Manny Machado (Part 2)

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Also to the person who said the Cubs have a 4-5 year window I would ask who will be pitching there even in a couple years? Their staff is old and honestly not performing all that well. Their farm is super bare. They are going to have to go out and buy some starters the next couple years.

 

Yes, you are correct. And that is exactly what they will do.

[502 to Right]

You cannot have too many quality starting pitchers--especially ones that are cost controlled and young.

[pacopete4]

You cannot have too many quality starting pitchers--especially ones that are cost controlled and young.

 

Correct. Not even sure why this would have to be said. Pitching depth has been key to our success. We have no Nelson, a bad Davies and an average Anderson and yet, success. Sure our pen was great but the starters have done their jobs too.

[Lathund]

Also to the person who said the Cubs have a 4-5 year window I would ask who will be pitching there even in a couple years? Their staff is old and honestly not performing all that well. Their farm is super bare. They are going to have to go out and buy some starters the next couple years.

 

It'll be very interesting to see how the Cubs do going forward. Their position player group are pretty much all under control through 2021 I believe, apart from Zobrist. And it's very good; barring injuries they are literally set at every position for years Contreras - Rizzo, Baez, Russell, Bryant - Schwarber, Almora, Heyward. With Happ as a super sub. Add a few role players to that and it's a really good lineup.

 

But since they all have such similar service time, the year-to-year arbitration rises will be huge. So it's all about the pitching. Chatwood, Quintana, Darvish and Hendricks all have good records. They could rebound, in which case the Cubs don't have that many holes to fill, and they have the money to sign a starter and a couple of relievers. The interesting thing is if those guys continue their 2017 form, and the Cubs will need to fill those voids in free agency. Which could be done, if they're willing to spend. But as Darvish, Cobb, Lynn et al have shown, it's not always easy to navigate the FA pitcher market.

 

They could have a super team for years, or they could have some real issues already in 2019 or 2020 finding pitching.

[paul253]

I look at more than just 2018 and 2019 though. Having 9 SPs, when I believe 6 of them have minor league options remaining (And at least 3 of them have experience working in relief), isn't a log jam

 

I understand but what good does stashing prospects in AAA or the bullpen for 3 years waiting for a spot or an injury do? At some point these guys start to lose their value. We more than anyone have to capitalize on these guys values. That means not only trading them before it becomes clear they aren’t major league quality but also giving them opportunities to succeed when they are ready. If Corbin Burnes, for instance, isn’t given a legitimate opportunity to win a rotation spot next year then I think we’ll be wasting his talent. But then again I’d say the same thing about Peralta. And Woodruff. But in reality there is just no chance all three will have the ability to win rotation spots next year. Not with Chacin Anderson Nelson and Davies all still around. That’s why I’d have no problem whatsoever using two of them to acquire Degrom or Syndergaard.

[Boomer5]

t

You cannot have too many quality starting pitchers--especially ones that are cost controlled and young.

 

Correct. Not even sure why this would have to be said. Pitching depth has been key to our success. We have no Nelson, a bad Davies and an average Anderson and yet, success. Sure our pen was great but the starters have done their jobs too.

 

That's all true but no one can predict pitching year over year, let alone the "4-5 year window"

 

It wasn't that long ago that Nelson was a true ace and Anderson was a sub 3 ERA starter combined with the greatest closer year we have ever seen including Rollie in Knebel. Now all three are question marks.

 

When you have a chance to win you take it.

[82brewcrew82]

To me, emptying the farm would have been the correct phrase if we had to give up two top end prospects in Burnes, Hiura, Peralta, Woodruff for a guy that won’t be a Brewer come October/November. You would be depleting top end talent, something we really lack for no gain come next season. It just doesn’t make any sense and never will no matter how many times this is hashed out. Glad this fiasco is almost over, that’s for sure.

 

Oh and this 40 man roster “crunch” definitely can be sorted out in a much more efficient manner than a rental.

Correct. There is a difference between depth and high end quality depth. There is no way this system has the high end talent it had when Fielder and that group were coming up. I think we have more depth now, but less high ceiling talent. To lose any portion of that upper crust talent for a rental would have been a travesty.

[82brewcrew82]

I look at more than just 2018 and 2019 though. Having 9 SPs, when I believe 6 of them have minor league options remaining (And at least 3 of them have experience working in relief), isn't a log jam

 

I understand but what good does stashing prospects in AAA or the bullpen for 3 years waiting for a spot or an injury do? At some point these guys start to lose their value. We more than anyone have to capitalize on these guys values. That means not only trading them before it becomes clear they aren’t major league quality but also giving them opportunities to succeed when they are ready. If Corbin Burnes, for instance, isn’t given a legitimate opportunity to win a rotation spot next year then I think we’ll be wasting his talent. But then again I’d say the same thing about Peralta. And Woodruff. But in reality there is just no chance all three will have the ability to win rotation spots next year. Not with Chacin Anderson Nelson and Davies all still around. That’s why I’d have no problem whatsoever using two of them to acquire Degrom or Syndergaard.

I think you are moving the goal posts a bit here. I think the argument has been about not using that talent on rentals. I think everyone would have a different opinion if we had wiffed on DeGrom or Syndergaard. Either way, I see no evidence this team is nesting away prospects. They just moved a bunch for Yelich. They are promoting guys quickly not only to the majors but aggressively to through the system. I think that is a bit of a strawman.

[bill hAll Star]

t

You cannot have too many quality starting pitchers--especially ones that are cost controlled and young.

 

Correct. Not even sure why this would have to be said. Pitching depth has been key to our success. We have no Nelson, a bad Davies and an average Anderson and yet, success. Sure our pen was great but the starters have done their jobs too.

 

That's all true but no one can predict pitching year over year, let alone the "4-5 year window"

 

It wasn't that long ago that Nelson was a true ace and Anderson was a sub 3 ERA starter combined with the greatest closer year we have ever seen including Rollie in Knebel. Now all three are question marks.

 

When you have a chance to win you take it.

 

I'm not really as certain about our chances to win even with Machado.

 

The Rays (during their solid run several years ago) and Cardinals rarely traded depth of pitching very often. If they ever did, it was a "sell high" on a guy currently in the majors for another MLB contributor (longer term).

[brewmann04]

Also to the person who said the Cubs have a 4-5 year window I would ask who will be pitching there even in a couple years? Their staff is old and honestly not performing all that well. Their farm is super bare. They are going to have to go out and buy some starters the next couple years.

 

Yes, you are correct. And that is exactly what they will do.

 

however a team with deep pockets can replenish quicker

[paul253]

think you are moving the goal posts a bit here. I think the argument has been about not using that talent on rentals.

 

 

First off can we agree not all “rentals” are equal? Machado is not your average mlb player. People should focus more on who the player is. Instead all some focus on is the fact that his contract is up after this year.

 

Additionally, just because Machado would have been a rental doesn’t automatically make it a bad deal. CC Sabathia was a rental. How many people are complaining about that trade? It all depends on who you give up for him and even then it’ll take years to know how good of a trade it turned out to be. I don’t think anyone would have argued we should have traded Hiura and Burnes to get Machado. But we do have some decent talent that, in all honestly, probably won’t make an impact at the major league level. So trading those guys, while it may hurt our system ranking, really wouldn’t have much of an effect on the franchise.

 

I don’t know what was offered to get Machado. But I’d have been perfectly ok moving the Woodruffs, the Gatewoods, the Laras, the Diplans or the Ponces of the system to get him.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

think you are moving the goal posts a bit here. I think the argument has been about not using that talent on rentals.

 

 

First off can we agree not all “rentals” are equal? Machado is not your average mlb player. People should focus more on who the player is. Instead all some focus on is the fact that his contract is up after this year.

 

Additionally, just because Machado would have been a rental doesn’t automatically make it a bad deal. CC Sabathia was a rental. How many people are complaining about that trade? It all depends on who you give up for him and even then it’ll take years to know how good of a trade it turned out to be. I don’t think anyone would have argued we should have traded Hiura and Burnes to get Machado. But we do have some decent talent that, in all honestly, probably won’t make an impact at the major league level. So trading those guys, while it may hurt our system ranking, really wouldn’t have much of an effect on the franchise.

 

I don’t know what was offered to get Machado. But I’d have been perfectly ok moving the Woodruffs, the Gatewoods, the Laras, the Diplans or the Ponces of the system to get him.

 

For all we know, it is possible, if not likely, that the Orioles demanded Burnes in any deal for Machado. Heck, for all we know, he may have been part of that "runner up" package.

[pacopete4]

 

I don’t know what was offered to get Machado. But I’d have been perfectly ok moving the Woodruffs, the Gatewoods, the Laras, the Diplans or the Ponces of the system to get him.

 

Paul, from the reports, those players weren’t getting this deal done.

[bill hAll Star]

Additionally, just because Machado would have been a rental doesn’t automatically make it a bad deal. CC Sabathia was a rental. How many people are complaining about that trade?

 

I am still retroactively a fan of the CC trade as I had never seen the Brewers do anything relevant in my lifetime and we needed it. He had a great run. It was cool.

 

That said, even with his injuries, I'd maybe have taken 6+ years of Brantley, especially since they got more like 8-10 years given he was able to be kept given his injuries keeping him in Cleveland's price range.

 

My heart would take the CC trade, my brain would probably take Brantley.

 

And now that I've at least seen the Brewers play in the playoffs, I don't have a desire for a shortsighted trade/move that probably won't even pay off and really could blow up in our faces.

 

Also, CC came attached with a comp pick (that we kinda got screwed on via the Yankees/Teixeira/weird MLB loophole), but we at least got something with that. We'd get nothing for Machado after the season.

[jjfanec]

 

Hiura maybe but Peralta and even Burnes? Next season for starting pitching option we have: Chacin. Guerra. Davies. Anderson. Nelson. Woodruff. Peralta. Burnes. Suter. Trading away a Peralta or a Woodruff would not create a hole. It was actually ease a logjam a bit, especially if they are traded for a pitcher. Ideally in the next year or two there would be a spot for Peralta, Burnes AND Woodruff but I don’t see that happening. So trading one of them now isn’t the end of the world. Obviously they have to be part of the right deal. I’m glad Burnes wasn’t traded for Machado. But if we’re going for Syndergaard or Degrom heck yeah I’d include two of Peralta Burnes Ortiz or Woodruff.

 

 

I think it could be argued that you can trade those guys this off season for a guy who isn't a rental like Machado. Does this team lose a single free agent? I would guess Davies becomes expendable in a trade if the team wants to go younger.

 

Wow, if 25 is old (Davies), I'm downright ancient.

 

Not only does the team have guys like Burnes, Peralta, Woodruff and Houser that are immediately knocking on the rotation door, there are guys such as Zach Brown and Kodi Medeiros that are likely to be knocking on that same door by September or early next season. I agree that some of that depth could and probably should be used to firm up other roster/system holes.

 

Old meant service time. Should have said cheaper instead of younger. Davies will start costing more soon

[Chicago Here]

think you are moving the goal posts a bit here. I think the argument has been about not using that talent on rentals.

 

 

First off can we agree not all “rentals” are equal? Machado is not your average mlb player. People should focus more on who the player is. Instead all some focus on is the fact that his contract is up after this year.

 

Additionally, just because Machado would have been a rental doesn’t automatically make it a bad deal. CC Sabathia was a rental. How many people are complaining about that trade? It all depends on who you give up for him and even then it’ll take years to know how good of a trade it turned out to be. I don’t think anyone would have argued we should have traded Hiura and Burnes to get Machado. But we do have some decent talent that, in all honestly, probably won’t make an impact at the major league level. So trading those guys, while it may hurt our system ranking, really wouldn’t have much of an effect on the franchise.

 

I don’t know what was offered to get Machado. But I’d have been perfectly ok moving the Woodruffs, the Gatewoods, the Laras, the Diplans or the Ponces of the system to get him.

if the dodgers did get machado then they will become the NL WS team. If the brewers didnt step up then its hard to see where we fit in with the 2018 playoff seen. We are only 1 game from being out of the WC spot but our bullpen is worn out since our starting pitching cant go thru a lineup 3 times.

 

It might be time to think about 2019. Shore up the team with a controllable Ace like Defrom but im not sure a starting pitcher rental helps us.

[jjfanec]

Also to the person who said the Cubs have a 4-5 year window I would ask who will be pitching there even in a couple years? Their staff is old and honestly not performing all that well. Their farm is super bare. They are going to have to go out and buy some starters the next couple years.

 

Yes, you are correct. And that is exactly what they will do.

 

Yep and they could end up with Darvish and Chatwood again. Great pitchers don't make free agency all that often and when they do they are already older and cost a lot. And other teams like the Yankees dodgers etc will have the money to spend too

[PDCBalla]

To be fair, it is the Orioles. This thing could fall through at any moment and wouldn't be a shock. I do think it ends up getting done with the Dodgers but the longer this drags on the more skeptical it becomes.

[Lathund]

I look at more than just 2018 and 2019 though. Having 9 SPs, when I believe 6 of them have minor league options remaining (And at least 3 of them have experience working in relief), isn't a log jam

 

I understand but what good does stashing prospects in AAA or the bullpen for 3 years waiting for a spot or an injury do? At some point these guys start to lose their value. We more than anyone have to capitalize on these guys values. That means not only trading them before it becomes clear they aren’t major league quality but also giving them opportunities to succeed when they are ready. If Corbin Burnes, for instance, isn’t given a legitimate opportunity to win a rotation spot next year then I think we’ll be wasting his talent. But then again I’d say the same thing about Peralta. And Woodruff. But in reality there is just no chance all three will have the ability to win rotation spots next year. Not with Chacin Anderson Nelson and Davies all still around. That’s why I’d have no problem whatsoever using two of them to acquire Degrom or Syndergaard.

 

I haven't said anything about stashing them for 3 years. 2019 sees a lot of pitching depth, but that's 1 year. And they wouldn't necessarily be the ones being stashed. I'd rather give them the opportunities to succeed in place of some of the established, expensive veterans. Davies and Guerra have options, they could be the ones stashed. Or traded. We don't know if Nelson will be back to his old self either.

 

Chacin, Anderson, Nelson, Burnes, Peralta as your starting 5. Woodruff next in line to be given a tryout (6th man will always get plenty of chances), Suter (Long relief role), Guerra and Davies (Unless traded) available as depth. I prefer that over losing Peralta and Burnes and adding $15m to the payroll. Keep Peralta and Burnes, and use that $15m for something else.

[YelichPosse]

DS Go make a last minute push!! WE NEED THE GOOD MOJO!

 

(pipe dreaming here)

[bill hAll Star]

Also to the person who said the Cubs have a 4-5 year window I would ask who will be pitching there even in a couple years? Their staff is old and honestly not performing all that well. Their farm is super bare. They are going to have to go out and buy some starters the next couple years.

 

Yes, you are correct. And that is exactly what they will do.

 

Yep and they could end up with Darvish and Chatwood again. Great pitchers don't make free agency all that often and when they do they are already older and cost a lot. And other teams like the Yankees dodgers etc will have the money to spend too

 

I'm one that agrees with this in general that the Cubs are slowly weakening and I don't think I'd go all in for 2018 anyways, but I wouldn't write their pitching off completely.

 

Starting pitching matters less, they have one of the best defenses in baseball, and someone like Darvish could put up a great season next year.

 

Lester/Darvish/Smyly/Hendricks/Quintana/Montgomery - I think Chatwood maybe goes to the bullpen.

 

I think a lot of those guys are on the wrong side of the regression curve, but they can probably find 5 serviceable pitchers out of that list yet again. And they can probably try to overpay one more.

 

2020/2021 those contracts start running out and guys like Lester start getting real old...hopefully they won't have figured out anything from their farm system at that point.

[82brewcrew82]

First off can we agree not all “rentals” are equal? Machado is not your average mlb player. People should focus more on who the player is. Instead all some focus on is the fact that his contract is up after this year.

 

Additionally, just because Machado would have been a rental doesn’t automatically make it a bad deal. CC Sabathia was a rental. How many people are complaining about that trade? It all depends on who you give up for him and even then it’ll take years to know how good of a trade it turned out to be. I don’t think anyone would have argued we should have traded Hiura and Burnes to get Machado. But we do have some decent talent that, in all honestly, probably won’t make an impact at the major league level. So trading those guys, while it may hurt our system ranking, really wouldn’t have much of an effect on the franchise.

 

I don’t know what was offered to get Machado. But I’d have been perfectly ok moving the Woodruffs, the Gatewoods, the Laras, the Diplans or the Ponces of the system to get him.

Nobody is saying all rentals are equal. I've made the distinction between a Dozier and a Machado even though both are rentals. Context matters and the difference between Machado and Sabathia has context that matters.

 

Who exactly was going to trade Machado for all this marginal talent you speak of? "Hey, take our junk that probably won't ever amount to much for this exceptionally talented rental player?" In what world is that going to work?

[mlloyd10]

From Steve Phillips

 

Possible snag in Machado deal to Dodgers. Sources indicate that one or more of prospects coming to #Orioles have some issues in their physicals. Surprise surprise. May open door for other clubs. Stay tuned.

[PDCBalla]

To be fair, it is the Orioles. This thing could fall through at any moment and wouldn't be a shock. I do think it ends up getting done with the Dodgers but the longer this drags on the more skeptical it becomes.

 

 

It's almost too easy with Baltimore sometimes.

[adambr2]

I'd like to feel excited about this, but even if he became available again, if Baltimore pivoted to the reported "2nd best offer", I'd be afraid to see what that is after seeing what the first best offer was.