heading somewhere else this month. I really would not care trading anyone if it brings back a good/controllable player. I just don't want specific packages. Ones that include multiple of our good rotation prospects(Burnes/Woodruff/Ortiz). Would also prefer not packaging multiple prospects that are at AA/AAA.

[monty57]

We should have a couple of starters and most of our future bullpen covered with what we have in the minors, so I'd hate to part with much of our MiLB pitching.

 

We have a surplus of OF and middle IF, so if we were to make a trade, I'd hope it would be from these groups.

 

No one is "untouchable" if the right trade is offered, but it would take a really good player with quite a bit of team control remaining to pry away any of our top guys.

[Austin Tatious]

Of the outfielders, I'd hang on to Harrison. If he puts it together, and he may be doing so, he can be really good. Of course, I'm not moving Brinson and we won't have to. Ray, Clark, and one of Cordell or Phillips is who I'd dangle there for big returns.

 

Having looked at Hader, I ain't moving him. He needs to improve his command but he may just do that. Like the upside there. Burnes and probably Woodruff are out too.

 

It's funny. Go through our prior threads. When we were sellers, informed fans said, you're never getting so and so from certain organizations, whether it was the mid rotation starter from the Dodgers or Rangers or Robles or whatever. Fans respected that some guys are no touch. Now, you have to give the Brewers respect consistently. Same thing, we ain't moving certain guys. We still have depth to make deals.

 

If you look at various proposed deals on the web, and see what other organizations would be giving up, we are in good shape. We can outmatch other offers without breaking into our untouchables. Or we can pass. The most unwise acquisition is the ok starting pitcher. The cost is out of whack. That's why informed fans want high arm talent pitchers drafted high or with int'l bonus money.

[JohnBriggs12]

Besides the prospects, I would think Aguilar would be very attractive to AL teams as he's proven to an extent vs. MLB pitching, and he's controllable through 2022.

 

White Sox for instance, have an opening at DH. They've been using Matt Davidson at DH only until Frazier is traded or leaves via FA. If he's added to the package offered for Quintana, they might be able to get Sox to take something less than two of the top 5-6 Brewer prospects.

[madbad2000]

I agree that no one is untouchable. I am also in the camp of staying the course. With the way things are setting up this year, I'm not sure that I would go all in. Controllable is nice, but I would be very hesistant to trade any top minors pitching prospects. Far too valuable to our franchise in terms of cost control and plugging holes. The costs at the deadline are far too steep for my taste. When you're hearing Brad Hand is being shopped at Miller/Chapman territory I take a step back. The amount of supply is low with so many teams hanging around. Stay the course and ride the continuity of this team. I say spend when you have legit World Series aspirations and not just a chance at a playoff spot.

 

Saying that, this might be a year to go for it if you think you can compete with the upper echelon. If things stay the course, we would be looking at a first round matchup against the Nationals with the Dodgers playing the Dbacks/Rockies play-in game winner. So we definitely need pitching to compete in any of those matchups.

[MrTPlush]

So I am not an informed fan if I am not pleading for the Brewers to draft a pitcher every year with their first pick? Good to know. I also think that is a very wrong way of looking at it Austin. If we agree that pitchers are worth more(not convinced in all cases) we would also have to agree a pitcher is more likely to flop, have injury problem, flame out, etc. Pitchers tend to be much riskier picks at the top of drafts in my opinion. Draft picks are investments so think of them like an investment. Any added potential value a pitcher has is quickly erased by the risk associated with them. That is why high school pitchers continue to not be drafted #1.

 

I would probably never recommend drafting a pitcher Top 10 unless you are desperate and are looking purely at ceiling. Over the long run you would get better value out of drafting hitters. That is just my opinion though. If you think you are going to strike gold with a pitcher go for it. However to hint people are uninformed because they don't want pitching high in the draft...well that seems off.

[And That]

The only guys that are absolutely untouchable are the 2017 draftees - because they can't be traded until after the World Series.

 

IMO, the correct way to group guys is to organize by future value, whether you want to do that by OFP/FV, or some other measure. The goal for any trade is to get at least as much value as you're giving up. So if the Brewers valued, say, Quintana as having $50 million in excess value (I just made that up for argument's sake), they should think it worthwhile to trade up to $50 million in excess value to the White Sox. That might include Brinson, or it might not.

 

Saying a deal cannot include Brinson is more risk averse for sure, but it also makes the prospects of acquiring value more difficult.

[Roderick]

I would not trade Woodruff or Burnes.

 

After that I am open for business, especially outfielder trading business. You have to assume one of Brinson/Broxton/Phillips is going to be traded in July or the offseason. Cordell has been injured and needs to improve his road splits to gain any trade value, so I would think he would be in CS again next year.

 

I think the guys I would have been hoping to trade (guys I didn't like as much as how high they were rated) have dropped their value enough now to where their value is about what I thought it was a bit ago. So I am not thinking there is someone I can "dupe" into taking off my hands for more value than worth.

[NievesNoNO]

No: Hader, Woodruff, Oritz, Burnes

 

Young starter: Brinson

 

Open for business with anyone else.

[A Swing and A Drive]

As long as we don't trade Garrett Cooper, I'll be happy.

[bigred]

Your hope for Cooper is too late.

[DocLuna7]

I am open to trade anyone in the right move. That being said, the right move would include not only cost controlled starting pitching but someone who is an ace if we are to give up the likes of Brinson or Hader. While no one is untouchable you only move those two for an ace and not a middleling starter like a Gray or Happ.

[anglotiger]

I am open to trade anyone in the right move. That being said, the right move would include not only cost controlled starting pitching but someone who is an ace if we are to give up the likes of Brinson or Hader. While no one is untouchable you only move those two for an ace and not a middleling starter like a Gray or Happ.

 

I'm on board with this.

 

I never understand the people who want to package Hader with several other prospects to get back a young pitcher who's just a middle-of-the-rotation starter (or #2 at best). Hader has a lot of potential, has been great out of the bullpen and, really, should be plugged into the rotation at this point just to see how he does when hitters get to see him more than once in a game. It's not as if Hader is a couple of years away - he's here now, so let's see what he can do rather than dump him -along with other prospects - for a mid-rotation starter who would leave in year or two.

 

Just MHO...

[Humans Need Water]

So I am not an informed fan if I am not pleading for the Brewers to draft a pitcher every year with their first pick? Good to know. I also think that is a very wrong way of looking at it Austin. If we agree that pitchers are worth more(not convinced in all cases) we would also have to agree a pitcher is more likely to flop, have injury problem, flame out, etc. Pitchers tend to be much riskier picks at the top of drafts in my opinion. Draft picks are investments so think of them like an investment. Any added potential value a pitcher has is quickly erased by the risk associated with them. That is why high school pitchers continue to not be drafted #1.

 

I would probably never recommend drafting a pitcher Top 10 unless you are desperate and are looking purely at ceiling. Over the long run you would get better value out of drafting hitters. That is just my opinion though. If you think you are going to strike gold with a pitcher go for it. However to hint people are uninformed because they don't want pitching high in the draft...well that seems off.

Yep. I made this same point on another thread recently. It's partly why they target up the middle players and the past 2 drafts being college bats up the middle. The chances they hit on those guys are much greater than hitting on a #2 rotation arm. And when you have a pipeline of up the middle performing prospects they're either filling your MLB positions or using them to land an MLB arm. Or you can use your veteran MLB players to land Top 50-75 prospects (Hader, Ortiz, Bickford) who have shown success through the A+/AA levels so there's less risk than draft day on them. You can still get potential rotation arms in the 2nd-4th rounds (ie Burnes) too. I'd personally take a college bat in the 1st every time unless there's a college arm you can't pass up. I wouldn't go after a HS rotation arm unless they're crazy special.

[Austin Tatious]

So I am not an informed fan if I am not pleading for the Brewers to draft a pitcher every year with their first pick? Good to know. I also think that is a very wrong way of looking at it Austin. If we agree that pitchers are worth more(not convinced in all cases) we would also have to agree a pitcher is more likely to flop, have injury problem, flame out, etc. Pitchers tend to be much riskier picks at the top of drafts in my opinion. Draft picks are investments so think of them like an investment. Any added potential value a pitcher has is quickly erased by the risk associated with them. That is why high school pitchers continue to not be drafted #1.

 

I would probably never recommend drafting a pitcher Top 10 unless you are desperate and are looking purely at ceiling. Over the long run you would get better value out of drafting hitters. That is just my opinion though. If you think you are going to strike gold with a pitcher go for it. However to hint people are uninformed because they don't want pitching high in the draft...well that seems off.

 

You're obviously a respected, knowledgeable, and honorable poster. My intent about using the word informed wasn't meant to say that only one view is possible. That's obviously not the case. I was trying to get at some people who look at these things closely, as compared with casual fans, have that view. I should have used the word "some" but I didn't intend any distress for my point.

 

I disagree on drafting pitchers, but that's the fun of message boards. It's not interesting if everyone has the same view. And beyond that, some people can be persuasive.

[MrTPlush]

So I am not an informed fan if I am not pleading for the Brewers to draft a pitcher every year with their first pick? Good to know. I also think that is a very wrong way of looking at it Austin. If we agree that pitchers are worth more(not convinced in all cases) we would also have to agree a pitcher is more likely to flop, have injury problem, flame out, etc. Pitchers tend to be much riskier picks at the top of drafts in my opinion. Draft picks are investments so think of them like an investment. Any added potential value a pitcher has is quickly erased by the risk associated with them. That is why high school pitchers continue to not be drafted #1.

 

I would probably never recommend drafting a pitcher Top 10 unless you are desperate and are looking purely at ceiling. Over the long run you would get better value out of drafting hitters. That is just my opinion though. If you think you are going to strike gold with a pitcher go for it. However to hint people are uninformed because they don't want pitching high in the draft...well that seems off.

 

You're obviously a respected, knowledgeable, and honorable poster. My intent about using the word informed wasn't meant to say that only one view is possible. That's obviously not the case. I was trying to get at some people who look at these things closely, as compared with casual fans, have that view. I should have used the word "some" but I didn't intend any distress for my point.

 

I disagree on drafting pitchers, but that's the fun of message boards. It's not interesting if everyone has the same view. And beyond that, some people can be persuasive.

 

I understand. Sometimes things don't exactly read as you meant. Agreed on differing views though. Even some of the more unique viewpoints end up being accurate sometimes. Briggs was famous for his "every year is special" opinion and got a lot of flack for it. Now it is proving true this year and if we thought like Briggs, for building our bullpen for instance, we could have had Wade Davis instead of Neftali Feliz.

 

Back on topic I don't think I would trade Corbin Burnes over anyone else thinking about it more deeply. I don't know if he can pitch to near ace levels at the MLB level, but I don't want to trade him and find out he can. We cannot afford to finally get a legit pitcher and trade him away.

[Humans Need Water]

So I am not an informed fan if I am not pleading for the Brewers to draft a pitcher every year with their first pick? Good to know. I also think that is a very wrong way of looking at it Austin. If we agree that pitchers are worth more(not convinced in all cases) we would also have to agree a pitcher is more likely to flop, have injury problem, flame out, etc. Pitchers tend to be much riskier picks at the top of drafts in my opinion. Draft picks are investments so think of them like an investment. Any added potential value a pitcher has is quickly erased by the risk associated with them. That is why high school pitchers continue to not be drafted #1.

 

I would probably never recommend drafting a pitcher Top 10 unless you are desperate and are looking purely at ceiling. Over the long run you would get better value out of drafting hitters. That is just my opinion though. If you think you are going to strike gold with a pitcher go for it. However to hint people are uninformed because they don't want pitching high in the draft...well that seems off.

 

You're obviously a respected, knowledgeable, and honorable poster. My intent about using the word informed wasn't meant to say that only one view is possible. That's obviously not the case. I was trying to get at some people who look at these things closely, as compared with casual fans, have that view. I should have used the word "some" but I didn't intend any distress for my point.

 

I disagree on drafting pitchers, but that's the fun of message boards. It's not interesting if everyone has the same view. And beyond that, some people can be persuasive.

 

I understand. Sometimes things don't exactly read as you meant. Agreed on differing views though. Even some of the more unique viewpoints end up being accurate sometimes. Briggs was famous for his "every year is special" opinion and got a lot of flack for it. Now it is proving true this year and if we thought like Briggs, for building our bullpen for instance, we could have had Wade Davis instead of Neftali Feliz.

 

Back on topic I don't think I would trade Corbin Burnes over anyone else thinking about it more deeply. I don't know if he can pitch to near ace levels at the MLB level, but I don't want to trade him and find out he can. We cannot afford to finally get a legit pitcher and trade him away.

Especially when he's touching 97 now (when did this happen?) with 2 secondary pitches being controlled. Burnes I don't part with. I'd prefer not to part with any of our top 4 pitchers.

[brewmann04]

Burnes and Hader,Woodruff as well as F Peralta should not be moved by DS

[CheezWizHed]

No: Hader, Woodruff, Oritz, Burnes

 

Young starter: Brinson

 

Open for business with anyone else.

 

+1 Any of our promising pitchers are "mostly" off the list.

 

For whom to trade, I'm going to vote for a trade of Broxton. I'm guessing that he is maxed out right not and his value will never be higher. With Brinson and Maverick, I think we can replace his defense and production.