2018 Starting Rotation

[KeithStone53151]

One interesting thought I had for the 5th starter spot is CC Sabathia. I can't imagine he'd demand a long term deal, I'm honestly not quite sure what he would demand. I'm guessing he'd be more inclined to sign with the yankees all things being equal. I think his veteran leadership would be very valuable to a young staff, and he'd likely come on a 1-2 year deal considering his age.

[MadThinker88]

One interesting thought I had for the 5th starter spot is CC Sabathia. I can't imagine he'd demand a long term deal, I'm honestly not quite sure what he would demand. I'm guessing he'd be more inclined to sign with the yankees all things being equal. I think his veteran leadership would be very valuable to a young staff, and he'd likely come on a 1-2 year deal considering his age.

 

The fact he would be able to swing a bat regularly might be enough of an enticement, especially since the Yankees are still looking to fill their manager and coaching slots....

[pacopete4]

1. Anderson

2. Davies

3. Sabathia

4. Woodruff

5. Hader

 

Suter is in the pen as the long man/spot starter. Meanwhile, Nelson is either going to fill a spot in that rotation or a guy like Burnes later in the season. I'm on board.

[bill hAll Star]

I think that the relatively effective finish from CC probably guaranteed that he wouldn't come at a sneaky "buy low" 1-year price of 1 year/$7 million. If it's gonna be one year, somebody will probably bid $10+ million now and probably go multiple years.

 

Who knows what he wants - maybe he's made enough money and is willing to go somewhere that he just wants to if the offers aren't wildly different. And if that's the case, as much as he said he liked it in MKE, he'd probably rather NYY or a few other places before coming here.

[monty57]

I'd like them to add another starter, but not one of the 31 year olds who will demand a long-term, high dollar deal (Arrieta, Darvish). Ideally, we'll find a younger starter in FA (Chatwood) or trade (??) who you can have for 3-4 "prime" years. If not, then we should bring in a veteran on a 1-year deal who may be replaced by Nelson or one of our prospects mid-season.

 

I like going into the year with Anderson, Davies, {Chatwood or guy we trade for}, Woodruff, Hader. Wilkerson is a good option in AAA who is ready to call up anytime someone goes down. Suter is a good guy to have as "long man/spot starter." Burnes should come up when the team thinks he is ready for a permanent call-up, which will probably be mid-season.

 

If Jungmann or Guerra make the team, it will likely be in the 'pen, with a potential to spot start if needed. We are getting to a point where more talented guys are pushing out the lesser talented guys, and that's a good thing.

 

Edit: I'll add that I think we're going to be significant players in the bullpen market this offseason. If we are can't find a good option to add a starting pitcher, we could put a lot of talent into the back of the bullpen and run with some guys like Suter, Guerra, or Jungmann who can go multiple innings from the bullpen. When a SP does well, we lock them down with our good relievers. When a starter doesn't do well, we have multiple guys who can finish the game without taxing the better relievers. If we end up relying on some younger guys, having a several multiple inning guys could help.

[BrewCrewBlueDevil]

1. Anderson

2. Davies

3. Guerra

4. Wilkerson

5. Hader

LRP: Jungman

RP: Hughes, Barnes, Williams, Suter

SU: Neshek (2 years, 16 million)

CP: Knebel

 

Pretty boring but very realistic.

[bill hAll Star]

1. Anderson

2. Davies

3. Guerra

4. Wilkerson

5. Hader

LRP: Jungman

RP: Hughes, Barnes, Williams, Suter

SU: Neshek (2 years, 16 million)

CP: Knebel

 

Pretty boring but very realistic.

 

If Guerra is not back to form, that's a very shallow pitching staff. I hate to be cruel about that projection, but that team might win 70-75 games.

 

Where is Woodruff?

[KeithStone53151]

1. Anderson

2. Davies

3. Guerra

4. Wilkerson

5. Hader

LRP: Jungman

RP: Hughes, Barnes, Williams, Suter

SU: Neshek (2 years, 16 million)

CP: Knebel

 

Pretty boring but very realistic.

 

If Guerra is not back to form, that's a very shallow pitching staff. I hate to be cruel about that projection, but that team might win 70-75 games.

 

Where is Woodruff?

 

Jeffress also isn't included, and I fully expect him on the staff next year. I think we'd target Swarzak over Neshek, but I'm expecting 2 signings. I can't imagine Jungmann or Guerra opening with the club.

[FVBrewerFan]

1. Anderson

2. Davies

3. Guerra

4. Wilkerson

5. Hader

LRP: Jungman

RP: Hughes, Barnes, Williams, Suter

SU: Neshek (2 years, 16 million)

CP: Knebel

 

Pretty boring but very realistic.

 

If Guerra is not back to form, that's a very shallow pitching staff. I hate to be cruel about that projection, but that team might win 70-75 games.

 

Where is Woodruff?

 

Yea, substitute Woodruff for Guerra

Jeffress for Neshek

 

Otherwise I would be fine with this. Looks like a 70 win team? So did the pitching staff before the start of the 2017 season. And that was before Peralta flamed out, Guerra was injured/ ineffective, and Nelson went down late in the year. Not to mention multiple implosions from various bullpen gas cans.

 

No, I like this to start the season. Burnes up by June.

[bill hAll Star]

1. Anderson

2. Davies

3. Guerra

4. Wilkerson

5. Hader

LRP: Jungman

RP: Hughes, Barnes, Williams, Suter

SU: Neshek (2 years, 16 million)

CP: Knebel

 

Pretty boring but very realistic.

 

If Guerra is not back to form, that's a very shallow pitching staff. I hate to be cruel about that projection, but that team might win 70-75 games.

 

Where is Woodruff?

 

Yea, substitute Woodruff for Guerra

Jeffress for Neshek

 

Otherwise I would be fine with this. Looks like a 70 win team? So did the pitching staff before the start of the 2017 season. And that was before Peralta flamed out, Guerra was injured/ ineffective, and Nelson went down late in the year. Not to mention multiple implosions from various bullpen gas cans.

 

No, I like this to start the season. Burnes up by June.

 

I think you're being a bit too rosy on the "we had bad events in 2017 with low expectations and still did well."

 

I'd argue that we had very positive luck on W/L in 2017. We won a lot of the games that

 

-Peralta was 6-2 in games he started. Only one of the losses was his fault.

 

-We lost every game Peralta was a reliever in but 1...but most of those he was in for were when we were getting smoked regardless. He factored into the losing effort for his first 3 or so games and then collected garbage after that. I think it can be agreed upon/expected that we'll have a reliever implode in 2018 as well and lose us 2 or 3 games before being demoted even if we have a deep bullpen.

 

-The bullpen won most of the days that Nelson would've pitched or at the very least pitched well.

 

-Guerra was so-so. He was pitching horribly but he somehow survived with 3 runs through 6 innings in a lot of his early starts. He was instrumental in the post ASB stretch of failure.

 

 

So, Guerra had a bad stretch, Peralta blew a few games, Nelson being out for a month I'd almost call a wash.

 

Do you really think that we wouldn't have worse hiccups with Wilkerson in the rotation plus Woodruff and Hader, guys that we cannot be certain will consistently go 4 or 5 innings? Jimmy Nelson now will miss most of the season. Will Chase Anderson pitch like a borderline ace again this year?

 

I think the pitching luck will be much worse this year unless we're proactive. Everything that went "bad" is pretty normal for a given season.

 

There is wayyyyyy too much confidence in our prospects/system. We have great depth but not many guys I want to count on in a rotation near-term. Hader is the one true legit prospect but he's a risk given that he can't throw a 3rd pitch right now. Woodruff looks like he could be a #3 but he could get washed out of the rotation as well. He hasn't shown long-term MLB staying power. His pitch counts got up there early. I do not want to count on Wilkerson to be an MLB starter to open next year.

[monty57]

I'm all for giving youth a chance, but I think having Hader and Woodruff in the rotation is plenty of guys "getting their feet wet" to start the season. I'd like to get someone else with some experience, and then bring our other prospects along as they force their way onto the roster. That way, we'll have a strong AAA staff, and the guys who deserve it will find their way onto the MLB roster. Having extra starters capable of playing at the MLB level is a good thing.

[FVBrewerFan]

There is wayyyyyy too much confidence in our prospects/system.

 

It's not that I have too much confidence. It's that guys like Hader, Woodruff, Williams are ready now, and Burnes should be real soon. Will all of them, and the guys that follow all be great? Of course not. But they are still rebuilding. So I don't care how many rookies/ young players are on the pitching staff. The more the better. We don't know who will be a #1, #3, etc.

 

The only way to find out is let them pitch. The longer we wait, the longer this rebuild will take. Sure, we can trade for or sign a stop gap or two, and we'll feel better. Maybe we win 84 games instead of 81 or whatever.

 

Get the young talent up, position players too. Let's not fall into the trap this organization has so many times thinking they're ready to compete for a WS title. They're not.

[bill hAll Star]

I'm all for giving youth a chance, but I think having Hader and Woodruff in the rotation is plenty of guys "getting their feet wet" to start the season. I'd like to get someone else with some experience, and then bring our other prospects along as they force their way onto the roster. That way, we'll have a strong AAA staff, and the guys who deserve it will find their way onto the MLB roster. Having extra starters capable of playing at the MLB level is a good thing.

 

Yeah, mostly this. Woodruff could be the next solid prospect that turns into a consistent #2 starter for 5 years, but I'm not banking on that. The odds are more likely that he is probably a #4 or he even is a higher ceiling guy that has to go back and forth to AAA a lot until he refines some things.

 

Hader could be Blake Snell early. Great stuff but lack of that 3rd pitch means hitters pitch count him in the 4th/5th every game.

 

I'm OK letting Woodruff and Hader start the year out in the rotation, but there is a large amount of risk there. Throwing Wilkerson on the fire is too much for me.

 

I know we likely aren't aiming to win the World Series this year, but I think there is little risk in signing a vet and letting the cream rise on the younger guys. If Wilkerson, Hader, and Woodruff are all really that good right away, we'll know...and at that point, it's a good depth problem to have.

[bill hAll Star]

There is wayyyyyy too much confidence in our prospects/system.

 

It's not that I have too much confidence. It's that guys like Hader, Woodruff, Williams are ready now, and Burnes should be real soon. Will all of them, and the guys that follow all be great? Of course not. But they are still rebuilding. So I don't care how many rookies/ young players are on the pitching staff. The more the better. We don't know who will be a #1, #3, etc.

 

The only way to find out is let them pitch. The longer we wait, the longer this rebuild will take. Sure, we can trade for or sign a stop gap or two, and we'll feel better. Maybe we win 84 games instead of 81 or whatever.

 

Get the young talent up, position players too. Let's not fall into the trap this organization has so many times thinking they're ready to compete for a WS title. They're not.

 

The difference to me is that the opportunity for tanking is gone now. Playing the young guys and letting them figure it out is still generally good practice, but the "sign a guy to win 84 instead of 81" doesn't bother me much. If we were an early stage rebuilding team and signing a guy to win 73 instead of 70 - now that is kinda stupid.

 

I think most of those guys will get their chance regardless if they are good. Woodruff will be in the rotation, Hader most likely will be - and I doubt anyone else really should be, but they'll show us or get a shot due to injury/underperformance if they really do deserve it.

 

Am I shooting for the World Series this year and signing every free agent imaginable? No. But it wouldn't kill me if we overspent on Lance Lynn, even if I know it's an overpay (assuming the deal is short). I'd prefer a 2 year/$15 million type risk signing a la Charlie Morton or maybe a bit more $ on Chatwood.

 

I don't think guys like Burnes will be ready so soon. And just by the power of odds, if Burnes is ready mid-season and is a stud, it's just as likely that Nelson is done/ineffective for his career or Hader is not a starter or Woodruff underwhelms or somebody gets hurt for a long period of time.

 

They have some space to spend money now so I wouldn't mind a surplus of arms. If we wait 2-3 years and let these guys pitch, chances are that 2 or 3 emerge as solid rotation pieces along with what we already have...but then our assumed space to spend is mostly gone and we're sitting with Davies/Nelson/Anderson all nearing the end of their tenures.

[KeithStone53151]

There is wayyyyyy too much confidence in our prospects/system.

 

It's not that I have too much confidence. It's that guys like Hader, Woodruff, Williams are ready now, and Burnes should be real soon. Will all of them, and the guys that follow all be great? Of course not. But they are still rebuilding. So I don't care how many rookies/ young players are on the pitching staff. The more the better. We don't know who will be a #1, #3, etc.

 

The only way to find out is let them pitch. The longer we wait, the longer this rebuild will take. Sure, we can trade for or sign a stop gap or two, and we'll feel better. Maybe we win 84 games instead of 81 or whatever.

 

Get the young talent up, position players too. Let's not fall into the trap this organization has so many times thinking they're ready to compete for a WS title. They're not.

 

I feel like far too many people think building a contender is this long, drawn out progression that takes years on year. By the time guys like Hader/Woodruff/Arcia/Phillips/Brinson/etc fully establish themselves and we on paper are "ready to compete", guys like Shaw/Thames/Santana/Braun/Anderson/Davies will be gone or on their way out. The Cubs won almost 100 games in 2015 in a year they were projected by all these "experts" to finish middle of the pack. Everybody thought their build would be more gradual than it ended up being.

 

We were very close this past year. Close considering Villar was awful, we had 3-4 terrible bullpen arms at most times for most of the season, and Guerra/Peralta got way more starts than they deserved before we pulled the plug. Most of that can be addressed this off season and through talent that will come up. Villar I'm expecting to come back hungry after a poor 2016 season, I'm sure he knows that he'll probably get DFA'd and wind up in AAA/minor league deal w/camp invite somewhere else in 2019 if he repeats his 2017 performance. We have quite a few younger players that should trend upward(Santana/Arcia/Phillips/Brinson). We aren't a team full of aging talent that we're just hoping certain guys don't hit an age wall and become useless immediately. We have only 1 or 2 guys that fall into that category. We are at a point where this team can compete now and into the foreseeable future if things fall correctly in a given year. And things falling correctly needs to happen for most teams to compete.

[FVBrewerFan]

We are at a point where this team can compete now and into the foreseeable future if things fall correctly in a given year. And things falling correctly needs to happen for most teams to compete.

 

If you believe that, that should start spending a lot more money right now. I don't believe it. A big part of the success last year was due to Shaw, Thames (early), Sogard (one month), Pina, Nelson, Anderson, Knebel, Swarzak (late.)

 

I am not sold on any of those guys repeating what they did. Certainly not Nelson, of course. Swarzak may not even be here. Not saying they won't, but they had the best season from all these guys.

 

Sure, if some of them regress other guys like Arcia and Villar can have better seasons. But if I add it all up, I just don't see a team ready to compete for the WS. Even if they added a couple really good BP arms and a rotation arm.

 

I agree, a rebuild rarely sticks to the original plan. Sometimes it takes longer, sometimes you have success earlier than expected. I just happen to believe last year's success was fool's gold. Fun season, I enjoyed it thoroughly. But I don't want decisions based on last year's success as though we make a tweak here and there and we win the WS in 2018. I'm just not seeing it.

[bill hAll Star]

We are at a point where this team can compete now and into the foreseeable future if things fall correctly in a given year. And things falling correctly needs to happen for most teams to compete.

 

If you believe that, that should start spending a lot more money right now. I don't believe it. A big part of the success last year was due to Shaw, Thames (early), Sogard (one month), Pina, Nelson, Anderson, Knebel, Swarzak (late.)

 

I am not sold on any of those guys repeating what they did. Certainly not Nelson, of course. Swarzak may not even be here. Not saying they won't, but they had the best season from all these guys.

 

Sure, if some of them regress other guys like Arcia and Villar can have better seasons. But if I add it all up, I just don't see a team ready to compete for the WS. Even if they added a couple really good BP arms and a rotation arm.

 

I agree, a rebuild rarely sticks to the original plan. Sometimes it takes longer, sometimes you have success earlier than expected. I just happen to believe last year's success was fool's gold. Fun season, I enjoyed it thoroughly. But I don't want decisions based on last year's success as though we make a tweak here and there and we win the WS in 2018. I'm just not seeing it.

 

If most of those guys falter, the team is 3 years away anyways and I don’t even think we have the NEXT level of prospects to be excited about that wave (who knows at this point).

 

So unless you want to tank, which I think is long gone as an opportunity, what is wrong with spending money right now? Say they sign Arrieta to the 4/$100 deal dreamed up by MLBTR (not advocating that specifically, but say we did). Yes, there is a draft pick to consider, but otherwise, what’s the harm? If you really think most of this wave of contributors is overrated, 75% of this contributing group and total salary will be gone after 2020 and, in theory, Arrieta would have one year left with a bunch of pre-arby players. We won’t be losing anyone if we spend some money right now.

 

We’re not able to tank anymore. We are in a unique situation with great minors depth but a lot of guys in the Shaw/Knebel/Nelson category where we can be pretty confident in letting them walk at age 32 or 33, if they even maintain the level of play that makes us want to keep them.

 

At positions where we don’t have someone for 1-2 years (2B, bullpen, a starting rotation spot), I’d rather spend some money and let the prospects break into the position or be there for depth. I don’t want to hand a role to Wilkerson, Dubon, etc. and try to “see what they can do.” They aren’t high ceiling players. Let them be nice depth in case of injury and make them force our hand to bring them up. If you go the former route and let those guys have roles, you’re really going to dig into your system if there are injuries.

[FVBrewerFan]

what is wrong with spending money right now? Say they sign Arrieta to the 4/$100 deal dreamed up by MLBTR (not advocating that specifically, but say we did). Yes, there is a draft pick to consider, but otherwise, what’s the harm?

 

Harm is two-fold.

 

1) He would be blocking prospects. That wouldn't be an issue in 2018, but it would the next three years. When guys like Burnes, Peralta, Ortiz, Houser, Ponce, Yamamoto, etc. are ready there's only so many spots in the rotation. But that doesn't concern me as much as #2 below, since they could always trade Davies or whoever.

 

2) If he is injured or ineffective, we now have $45MM in (practically)dead money committed to him and Braun. The risk is you commit $25MM to a SP when we don't even know if that is what will be most needed when this team is ready to compete. What is they can develop a really good rotation in-house over the next couple years? I would rather use that money then to buy a big bat and/or a couple top shelf bullpen guys, etc.

 

I have no problem spending big money. It just has to be done for the right player, and just as importantly at the right time.

[reillymcshane]

I'm guessing the Brewers rotation for 2018 will be:

 

Davies

Anderson

Woodruff

Hader

Free agent signing or trade

 

Deep down, I'm not sure Hader goes in the rotation, but he's got a lot of talent, so I'm putting him there now. You don't give up on an arm like his too quickly. But in the end, the club might keep him in the bullpen because they don't buy Hader as a starter.

 

As for the free agent starter -- we will see. I wouldn't be surprised if the team made a run at a top tier guy - like Arietta or Darvish, but they won't go nuts like the Diamondbacks did with Greinke. I think they will end up with a guy on a one or two year deal - an innings eater to fill the back of the rotation. It might be an older guy - such as Lackey, Dickey, Jason Vargas, or Sabathia. They'll hope for a guy

[clancyphile]

I'm guessing the Brewers rotation for 2018 will be:

 

Davies

Anderson

Woodruff

Hader

Free agent signing or trade

 

Deep down, I'm not sure Hader goes in the rotation, but he's got a lot of talent, so I'm putting him there now. You don't give up on an arm like his too quickly. But in the end, the club might keep him in the bullpen because they don't buy Hader as a starter.

 

As for the free agent starter -- we will see. I wouldn't be surprised if the team made a run at a top tier guy - like Arietta or Darvish, but they won't go nuts like the Diamondbacks did with Greinke. I think they will end up with a guy on a one or two year deal - an innings eater to fill the back of the rotation. It might be an older guy - such as Lackey, Dickey, Jason Vargas, or Sabathia. They'll hope for a guy

 

A free-agent signing or dealing prospects for a pitcher is bad news.

 

I am hoping for the 2018 rotation to be:

Anderson

Davies

Suter

Woodruff

Hader/Jungmann/Derby (one in rotation, one as LR, one in AAA)

 

Suter and Woodruff showed flashes in 2017 that they could be rotation contributors, and I think giving them a full-season look in the rotation will answer a lot of questions definitively. Suter could very well be what Sharpie was for the Crew from 2003-2005. Woodruff could be a solid 3/4. Both have control, both come cheap. If they have to go to the pen, or someone like Burnes/Ortiz/Derby forces the issue, they can be valuable trade chips (or allow the trading of a prospect).

 

I think it is worth it to try to use the 2018 season to stretch Hader into a starter. If he can get those other pitches to work, great. As is the case with Suter and Woodruff, having Hader in the rotation (at least until Nelson returns) is a chance to answer some questions as definitively as possible. Is Hader a TOR fixture, or Andrew Miller?

 

I'm okay with seeing the Brewers drop from 86-76 to 76-86 if we get those answers. Of course, if Suter, Woodruff, and Hader excel... I think we'll see another run for the playoffs AT WORST.

[bill hAll Star]

I'm okay with seeing the Brewers drop from 86-76 to 76-86 if we get those answers. Of course, if Suter, Woodruff, and Hader excel... I think we'll see another run for the playoffs AT WORST.

 

The problem is I think it is much more likely to fall to 76-86. I don't think the upside is there on most of those guys.

 

The compounding problem is that we're not the Astros or Cubs of 2014. We're not sitting here waiting on Bryant, Rizzo, McCullers, Correa, etc. We have a bunch of older "prospects" like Shaw, Nelson, Anderson, and Knebel. We've got a 3-4 year window with those guys plus the wild cards of Hader, Phillips, Brinson, Arcia. It's probably an 80-85 win base that could go up given our depth, free agent signings, and Hader or Brinson turning into stars.

 

There's another wave after that that will very likely have good players and organizational depth, but I also don't see a bunch of blue chip talent in that group. Even if it does, it's still 3 years away.

 

If we wait this year out and the pitching staff fails, we're not giving ourselves much help. "Oh, well Burnes/Ortiz/Wilkerson/Derby/etc. are still in our minor league system" is not "don't worry, we're gonna wait this out because Correa/McCullers/Bregman are coming up." Save for maybe Burnes, there aren't any high likelihood #2 or #1 starters on their way up in the next 3 years. We're just going to keep saying, "not yet, let's see if this next unspectacular, yet solid group of guys can randomly produce some TOR pitchers."

 

I don't care if Suter is "blocked" from a rotation spot. I don't care if Burnes has to come up in 2 years instead of 1. If any of the guys in the minors are truly this good, they'll be banging down the door in AAA and we'll have no choice...and we'll probably have an opening due to injury or something like Woodruff being a bust in the rotation and moving to the pen. That's how things go.

 

If this crop of 8-10 pitchers that we think could be MLB guys (most being low ceiling) but aren't yet really produces 5 or 6 really good pitchers to go along with Nelson, Anderson, Davies all still remaining good pitchers we can deal with that problem then by making some deals...and it's a great problem to have.

 

Letting a bunch of guys with #3 starter ceilings "try out" in the majors and inevitably producing mediocre results does nothing for me and is just as much of a waste of time as you all think signing Arrieta or Lynn and being a projected 87 win team this year or next does for you guys.

[monty57]

I just think that it shouldn't be all or nothing. We should always be "rebuilding" if by "rebuilding" we mean adding young talent to the system. At the same time, we should always be trying to compete at the MLB level. If you never go "all in" one way or the other, you can chase both of these goals at the same time. Emulate the Cardinals, who are always competitive on the MLB field and always have good prospects on the farm.

 

Right now, we have some so-so prospects who could fill the MLB rotation, but the upside is minimal while the downside is that we would basically be giving up on 2018 before it starts. I would rather use those players as insurance at AAA (Wilkerson) or as swing-men in the bullpen (Suter). Suter would be very valuable in that role, and Wilkerson will pitch at the MLB level in 2018 if he deserves it, as no team goes through a season with only five starters.

 

Meanwhile we have a great prospect in Brinson (and probably in Phillips as well) who we need to let play. The upside there far outweighs the downside. When a prospect has forced his way onto the roster, you make room for him. I hope in the future this means we will trade away "proven" talent with limited control to open a spot for the prospect, but that's not the case right now unless you consider Broxton "proven."

 

We can sign some free agent deals to fill some holes without impeding the future. Good prospects will still make it to the MLB field, while lesser prospects will be pushed aside. Thankfully we're getting to a situation where we don't have to put all of our hopes on a mediocre prospect somehow becoming a star. If we continue to look for ways to add talent to the franchise at all levels (even when we're good at the MLB level), we should be able to stay in this enviable position.

[bill hAll Star]

Emulate the Cardinals, who are always competitive on the MLB field and always have good prospects on the farm.

 

Amen to this. The ship has sailed on tanking and becoming the Astros or Cubs of several years ago. However, we have a deep farm system and money to spend.

 

To me, we should have a 10 year window here of consistently good teams. Generally, we should not be dumping prospects for a rental but I would not be afraid of spending our $ and letting the prospects take over when guys like Shaw become free agents at 32 or 33. We can go in for a rental if circumstances are right in a given season.

[FVBrewerFan]

I'm okay with seeing the Brewers drop from 86-76 to 76-86 if we get those answers. Of course, if Suter, Woodruff, and Hader excel... I think we'll see another run for the playoffs AT WORST.

 

The problem is I think it is much more likely to fall to 76-86. I don't think the upside is there on most of those guys.

 

 

First, I just wanted to say it's nice to have debates like this without name calling, taking comments out of context, etc. Must say, it's very refreshing!

 

Here's what I'm trying to figure out about your position. (And to be fair, not just you, but a lot of people who would be at least open to signing an Arrieta or someone for 4 years/ $100MM.)

 

If you believe they are closer to 76-86, do you really think Arrieta is worth another 15wins or so it would take to win the division? Not to mention being a legit WS contender?

 

I don't want to tank. But I also don't want to start spending real money until the rotation is more settled, and most of the position players as well. You have to get the fire started a little before you throw the big wood on it. The Cardinals model is fine, but you have to get there first before you can maintain.

[bill hAll Star]

I'm okay with seeing the Brewers drop from 86-76 to 76-86 if we get those answers. Of course, if Suter, Woodruff, and Hader excel... I think we'll see another run for the playoffs AT WORST.

 

The problem is I think it is much more likely to fall to 76-86. I don't think the upside is there on most of those guys.

 

 

First, I just wanted to say it's nice to have debates like this without name calling, taking comments out of context, etc. Must say, it's very refreshing!

 

Here's what I'm trying to figure out about your position. (And to be fair, not just you, but a lot of people who would be at least open to signing an Arrieta or someone for 4 years/ $100MM.)

 

If you believe they are closer to 76-86, do you really think Arrieta is worth another 15wins or so it would take to win the division? Not to mention being a legit WS contender?

 

I don't want to tank. But I also don't want to start spending real money until the rotation is more settled, and most of the position players as well. You have to get the fire started a little before you throw the big wood on it. The Cardinals model is fine, but you have to get there first before you can maintain.

 

My issue is that I have a strong belief that the rotation won't be "more settled" by just letting it figure itself out over the next 2-3 years with what is in house. Chances are we'll end up with 3 solid/good pitchers and then a few good 4/5/rotation depth guys.

 

Even if it does go better than we think, we will have to decide to pay Davies, keep a 32/33 year old Nelson/Anderson 4 years from now. That seems like a long way off, but those guys will probably all be priced out of the Brewers or not worth keeping at their age if they are as good as we hope.

 

I think the idea of signing somebody right now (doesn't have to be a bigger ticket/longer signing like Arrieta or Lynn) not hurting much is that Braun and Arrieta/Lynn/Cobb/whoever will basically be off the books in 4 years. Help now, help later. I'd probably still go with a 2 year signing and hope for a Charlie Morton transformation, but I think the room is there right now if they want to spend on another rotation piece and/or 2B or relief pitching.

 

If Burnes is truly kicking down the door or Ortiz/Peralta are kicking down the door in 2 years, we can deal with our overflow of pitching at that point.

 

Nelson/Anderson/Davies are all entering or at the back end of their prime right now. I wouldn't mind trying to win now with them while still being ready to hand the baton off to Hader/Ortiz/Burnes/Woodruff 2-3 years from now. And of course, in that process, the guys I mentioned in the 2nd list will help in the 1st window. I'm just not counting on all of them to meet high expectations right away (plus some of the depth like Wilkerson/Suter/Derby).

 

I think we can spend right now for 3 years (and maybe one guy for a 4th) because some big bills will come due 3 or 4 years from now. Now if you say, "I'm ready to spend" 2 years from now, you start to dip into the years where you have a lot of your core to pay higher arby to or to keep them around. It probably makes more sense to spend on 2 year guys, but if you want the better players, you do have to go to 4-5 years.