Significant Acquisition Coming? Krasnick says "buzz" Brewers close to a trade

[mlloyd10]

I guess im not high on Ortiz/Diaz -

[trwi7]

According to Baseball Reference, Phillips was a 1.4 WAR player in 98 PA.

 

Okay? And when his BABIP drops to .330 (or worse) which causes his offense to go to crap, what's his WAR going to be? This is exactly the overachieving I'm talking about.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I guess im not high on Ortiz/Diaz -

 

Gotta look deeper than 2017, man. Both are high-end prospects who had down years. It happens.

[homer]

I guess im not high on Ortiz/Diaz -

 

That's kind of where I am. I think Ortiz is overrated.

[mlloyd10]

I guess im not high on Ortiz/Diaz -

 

Gotta look deeper than 2017, man. Both are high-end prospects who had down years. It happens.

 

14/16/17 - All down years for Diaz

 

Top 100 for Ortiz - Not in Law's or Baseball America

[bill hAll Star]

Great, now we just need the Marlins' professional evaluation staff to not think Ortiz is overrated.

[Warning Track Power]

According to Baseball Reference, Phillips was a 1.4 WAR player in 98 PA.

 

Okay? And when his BABIP drops to .330 (or worse) which causes his offense to go to crap, what's his WAR going to be? This is exactly the overachieving I'm talking about.

Care to share your plan for improving the Brewers moving forward? I understand you would prefer years of 100 loss seasons and that the 86 win season was the worst thing to happen to the franchise. I hear a lot of negativity and cynicism in your posts without a real plan of success (which isn't guaranteed with top 3 picks for multiple years).

[82brewcrew82]

I guess im not high on Ortiz/Diaz -

 

That's kind of where I am. I think Ortiz is overrated.

I'm the opposite. I'd keep Ortiz over either of Woodruff or Burnes.

[homer]

Great, now we just need the Marlins' professional evaluation staff to not think Ortiz is overrated.

 

Just saying I wouldn't be all that upset if we traded him.

[pacopete4]

We can trade Ortiz just for the fact that he's hanging around Garza. Half blue.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I guess im not high on Ortiz/Diaz -

 

Gotta look deeper than 2017, man. Both are high-end prospects who had down years. It happens.

 

14/16/17 - All down years for Diaz

 

Top 100 for Ortiz - Not in Law's or Baseball America

 

Diaz was the team's 2016 Minor League Player of the Year! I guess we have different ideas of what a "down year" actually is.

 

Ortiz lost a little luster because of not super great results last year, but he's a 1st rounder for a reason. And the numbers he put up as a 21-year-old in AA in 2017 aren't half bad.

[trwi7]

Care to share your plan for improving the Brewers moving forward? I understand you would prefer years of 100 loss seasons and that the 86 win season was the worst thing to happen to the franchise. I hear a lot of negativity and cynicism in your posts without a real plan of success (which isn't guaranteed with top 3 picks for multiple years).

 

You literally said it. 100 losses, scorched earth, top 3 at minimum draft picks, huge bonus pools. Is it guaranteed to work? No. But at least I'm giving myself a shot at 5-8 WAR players making nothing (relatively) for the first few years of their careers so I don't have to go out and trade all of my prospects to get these guys.

 

I said it last night. After the 27th out was made in game 162 I would've been shopping Knebel, Santana, Shaw, Anderson, probably not Nelson because he's hurt and has no value, maybe Davies etc. Doesn't mean I'd trade them but if I was blown away with an offer, you bet I would take it. I think they all overachieved last year and are due for regression and they're not really core players anyways, so you can always flip guys like that for prospects and have other prospects fill their spots.

[bill hAll Star]

Great, now we just need the Marlins' professional evaluation staff to not think Ortiz is overrated.

 

Just saying I wouldn't be all that upset if we traded him.

 

Right...we all have our own opinions of players and those are all valid.

 

Ortiz could be a throw-in that the Brewers force or the Marlins just begrudgingly take even if both or one staff don't think he's as good as hyped.

 

However, if he is the 2nd or 3rd best piece in the trade, most likely, the Marlins' brass thinks he could be really good. Your guys' take that he could be a bust is warranted, but the Marlins' professional baseball evaluation team would think highly enough of him to put him as the 2nd piece in a trade for their extremely valuable trade chip.

[Warning Track Power]

Care to share your plan for improving the Brewers moving forward? I understand you would prefer years of 100 loss seasons and that the 86 win season was the worst thing to happen to the franchise. I hear a lot of negativity and cynicism in your posts without a real plan of success (which isn't guaranteed with top 3 picks for multiple years).

 

You literally said it. 100 losses, scorched earth, top 3 at minimum draft picks, huge bonus pools. Is it guaranteed to work? No. But at least I'm giving myself a shot at 5-8 WAR players making nothing (relatively) for the first few years of their careers so I don't have to go out and trade all of my prospects to get these guys.

 

I said it last night. After the 27th out was made in game 162 I would've been shopping Knebel, Santana, Shaw, Anderson, probably not Nelson because he's hurt and has no value, maybe Davies etc. Doesn't mean I'd trade them but if I was blown away with an offer, you bet I would take it. I think they all overachieved last year and are due for regression and they're not really core players anyways, so you can always flip guys like that for prospects and have other prospects fill their spots.

So this team isn't built to compete as currently constituted and the Brewers should continue to stack prospects? What about the 40 man roster crunch? What about rushing players to MLB when they aren't ready, impacting development?

 

While I understand the idea of regression when does simple maturation in the case of Shaw, Anderson, Santana and Davies occur and not have it be a career year? What happens if they all replicate 2017? Doesn't that make their value even more in 2019?

[bill hAll Star]

Care to share your plan for improving the Brewers moving forward? I understand you would prefer years of 100 loss seasons and that the 86 win season was the worst thing to happen to the franchise. I hear a lot of negativity and cynicism in your posts without a real plan of success (which isn't guaranteed with top 3 picks for multiple years).

 

You literally said it. 100 losses, scorched earth, top 3 at minimum draft picks, huge bonus pools. Is it guaranteed to work? No. But at least I'm giving myself a shot at 5-8 WAR players making nothing (relatively) for the first few years of their careers so I don't have to go out and trade all of my prospects to get these guys.

 

I said it last night. After the 27th out was made in game 162 I would've been shopping Knebel, Santana, Shaw, Anderson, probably not Nelson because he's hurt and has no value, maybe Davies etc. Doesn't mean I'd trade them but if I was blown away with an offer, you bet I would take it. I think they all overachieved last year and are due for regression and they're not really core players anyways, so you can always flip guys like that for prospects and have other prospects fill their spots.

So this team isn't built to compete as currently constituted and the Brewers should continue to stack prospects? What about the 40 man roster crunch? What about rushing players to MLB when they aren't ready, impacting development?

 

While I understand the idea of regression when does simple maturation in the case of Shaw, Anderson, Santana and Davies occur and not have it be a career year? What happens if they all replicate 2017? Doesn't that make their value even more in 2019?

 

I think that the prospect 40 man crunch is overblown.

 

Given the reality that we aren't going scorched earth, I'll give my take:

 

I'd play it safer for the next 2 years and only sign free agents. If we're ahead of the Cubs near a trade deadline, I'd trade for a rental.

 

If the Brewers trade for Yelich, they'd better be sure that they can overtake the Cubs in the next 2-3 years or it wouldn't have been worth it (and yes, before 20 people jump in, I do know that Yelich has 5 years of control).

 

I understand the sentiment that the Cubs could be every bit as strong for 5 years instead of 2 and at some point you need to take a shot, but Stearns/Attanasio need to be pretty certain that they can make the jump right now if they're going to make this move or we might be sitting on another decade of no playoff appearances.

 

I personally think that Yelich is a great player and 5 years of player control is wonderful and I also even think that some of our prospects may be overrated! But I don't think that the Brewers are a Yelich away from winning the division this year. So then the choice is to keep shoveling prospects on to the fire to try to beat the Cubs or to just pray that everything falls into place in the next year or two. And when we eventually do not do that, we'll be ready for another semi or full teardown in 2021 or 2022.

 

If you go with Yelich and/or Archer, you are declaring that 2018 and 2019 are the years. Sure, you've got those two guys somewhat in their primes for 2020 and 2021, but at that point, I'd have hoped that the giant haul of prospects that I gave up can provide as much value as those guys are. And maybe all of the guys we trade will be duds...but as we saw with the Royals, the other teams have professional evaluators and generally take good players from us.

[trwi7]

So this team isn't built to compete as currently constituted

 

I don't believe so.

 

What about the 40 man roster crunch?

 

I've already addressed this. There is no crunch coming after this season.

 

What about rushing players to MLB when they aren't ready, impacting development?

 

Who suggested doing this?

 

While I understand the idea of regression when does simple maturation in the case of Shaw, Anderson, Santana and Davies occur and not have it be a career year? What happens if they all replicate 2017? Doesn't that make their value even more in 2019?

 

Shaw is in his prime. Anderson is nearing the end of his prime. Why would I think those two are anything but regression candidates since they are in or near the end of their prime and had done nothing close to what they did last year?

 

Santana and Davies are at least young enough where you could say there's maybe a little more in there but Santana is always going to suck defensively and might not carry a .360+ BABIP but I'd be more inclined to believe he will with a 28.2 LD% and nearly 40% of the contact he does make being hard contact. He's probably a 3-4 WAR player going forward, which is right around where he was this year.

 

Davies, I don't know why, just not a huge fan. I know he gets results. Can't really explain it. Just feel that if he loses a little bit on his fastball and its velocity gets closer to his changeup that he's going to get crushed and turn into a pumpkin.

[Surhoff5]

Care to share your plan for improving the Brewers moving forward? I understand you would prefer years of 100 loss seasons and that the 86 win season was the worst thing to happen to the franchise. I hear a lot of negativity and cynicism in your posts without a real plan of success (which isn't guaranteed with top 3 picks for multiple years).

 

You literally said it. 100 losses, scorched earth, top 3 at minimum draft picks, huge bonus pools. Is it guaranteed to work? No. But at least I'm giving myself a shot at 5-8 WAR players making nothing (relatively) for the first few years of their careers so I don't have to go out and trade all of my prospects to get these guys.

 

I said it last night. After the 27th out was made in game 162 I would've been shopping Knebel, Santana, Shaw, Anderson, probably not Nelson because he's hurt and has no value, maybe Davies etc. Doesn't mean I'd trade them but if I was blown away with an offer, you bet I would take it. I think they all overachieved last year and are due for regression and they're not really core players anyways, so you can always flip guys like that for prospects and have other prospects fill their spots.

 

In 2015, the Astros won 86 games and the wildcard. Could you imagine if they would have traded away Altuve, Keuchel, and Marwin Gonzalez because they weren't big prospects and all overachieved (I realize that was the 2nd good year in a row for Altuve)? In fact, they got railroaded by the Brewers in a deal that year and I think they are doing ok for themselves. I guess I trust the scouts/GM to determine what the true talent level of this Brewers team is.

[Fear The Chorizo]

I struggle to understand the argument against trading for a player of yelich's caliber being "we aren't one yelich away from winning the division". First off, acquiring yelich for 5 seasons through his prime makes the brewers a better team each of those 5 seasons than if they didn't have him. Secondly, getting a yelich allows the brewers to focus on other positions of need to improve the roster in 2019, 2020, and 2021.

 

The last round of contending brewer teams didn't have all their homegrown prospects called up and trades happen in one offseason. Viewing moves like this in a vacuum conflicts with how MLB rosters are built and evolve due to a myriad of situations.

 

And as presently constructed, you simply can't state that the cubs are automatically 10 games better than the brewers - so dismissing their postseason chances in january when there are still a lot of bullets in the brewers' ammo clip to be fired is pretty shortsighted even when looking at just the 2018 season.

[umpref]

When HH says Brewers upped offer, what are the odds Arcia was packaged in to the deal if they are adding "friends" to the package? HH post last night mentioned our offer might "sting".

[brewcrewdue80]

I do agree that Davies' stats are I believe as good as they'll get, and regression is just a 1/2MPH away. He is young so you count on that velocity to stick around awhile.

Davies though is why I say sign Lynn as I think a proven workhorse is what this staff needs and lessens the blow on Woodruff/Davies not excelling, and or Anderson regressing to norm.

 

But essentially reading your posts, you want regression but then sell these guys for prospects. Rather than the team overachieve you want them to underachieve but all the while maintain value for trades. Villar underachieved. Now it's him being non-tendered with another year like '17. That's not getting prospects back for the future. Davies I assume will be in that range should he be closer to 4.15 ERA vs. under 4ERA. I'm rooting for the guys to overachieve as it leaves the net result that a guy like Santana can be traded for say pitching. Had Bandy/Susac done anything well last season we'd certainly be in a state to trade one and not have to sign Vogt as a Backup to Pina, who overachieve expectations. See how that works?

If you want the team to be 100loss value or the 70win Steamer/FG projection where Santana is under a 2WAR value, guess how that works when you want to trade our ML guys for prospects?

 

Get higher picks and develop 4-7WAR players to make this plan work? Well Corey Ray was #5 and now He's not even a top 10 Brewers prospect now, much less a guy who's got 4-7WAR Star potential. That's '16. '15 how did the Rangers do with Dillon Tate at #4, nope not a 4-7WAR player. '14 Looked great but Aiken, Kolek, Rodon, Schwarber and Nick Gordon...not 4-7WAR stars. '13 Appel, Stewart, and Frazier not Star players. I can go on and on. The point is, Tanking even to a #1 pick doesn't get you the Stars to build a competitive team around. How is it working for Philly? 4 years of top 10 picks a 5th year happening in June. Entering year 6 of rebuild for them and in BA's latest top 100 they have 5 in it. Stearns with Milw in 2 years has 6 and none were the 1st round selections he's made. Oh and an 86win team vs the 66wins Philly tanked to last season.

 

I've been on the no trade for Archer as I don't think we are a WS team with his addition, and no Yelich alone doesn't move the needle there. But we were just in on the Darvish FA signing, which is the ultimate FA out there, so there's willingness to sign a big FA and there are 3 other SPs out there that helps this team to sign. Adding Yelich to the offense improves it by a lot. It's going to be a winning season(barring injury of course) as players that overachieved last year, also had players who underachieved. Back end of Relievers are in way better shape than going in '17 by a TON. Don't expect to lead Baseball in RP losses mid-way through this '18 season. Something to remember for an 86 win team, the amount of losses by that bullpen.

[umpref]

HH post last night mentioning our offer might "sting".

[82brewcrew82]

When HH says Brewers upped offer, what are the odds Arcia was packaged in to the deal if they are adding "friends" to the package?

0

[brewcrewdue80]

When HH says Brewers upped offer, what are the odds Arcia was packaged in to the deal if they are adding "friends" to the package?

 

0. Arcia is : :this close to being worth Yelich alone straight up. The drop down in SS behind Arcia would make this move very bad when OF is in good shape now. SS would immediately become the worst position on the team.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

When HH says Brewers upped offer, what are the odds Arcia was packaged in to the deal if they are adding "friends" to the package? HH post last night mentioned our offer might "sting".

 

Arcia is a building-block player. Not the type of player you move if you are building a contender. I truly believe that there is no way Stearns would have moved Escobar in the Greinke deal had he been the GM at the time. Strong shortstops are just too valuable.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

HH post last night mentioning our offer might "sting".

 

Of course it would. They would have to give up solid high-end prospects to do it.