Buying a prospect(s)?

[balsamlaker]

If you were Stearns, would you buy yourself a prospect(s) by picking up a corner infielder (Belt or Seager) with a big contract?

[trwi7]

They have enough value that they are at worst just salary dumps and neither of those teams are in a position to give away prospects to rid themselves of a player.

[Oxy]

Nope. That would be a "full rebuild" type of move. I WOULD do it if you felt the player you're getting is actually a better player than a cheaper replacement (or at least is possibly better if things work out). Say, a Jed Lowrie. He's not worth $10M, but his versatility easily makes him a player worth rostering--even on a playoff team he'd be a nice bench bat/glove. I'm not sure that Seager or Belt have a spot on the roster of a playoff team even if they were cheeep.

[SRB]

If it is literally just buying a prospect by taking on a useless player (Familia) then no, because we have limited payroll space and should be competing in 2020-2021 rather than when the next wave of prospects is ready. If it is paying slightly more than market value in order to get a player better than those available in free agency (Seager, Lowrie, possibly Belt) then absolutely.

[TJseven7]

In 2020, no.

 

I'd continue to shop the FA market, the only time I'd consider doing that (where the team is currently) is if the FA market completely fell through. I'd assume opportunities would be less likely at that point in FA. Even if FA fell through, you could improve the team around the trade deadline by taking on salary.

 

I think it's a good idea for teams who are rebuilding. MKE isn't rebuilding.

[JohnBriggs12]

Let's be realistic. Seager and Belt might be overpaid, but they're not Zach Cozart bad so they'd only get a more marginal prospect. I personally think Seager is a great fit for the Brewers and Belt's not bad either. You can argue all you want, that Thames is just as good, but strictly on ability going forward, I'd prefer Belt. Seager is the only decent LH hitting 3B out there available in trade and if the Brewers got him, even at a fairly hefty price, they won't need to find a more expensive LH hitting 1B. They could just let Braun play the bulk of the time, maybe bring in a Matt Adams at a bargain price, and they're fine and then sign Garcia to fill the gap in the OF. Seager is capable of close to Moustakas production.

[wntrtxn21]

Let's be realistic. Seager and Belt might be overpaid, but they're not Zach Cozart bad so they'd only get a more marginal prospect. I personally think Seager is a great fit for the Brewers and Belt's not bad either. You can argue all you want, that Thames is just as good, but strictly on ability going forward, I'd prefer Belt. Seager is the only decent LH hitting 3B out there available in trade and if the Brewers got him, even at a fairly hefty price, they won't need to find a more expensive LH hitting 1B. They could just let Braun play the bulk of the time, maybe bring in a Matt Adams at a bargain price, and they're fine and then sign Garcia to fill the gap in the OF. Seager is capable of close to Moustakas production.

 

If Stearns thought it was worth the price he would have re-signed Moustakas (cheaper than Seager's contract), and kept the prospects it will cost to get Seager.

[MrTPlush]

Not a ton of history of true prospects sales. Toussaint comes to mind, I’m really not much of a fan unless the owner really wants to burn profits when we absolutely suck. Competing? Yah, that’s a weird way to waste payroll. Odds are that money is totally wasted.

 

Belt/Seager aren’t exactly salary dumps either.

[SRB]

Let's be realistic. Seager and Belt might be overpaid, but they're not Zach Cozart bad so they'd only get a more marginal prospect. I personally think Seager is a great fit for the Brewers and Belt's not bad either. You can argue all you want, that Thames is just as good, but strictly on ability going forward, I'd prefer Belt. Seager is the only decent LH hitting 3B out there available in trade and if the Brewers got him, even at a fairly hefty price, they won't need to find a more expensive LH hitting 1B. They could just let Braun play the bulk of the time, maybe bring in a Matt Adams at a bargain price, and they're fine and then sign Garcia to fill the gap in the OF. Seager is capable of close to Moustakas production.

 

If Stearns thought it was worth the price he would have re-signed Moustakas (cheaper than Seager's contract), and kept the prospects it will cost to get Seager.

 

Well the issue with Moose is that its' a much longer contract (and he is significantly worse than Seager...)

[LouisEly]

If Stearns thought it was worth the price he would have re-signed Moustakas (cheaper than Seager's contract), and kept the prospects it will cost to get Seager.

One big difference - Moustakas got a 4-year deal and Seager has only two guaranteed years left. I believe I heard that if Seager gets traded the team option becomes a player option, making it likely three guaranteed years, but I believe I also heard that Seager may be willing to negotiate that if he gets traded to a contender.

 

If that last sentence is true, then the risk for Seager is only two years versus four for Moustakas. And the info about Seager being willing to negotiate the team/player option for 2022 may not have been available when the decision to offer Moustakas four years needed to be made.

 

Back to the original question - for a prospect, no, but for a young controlled major-league ready player who can fill a hole the next 3-4 years, absolutely.

[BrewBalls]

Yes if we are talking about the dump being someone who can contribute in 2020 like Lowrie. I don’t see Seattle or San Fran adding quality prospects to any trade involving Seager or Belt. They would rather pay down some of the remaining salary to make it more palatable to the receiving team in hopes of netting a lower level prospect.

 

This being said, I’m still onboard with a Smith + Lowrie or Seager + $$$ deal since I believe both would not cost much and improve our roster moving forward.

[clancyphile]

Let's be realistic. Seager and Belt might be overpaid, but they're not Zach Cozart bad so they'd only get a more marginal prospect. I personally think Seager is a great fit for the Brewers and Belt's not bad either. You can argue all you want, that Thames is just as good, but strictly on ability going forward, I'd prefer Belt. Seager is the only decent LH hitting 3B out there available in trade and if the Brewers got him, even at a fairly hefty price, they won't need to find a more expensive LH hitting 1B. They could just let Braun play the bulk of the time, maybe bring in a Matt Adams at a bargain price, and they're fine and then sign Garcia to fill the gap in the OF. Seager is capable of close to Moustakas production.

 

Plus, there are park factors to consider. Seager and Belt are playing in pitcher-friendly parks. Oracle Park, in particular had one-year park factors that were 88 (hitting)/90 (pitching) compared to Miller Park's 101/101.

 

Ideally, I take the whole amount of a Seager or Belt, and see if I can make Seattle and San Francisco cough up prospects. Lutz for Seager/Sheffield/Dunn would be a nice return.

https://www.baseballtradevalues.com/trades/trade-18674/

 

Sign Garcia, add on a small deal with the Mets (https://www.baseballtradevalues.com/trades/trade-18675/), and here's what I think a 26-man roster would look like:

 

ss: Urias

2b: Hiura

lf: Yelich

rf: Garcia

c: Narvaez

1b: Braun

3b: Seager

cf: Cain

pitcher

bench: Pina, Smith, Lowrie, Gamel, Mathias

rotation: Woodruff, Dunn, Lauer, Houser, Anderson

bullpen: Knebel, Hader, Suter, Peralta, Sheffield, Lindblom, Yardley, D. Williams

[Roderick]

If the guy is at a position of need and he is just overpaid compared to production, but the production is adequate considering we have no one there like 3B - then sure.