2018 Starting Rotation

[KeithStone53151]

If those players all have great years and we win 10 less games, something sure went very wrong elsewhere.

 

Yes, and there's a whole lot of ways that can happen. Nelson doesn't pitch at all. Anderson returns to norm, Knebel could be traded, platoon at 1B may really fall off, Braun could really fall off.

 

A whole laundry list of things could happen, and it wouldn't take very many of them. I mentioned 6 names, still dependent on 19+ more players.

 

In general I find this obsession some fans have with tanking for the high draft pick to be quite sad. Especially in our current situation. A young team surprised MLB and missed the playoffs by a game, and now this guy wants to tank for a draft pick? If we are 100 games into the season and 40-60 with veteran players and not young up and coming talent...fine, might as well tank for the draft pick. That's not even remotely the situation we are in. I'm not exactly sure what situation this dude would need to concoct to want to compete versus tank for the high pick. Tanking for the high pick in general is sad and dishonest.

[adambr2]

If those players all have great years and we win 10 less games, something sure went very wrong elsewhere.

 

Yes, and there's a whole lot of ways that can happen. Nelson doesn't pitch at all. Anderson returns to norm, Knebel could be traded, platoon at 1B may really fall off, Braun could really fall off.

 

A whole laundry list of things could happen, and it wouldn't take very many of them. I mentioned 6 names, still dependent on 19+ more players.

 

In general I find this obsession some fans have with tanking for the high draft pick to be quite sad. Especially in our current situation. A young team surprised MLB and missed the playoffs by a game, and now this guy wants to tank for a draft pick? If we are 100 games into the season and 40-60 with veteran players and not young up and coming talent...fine, might as well tank for the draft pick. That's not even remotely the situation we are in. I'm not exactly sure what situation this dude would need to concoct to want to compete versus tank for the high pick. Tanking for the high pick in general is sad and dishonest.

 

I'm really confused here. What are you addressing and whose comments specifically are you talking about? No one from what I can tell said anything even close to resembling tank talk.

[KeithStone53151]

 

Yes, and there's a whole lot of ways that can happen. Nelson doesn't pitch at all. Anderson returns to norm, Knebel could be traded, platoon at 1B may really fall off, Braun could really fall off.

 

A whole laundry list of things could happen, and it wouldn't take very many of them. I mentioned 6 names, still dependent on 19+ more players.

 

In general I find this obsession some fans have with tanking for the high draft pick to be quite sad. Especially in our current situation. A young team surprised MLB and missed the playoffs by a game, and now this guy wants to tank for a draft pick? If we are 100 games into the season and 40-60 with veteran players and not young up and coming talent...fine, might as well tank for the draft pick. That's not even remotely the situation we are in. I'm not exactly sure what situation this dude would need to concoct to want to compete versus tank for the high pick. Tanking for the high pick in general is sad and dishonest.

 

I'm really confused here. What are you addressing and whose comments specifically are you talking about? No one from what I can tell said anything even close to resembling tank talk.

 

I must have replied to the wrong comment. The guy hoping to have good years from certain players and lose 10 more games. Between that and his comment about the bucks and not wanting to remain the 5th best team, sure seems he is advocating for tanking.

[mrn1ceguy]

 

I must have replied to the wrong comment. The guy hoping to have good years from certain players and lose 10 more games. Between that and his comment about the bucks and not wanting to remain the 5th best team, sure seems he is advocating for tanking.

 

It wasn't me but I saw that as more that even if we were to lose 10 more games, he would still see the season as a success if Arcia, Phillips, Brinson, Woodruff, Hader, and Burnes have great years. And overall, I would agree because that means we now have a stud/GG shortstop, top tier RF and CF players and a #1 (Hader), #2 (Burnes), #3 (Woodruff) pitchers. That would be an amazing core to build around and what would have likely happened to get there is the surprises from 2016 (Villar, Broxton) didn't recover, a couple surprises from last year (Shaw, Anderson, Thames, Knebel, Pina) didn't repeat, and maybe a mainstay or two (Braun, Santana) faltered.

 

Now, if we went exactly 76-86 and we got good to great production from the young guns mentioned, that could mean all that happen was we had a bullpen implosion and 2-3 blackholes in the lineup with and half failed starter. So I'm going to project Braun getting injured, Villar/2B and Thames playing poorly, whoever the 5th starter that gets replaced by Burnes (Suter?) and all FA bullpen pieces failing. Maybe sprinkle in some early season struggles by the young guys who eventually recover. So that still leaves us with a good Shaw, Santana, Pina, Knebel, Davies/Anderson and a returning Nelson to go along with Arcia, Phillips, Brinson, Woodruff, Hader, and Burnes. While the record is disappointing, I would still consider this a successful year because the future is very bright with young strong talent everywhere and only holes at 1B, 2B and bullpen for 2019 (in my imaginary projection).

[bill hAll Star]

 

That's it. I don't want to see them get a FA starter, or trade for one. No, I want those starts to go to Hader and Wilkerson and eventually Burnes, Peralta, Ortiz, Houser, Perrin, Ponce and anyone else on the verge over the next two seasons.

 

I think they have enough there to build a really good rotation in-house, and spend big money on a bat or two when the time is right.

 

A few issues:

 

1. The room to make a signing is more now than later. Yes, a hefty 4-5 year deal does eat into "later" but I think there is room to make a move now.

 

2. You said it - most of those guys are 2+ years away. While I'm not a major fan of most of the pitchers available, most of them would be a 4-5 year deal. It's likely that Nelson is gone in 3 years or is ineffective. Davies might be gone shortly after that. Suter could fall off the face of the earth. There would still be room for all of the guys you mention even if they did go 4/$100 on Arrieta. I would like to have 6-7 MLB caliber starters each year and then slowly phase in the cream of the crop in that younger group you mention.

 

3. I think there's some overvaluation of our own guys. I don't think the Brewers have to spend to go all in to win the World Series in 2018, but I just think we'll have lost seasons giving Aaron Wilkerson a key rotation spot. Let him be depth, fine, but I think we're fooling ourselves if we think guys like that are going to play a role. I think we've done our evaluation in previous minor league seasons.

 

We can all be excited to see these guys pitch in the majors and then not be surprised when they're replacement level.

 

Dubon, Wilkerson, Jungmann, etc. are all talked about as "the young guys" when they should more likely be depth players that maybe one will emerge as a good player from - the rest will end up being AAAA guys that are nice to have in case of injury over the next few years. If we think giving all of these guys a shot is a thing - we're likely just saving Mark's ownership group $40-50 million bucks this coming year and wasting everyone's time.

 

The latter part of the list - Ponce, Ortiz, Peralta, etc. - I have no real opinion on...but they're a long ways away. I hope they're all around for depth and the cream will rise and fill the inevitable open rotation spots.

[FVBrewerFan]

 

I must have replied to the wrong comment. The guy hoping to have good years from certain players and lose 10 more games. Between that and his comment about the bucks and not wanting to remain the 5th best team, sure seems he is advocating for tanking.

 

It wasn't me but I saw that as more that even if we were to lose 10 more games, he would still see the season as a success if Arcia, Phillips, Brinson, Woodruff, Hader, and Burnes have great years. And overall, I would agree because that means we now have a stud/GG shortstop, top tier RF and CF players and a #1 (Hader), #2 (Burnes), #3 (Woodruff) pitchers. That would be an amazing core to build around and what would have likely happened to get there is the surprises from 2016 (Villar, Broxton) didn't recover, a couple surprises from last year (Shaw, Anderson, Thames, Knebel, Pina) didn't repeat, and maybe a mainstay or two (Braun, Santana) faltered.

 

Now, if we went exactly 76-86 and we got good to great production from the young guns mentioned, that could mean all that happen was we had a bullpen implosion and 2-3 blackholes in the lineup with and half failed starter. So I'm going to project Braun getting injured, Villar/2B and Thames playing poorly, whoever the 5th starter that gets replaced by Burnes (Suter?) and all FA bullpen pieces failing. Maybe sprinkle in some early season struggles by the young guys who eventually recover. So that still leaves us with a good Shaw, Santana, Pina, Knebel, Davies/Anderson and a returning Nelson to go along with Arcia, Phillips, Brinson, Woodruff, Hader, and Burnes. While the record is disappointing, I would still consider this a successful year because the future is very bright with young strong talent everywhere and only holes at 1B, 2B and bullpen for 2019 (in my imaginary projection).

 

Yes, I was "that guy" and you summed up my thoughts very well. I did not say I wanted to tank, nor did I say I wanted them to lose 10 more games than last year.

 

As you said, my point was I would feel better about this team if a bunch of young talent performed very well- regardless of their record.

[ClosetBrewerFan]

Why do we want to sign an aging SP to a long term deal? Didn't we learn our lesson over the past few years. If there was a true TOR SP, I'd say go for it. I just don't see it this year. If we want to sign a few reclamation projects for a 1 or 2 year deals, I'd be ok with that. But a 4 year Middle of the rotation (or worse) starter makes no sense. I thought that was why we were obtaining all this controllable depth.

[brewmann04]

I would not Prefer the crew to spend alot of money on 30 year pitcher think we beyond that and rather see DS trade some of the Prospects for a young arm

[brewcrewdue80]

 

You're generally dreaming if you think Perrin/Ponce/Wilkerson/Jungmann are talented enough to start and to help a team contend. Guys with #5 ceilings shouldn't be more than the #7 or 8 starter for this team with what we have in the farm. It serves no purpose and adds no value. It's not like another team is going to backup the prospect truck because Perrin or Wilkerson fooled MLB hitters with 90 mph heat and fringe average offspeed offerings for a month. The reason people like me are hoping to add a SP in free agency or via trade is to add stability to the rotation for 2018. We currently have 3 guys locked into the 2018 rotation, 4 if you count Hader as I do.

 

 

How can you bundle Ponce as a #5 Ceiling? Perrin has productive numbers for a '15 late round pick. Solid year this year. Can't lable him a #5, you know what that is calling for? A 5+ERA ability and not lower.

 

Wilkerson aside from his stint in AAA in '16 has an under 3.5ERA in every stop in the minors. Now, he's 28 so I'll give that #5 ceiling some thought, but a #4 seems more appropriate.

 

Jungmann is a definite agree as #5 ceiling. I'd move on and use the 40man spot towards someone with a higher ceiling.

 

I agree on looking to add a SP via FA because clearly we are thin and need more stability. I just don't agree that Wilkerson/Perrin/Ponce options are of #5 ceilings. Ponce in particular I'd argue is a #4 Floor with a #2 easy potential.

[bill hAll Star]

 

You're generally dreaming if you think Perrin/Ponce/Wilkerson/Jungmann are talented enough to start and to help a team contend. Guys with #5 ceilings shouldn't be more than the #7 or 8 starter for this team with what we have in the farm. It serves no purpose and adds no value. It's not like another team is going to backup the prospect truck because Perrin or Wilkerson fooled MLB hitters with 90 mph heat and fringe average offspeed offerings for a month. The reason people like me are hoping to add a SP in free agency or via trade is to add stability to the rotation for 2018. We currently have 3 guys locked into the 2018 rotation, 4 if you count Hader as I do.

 

 

How can you bundle Ponce as a #5 Ceiling? Perrin has productive numbers for a '15 late round pick. Solid year this year. Can't lable him a #5, you know what that is calling for? A 5+ERA ability and not lower.

 

Wilkerson aside from his stint in AAA in '16 has an under 3.5ERA in every stop in the minors. Now, he's 28 so I'll give that #5 ceiling some thought, but a #4 seems more appropriate.

 

Jungmann is a definite agree as #5 ceiling. I'd move on and use the 40man spot towards someone with a higher ceiling.

 

I agree on looking to add a SP via FA because clearly we are thin and need more stability. I just don't agree that Wilkerson/Perrin/Ponce options are of #5 ceilings. Ponce in particular I'd argue is a #4 Floor with a #2 easy potential.

 

Arguing a guy is a #4/#5 is splitting hairs - they're still basically depth guys. It's a nice boost if any of them are more solid rotation pieces, but it doesn't move the needle for me.

 

I have almost zero research on Ponce and don't have a strong opinion, but he's striking out 7 batters per 9 right now in high A ball as a 23-year-old. Never say never, but #1/#2/#3 guys are generally far beyond that.

[KeithStone53151]

 

How can you bundle Ponce as a #5 Ceiling? Perrin has productive numbers for a '15 late round pick. Solid year this year. Can't lable him a #5, you know what that is calling for? A 5+ERA ability and not lower.

 

Wilkerson aside from his stint in AAA in '16 has an under 3.5ERA in every stop in the minors. Now, he's 28 so I'll give that #5 ceiling some thought, but a #4 seems more appropriate.

 

Jungmann is a definite agree as #5 ceiling. I'd move on and use the 40man spot towards someone with a higher ceiling.

 

I agree on looking to add a SP via FA because clearly we are thin and need more stability. I just don't agree that Wilkerson/Perrin/Ponce options are of #5 ceilings. Ponce in particular I'd argue is a #4 Floor with a #2 easy potential.

 

Arguing a guy is a #4/#5 is splitting hairs - they're still basically depth guys. It's a nice boost if any of them are more solid rotation pieces, but it doesn't move the needle for me.

 

I have almost zero research on Ponce and don't have a strong opinion, but he's striking out 7 batters per 9 right now in high A ball as a 23-year-old. Never say never, but #1/#2/#3 guys are generally far beyond that.

 

Agreed for the most part. Also add that Ponce allows more hits than IP in a very pitcher friendly league. He might be more #4 than #5 ceiling but he certainly isn't a #4 floor. His likely future is in the bullpen, where hopefully he can throw a bit harder and his offspeed stuff plays up. I think it's more likely that Ponce doesn't ever see the MLB level...same with Perrin. Wilkerson I will give a ceiling of Marco Estrada/Mike Fiers...sometimes a guy with one plus-double plus off speed offering can overcome averagish stuff everywhere else. Perrin to me reads like Hiram Burgos. Decent minor league numbers based solely on good command and filling the zone with strikes. Every system has 2 or 3 guys just like Perrin. The problem with giving any of these guys a serious look is we have other better options available. They are injury/poor performance insurance only and should not be considered to open in the rotation.

[JohnBriggs12]

There's a vast number of options in between paying huge money over 4-5 years to round out a rotation and projecting guys who pitched in AA in 2017 suddenly becoming rotation pieces.

 

There's always guys available (non-tenders, value FA, guys coming off injury) that are out there in January every year. Take Mike Fiers for instance as an example. Likely to be non-tendered, coming off a bad year, but still fanned 8.6 per 9 IP. At 33, his best days behind him, but a slight rebound and he's a viable 5th starter someplace. Selecting guys like that to bring to ST, is where front offices make their money.

[Lathund]

The 2018 free agent market isn't great at the top end, while at the same time several teams will be competing for those top names. I suspect that they'll all sign for longer/bigger contracts than you'd normally see in free agency for players of that caliber. I'd stay far away from Darvish, Arrieta, Lynn etc. Not because they wouldn't improve us, but because while there is a time to eat a bad contract due to the benefit you'd see in the first couple of years, now is not it. And it'd be a worse contract than usual.

 

I agree we'd like to go into spring training with a couple of experienced rotation arms, but I'd look a few tiers below the top. Look at the Tyler Chatwoods (Look at the numbers away from Coors rather than the overall) and Jhoulys Chacins of this free agent class. Now my point isn't specifically about those two; I don't know enough about them or what they'd demand, it's more the general level.

 

In adition to that, with a rotation that'll feature (Either to start with, or later on due to injury and such) several players whose ability to eat innings is unknown or questionable (Suter, Guerra, Hader, Wilkerson, even Woodruff) I wouldn't mind also seeing an effort to focus on guys who have that ability, even at the cost of a few extra points of ERA. Exactly how big that trade off can be and still be worthwhile is up to smarter people than me to judge, but I like the concept of it.

 

Now if some of the better starters can be had for fewer years than expected, then by all means go for it. For me the key to spending big money this offseason should be that it should either be short-mid term (1-3 year deals) or if longer it should be the type of deals where you're not knowingly paying for the first 3-4 years only but spread over 6-8. There's (possibly) a time for that, but it's not now.

 

So basically look at #4 types with potential upside, hope for another Chase Anderson. Spend the rest of the money on top relievers on short deals. I don't mind overpaying if the deals are short.

[clancyphile]

Agreed for the most part. Also add that Ponce allows more hits than IP in a very pitcher friendly league. He might be more #4 than #5 ceiling but he certainly isn't a #4 floor. His likely future is in the bullpen, where hopefully he can throw a bit harder and his offspeed stuff plays up. I think it's more likely that Ponce doesn't ever see the MLB level...same with Perrin. Wilkerson I will give a ceiling of Marco Estrada/Mike Fiers...sometimes a guy with one plus-double plus off speed offering can overcome averagish stuff everywhere else. Perrin to me reads like Hiram Burgos. Decent minor league numbers based solely on good command and filling the zone with strikes. Every system has 2 or 3 guys just like Perrin. The problem with giving any of these guys a serious look is we have other better options available. They are injury/poor performance insurance only and should not be considered to open in the rotation.

 

I disagree to some extent.

 

A Ponce/Perrin/Suter/Jungmann/Woodruff/Fiers/Estrada is still valuable for the Brewers. In 2017, Matt Garza was paid $12 million or so for an ERA in the high fours. Get that down to $750,000 or so for a 4.75 ERA, and that frees up $10 million for farm system, scouting, additional coaching, or free agents at other areas of need.

 

But if you get a guy like Suter, delivering a 3.42 ERA as he did in 2017... or Jungmann re-discovers his 2015 form (3.77 ERA), that becomes a huge boost. Right now, Brent Suter and Brandon Woodruff are the two biggest bargains in the 2018 Brewers' starting rotation. If the Crew can keep Angel Ventura in the fold and Bubba Derby, plus Corbin Burnes and Luis Ortiz... they don't need to hit the free agent market for a borderline pitcher.

[bill hAll Star]

Agreed for the most part. Also add that Ponce allows more hits than IP in a very pitcher friendly league. He might be more #4 than #5 ceiling but he certainly isn't a #4 floor. His likely future is in the bullpen, where hopefully he can throw a bit harder and his offspeed stuff plays up. I think it's more likely that Ponce doesn't ever see the MLB level...same with Perrin. Wilkerson I will give a ceiling of Marco Estrada/Mike Fiers...sometimes a guy with one plus-double plus off speed offering can overcome averagish stuff everywhere else. Perrin to me reads like Hiram Burgos. Decent minor league numbers based solely on good command and filling the zone with strikes. Every system has 2 or 3 guys just like Perrin. The problem with giving any of these guys a serious look is we have other better options available. They are injury/poor performance insurance only and should not be considered to open in the rotation.

 

I disagree to some extent.

 

A Ponce/Perrin/Suter/Jungmann/Woodruff/Fiers/Estrada is still valuable for the Brewers. In 2017, Matt Garza was paid $12 million or so for an ERA in the high fours. Get that down to $750,000 or so for a 4.75 ERA, and that frees up $10 million for farm system, scouting, additional coaching, or free agents at other areas of need.

 

But if you get a guy like Suter, delivering a 3.42 ERA as he did in 2017... or Jungmann re-discovers his 2015 form (3.77 ERA), that becomes a huge boost. Right now, Brent Suter and Brandon Woodruff are the two biggest bargains in the 2018 Brewers' starting rotation. If the Crew can keep Angel Ventura in the fold and Bubba Derby, plus Corbin Burnes and Luis Ortiz... they don't need to hit the free agent market for a borderline pitcher.

 

The thing is, the odds of those players actually succeeding as we hope is low. I think even Suter is destined to come down a bit, but I digress.

 

There is a finite amount of $ that we can put into scouting/development before returns do not grow proportionally and...where do you spend the money then on the roster if not at pitcher? The bullpen? You are going to overpay bullpen or a 2B to come in if you want to get a good player.

 

Matt Garza did that last year for $12 million and the payroll was still only $65 million. At a certain point you have the choice to roll with AAAA players at a position or spend money. We're not going to raise a banner for "$60 million payroll that won 84 games" in 2019.

[KeithStone53151]

Agreed for the most part. Also add that Ponce allows more hits than IP in a very pitcher friendly league. He might be more #4 than #5 ceiling but he certainly isn't a #4 floor. His likely future is in the bullpen, where hopefully he can throw a bit harder and his offspeed stuff plays up. I think it's more likely that Ponce doesn't ever see the MLB level...same with Perrin. Wilkerson I will give a ceiling of Marco Estrada/Mike Fiers...sometimes a guy with one plus-double plus off speed offering can overcome averagish stuff everywhere else. Perrin to me reads like Hiram Burgos. Decent minor league numbers based solely on good command and filling the zone with strikes. Every system has 2 or 3 guys just like Perrin. The problem with giving any of these guys a serious look is we have other better options available. They are injury/poor performance insurance only and should not be considered to open in the rotation.

 

I disagree to some extent.

 

A Ponce/Perrin/Suter/Jungmann/Woodruff/Fiers/Estrada is still valuable for the Brewers. In 2017, Matt Garza was paid $12 million or so for an ERA in the high fours. Get that down to $750,000 or so for a 4.75 ERA, and that frees up $10 million for farm system, scouting, additional coaching, or free agents at other areas of need.

 

But if you get a guy like Suter, delivering a 3.42 ERA as he did in 2017... or Jungmann re-discovers his 2015 form (3.77 ERA), that becomes a huge boost. Right now, Brent Suter and Brandon Woodruff are the two biggest bargains in the 2018 Brewers' starting rotation. If the Crew can keep Angel Ventura in the fold and Bubba Derby, plus Corbin Burnes and Luis Ortiz... they don't need to hit the free agent market for a borderline pitcher.

 

The Matt Garza contract was a bad deal before the ink dried. For every Fiers that comes up and is successful, there are 10 guys like Burgos or Espino that get shelled immediately and sent back to AAA. Our goal shouldn't be to put a guy with a probable high 4s or worse era into the rotation and say "well at least we saved money". We have enough talent that we shouldn't be planning to put guys that have no business being anything but the #7-8 starter into the rotation to open the year. Those guys likely see a handful of starts at some point due to injury, but ideally we aren't counting on them. I'm not advocating to go spend on a free agent SP, I actually really don't like the free agent class. I'd prefer to target someone in trade. The answer definitely cannot consist of anybody in that group opening the season in the rotation barring at least 1-2 injuries.

[reillymcshane]

If the club feels that Hader can be a starter, then I would give him a try there. A premium starting pitcher is worth more than a reliever - and Milwaukee is the kind of team that needs to maximize its players values.

 

That said, I don't know what the club thinks about Hader's ability to be a front line starter. Or Hader's thoughts on the matter as well. Hader may very well hate starting. Or he might just not have that third pitch necessary to succeed in the role. Those are internal things the club has to deal with - things most of us don't really know about.

 

Obviously, this club needs starting pitching in 2018 - so if Josh is hyped to show he can be a starter, I'd do in a heartbeat. But you just don't know what the club - or Hader - is thinking.

[bill hAll Star]

I think Hader being in the rotation is entirely up to him having an offspeed pitch. If he can't throw it for strikes, even if he starts and is gung ho about the role, he will not last more than 4 innings most games, even if he has not given up much damage...teams will just throttle his pitch count.

[mrn1ceguy]

I disagree to some extent.

 

A Ponce/Perrin/Suter/Jungmann/Woodruff/Fiers/Estrada is still valuable for the Brewers. In 2017, Matt Garza was paid $12 million or so for an ERA in the high fours. Get that down to $750,000 or so for a 4.75 ERA, and that frees up $10 million for farm system, scouting, additional coaching, or free agents at other areas of need.

 

But if you get a guy like Suter, delivering a 3.42 ERA as he did in 2017... or Jungmann re-discovers his 2015 form (3.77 ERA), that becomes a huge boost. Right now, Brent Suter and Brandon Woodruff are the two biggest bargains in the 2018 Brewers' starting rotation. If the Crew can keep Angel Ventura in the fold and Bubba Derby, plus Corbin Burnes and Luis Ortiz... they don't need to hit the free agent market for a borderline pitcher.

 

The Matt Garza contract was a bad deal before the ink dried. For every Fiers that comes up and is successful, there are 10 guys like Burgos or Espino that get shelled immediately and sent back to AAA. Our goal shouldn't be to put a guy with a probable high 4s or worse era into the rotation and say "well at least we saved money". We have enough talent that we shouldn't be planning to put guys that have no business being anything but the #7-8 starter into the rotation to open the year. Those guys likely see a handful of starts at some point due to injury, but ideally we aren't counting on them. I'm not advocating to go spend on a free agent SP, I actually really don't like the free agent class. I'd prefer to target someone in trade. The answer definitely cannot consist of anybody in that group opening the season in the rotation barring at least 1-2 injuries.

 

I would think at least one (Woodruff) should be considered and expected to start the season. Add him to Anderson, Davies and Hader, you only have one more spot to fill and the rest of that list are the injury replacements we think they should be (along with Guerra, Wilkerson, ...). Now, considering there is a high likelihood we will want to clear two starring spots in the rotation mid-season for Burnes and Nelson, it may not be a bad idea to let that group of #7/#8 battle camp to see if someone can earn that #5 spot. If we can trade for a starter who we expect to be better than Davies and here for at least 3 years, by all means get them. But if not, I'd rather start the year a little weak at SP knowing their are midseason replacements then sign someone for 3-4 years and have to deal with starting a known week SP in 2020/2021 because they are our new Garza.

 

Note, I'm strongly assuming Hader will be given at least a half season as a starter and Nelson will be available sometime in 2018 (late July?). If not, this is all moot and we need to get someone else.

[KeithStone53151]

I disagree to some extent.

 

A Ponce/Perrin/Suter/Jungmann/Woodruff/Fiers/Estrada is still valuable for the Brewers. In 2017, Matt Garza was paid $12 million or so for an ERA in the high fours. Get that down to $750,000 or so for a 4.75 ERA, and that frees up $10 million for farm system, scouting, additional coaching, or free agents at other areas of need.

 

But if you get a guy like Suter, delivering a 3.42 ERA as he did in 2017... or Jungmann re-discovers his 2015 form (3.77 ERA), that becomes a huge boost. Right now, Brent Suter and Brandon Woodruff are the two biggest bargains in the 2018 Brewers' starting rotation. If the Crew can keep Angel Ventura in the fold and Bubba Derby, plus Corbin Burnes and Luis Ortiz... they don't need to hit the free agent market for a borderline pitcher.

 

The Matt Garza contract was a bad deal before the ink dried. For every Fiers that comes up and is successful, there are 10 guys like Burgos or Espino that get shelled immediately and sent back to AAA. Our goal shouldn't be to put a guy with a probable high 4s or worse era into the rotation and say "well at least we saved money". We have enough talent that we shouldn't be planning to put guys that have no business being anything but the #7-8 starter into the rotation to open the year. Those guys likely see a handful of starts at some point due to injury, but ideally we aren't counting on them. I'm not advocating to go spend on a free agent SP, I actually really don't like the free agent class. I'd prefer to target someone in trade. The answer definitely cannot consist of anybody in that group opening the season in the rotation barring at least 1-2 injuries.

 

I would think at least one (Woodruff) should be considered and expected to start the season. Add him to Anderson, Davies and Hader, you only have one more spot to fill and the rest of that list are the injury replacements we think they should be. Now, considering there is a high likelihood we will want to clear two starring spots in the rotation mid-season for Burnes and Nelson, it may not be a bad idea to let that group of #7/#8 battle camp to see if someone can earn that #5 spot. If we can trade for a starter who we expect to be better than Davies and here for at least 3 years, by all means get them. But if not, I'd rather start the year a little weak at SP knowing their are midseason replacements then sign someone for 3-4 years and have to deal with starting a known week SP in 2020/2021 because they are our new Garza.

 

Note, I'm strongly assuming Hader will be given at least a half season as a starter and Nelson will be available sometime in 2018 (late July?). If not, this is all moot and we need to get someone else.

 

I didn't catch the Woodruff was in his grouping, nor am I sure why as he's a completely different pitcher than anyone on his list. He's virtually locked into a rotation spot at this point I would think. I expect it to be Anderson/Davies/Woodruff/Hader/external. I'm expecting external to come via trade. Suter opens in the old Estrada role.

[clancyphile]

I disagree to some extent.

 

A Ponce/Perrin/Suter/Jungmann/Woodruff/Fiers/Estrada is still valuable for the Brewers. In 2017, Matt Garza was paid $12 million or so for an ERA in the high fours. Get that down to $750,000 or so for a 4.75 ERA, and that frees up $10 million for farm system, scouting, additional coaching, or free agents at other areas of need.

 

But if you get a guy like Suter, delivering a 3.42 ERA as he did in 2017... or Jungmann re-discovers his 2015 form (3.77 ERA), that becomes a huge boost. Right now, Brent Suter and Brandon Woodruff are the two biggest bargains in the 2018 Brewers' starting rotation. If the Crew can keep Angel Ventura in the fold and Bubba Derby, plus Corbin Burnes and Luis Ortiz... they don't need to hit the free agent market for a borderline pitcher.

 

The thing is, the odds of those players actually succeeding as we hope is low. I think even Suter is destined to come down a bit, but I digress.

 

There is a finite amount of $ that we can put into scouting/development before returns do not grow proportionally and...where do you spend the money then on the roster if not at pitcher? The bullpen? You are going to overpay bullpen or a 2B to come in if you want to get a good player.

 

Matt Garza did that last year for $12 million and the payroll was still only $65 million. At a certain point you have the choice to roll with AAAA players at a position or spend money. We're not going to raise a banner for "$60 million payroll that won 84 games" in 2019.

 

Maybe you can use some of it for signing amatuer draftees, like a prep-school talent who slips due to signability questions. Imagine being able to offer Gage Workman (14th-round pick) enough money to sign - or some of the other high-level talent that passed on signing.

 

If you can't sign the picks, your farm system goes downhill.

 

Hence, I'd still take a chance with Suter over a free agent. Who knows? If he does do well, maybe instead a pitcher becomes a trade chip. Maybe they flop, maybe they succeed. But I'd rather be developing a lot of starters, because the more you develop, the better the chance you find that diamond in the rough.

[FVBrewerFan]

Anderson, Davies, Woodruff, Hader, Wilkerson. Suter your emergency starter.

 

Then, at some point early in the season I could see Burnes coming up for anyone who is injured or ineffective.

 

Then, there's Nelson- who I'm not counting on at all but could come back late in the year. If not, Derby may be a guy to kick the tires on. At the end of the year, maybe Peralta is ready.

 

That's how I would roll. I'm sure they can/will bring in a couple AAAA types just for insurance.

[clancyphile]

Anderson, Davies, Suter, Woodruff, Hader

 

Jungmann as the long relief/emergency starter.

 

Burnes/Derby as the call-ups for injury.

[bill hAll Star]

Anderson, Davies, Suter, Woodruff, Hader

 

Jungmann as the long relief/emergency starter.

 

Burnes/Derby as the call-ups for injury.

 

We’d need a very, very deep bullpen because 3 of those starters won’t go more than 5 most nights.

[brewcrewdue80]

If Hader starts, he'll be heading to the bullpen around the trade deadline if not earlier with Inning Limitations. Which certainly may happen if we're competing. You know what you have with him for the bullpen. Trade Deadline you acquire a SP and move Hader to bullpen improving both with 1 move.

 

I only have concern with Anderson, Davies being relied as you #1/2 for the '18 season. These two were, you know #4 types that are exceeding to be better than #3 coming in to the League.

But hey, Wilkerson, Perrin, Ponce are shoe-ins to be worse than a #3. What if this was the oddball year for Anderson and he returns to the 4.14+Fip pitcher he was the 1st 3 seasons of his career? Davies Fip was actually higher this year than his 1st two seasons.

 

I like Woodruff, and Hader, but the Rotation could be a rotation of #4 shambles.

 

I argue for Lynn because of a 3.38 career ERA but it's blasted because of his weak 1st time ever Fip. Of which a lot likely came from his final 4starts of wearing down trying to give 33Starts immediately following a TJ season.

If this were Nelson with the stats Lynn had up to those final 4 starts 2.94ERA, the talk would be of him being a bad SP. I'm sure if we had him posted for trade the demand would be top 20 prospect, a top 60 prospect, plus 2 others. In the FA thread the idea that he could be had for 4/56 is amazing as he's the least likely of the FAs to not produce to the value.

Somehow Holland would get 4/50. A good RP, but it's not like his ERA/Fip in under 60IP make him that close in value to what Lynn provided.

 

I seen a suggestion on Andrew Cashner who amazingly had a 4.6BWar for numbers that aren't impressive at all....unless it was in Colorado.

 

Point being, the team needs to find a safety net with a FA signing. If Nelson were healthy, fine with what we had. But him down and who knows what future he has, there is too much riding on arms that weren't well thought of, heading in to 2017.

 

What do you do with plans like post above, and Spring Training comes towards it's end and 1 of the 5 SP ends up heading to the 60 day or worse DL?

 

You wind up digging at the scraps or WW that late in to the end game. One of those FAs you could have signed Cobb, Lynn, or Chatwood. to deals that won't cripple your payroll in 3 years or more, much less today.

 

Now, all this is mute, if Stearns makes some great addition of SP via trade, and with this ML roster and prospects, he certainly can find someone out there at his price.