Brandon Woodruff

[KeithStone53151]

Posts pondering Peralta for MadBum as a possibility are so far off the mark and that's why I comment and share what I know.

 

I'll agree for MB is a bit of a stretch, I think it's a minority of people willing to include Peralta in that deal. It's usually higher caliber players that he's being mentioned in trade scenarios.

 

I'll also add that I hope you're right about how good Peralta will be. I think all of us do.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Then you're not paying attention. Peralta is thrown in just about every trade proposal on this forum. It's very clear that he's undervalued and misunderstood here. That's not a created narrative. You think passing word from scouts that Peralta is special would get people excited but that hasn't been the case. I can also pass along third-hand word (Brewers scout to scout to me) that Peralta is going nowhere. The Brewers know what they have.

 

Posts pondering Peralta for MadBum as a possibility are so far off the mark and that's why I comment and share what I know.

 

Players mentioned as trade targets for a package including Peralta:

 

1. Madison Bumgarner

2. Jacob deGrom

3. Noah Syndergaard

4. James Paxton

5. J.T. Realmuto

6. Whit Merrifield

7. Jean Segura

8. Paul Goldschmidt

 

I looked back over the last 3 months of posts. Every one of those guys is either an ace type, or a lineup altering bat. And trades for the guys like Bumgarner and Goldschmidt who have little control remaining were shot down by multiple posters. I, along with most here, am paying attention.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Nobody is saying Peralta is bad or that we "want" to trade him. That's what's being missed in this True Blue discussion as he acts like we all think he's bad or something. All this side is saying that if you're attempting to trade for a good player you have to give something good up. Generally speaking I don't want to trade any of the 3 as I have confidence in all 3 being contributors and good pitchers. And I see how Peralta could go from the spot he is now to really darn good if he adds a change. But again, you have to give up something in these trades.

 

Right. And I'll add that anybody that considers Woodruff a slightly better prospect than Peralta isn't taking a shot at Peralta. Hard not to get excited about the guy after what we saw from him the last 2 months of the season. I think all 3 of these guys are far and away better than any pitching prospects we've had come up since Yovani Gallardo, and they may in fact be better than Gallardo. Most discussion of trading these guys has been in conversations for Realmuto, Syndergaard, Kluber, etc. It's not like we are actively trying to dump any of these guys, and it's all speculation anyways. For all we know, Stearns is making those guys virtually off limits.

 

Right! Since when did including a player in a hypothetical trade scenario equate to undervaluing him? It is quite the opposite, actually. The fact that he is being included in trade scenarios for high-end MLB stars means that he is extremely highly valued among BF posters.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

In defending having Woodruff over Peralta ranked in value going forward someone had said Woodruff was consistently ranked higher by scouting and ranking services. Something I see no evidence of. Peralta wasn't on the radar when Woodruff was at his peak as a prospect so there really wasn't overlap. When Peralta shot up prospect rankings Woodruff was already off them for the most part. Anyway, Baseball America put this out today...

 

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/top-10-prospects-the-mariners-traded-away/

[True Blue Brew Crew]

Posts pondering Peralta for MadBum as a possibility are so far off the mark and that's why I comment and share what I know.

 

I'll agree for MB is a bit of a stretch, I think it's a minority of people willing to include Peralta in that deal. It's usually higher caliber players that he's being mentioned in trade scenarios.

 

I'll also add that I hope you're right about how good Peralta will be. I think all of us do.

 

Me too. I'll add that the poster rushing in here to agree with you is the one who in the post directly above mine, was proposing Peralta for MadBum. I do need to do a better job not letting that stuff get to me but one can only read so many Peralta giveaway trade proposals before they snap. I'm trying to be more open minded.

[tmwiese55]

I'd just stop using the phrase "giveaway". No one is trying to give him away.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

I'd just stop using the phrase "giveaway". No one is trying to give him away.

 

Well, Peralta for 1-year of Bumgarner would be pretty darn close. It's so far from reality that I know it won't happen and that's what I need to focus on.

[tmwiese55]

I just went through the Bumgarner thread and the proposals were all about Woodruff for Bumgarner and almost everyone was saying No on that too. Granted I flew through it and maybe missed one, but the proposals thrown out were for Woodruff. So maybe the talk should be about not giving away Woodruff rather than this constant theme promoting Peralta.

 

And again, I don't think if someone was willing ot trade him straight for Bumgarner they don't t hink it's a give away. They view Bumgarner as a true ace that could be a difference maker in the playoffs like he has before. They're just likely a little off on the current state of Bumgarner, but they would be viewing Peralta as a piece to get a key Ace to win WS. Don't think that's giving away.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

I just went through the Bumgarner thread and the proposals were all about Woodruff for Bumgarner and almost everyone was saying No on that too. Granted I flew through it and maybe missed one, but the proposals thrown out were for Woodruff. So maybe the talk should be about not giving away Woodruff rather than this constant theme promoting Peralta.

 

Heck people probably think I'm bashing Woodruff but I even said that if Woodruff is part of a deal to get MadBum, there would have to be additional pieces to the deal.

[wallus]

I am just happy that we have this HighHigh level of insider information now!

[True Blue Brew Crew]

I am just happy that we have this HighHigh level of insider information now!

 

I'd love to hear me some inside stuff but the best I'm privy to is scout opinion. The Brewers scout that my uncle is pals with has a feel for where they value certain players but scouts get blindsided by the front office all the time. My uncle was an active scout many years ago and still knows how to identify talent. His connections come from friendships with those still in the game. For those who remember Vinny Rotino, my uncle is the one who got him his tryout with the Brewers. He also used his Marlins connections to get Rottino a shot there in 2009. He was Rottino's summer ball coach and a longtime Mets scout.

[TURBO]

For those who remember Vinny Rotino, my uncle is the one who got him his tryout with the Brewers. He also used his Marlins connections to get Rottino a shot there in 2009. He was Rottino's summer ball coach and a longtime Mets scout.

 

Is this a good thing?

[True Blue Brew Crew]

For those who remember Vinny Rotino, my uncle is the one who got him his tryout with the Brewers. He also used his Marlins connections to get Rottino a shot there in 2009. He was Rottino's summer ball coach and a longtime Mets scout.

 

Is this a good thing?

 

It was just a anecdote for anyone who cared to search the connection online. It has nothing to do with Rottino's ability as a major leaguer. He was actually a pretty great story and I know there are people here who would remember him. But you apparently wanted to go in a negative direction.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

But you apparently wanted to go in a negative direction.

 

So is calling the opinion of other posters "laughable", or any other of the dozens of condescending remarks you've thrown out there over the last few months.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

But you apparently wanted to go in a negative direction.

 

So is calling the opinion of other posters "laughable", or any other of the dozens of condescending remarks you've thrown out there over the last few months.

 

I barely post here so I surely rank far down the list of offenders especially when I read so much condescension throughout the forum. I believe I just read a zinger you threw clancyphile's way. In your 5000+ posts, I'd bet you have more condescending ones than the entirety of all my posts. But I'm delighted to know I've made such an impression on you. I suggest that you put me on ignore to benefit us both, because we're way off track now.

[brewmann04]

Is anyone else excited to have 3 potential young stud starters in Woodruff,Perelta and Burnes. I don't know when i been more excited about a brewers rotation.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Is anyone else excited to have 3 potential young stud starters in Woodruff,Perelta and Burnes. I don't know when i been more excited about a brewers rotation.

 

I remember being pretty excited by the prospect of having Sheets and Gallardo at the top of the rotation, but that didn't exactly work out the way I had hoped. They ended up barely overlapping. I don't remember a time when they had three potential young solid rotation members that were basically home grown. Having too many solid rotation options is a pretty foreign feeling for a Brewer fan.

[MNBrew]

Having a plethora of strong rotation options is normally what other teams have, not the Brewers.

 

Woodruff, Burnes, and Peralta didn't get a lot of big-time love on a national scale for the majority of their ascent through the minors, but they've proven themselves quite well and I'm so glad they're part of our cache of good, young arms.

[ClosetBrewerFan]

Having a plethora of strong rotation options is normally what other teams have, not the Brewers.

 

Woodruff, Burnes, and Peralta didn't get a lot of big-time love on a national scale for the majority of their ascent through the minors, but they've proven themselves quite well and I'm so glad they're part of our cache of good, young arms.

I think you have to go back to 1987. Wegman, Nieves, Bosio + Higuera (older but a solid #1). Plesac and Crim in the bullpen. Don August, Knudsen and Birkbeck were up and coming. Unfortunately all that talent still did not get us to the world series.

[tmwiese55]

Yes, this is a first for my lifetime. Discussing which of our 3 really good young pitching prospects would be most expendable if we haaaad to trade one. I don't think there's even been 3 guys total other teams would've coveted in my life, haha. Yes, I'm sure (I think) that I'm exaggerating.

[ClosetBrewerFan]

Just looking through the team stats during those years. Most of those pitchers missed considerable time or were inconsistent over the next 5 years. At least 2 or 3 per year were out/ineffective. The Brewers never surrounded that team with any significant free agents or major trades. They just went with the kids.

 

I've been struggling with whether I want the Brewers to trade some young pitching to go for it now. The last few times the brewers got to the playoffs they made major acquisitions (Sabathia, Grienke, Yelich/Cain) and last year they kept adding throughout the year. I would hate to give up young pitching, but it is very inconsistent. Unfortunately, I think we may have to in order to continue to push for the playoffs.

[MNBrew]

Having a plethora of strong rotation options is normally what other teams have, not the Brewers.

 

Woodruff, Burnes, and Peralta didn't get a lot of big-time love on a national scale for the majority of their ascent through the minors, but they've proven themselves quite well and I'm so glad they're part of our cache of good, young arms.

I think you have to go back to 1987. Wegman, Nieves, Bosio + Higuera (older but a solid #1). Plesac and Crim in the bullpen. Don August, Knudsen and Birkbeck were up and coming. Unfortunately all that talent still did not get us to the world series.

Of those, Nieves was by far supposed to be the biggest deal but arguably did the least other than his no-hitter. Higuera was a stud until injuries shelved him and afterward undercut his effectiveness, though overall he was a really awesome Brewer.

 

Looking back, that Trebelhorn era was better than we may have realized at the time. Only 1 season in 5 with a losing record. Decent teams with lots of good players. Too bad those young pitchers didn't all live up to their promise, esp. at the same time!

[Humans Need Water]

Then you're not paying attention. Peralta is thrown in just about every trade proposal on this forum. It's very clear that he's undervalued and misunderstood here. That's not a created narrative. You think passing word from scouts that Peralta is special would get people excited but that hasn't been the case. I can also pass along third-hand word (Brewers scout to scout to me) that Peralta is going nowhere. The Brewers know what they have.

 

Posts pondering Peralta for MadBum as a possibility are so far off the mark and that's why I comment and share what I know.

Except *this* isn't what you're saying. You're fabricating evidence and lying about trivial nonsense to put Peralta on a pedestal because your Uncle is an ex-scout and you take his *opinion* as gold.

 

Examples: my post laying out your lies on the Woodruff/Peralta thread. This thread - Woodruff isn't 4yrs older than Peralta. He's 3yrs 3 months and 20 some odd days older. The difference between reality and 4yrs is literally an additional full season's worth of experience.

 

Regarding prospect rankings, Peralta absolutely was on the radar during Woodruff's peak status (43-62 ranking mid-2017/pre-2018). Peralta already had a very good A then ever better A+ (mid-2017) then even better AA (pre-2018) while being 2-3yrs young for level and he made *zero* Top 100. Woodruff's peak prospect status is literally the same time frame when Peralta blew up. And those pub rankings are heavily influenced by *active* scouts opinions. On the opinion side, I disagree Woodruff's age puts him on a tier below Peralta as they both have 6yrs control, especially considering one of them (Peralta) still has control issues and needs to develop consistency with his secondary pitches while the other (Woodruff) is essentially a finished product with good control.

 

You also stated on this thread that *both* of Peralta's fastballs (same fourseam grip on both) are thrown *equally*. Except there's *zero* evidence to back that claim.

 

Now on to varying success going through the lineup multiple times. In the first 7 of Woodruff's 8 starts to end 2017 he averaged between 5.2 - 6 innings per start, with a 1.23 whip and 3.76 era, not to mention his entire minor league career as a rotation arm on top of that. In 2018 he was shuffled nonstop between the rotation/pen and AAA/MLB so he rarely had a consistent role until the final month of the season and playoffs. There's gaps with his pitching dates and amount of pitches because in order for his role to work they needed to limit what he can do at times.

 

In the meantime, Peralta was a starter all year and 5 of his 14 MLB starts he threw between 3 - 4.1 innings with a 6th start going 6 innings giving up 7er (if they didn't need him to eat up innings so badly he would've been pulled at 4.2 innings giving up 6er, if not sooner). So you don't question Peralta at all going multiple times through the order based on *half* of his MLB starts this year but you definitively state Woodruff can't? Peralta has proven success but Woodruff doesn't?

 

(Side note for people saying Woodruff hasn't proven anything as a starter and reference his overall line - in 10 of his 12 MLB starts he's combined to post 53.1ip, 43h, 21er, 21bb, 43k, 3.54 era, 1.2 whip and that doesn't include his 2 starts in the playoffs this year where he combined 8.1ip, 5h, 3er, 2bb, 11k.....all these young guys are going to get roughed up here and there and Woodruff did vs CO this year and his 8th/final start in STL the year before and those 2 games alone ballooned the living beep out of his numbers. Woodruff has been more consistent with his starts, including playoffs, than Peralta has).

 

On this thread you said Peralta improved his BB9 from 4.2 to 1.3 on his *rapid ascent*. False. That happened in 2014/2015 when he was in Rookie ball and repeating levels has nothing to do with improving control. What level one's at, who's standing in the box, etc has no impact on one's control.

 

And no, it isn't "very common" for players to improve control. Control literally makes and breaks careers and the past 2yrs Peralta has been between 4-5 BB9 at each level A+ and up. The reality is if he doesn't improve his BB9 rate to upper-3 or better at the MLB level he's going to continue to be inconsistent and not reach his potential. Look at the rotation arms with 20+ starts this year who had the most BBs and see how well the vast, vast majority of them performed. Peralta had a 1.3 in Rookie ball then a 3.6 in A but he's been 4-5 BB9 since. He can improve on where he's been because he's had decent control earlier in his career but to brush it off as if it's not a concern and there's no risk with him moving forward in absurd.

 

And I say all this believing Peralta has better stuff and a higher ceiling than Woodruff but he has control issues right now that shouldn't be easily dismissed. Dude had a 4.6 BB9 in MLB throwing his fastball 78% of the time. That's absolutely brutal. His control will determine if he's great or if he's Teheran (AS caliber one year and average the next).

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Then you're not paying attention. Peralta is thrown in just about every trade proposal on this forum. It's very clear that he's undervalued and misunderstood here. That's not a created narrative. You think passing word from scouts that Peralta is special would get people excited but that hasn't been the case. I can also pass along third-hand word (Brewers scout to scout to me) that Peralta is going nowhere. The Brewers know what they have.

 

Posts pondering Peralta for MadBum as a possibility are so far off the mark and that's why I comment and share what I know.

Except *this* isn't what you're saying. You're fabricating evidence and lying about trivial nonsense to put Peralta on a pedestal because your Uncle is an ex-scout and you take his *opinion* as gold.

 

Examples: my post laying out your lies on the Woodruff/Peralta thread. This thread - Woodruff isn't 4yrs older than Peralta. He's 3yrs 3 months and 20 some odd days older. The difference between reality and 4yrs is literally an additional full season's worth of experience.

 

Regarding prospect rankings, Peralta absolutely was on the radar during Woodruff's peak status (43-62 ranking mid-2017/pre-2018). Peralta already had a very good A then ever better A+ (mid-2017) then even better AA (pre-2018) while being 2-3yrs young for level and he made *zero* Top 100. Woodruff's peak prospect status is literally the same time frame when Peralta blew up. And those pub rankings are heavily influenced by *active* scouts opinions. On the opinion side, I disagree Woodruff's age puts him on a tier below Peralta as they both have 6yrs control, especially considering one of them (Peralta) still has control issues and needs to develop consistency with his secondary pitches while the other (Woodruff) is essentially a finished product with good control.

 

You also stated on this thread that *both* of Peralta's fastballs (same fourseam grip on both) are thrown *equally*. Except there's *zero* evidence to back that claim.

 

Now on to varying success going through the lineup multiple times. In the first 7 of Woodruff's 8 starts to end 2017 he averaged between 5.2 - 6 innings per start, with a 1.23 whip and 3.76 era, not to mention his entire minor league career as a rotation arm on top of that. In 2018 he was shuffled nonstop between the rotation/pen and AAA/MLB so he rarely had a consistent role until the final month of the season and playoffs. There's gaps with his pitching dates and amount of pitches because in order for his role to work they needed to limit what he can do at times.

 

In the meantime, Peralta was a starter all year and 5 of his 14 MLB starts he threw between 3 - 4.1 innings with a 6th start going 6 innings giving up 7er (if they didn't need him to eat up innings so badly he would've been pulled at 4.2 innings giving up 6er, if not sooner). So you don't question Peralta at all going multiple times through the order based on *half* of his MLB starts this year but you definitively state Woodruff can't? Peralta has proven success but Woodruff doesn't?

 

(Side note for people saying Woodruff hasn't proven anything as a starter and reference his overall line - in 10 of his 12 MLB starts he's combined to post 53.1ip, 43h, 21er, 21bb, 43k, 3.54 era, 1.2 whip and that doesn't include his 2 starts in the playoffs this year where he combined 8.1ip, 5h, 3er, 2bb, 11k.....all these young guys are going to get roughed up here and there and Woodruff did vs CO this year and his 8th/final start in STL the year before and those 2 games alone ballooned the living beep out of his numbers. Woodruff has been more consistent with his starts, including playoffs, than Peralta has).

 

On this thread you said Peralta improved his BB9 from 4.2 to 1.3 on his *rapid ascent*. False. That happened in 2014/2015 when he was in Rookie ball and repeating levels has nothing to do with improving control. What level one's at, who's standing in the box, etc has no impact on one's control.

 

And no, it isn't "very common" for players to improve control. Control literally makes and breaks careers and the past 2yrs Peralta has been between 4-5 BB9 at each level A+ and up. The reality is if he doesn't improve his BB9 rate to upper-3 or better at the MLB level he's going to continue to be inconsistent and not reach his potential. Look at the rotation arms with 20+ starts this year who had the most BBs and see how well the vast, vast majority of them performed. Peralta had a 1.3 in Rookie ball then a 3.6 in A but he's been 4-5 BB9 since. He can improve on where he's been because he's had decent control earlier in his career but to brush it off as if it's not a concern and there's no risk with him moving forward in absurd.

 

And I say all this believing Peralta has better stuff and a higher ceiling than Woodruff but he has control issues right now that shouldn't be easily dismissed. Dude had a 4.6 BB9 in MLB throwing his fastball 78% of the time. That's absolutely brutal. His control will determine if he's great or if he's Teheran (AS caliber one year and average the next).

 

Terrific post! He is 100% creating a narrative, and not only gets ultra defensive when questioned on it, or when someone disagrees, he gets extremely condescending. Then when questioned on that, he accuses others of creating drama. It's turned this board very negative lately.

 

I agree on Peralta as well. I think he has a higher upside than Woodruff, but probably a lower floor as well. Also, if you view the Brewers as having a 3 year window of World Series contention, it can be argued that Woodruff's age and experience makes him a better fit to be a high-end contributor during that window. That could be 100% wrong, but just looking at how both were used during the stretch this year, that appears to be the direction they are headed.

 

As for trading one of them, I think Peralta is more likely, but that is more based on his age than anything. Because he is younger and has already shown the ability to get MLB hitters out, it is likely his trade value is substantially higher than Woodruff's in a potential blockbuster-type deal (which are the ONLY type of deals Peralta's name is coming up in).

[TooLiveBrew]

The Woodruff/Peralta discussion has been a very interesting one so far, so let's dial back the agitation toward each other. Please make a genuine effort to keep things civil. Thanks.