Jake Arrieta

[bill hAll Star]

I would tend to believe that the Brewers are not the type of team that can or will sign Arrieta and maybe shouldn't.

 

That said, this is a special-case offseason. None of the other big market teams are in play. The Yankees, Dodgers, now Cubs, Red Sox, Angels, Rangers, Nationals (they are in on him, but they may be avoiding the threshold as well) are all out on the bidding. This does present an opportunity if the Brewers so choose.

[NOMAAM]

Right now I think the Brewers need to add a smaller priced FA pitcher for depth and to let the trade market/Arrietta market play out. So they don't end up with overpaying for a Corbin or Odorizzi as their lone move.

[monty57]

No, since the Brewers decided Hader would stay in the 'pen, they need to add a starting pitcher. I would prefer we do something along the lines of a Santana-for-Salazar trade, and I even like the rumored Cotton pickup if the price is right.

 

That might not be as big of a "win now" move as signing an expensive free agent, but I think it would allow for us to still be competitive while maintaining some flexibility for future years. Adding another expensive 30-something could hamstring us if they decline and we're paying $60M+ per year to three anchors. Trading for someone like Archer sounds great, but I think the prospect cost (in addition to what we gave up for Yelich) would gut our farm too much.

 

So I think the best move when considering both now and the future is to trade from the group of Santana, Broxton, Thames, Aguilar to find a young, controllable starter. Not looking for a star, just someone who can give you decent innings this year with some upside potential going forward.

 

I can see the thought of maintaining a bit more flexibility for the trade deadline or next year, but at some point, we're going to have to make a plunge. Maybe Santana-for-Salazar is all we need to be a serious contender. I'm not buying that, but of course it's possible (not suggesting that that is your preferred method).

 

The issue is that say you make that Santana (the rest of your list has very little value) for controllable starter trade...that probably still doesn't move the needle. I very much get your idea of seeing how that goes and then maintaining flexibility to make one more move...but that one more move is going to be the same thing: either overpaying someone like Arrieta or dumping half of our prospects into someone like Archer at the deadline.

 

I like the idea of Arrieta or Lynn or Cobb now. It's an overpay, but we now have placed our last chip on the table right now. We can always shuffle the deck with some trades, but now we can go into 2021 with only short Cain/Arrieta (in this example) contracts remaining. We are effectively going "all in" without messing with our prospects and if we have to reconfigure and try this all over again in 2021, we will not have a bad long-term outlook.

 

Moves that "don't move the needle" (like Thames) along with trading away proven guys and letting "unproven" guys play are what got us to playoff contention in 2017. Then this offseason we made two big "needle moving" moves in Yelich and Cain. Stearns has continued to add talent to this franchise since the day he joined. Of course there are always going to be other players out there on whom we could spend out capital, but eventually the capital dries up and we end up starting Yuni B at shortstop because we are out of resources.

 

Right now we have a decent team, but should get someone else who can fill out the rotation. There is risk to any move, but I'll take some performance risk from a young, high-upside guy over the risk of tying $60M+ per year into three aging/declining players. This year is not more important than next year or the years after, and I don't think the marginal improvement this year of signing Arrieta is worth the potential negative he could have on future years if he continues to decline while eating up 20-25% of our max payroll.

 

He gave the Cubs 2.4 WAR last year, and is projected (Fangraphs) to post 2.8-3.0 WAR in 2018. Salazar gave the Indians 2.2 WAR last year and is projected for 2.2-2.3 with an expectation that he'll work as both a reliever and a starter. If they're right (they're only projections after all), then he should be able to match Arrieta if given a full season's worth of starts.

 

Even Cotton, who had a bad rookie season, is projected to post 1.3 WAR. So is Suter if he were to get the projected 26 starts they're listing for him. If Arrieta was younger, and we knew the next three years would be as good as the last three, then I'd be fine signing him to a multi-year deal for 1/4 of our payroll. Unfortunately, he's aging and declining. Signing him might feel good and make us look like we're "trying to win," but I don't think the signing is going to turn out well for the team that gets him. A big money team can afford that mistake, the Brewers can't.

 

If he's fully recovered from TJ, I would be more in favor of signing Lynn than Arrieta, assuming he'd sign for less years and less money. But the fact that he and Cobb are still unemployed lead me to believe that those guys won't be as cheap as many are expecting.

 

Of course, if the price comes down enough it would make sense to sign one of these guys. But in no way should we sign a guy just to "make a plunge." If we are going to commit the resources we're being asked to commit, then we had better be darned sure that player is a true difference maker. Being projected to be a game better than Brent Suter doesn't scream "must have" to me. For the $20M+ annual difference in salary, I'd just stick with Suter if those were truly the only options out there.

[SandyTolan]

If two things reported in the wake of the Darvish deal are true, first being that Cubs contacted Arrieta and offered same deal to him and he didn't say yes, implying he wanted more, and second being that the Brewers did not have a huge offer in to Darvish (perhaps topping out at $100 million), my question would be how would the Brewers be in on Arrieta if they weren't in on Darvish?

 

Was it only because the Brewers knew Darvish didn't prefer to play in Milwaukee so they never bothered to raise their offer? Or was it that the Brewers didn't want to pay any more than what they had already offered?

 

Based on the past I'm more inclined to think it was scenario B, they didn't want to go any higher with their offer. If that's the reason I don't think there's any chance they sign Arrieta.

 

The reports of the Cubs offering Arrieta the same deal Darvish took, and Arrieta turning them down, appear to be inaccurate:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/02/jake-arrieta-turned-down-six-year-offer-from-cubs.html

 

A careful reading of Heyman’s phrasing is advised, as he at no point states that the Cubs actually made a six-year offer to Arrieta. Nor could one accurately say Arrieta turned down a six-year offer from the Cubs, as we erroneously did in an earlier version of this post.

[SeaBass]

If two things reported in the wake of the Darvish deal are true, first being that Cubs contacted Arrieta and offered same deal to him and he didn't say yes, implying he wanted more, and second being that the Brewers did not have a huge offer in to Darvish (perhaps topping out at $100 million), my question would be how would the Brewers be in on Arrieta if they weren't in on Darvish?

 

Was it only because the Brewers knew Darvish didn't prefer to play in Milwaukee so they never bothered to raise their offer? Or was it that the Brewers didn't want to pay any more than what they had already offered?

 

Based on the past I'm more inclined to think it was scenario B, they didn't want to go any higher with their offer. If that's the reason I don't think there's any chance they sign Arrieta.

 

The reports of the Cubs offering Arrieta the same deal Darvish took, and Arrieta turning them down, appear to be inaccurate:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/02/jake-arrieta-turned-down-six-year-offer-from-cubs.html

 

A careful reading of Heyman’s phrasing is advised, as he at no point states that the Cubs actually made a six-year offer to Arrieta. Nor could one accurately say Arrieta turned down a six-year offer from the Cubs, as we erroneously did in an earlier version of this post.

 

His phrasing is a little more clear here and is more recent than that article.

 

[Cire52]

Can we stop posting the fake HH19 tweets in the forum?

[Boomer5]

My buddy does legal work with the Cubs (non baseball related) and fwiw he said the Cubs did offer him a deal during the seasons but had no offers to him once FA started.

[Boomer5]

I can't see Arrieta signing for less than 5 years. This is his one shot at the long term contract. With all the big free agent names next season there will only be so much money to go around. Machado, Harper, Kershaw is going to eat up a lot of that money. Arrieta is not going to sign a one year deal. I don't think he will sign a two year deal either, two years from now he will really be getting long in the tooth so no one is going to give him a long term deal then either. He will hold out for now and he will get that 5 year deal from someone this season. In looking at his numbers from last season one thing really jumped out at me. His numbers were really good except for one thing. Five different catchers caught games for Arrieta. Four of the five catchers had very good numbers while catching him. In games when Miguel Montero was his catcher his numbers were horrible. Why? Montero caught him in 7 games, 35 innings or about 21% of the innings he threw. His numbers were bad across the board with Montero. ERA was almost 7.00, BABIP was extremely high, walk rate was up, hits were up. Was Arrieta just off in those games or was it how Montero called the games? I don't know how good a catcher Montero is but those numbers I thought were striking. I am not advocating signing Arrieta in any way, just found it interesting how bad he was when Montero caught him.

 

Interesting research on Montero.

[reillymcshane]

Can we stop posting the fake HH19 tweets in the forum?

Cire52 is correct. HH19 doesn't have a twitter account - he has stated so himself.

 

I've deleted the post - and those that followed - to prevent confusion.

[reillymcshane]

* removed my own comment so as not to further off topic discussion *

SeaBass, you can always hit the 'edit' button at the bottom of any of your posts and click 'delete' if you just want to remove something. But thanks for taking the time to explain what you did - and thanks for trying to keep the thread on topic.

[danzig6767]

I can't see Arrieta signing for less than 5 years. This is his one shot at the long term contract. With all the big free agent names next season there will only be so much money to go around.

Maybe he will get five years, but at some point if literally zero teams are willing to offer five years at the yearly average he wants, what are Arrieta and Boras gonna do? Sit out the season?

 

Darvish got six years because his stats have been relatively consistent through his time in the majors. Arrieta has red flags which are going to concern every team.

 

I think Arrieta will end up signing with some team at four years and a 5th year being either a team/player option or some sort a vesting option where he can earn a 5th year based on reaching certain criteria.

[SandyTolan]

Can we stop posting the fake HH19 tweets in the forum?

Cire52 is correct. HH19 doesn't have a twitter account - he has stated so himself.

 

I've deleted the post - and those that followed - to prevent confusion.

 

Forgive me for bringing this up again especially as it is off-topic but it does appear that since you wrote this, Relly, HH19 has indeed joined twitter. Here's a tweet:

Well, it's finally here. I have officially joined twitter. There have been fake accounts everywhere including Brewersworld. You can verify this account on http://Brewerfan.net under the section called "Off Topic". You can also verify this account at Al's Ramblings. Stay tuned

 

And indeed in Off Topic HighHeat19 does say the same thing in a thread called HIghHeat19 New twitter account. So, maybe this is finally for real...

[brewmann04]

3-4 years might in the Brewers wheelhouse

[HighHeat19]

3-4 years might in the Brewers wheelhouse

 

5

[TJseven7]

Can we stop posting the fake HH19 tweets in the forum?

Cire52 is correct. HH19 doesn't have a twitter account - he has stated so himself.

 

I've deleted the post - and those that followed - to prevent confusion.

 

Forgive me for bringing this up again especially as it is off-topic but it does appear that since you wrote this, Relly, HH19 has indeed joined twitter. Here's a tweet:

Well, it's finally here. I have officially joined twitter. There have been fake accounts everywhere including Brewersworld. You can verify this account on http://Brewerfan.net under the section called "Off Topic". You can also verify this account at Al's Ramblings. Stay tuned

 

And indeed in Off Topic HighHeat19 does say the same thing in a thread called HIghHeat19 New twitter account. So, maybe this is finally for real...

 

Yeah I'd guess you are on to something ;-)

[brewmann04]

brewers nuts to do a 5 year deal unless its frontloaded

[pacopete4]

brewers nuts to do a 5 year deal unless its frontloaded

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I guess I'd be ok with a 4-year deal with a team option for year 5. Player opt out after 2 years. $110 million total value ($95 million for the first 4 years, with a $15 million option for year 5). Front loaded deescalating deal.

[Mr Southpaw]

How about this, Jake?

 

1.$24 mill

2.$22 mill with a player option

3.$20 mill

4.$18 mill

5.$16 mill with $5 mill team buyout

 

Seems like a can't lose from both sides?

[TJseven7]

How about this, Jake?

 

1.$24 mill

2.$22 mill with a player option

3.$20 mill

4.$18 mill

5.$16 mill with $5 mill team buyout

 

Seems like a can't lose from both sides?

 

Not pissing away a pick so he can opt out next year. Just buy a 1 year filler scrub or trade for a 1 year rental on the cheap. Give Woodruff Burnes Nelson (hell suter ortiz) til the trade deadline to show us our true need level. If they pan out offer something stupid to Machado instead. So stupid he'd have to consider it. 35mil stupid. He'd be turning 26.

[PeaveyFury]

Honestly, I could see something like that working for them. Arrieta has a chance to hit another big contract if he performs well (which works for the Brewers too), and the Brewers aren't saddled by that 5th year if he's not. I'm not sure Arrieta signs if it's total guaranteed is 89 mil, though.

 

Better put, I'd do that deal, and I think the Brewers would, but I'm not convinced Arrieta does.

[Oldcity]

How about this, Jake?

 

1.$24 mill

2.$22 mill with a player option

3.$20 mill

4.$18 mill

5.$16 mill with $5 mill team buyout

 

Seems like a can't lose from both sides?

 

Not pissing away a pick so he can opt out next year. .

 

You aren't pissing the pick away if he ends up opting out. That would mean he was great and well worth a pick.

[KCBrewerfan34]

God knows we've done so great drafting. We're worried about a 3rd or 4th round pick for Arrietta?? Really?

 

I can't remember where we have gone for it except in a rental situation. Lets add Arrietta and add a controllable starter and lets enjoy this team for the next 3 -4 years. We have NEVER won a world series you guys!!!!! Fricking Kansas City has how many??

 

Now is the time, this off season to go for this and be very good for years. Lets add. After we trade the rest of the farm for the last piece Stearns walks into the draft guy's office and says you need to replenish the system or you fired

[reillymcshane]

If Arrieta had an opt out and used it - that means he did really well. The Brewers would then be able to recoup any draft pick simply by giving him a qualifying offer. In fact, it would be a better pick than what we gave up (I think qualifying offer picks are at the end of the 1st round - but I might be wrong). We'd only be giving up a 3rd or 4th round pick to sign Arrieta.

[superfly]

"Red flags" is really getting overblown IMO. Did anybody happen to watch him pitch in the postseason the past couple years or were we all too busy admiring our wild card banner in the outfield? Sure, there is risk involved at the back end of the contract, as there is with almost anybody we'd sign over 27-28 years old. Arrieta's "down" season last year was nearly as good as any season Nelson has had in the majors, if not as good. I think there needs to be a bit of perspective as to what we're signing sometimes. Who was the last pitcher Milwaukee had that was even comperable to what Arrieta has accomplished in his career?

 

Gallardo wasn't. Sheets? Even he might be suspect. And that was a decade ago. We haven't had a guy like Arrieta as far back as I can remember, and i'm almost 30 years old.

 

Is it too much to hand out a 5/100 or 6/120 type of contract to Jake Arrieta? It sounds like a ton of payroll, but no, no it really is not. That is what the going market rate is. A healthy Nelson would probably command a large deal too if he were a FA. Would I rather have ponied up 6/140 to try and get Darvish instead? Maybe. But on the other hand the intangibles that Arrieta brings far outweigh the diva mentality Darvish can have. Can anybody place a monetary value on hard work, being a great teammate, and work ethic? That's the main question that needs to be answered at this point with Jake as to whether it's too much money or not. Everybody seems to be all gung ho about great DJ is at tweaking pitchers that come here, why wouldn't he find something to tweak Arrieta as well?