Ryan Braun

[brewerfan82]

I mean maybe awful by Kemp's standards, but any worse than Braun?

Yes. Kemp has been significantly worse than Braun.

 

[pre]Kemp

2015 .265/.312/.443/.755 0.6 bWAR

2016 .268/.304/.499/.803 0.0 bWAR

2017 .276/.318/.463/.781 -1.3 bWAR

 

Braun

2015 .285/.356/.498/.854 3.8 bWAR

2016 .305/.365/.538/.903 4.4 bWAR

2017 .268/.336/.487/.823 1.2 bWAR[/pre]

[PeaveyFury]

The problem with this is that Braun is hypothetically a useful player to the Brewers in 2018. Yes, it'd be great to get that money off the books a year early, but he's likely to be a contributor. Kemp will likely be cut, or will waste a roster space.

 

I appreciate the value of the money, but you'd have to get another piece of value for this to make any sense.

What value? To pad the owners profits? I am not an Attanasio hater, but at some point the ownership has to spend some of the vast profit they have been raking in to add the necessary players to be championship competitive. The $16M savings means nothing to me when they are likely sitting on over $100M excess cash ($50M from MLB rights, $50M from profit last few years). The Seligs wasted money and didn't make great decisions, the Attanasio ownership makes mostly good decisions (jeff suppan waives hi) and doesn't waste money, but we've got 1 world series appearance under the Seligs and how many under Attanasio? Hmmm?

 

I'm really perplexed by this....

 

You think that by making a move that frees up $16 million in 2020 means that Mark A. is going to pocket that money in two years? You don't see the value in having those funds available to make additional moves at that time? Say their payroll budget is $120 million- it's almost certainly better to have an additional $16 million + whatever else would be available to improve the team, right?

 

You seem to be advocating for keeping a declining Braun based on your belief that Attanasio needs to "spend his profits." Perhaps, though, they're better off having that $16 million to spend on a player (or players) that may be quite bad by that point instead?

[McRibMcLove]

The problem with this is that Braun is hypothetically a useful player to the Brewers in 2018. Yes, it'd be great to get that money off the books a year early, but he's likely to be a contributor. Kemp will likely be cut, or will waste a roster space.

 

I appreciate the value of the money, but you'd have to get another piece of value for this to make any sense.

What value? To pad the owners profits? I am not an Attanasio hater, but at some point the ownership has to spend some of the vast profit they have been raking in to add the necessary players to be championship competitive. The $16M savings means nothing to me when they are likely sitting on over $100M excess cash ($50M from MLB rights, $50M from profit last few years). The Seligs wasted money and didn't make great decisions, the Attanasio ownership makes mostly good decisions (jeff suppan waives hi) and doesn't waste money, but we've got 1 world series appearance under the Seligs and how many under Attanasio? Hmmm?

 

I'm really perplexed by this....

 

You think that by making a move that frees up $16 million in 2020 means that Mark A. is going to pocket that money in two years? You don't see the value in having those funds available to make additional moves at that time? Say their payroll budget is $120 million- it's almost certainly better to have an additional $16 million + whatever else would be available to improve the team, right?

 

You seem to be advocating for keeping a declining Braun based on your belief that Attanasio needs to "spend his profits." Perhaps, though, they're better off having that $16 million to spend on a player (or players) that may be quite bad by that point instead?

 

By gaining $16M we lose at least 4 WAR in production. To replace that on the open market is going to be difficult. So slot in Phillips and hope he can match that (his defense may get us close). Does the $16M net us a TOR? nope. Does that get us partly to a TOR? sure, but I'm arguing that they already have money in the bank and $28-38M in already admitted budget flexibility to buy that TOR if they can/want. Does that get us Neil Walker for 2 year (sure, but we can buy Neil Walker now). There is no restriction right now that the $16M is needed or likely will be needed in the next three years, and if it does, then there were some bad decisions by Sterns in the interim...

 

Keeping Braun and platooning him at 1B will likely make him and Thames more valuable. Braun backs up the OF until/if Santana is traded and can serve as DH when needed. I get that the Brewers may be able to use Braun's salary better in 2020, but he has value until then and there isn't a single move that can't be made now that is impacted by not having the $16M. Now if they sign Arrieta to a 5/100 contract and he bombs in the next 2 years then yes we may have a budget issue, but I don't see that happening (signing, not the bombing). Even then we are still $18-28M under, which is plenty of room to add another TOR candidate. Kemp is negative value at this point and should be waived even by the Dodgers. The only signal making this trade would be is that ownership is still nickeling and diming their fans.

 

What I keep reading at brewerfan.net is that the Brewers can go up to $120-$130M in budget, but what I don't hear is that the owners are pocketing significant profits ever dollar they are under. At $92M they are making $30-$35m in profit (easily). What I want is them to start spending some of that profit to make the team competitive (and I don't mean 1 game of wild card). I want to see a world series in Milwaukee. The owners have made plenty of money during the rebuild and have a huge unrealized gain in franchise value. Time for them to stop gouging the loyal Brewers fans and breaking open the piggy bank. Trading Ryan Braun for Matt Kemp is only a bigger way for the owners to make profit and not to make the team better as they can make the team better without requiring that $16M.

[PeaveyFury]

Again, only if you assume that they pocket that $16 million, which you are for some reason. I think it’s far more likely that they do indeed use it elsewhere on players.

[KeithStone53151]

Again, only if you assume that they pocket that $16 million, which you are for some reason. I think it’s far more likely that they do indeed use it elsewhere on players.

 

+1. You might have an argument if said team was the Marlins or Pirates. Attanasio has a proven track record of playing to win and investing in the club.

[brewcrewdue80]

I just don't get the trade idea. Aren't the Dodgers scrimping on payroll? What does a 6 man crowded OF get when trading 1 OF for another OF? I'd expect if we got Kemp, he'd simply be waved, so the best we'd do in trading Braun is saving his 3rd year of his contract? I mean come on!

[coolhandluke121]

I just don't get the trade idea. Aren't the Dodgers scrimping on payroll? What does a 6 man crowded OF get when trading 1 OF for another OF? I'd expect if we got Kemp, he'd simply be waved, so the best we'd do in trading Braun is saving his 3rd year of his contract? I mean come on!

 

They would free up a lot of payroll flexibility in a year in which they need to, clear up a logjam in the outfield by waiving Kemp, and get at least one worthwhile prospect from LAD. And the Dodgers are scrimping on payroll this year to avoid the luxury tax, which trading Kemp for Braun does for them if I'm not mistaken (pretty sure they're only a few million over).

[bylo tesi me]

The problem with this is that Braun is hypothetically a useful player to the Brewers in 2018. Yes, it'd be great to get that money off the books a year early, but he's likely to be a contributor. Kemp will likely be cut, or will waste a roster space.

 

I appreciate the value of the money, but you'd have to get another piece of value for this to make any sense.

 

 

This is kind of my thinking. I don't know much about Kemp other than my Dodger fan business associates in L.A. are desperate to get rid of him at all cost. Braun, when healthy ( at least by Braun Standards) in 2016 proved he was still Braun. Last year he battled injuries, but still put up a decent offensive season. I look at Braun at this point like a delicious Banana split, when healthy, you play him somewhere and enjoy the deliciousness If not, he's still a valuable Bat coming off the bench in key situations. So unless the Dodgers are sending a MLB ready top pitching prospect with Kemp, what would be the point. I would have no problem with Braun as a part time player if he's battling injuries. We have plenty of good options. I would love to see a healthy Braun in this lineup.

[McRibMcLove]

I am assuming the Dodgers aren't taking on salary to swap Braun/Kemp and give us something in addition to it. So we are getting worse today (2018) and tomorrow (2019) for a $16M future benefit to payroll. I don't see the benefit at this time as we are well below the stated max payroll now and have flexibility to add additional assets, not clear them off the books.

 

The only real assumption I am making about the payroll is that $110M is likely the break even point based on last years revenues. That means any payroll less than that generates profit for the owners. Any substantial revenue increase creates a higher break-even point and there is likely room for $10-$15M in increased revenue by increased attendance.

 

I can't assume that they will deficit spend, for an extended period of time, on payroll, but based on their comments I would guess that on a short-term basis they may be willing to lose $10M-$20M for a season or few.

 

I believe, based on Forbes numbers, and general revenue numbers that the brewers have probably lost a small amount of money 3 of the years that Attanasio has been owner. It is also clear that he has made a significant amount of money in many of the other years including a $50M windfall this year (MLB digital rights). Is any of that excess money (i.e. profit) going into a bank account? I don't think any of us can answer that question. I hope that they will use some prior profit to deficit spend when necessary. Hope, but I can't assume that since they are currently under budget that any savings (such as the $16M Braun/Kemp swap) is going to be value to the team - it could end up as owner's profit (no assumption, just a possibility).

[TJseven7]

I just don't get the trade idea. Aren't the Dodgers scrimping on payroll? What does a 6 man crowded OF get when trading 1 OF for another OF? I'd expect if we got Kemp, he'd simply be waved, so the best we'd do in trading Braun is saving his 3rd year of his contract? I mean come on!

 

They would free up a lot of payroll flexibility in a year in which they need to, clear up a logjam in the outfield by waiving Kemp, and get at least one worthwhile prospect from LAD. And the Dodgers are scrimping on payroll this year to avoid the luxury tax, which trading Kemp for Braun does for them if I'm not mistaken (pretty sure they're only a few million over).

 

Even if we ate a couple mil on Braun to put them under the tax the money we kick in would be more valuable to them than us. That's another positive. If we ate say 5 mil of this year the gains they get in saved penalties and repeater penalties could be gigantic for them.

 

Them scrimping on payroll benefits us in this situation even more. They dont want to spend and do want to improve. Forces them to dump salary while adding it. Braun Kemp does that.

 

They have a lot of OF... sure. Puig in RF and Taylor, if he keeps it up, can play CF. The other options leave a lot to be desired. Having a lot of OFs doesn't remove the need for quality OFs. Every OF they have has bigger questions attached than Braun does.

 

Kemp is going to be ridiculously hard to move without paying his salary. The consolidated crap made it easier to move 1 junk deal but look around for teams who would want kemp, and have a piece the dodgers want, and at a price that lines up.

 

Stearns pointed to buying power. Eating 6 mil to save the dodgers much much more would allow us to ask for more prospects than most seem to think. They could also trade some of the OF depth for prospects. Joc Hernandez could be flipped.

[PeaveyFury]

I am assuming the Dodgers aren't taking on salary to swap Braun/Kemp and give us something in addition to it.

 

Then why make your argument by singling out the first part of a sentence in my post, when the complete sentence read "I appreciate the value of the money, but you'd have to get another piece of value for this to make any sense"?

[TJseven7]

I am assuming the Dodgers aren't taking on salary to swap Braun/Kemp and give us something in addition to it.

 

Then why make your argument by singling out the first part of a sentence in my post, when the complete sentence read "I appreciate the value of the money, but you'd have to get another piece of value for this to make any sense"?

 

Mcrib... whats better a worthless guy at 43 mil or a guy worth 32 mil at 56 mil?

 

What better for their title hopes. A worthless guy or Braun in LF?

 

You act like Kemp is comparable to Braun. Brauns an old star who is now injury prone and likely declining. Kemp is a dead albatross. Eating salary to get something worth more than the dead money you have on the roster is a wise move. It's not like the dodgers are trying to shed payroll long term.

 

If they think a 13 mil payroll shed is worth moving from Kemp to Braun... laugh and move along.

[brewcrewdue80]

I just don't get the trade idea. Aren't the Dodgers scrimping on payroll? What does a 6 man crowded OF get when trading 1 OF for another OF? I'd expect if we got Kemp, he'd simply be waved, so the best we'd do in trading Braun is saving his 3rd year of his contract? I mean come on!

 

They would free up a lot of payroll flexibility in a year in which they need to, clear up a logjam in the outfield by waiving Kemp, and get at least one worthwhile prospect from LAD. And the Dodgers are scrimping on payroll this year to avoid the luxury tax, which trading Kemp for Braun does for them if I'm not mistaken (pretty sure they're only a few million over).

 

But the context of the original idea was Kemp for Braun not adding the pieces assumed here by some.

 

Certainly they should receive something back but until that rumor appears I am taking it as Braun for Kemp straight up.

[TJseven7]

Which would be so laughably bad it defies logic. I'd rather see a rumor and think about how it could be done logically to serve both teams.

[superfly]

This is absolutely insane.

[pacopete4]

This is absolutely insane.

 

I blame Boras. Or wait, those greedy billionaire owners. Aw hell, I can’t remember anymore.

[jonescm128]

I see Kemp is 40 pounds lighter this year. Probably ready to regain his "MVP" form of 2011...

[brewcrewdue80]

I see Kemp is 40 pounds lighter this year. Probably ready to regain his "MVP" form of 2011...

 

Or ding up and miss games with a more fragile body. Guess depends on what his build is now vs the 40lbs ago build.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I see Kemp is 40 pounds lighter this year. Probably ready to regain his "MVP" form of 2011...

 

Ah, the annual "Best Shape of my Life" February feature story. Spring has finally sprung!

 

Yawn! Kemp has become a garbage player with an even "garbagier" contract. I hope the Dodgers enjoy that albatross. No one should even think about bailing them out unless they are giving up some of their top prospects.

[bill hAll Star]

The reality of our market is that Mark probably is only willing to pay $120 million, tops, in a competitive year. To me, salary has always seemed like more of a year-to-year thing. You can do thinks like take a 3-4 year hiatus from big spending and use it to bolster future payroll as we just have, but there is still roughly a yearly budget.

 

So, yes, on the surface, saving $10-15 million to potentially downgrade from Braun to Kemp would be not ideal.

 

However, if we are operating under the premise that that is Mark's constraint, then you need to pick up on some nuance in this.

 

Let's assume this rumor is legitimate for a moment. What if shedding Braun's 2020 salary is key in signing a good pitcher right now, because Mark fears being up against his cap if he signs Cobb tomorrow? Or, since we can probably assume that we'll still be going for it in 2020, would you rather be paying 36-year-old Braun $17 million with a mandatory $4 million buyout the following year or would you rather use that to bolster the team in another way?

 

I think the best thing half of this board can do is to liberate itself from only being able to view player + contract = good or player + contract = bad. There are a lot of other angles involved.

 

I definitely hear the argument of 2018 and 2019 Braun probably being a better player, but there is more to consider. I'd still want something more from the Dodgers to make the deal happen, but I try to look at the "good intentions" side of anything. Both teams have good motivations for this trade but all we're operating on is a binary response to "Ryan Braun for Matt Kemp."

[jonescm128]

I see Kemp is 40 pounds lighter this year. Probably ready to regain his "MVP" form of 2011...

 

Ah, the annual "Best Shape of my Life" February feature story. Spring has finally sprung!

 

Yawn! Kemp has become a garbage player with an even "garbagier" contract. I hope the Dodgers enjoy that albatross. No one should even think about bailing them out unless they are giving up some of their top prospects.

 

Walker Buehler please

[JosephC]

In all reality, a Braun+cash for Kemp+prospects made much more sense prior to the Yelich/Cain moves. The Brewers would be in wait-and-see mode, would enter 2018 and if were running at .500 would still have all the prospects to make some significant moves in June/July. They would have picked up a couple more prospects in the Kemp deal and had gotten rid of Braun's 2020 salary and the buyout for 2021. If they were performing badly, and Kemp had hit something like 18 home runs by the break (not crazy as he still has some pop, 77 home runs over the last three years) and was slashing something like .270/.320/.500/.820 (not crazy in Miller Park), the Brewers might have been able to package him with another 10 million dollars and flip him for a role player prospect (nothing special)...and while the team would have probably eaten something like 14-15 million between both deals, then they would also have Kemp's 2019 salary off the books.

 

But looking at the situation now...if Braun is traded then Santana stays. If Santana stays then how does Kemp play with Yelich/Cain/Santana in the outfield? If Kemp doesn't play, then how does he re-gain any value so he can be flipped? Kemp is obviously on the bench and then the Brewers are stuck with him through 2019. Doesn't make any sense to trade both Braun and Santana and play Kemp everyday for a team that spent significant resources this off-season and are apparently in win-mode. Sure, trading both Braun and Santana works out if Kemp comes in and actually does slash .270/.320/.500/.820 but chances of him hitting what I consider his ceiling is probably about 30%. Too risky after making bold moves with Yelich and Cain.

 

This had come up somewhere in a previous thread and really didn't go that far. I still think the #1 biggest hangup would be convincing Attanasio that we are picking up Matt Kemp's contract, and oh by the way we have to throw in a few million dollars for it to work because the Dodger's luxury tax committment has to go down in the swap. Braun is almost irrelevant in the conversation. Hard for me to imagine a small market owner giving the thumbs up to taking on what certainly appears to be a negative WAR player at a 43 million dollar price tag and then throwing in 4 million dollar on top of it.

[coolhandluke121]

In all reality, a Braun+cash for Kemp+prospects made much more sense prior to the Yelich/Cain moves.

 

 

I don't think they're operating that way, nor should they. Just make smart moves for now and/or for the future when you get a chance. Depending on the prospects, and they should get at least one worthwhile one, this would be a good move. And it doesn't even hurt the Brewers that much now anyway. They're good enough to compete without Braun, especially if they sign Cobb and forfeit just a 4th-round pick.

[CheezButt]

MLB radio had Braves reporter on and they were discussing Kemp. The gist of the conversation was that Kemp is a clubhouse problem in addition to being a below average left fielder. He said LA dumped him the first time because of his confrontation with Puig and he wore out his welcome in San Diego and Atlanta. It is surprising that LA got him back. Let them eat his salary. I'll take Braun every day of the week

[coolhandluke121]

MLB radio had Braves reporter on and they were discussing Kemp. The gist of the conversation was that Kemp is a clubhouse problem in addition to being a below average left fielder. He said LA dumped him the first time because of his confrontation with Puig and he wore out his welcome in San Diego and Atlanta. It is surprising that LA got him back. Let them eat his salary. I'll take Braun every day of the week

 

Don't think of it as trading Braun for Kemp. Think of it as trading Braun for prospects while investing about $5m to get $15m back in 2 years. That should more than pay for the ink you use to sign Kemp's waiver.