Davies and Grisham to San Diego, Urias and Lauer to the Brewers

[Jopal78]

Whether Tyler Black plays 2B for Milwaukee at some point in the future is truly unknown, but by selecting him in the first round and making him a millionaire, I think its safe to say it is the Brewers intent.

 

Clearly, that's the Brewers desired outcome. But, what I take issue with here is your attempt to categorize a draft pick as something related to the performance/expectations for Luis Urias. At best, it's a stretch. More likely, it's completely off base. The Brewers likely drafted Black because of his potential, his position on the draft board, and his signability/bonus demands relative to their remaining draft bonus pool. Trying to lump that draft pick into anything related to Urias or the current construct of the Major League is almost certainly off-base.

 

Then again its not really my point. Rather it is Urias is a player without a home except at third base where his current offensive production and defense render him ordinary. He's blocked long-term at shortstop with Adames and he's blocked long term at second base with Wong, and even after the expiration of Wong's contract (be that in one or two years) there is the potential that there will be other players competing for the job at 2nd base.

 

As that ties in to the larger discussion, this trade was sort of a miss for the Brewers from a strategic roster building perspective as they traded a starting outfielder plus away for an infielder plus. Then, since making the trade they've signed two starting outfielders as free agents and have acquired an entire new group of infielders.

[PeaveyFury]

As that ties in to the larger discussion, this trade was sort of a miss for the Brewers from a strategic roster building perspective as they traded a starting outfielder plus away for an infielder plus.

 

And that's where I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. If you're evaluating a trade while completely excluding (or simply noting him as a "plus") the acquisition in said trade of a young, controlled starting pitcher who has performed exceptionally well this year and may well end up as the most valuable piece of the trade in the end, I'm not sure you're evaluating the trade fairly.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Whether Tyler Black plays 2B for Milwaukee at some point in the future is truly unknown, but by selecting him in the first round and making him a millionaire, I think its safe to say it is the Brewers intent.

 

Clearly, that's the Brewers desired outcome. But, what I take issue with here is your attempt to categorize a draft pick as something related to the performance/expectations for Luis Urias. At best, it's a stretch. More likely, it's completely off base. The Brewers likely drafted Black because of his potential, his position on the draft board, and his signability/bonus demands relative to their remaining draft bonus pool. Trying to lump that draft pick into anything related to Urias or the current construct of the Major League is almost certainly off-base.

 

Then again its not really my point. Rather it is Urias is a player without a home except at third base where his current offensive production and defense render him ordinary. He's blocked long-term at shortstop with Adames and he's blocked long term at second base with Wong, and even after the expiration of Wong's contract (be that in one or two years) there is the potential that there will be other players competing for the job at 2nd base.

 

As that ties in to the larger discussion, this trade was sort of a miss for the Brewers from a strategic roster building perspective as they traded a starting outfielder plus away for an infielder plus. Then, since making the trade they've signed two starting outfielders as free agents and have acquired an entire new group of infielders.

 

When you have good players, you find a way to get them in the lineup and on the field. And Luis Urias is a good player. Is it possible that Tyer Black may eventually be better than Urias? Certainly. But that isn't going to happen for awhile. As players such as Kike Hernandez and Ben Zobrist have shown, the ability to play multiple positions, while not necessarily holding down a set position on a regular basis, can still bring a ton of value to a team. Right now Urias is hitting .244 with 18 HRs and a .771 OPS. He just turned 24 on June 3. So what are we talking for upside as he gets into his mid to late 20s? .270-.280? 30 HRs? An OPS in the low to mid .800s? Those look like mighty fine numbers for a 3B to me, and absolutely terrific for a utility player.

[markedman5]

And if Urias continues to hit at this level or above he will have value if you want to move him in 2 or 3 years as a guy who can play 3 positions……if that is what they decide to do.

 

The future is always uncertain

 

Versatility is a plus not a minus…….if he gets 400-500 at bats a season who cares if it’s as the starter at short, 2nd or 3rd?

 

Have we learned nothing about the Brewers philosophy on roster building after all these years?

[pacopete4]

And if Urias continues to hit at this level or above he will have value if you want to move him in 2 or 3 years as a guy who can play 3 positions……if that is what they decide to do.

 

The future is always uncertain

 

Versatility is a plus not a minus…….if he gets 400-500 at bats a season who cares if it’s as the starter at short, 2nd or 3rd?

 

Have we learned nothing about the Brewers philosophy on roster building after all these years?

 

This I often wonder about when talking about Brewers baseball. They do things differently. They think outside the box on just about anything they do. It's so refreshing.

[timpep]

Even if he doesn't have a full time position I would be absolutely thrilled to have a guy like Urias as a utility player who can cover basically any infield position (potentially outfield?) in the event of an injury. We know that CC is going to give at bats to whoever is on the roster because that's just how he does it. I'd rather have Urias getting 400ish ABs a year as a super utility guy than the McKinney's of the world.

 

Maybe in 2 or 3 years he learns to avoid the throwing errors, adds a few pounds of muscle and turns into a 35HR threat starting at SS or 2B. There is a lot to like in Urias no matter what you thought/think of this trade then/now.

[Jopal78]

As that ties in to the larger discussion, this trade was sort of a miss for the Brewers from a strategic roster building perspective as they traded a starting outfielder plus away for an infielder plus.

 

And that's where I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. If you're evaluating a trade while completely excluding (or simply noting him as a "plus") the acquisition in said trade of a young, controlled starting pitcher who has performed exceptionally well this year and may well end up as the most valuable piece of the trade in the end, I'm not sure you're evaluating the trade fairly.

 

Then again I also referenced Zach Davies as a plus, and he lead the 2020 Padres in innings and quality starts and was 2nd on the staff in terms of WHIP and FIP. Can agree or disagree with the premise its fine, but at least read carefully.

[PeaveyFury]

As that ties in to the larger discussion, this trade was sort of a miss for the Brewers from a strategic roster building perspective as they traded a starting outfielder plus away for an infielder plus.

 

And that's where I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. If you're evaluating a trade while completely excluding (or simply noting him as a "plus") the acquisition in said trade of a young, controlled starting pitcher who has performed exceptionally well this year and may well end up as the most valuable piece of the trade in the end, I'm not sure you're evaluating the trade fairly.

 

Then again I also referenced Zach Davies as a plus, and he lead the 2020 Padres in innings and quality starts and was 2nd on the staff in terms of WHIP and FIP. Can agree or disagree with the premise its fine, but at least read carefully.

 

Thanks for reiterating, but I did indeed notice it, and doesn't effect the fact that dismissing Lauer as a 'plus' is inherently unfair. Problem is, Davies is no longer with the Padres and my response was future-looking. Zero people will/should/can argue anything other than that the Padres 'won' year one of the trade. But the Brewers are winning year two, and look poised to end up with the better return in the long run as well. Dismissing the Lauer part of the trade is dismissive of the total return the Brewers got, which as I noted, may end up being the bigger part of the deal. If the Brewers end up essentially trading a .770 OPS outfielder for years of a cheap 3-4 starter and a solid 3B/UTIL guy, that ends up just fine for Milwaukee, while many in San Diego will barely remember that Davies even pitched there by then.

[markedman5]

And let’s not forget to mention that if Davies was still with us (if we hadn’t made the trade) he would be making 8.6 million this season as opposed to Lauers 560,000.

 

Brewers clearly viewed Davies as someone they didn’t want to ride through the arbitration process…..and found a way to get a comparable replacement for a fraction of the cost.

 

Davies was obviously much better last season playing in a great pitchers park( his FIP last season was over a run higher then his era)……Lauer has outperformed him in 2021.

[tigerbrew]

This season performances shows that the lefty Lauer as equally valuable a return as Urias in this trade. This Grisham for Urias and Lauer trade is a good deal for the Brewers and next season could be even better.

 

For me, Lauer has overtaken Houser as the 4th starter due to his consistency. Next season we could see a rotation of Burnes, Woodruff, Peralta, Lauer, Ashby and Houser as the 6th sixth starter. I find that Houser is more suited for the bullpen.

[monty57]

This season performances shows that the lefty Lauer as equally valuable a return as Urias in this trade. This Grisham for Urias and Lauer trade is a good deal for the Brewers and next season could be even better.

 

For me, Lauer has overtaken Houser as the 4th starter due to his consistency. Next season we could see a rotation of Burnes, Woodruff, Peralta, Lauer, Ashby and Houser as the 6th sixth starter. I find that Houser is more suited for the bullpen.

 

And he will become even more valuable as Burnes and Woodruff become more expensive. I have a hard time believing that the Brewers can afford to keep the "Big three" together all the way through arbitration. If Lauer proves to be a solid middle-of-the-rotation starter, we can remain competitive even if we are forced to trade away Woodruff and/or Burnes during their arby years.

[pacopete4]

If they are all looking like studs, you keep them and make your runs with them and let the rebuild occur after. You may really never have the arms that we do currently ever again. I know the Rays are used as an example but I don't think they've ever had the stack that we do right now. Make your runs. Try like mad to win a WS and let the down years be the down years as a result of that attempt. That's how I'd view it if I was an owner.

[homer]

If this trade ends up being a push that's an acceptable result. And I'm not sure what draft picks have to do with this trade. For one thing, the position a guy plays when he is drafted isn't always the position he ends up playing in the majors. Stearns loves the flexibility. Secondly, you want a stockpile of good players regardless of position. If you end up heavy at one spot you can trade them to fill in spots where you are thin.

[Fear The Chorizo]

If they are all looking like studs, you keep them and make your runs with them and let the rebuild occur after. You may really never have the arms that we do currently ever again. I know the Rays are used as an example but I don't think they've ever had the stack that we do right now. Make your runs. Try like mad to win a WS and let the down years be the down years as a result of that attempt. That's how I'd view it if I was an owner.

 

As the arms get more expensive in arbitration, the position player portion of the payroll needs to shrink accordingly - the way current payrolls are structured for the next few years, contracts like Cain and Bradley come off the books and those dollars will go largely towards pitching arbitration salaries.

 

No way should the Brewers consider trading some of these young ace-caliber arms until their free agent year - if they are out of contention, you can still get a haul by dealing an ace-caliber starter at the July deadline if it's unlikely a guy like Woodruff or eventually Burnes won't be resigned longterm.

[monty57]

If they are all looking like studs, you keep them and make your runs with them and let the rebuild occur after. You may really never have the arms that we do currently ever again. I know the Rays are used as an example but I don't think they've ever had the stack that we do right now. Make your runs. Try like mad to win a WS and let the down years be the down years as a result of that attempt. That's how I'd view it if I was an owner.

 

Right, but they still have to be able to afford them which they probably won't be able to do. I've seen future payroll estimates in the $190M+ range as our current guys move through arby. Having some quality guys like Urias and Lauer who shouldn't be overly expensive will help. Or, if nothing else, they (Urias and Lauer) could be some of the guys who get traded for some pre-arby guys to bring the payroll down.

 

But taking the emotion out, the practical side of me realizes that it will have to be guys like Woodruff, Burnes and Adames who will be traded, so having players like Lauer and Urias around will be pretty important.

 

As time goes on, the trade this thread is based on allows us to have two holes filled with quality players who are playing for less than market value (pre-arby/arby) vs having one quality player playing for less than market value.

[adambr2]

Keep in mind that one of the big 3, Freddy Peralta, is extremely reasonably cost controlled through the 2026 season. We only need to worry about arbitration costs for Woodruff and Burnes, not all 3.

[ThisIsMyCrew]

Keep in mind that one of the big 3, Freddy Peralta, is extremely reasonably cost controlled through the 2026 season. We only need to worry about arbitration costs for Woodruff and Burnes, not all 3.

 

This is a huge part of that equation!

2.25, 3.5 and 5.5 million for Peralta the next 3 years. Following two years are 8 million Team options.

 

So as the Cain, JBJ, García etc fall off. We will have room for pitching extensions if desired.

[monty57]

Keep in mind that one of the big 3, Freddy Peralta, is extremely reasonably cost controlled through the 2026 season. We only need to worry about arbitration costs for Woodruff and Burnes, not all 3.

 

Right, but in a couple years we could have like $70-80M going to Yelich, Burnes, Adames, Hader and Woodruff with most of the rest of the roster in their arby years. That's after Cain and Bradley are gone, and we'll still be in a major payroll crunch.

 

Sorry if this is derailing the thread, but to topic Urias' job may be to replace Adames when he gets too expensive and gets traded and/or Lauer's job may be to do the same in the rotation. It's just the reality of being a small market team. I'd love to keep this team together for the long haul, but we can't, so it's good that we have talent spread around the 26-man roster and aren't reliant on one or two guys.

 

Thankfully, as this trade shows, even Stearns' "losses" in trades haven't turned out too bad, so when the day comes that he has to shed a big contract or two, I trust him to make those trades and keep the team competitive far more than I've trusted any other Brewer GM in the past (I know he's technically not the GM anymore, but he'll be the one making the trades).

 

Edit: As the Cubs showed this year, having a handful of stars surrounded by garbage doesn't get you very far. If we insist on holding onto our stars, we will have to get rid of the supporting cast as they hit arby, and we don't have a good enough farm to replace them. We will look like this year's Cubs, and then we will blow everything up and go through some 100-loss seasons. That doesn't seem like Stearns' M.O.

[Thurston Fluff]

Thanks for reiterating, but I did indeed notice it, and doesn't effect the fact that dismissing Lauer as a 'plus' is inherently unfair. Problem is, Davies is no longer with the Padres and my response was future-looking. Zero people will/should/can argue anything other than that the Padres 'won' year one of the trade. But the Brewers are winning year two, and look poised to end up with the better return in the long run as well. Dismissing the Lauer part of the trade is dismissive of the total return the Brewers got, which as I noted, may end up being the bigger part of the deal. If the Brewers end up essentially trading a .770 OPS outfielder for years of a cheap 3-4 starter and a solid 3B/UTIL guy, that ends up just fine for Milwaukee, while many in San Diego will barely remember that Davies even pitched there by then.

 

I agree with most of what you said but is it fair to view Davies only year without adding the trade value he gave them to help acquiring Darvish? If they trade Grisham for someone even better than Lauer down the road how does that effect the value of our trade?

That's the whole problem of judging trades. The piece don't stop moving long enough to make it an apples to apples comparison. It's easy to see a Yelich type trade where one team got an MVP and the other ended up with nothing but replacement level players. Not so easy to determine winners and losers when teams get viable major league talent for viable major league talent.

Both teams got what they wanted and moved on successfully using the players they got. They did so either by trading or using them. Does it really matter if one got slightly more or less value out of the specific players?

[markedman5]

Lauer has a 1.2 BWAR and an ERA plus of 122 this season.

 

Davies has a .4 WAR an ERA plus of 86......for the bargain price of 8.6 million.

 

Last season Davies WAR was 1.6....so it's possible that Lauer could end up with a similar season in 2021 to Davies in 2020

[adambr2]

Honestly, the guys I would look to deal would be ones like Houser and/or Lauer. Not that there is anything wrong with them but I think they are near peak value and will probably make more in arbitration than they will be worth to us. Should fetch a decent return, to shore up some other areas and/or help keep the farm replenished. Just look alone how much trading Rasmussen and Feyereisen did for us. Maybe keep Lauer and Houser for their 2022 arbitration year and then deal before they get too pricey. Kind of like what we did with Davies. Replace with guys like Ashby and Small and keep this train moving.

 

I would really try to keep the core of Peralta/Burnes/Woodruff together as long as possible. Look how much it has transformed this team, they are most of the reason why. We have this 3 year window coming up with them controlled, don't throw that away over the price tag. Peralta's contract is already taken care of. Likely scenario is Burnes and Woodruff probably come in at $25M or so each in their last arbitration season in 2024, we can swing it. We only have $31.7M committed already in both '23 and '24. Cain will be off the books, Bradley and Garcia too, Taylor will be relied on to be one of our future replacements. Mitchell will likely be a cheap part of our OF. A $125M or so payroll isn't unreasonable for those years at all. Helping avoid that middle ground of arbitration salaries by dealing the back end starters like Houser and Lauer will help us afford to keep the big 3 together.

 

Continue to make smart, reasonable trades to supplement the roster around our monster rotation. If we continue to find guys like Adames and Urias in trade and continue to find under the radar relievers like Cousins and Box and Strickland, we will be just fine. We can keep the big 3 together, we just aren't going to be able to be extremely active in free agency over the next 5 years or so and that is perfectly okay.

[clancyphile]

Honestly, the guys I would look to deal would be ones like Houser and/or Lauer. Not that there is anything wrong with them but I think they are near peak value and will probably make more in arbitration than they will be worth to us. Should fetch a decent return, to shore up some other areas and/or help keep the farm replenished. Just look alone how much trading Rasmussen and Feyereisen did for us. Maybe keep Lauer and Houser for their 2022 arbitration year and then deal before they get too pricey. Kind of like what we did with Davies. Replace with guys like Ashby and Small and keep this train moving.

 

I would really try to keep the core of Peralta/Burnes/Woodruff together as long as possible. Look how much it has transformed this team, they are most of the reason why. We have this 3 year window coming up with them controlled, don't throw that away over the price tag. Peralta's contract is already taken care of. Likely scenario is Burnes and Woodruff probably come in at $25M or so each in their last arbitration season in 2024, we can swing it. We only have $31.7M committed already in both '23 and '24. Cain will be off the books, Bradley and Garcia too, Taylor will be relied on to be one of our future replacements. Mitchell will likely be a cheap part of our OF. A $125M or so payroll isn't unreasonable for those years at all. Helping avoid that middle ground of arbitration salaries by dealing the back end starters like Houser and Lauer will help us afford to keep the big 3 together.

 

Continue to make smart, reasonable trades to supplement the roster around our monster rotation. If we continue to find guys like Adames and Urias in trade and continue to find under the radar relievers like Cousins and Box and Strickland, we will be just fine. We can keep the big 3 together, we just aren't going to be able to be extremely active in free agency over the next 5 years or so and that is perfectly okay.

 

This.

 

Use the farm system to fill the holes around the core - to wit, Yelich, Woodruff, Burnes, Hader, Peralta, Adames, and Urias. There are LOTS of prospects who can fill the holes around them: Feliciano ©, Martinez (1B), Turang (SS/2B), Wilson (IF/OF), Fry (C/IF/OF), Howell (SS/2B/OF), Perez (OF), Mitchell (OF), Frelik (OF/UT)... not to mention pitchers.

[ebmackenzie]

I can see Feliciano taking over MPina next year seems in order. Ashby takes over for Anderson. Gustave, Sanchez, Cousins, and Small have bigger roles next year too. It will be interesting who occupies RF if/when Garcia jumps. JBJ, TTaylor, Dahl(?), and a free agent as not one is really ready in AAA.

 

Don't we have $$$ on the books in dead money as well? Braun's maybe?

[Eye Black]

Coming into today…

 

Luis Urias since April 12: .264 BA / .345 OBP / .475 SLG / .820 OPS

 

Trent Grisham since June 12 (date of return from IL): .226 BA / .321 OBP / .389 SLG / .710 OPS

[clancyphile]

I can see Feliciano taking over MPina next year seems in order. Ashby takes over for Anderson. Gustave, Sanchez, Cousins, and Small have bigger roles next year too. It will be interesting who occupies RF if/when Garcia jumps. JBJ, TTaylor, Dahl(?), and a free agent as not one is really ready in AAA.

 

Don't we have $$$ on the books in dead money as well? Braun's maybe?

 

For 2022, a soft platoon of JBJ and Taylor makes sense (JBJ can also give LoCain time off in center).

 

Figure Cain gets 130 starts in center, Taylor gets 100 in right, and JBJ gets 90 starts - 60 in right, 30 in center. Yelich gets 160 in left.