Trade Deadline Rumors

[KeithStone53151]

Scherzer seems destined to be a Dodger or Padre. Both have loaded farm systems to trade from and he supposedly prefers the West Coast. He might just veto a trade anywhere else.

 

I'd bet heavily on the Dodgers. The Betts trade tells me there's just no way he isn't a Dodger, especially with the need/injuries.

[A Swing and A Drive]

Given the fact that 2021 could be the 4th straight season the Brewers make the playoffs, the current Brewers front office has tried to build the team for sustained success. Previously, in 50 years, the Brewers had never made the playoffs more than 2 straight seasons.

 

One strategy to win a World Series, is to rebuild for several seasons and then when you are in position to make the playoffs, cash in your future assets (prospects) to go all-in (Sabathia/Greinke/Scherzer?).

 

This can certainly work but I believe the current strategy is to try to be in the postseason as much as possible without trading away your key future assests, and hope that at least one season you get all the breaks and win a championship.

 

I believe that the best strategy is a hybrid of those two. If the current front office makes the assessment this week that the Brewers can emerge from the 2021 playoffs as the last NL team standing, I think they should be willing to trade almost any player from the current farm system.

 

I believe the Brewers are currently built much better for playoff baseball success than the Braun/Prince ERA teams of 2008 and 2011 because our current team strenghs are Starting Pitching and Bullpen.

 

My guess is that Stearns and Company stay the course and make one or two seemingly underwhelming additions that prove to ultimately make the team better for our playoff run.

[KeithStone53151]

One strategy to win a World Series, is to rebuild for several seasons and then when you are in position to make the playoffs, cash in your future assets (prospects) to go all-in (Sabathia/Greinke/Scherzer?).

 

This can certainly work but I believe the current strategy is to try to be in the postseason as much as possible without trading away your key future assests, and hope that at least one season you get all the breaks and win a championship.

 

I believe that the best strategy is a hybrid of those two. If the current front office makes the assessment this week that the Brewers can emerge playoffs as the last NL team standing, I think they should be willing to trade almost any player from the current farm system.

 

It's kinda tough to make that assessment considering the Dodgers are still in the NL. I mean yes the Brewers can beat them, but the probability can't be 50/50 as the rosters stand now. And that's before the Dodgers bring in probably Scherzer and Kimbrel and Iglesias simply because they can.

 

As much as it sucks, I like the current strategy of continued success...continue to be good. Make prudent trades when available, but I don't really want to fall into a 5-6 year rebuild if we can avoid it, and I certainly don't want to become the Pirates/Marlins/yuck teams that it's a miracle if they go 500 more than twice a decade.

[DuWayne Steurer]

It feels like this question gets asked every year. Would you trade XY or z for a world series title? And every year, any number of folks chime in to remind that a world series is never guaranteed. The flawed premise of the question is that I don't care who you add to your roster You aren't guaranteed to win a playoff series, let alone a world series title.

[SandyTolan]

>>>>>The PTBNL list included Brantley, Lucroy, and Taylor Green (who was one of our highest ranked prospects at the time). If we would have missed the playoffs, my understanding is that they would have sent Green to Cleveland (the Brewers' choice). Because we won the Wild Card, the Indians got to pick and chose Brantley.<<<<<<

 

Angel Salome, then a more highly-regarded catching prospect than Lucroy, was on that list, and not Lucroy, if I recall correctly.

[reillymcshane]

Question for everyone out there. Is it worth giving up your top prospect to win a World Series?

Of course we do. But that's impossible to guarantee - so it's sort of a silly question.

 

The question is 'Is it worth giving up your top prospect to have a better better chance at winning a World Series?'

 

One thing about baseball is that one person's addition isn't going to vault a team from 'playoff contender' to 'near-guaranteed' Series champion.

 

If the Brewers had a 20% of winning the World Series, and added a healthy Mike Trout, it's not like we would suddenly have a 80-90% chance of winning. Yes, we have improved our chances, but not by that much.

 

It doesn't mean you don't make moves. Just that it's all a fine balance.

[Jopal78]

The Brewers are the only team in their Division with a positive run differential

 

Reds -20

Cubs-20

Cardinals -35

Pirates -120

 

If the Brewers only play .500 baseball the rest of the way they would end up 89-73.

The Reds would have to go 38-24 just to tie a .612 winning percentage

The Cubs would have to go 39-22 just to tie a .639 winning percentage

The Cardinals need to go 39-23 just to tie a .629 winning percentage.

 

Given the math, it actually wouldn't surprise me if the Brewers skipped making a big trade at the deadline and instead added some more peripheral players to add a couple of fresh arms to the pitching staff, and upgrade their bench and hang on to their best minor league depth.

[Brewcrewin07]

Given the fact that 2021 could be the 4th straight season the Brewers make the playoffs, the current Brewers front office has tried to build the team for sustained success. Previously, in 50 years, the Brewers had never made the playoffs more than 2 straight seasons.

 

One strategy to win a World Series, is to rebuild for several seasons and then when you are in position to make the playoffs, cash in your future assets (prospects) to go all-in (Sabathia/Greinke/Scherzer?).

 

This can certainly work but I believe the current strategy is to try to be in the postseason as much as possible without trading away your key future assests, and hope that at least one season you get all the breaks and win a championship.

 

I believe that the best strategy is a hybrid of those two. If the current front office makes the assessment this week that the Brewers can emerge from the 2021 playoffs as the last NL team standing, I think they should be willing to trade almost any player from the current farm system.

 

I believe the Brewers are currently built much better for playoff baseball success than the Braun/Prince ERA teams of 2008 and 2011 because our current team strenghs are Starting Pitching and Bullpen.

 

My guess is that Stearns and Company stay the course and make one or two seemingly underwhelming additions that prove to ultimately make the team better for our playoff run.

 

"Hope" is not a strategy.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

"Hope" is not a strategy.

 

Perhaps not. But operating conservatively in an effort to give yourself as many bites at the apple as possible most definitely is.

[Brewcrewin07]

"Hope" is not a strategy.

 

Perhaps not. But operating conservatively in an effort to give yourself as many bites at the apple as possible most definitely is.

 

From Will Sammon's Athletic article:

 

What can history tell us?

The idea of giving yourself as many bites of the apple as you can sounds great in theory, but when has it ever really worked out? The Rays are probably the best example of nearly winning a title with this strategy. They advanced to the World Series last season and lost to the Dodgers, but they seem primed for another deep run this postseason. And that was even before they traded for Nelson Cruz on Thursday to bolster their lineup.

 

Which utilizing this strategy continuously means also that "hope" is part of your strategy as well.

[KeithStone53151]

"Hope" is not a strategy.

 

Perhaps not. But operating conservatively in an effort to give yourself as many bites at the apple as possible most definitely is.

 

Is it better to have 3 opportunities over the course of a decade with an average of a 20% chance of winning the world series, or 8 opportunities over the course of a decade with an average of a 10% chance of winning the world series? These numbers are clearly pulled out of thin air, it's worth considering which is better though. You never know which year you're team could get hot at the right time, or worse go cold at the wrong time.

 

For me, in a league where the very best team in the league might win 2/3 of their games against all opponents...variance can easily result in the best team not winning the world series. Having a lot of bullets is advantageous. Heck even in a league where the best team much more often wins the championship...we were one big toe away from not making it out of the second round.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Which utilizing this strategy continuously means also that "hope" is part of your strategy as well.

 

How would mortgaging your future for a bunch of "all-in" moves not be considered "hope", though. I think you are focusing on the wrong word there. All these strategies have different levels of hope tied to them.

[StearnsFTW]

Scherzer seems destined to be a Dodger or Padre. Both have loaded farm systems to trade from and he supposedly prefers the West Coast. He might just veto a trade anywhere else.

 

I'd bet heavily on the Dodgers. The Betts trade tells me there's just no way he isn't a Dodger, especially with the need/injuries.

 

Yeah, seems likely to me. Especially since they lost Bauer.

[KeithStone53151]

"Hope" is not a strategy.

 

Perhaps not. But operating conservatively in an effort to give yourself as many bites at the apple as possible most definitely is.

 

From Will Sammon's Athletic article:

 

What can history tell us?

The idea of giving yourself as many bites of the apple as you can sounds great in theory, but when has it ever really worked out? The Rays are probably the best example of nearly winning a title with this strategy. They advanced to the World Series last season and lost to the Dodgers, but they seem primed for another deep run this postseason. And that was even before they traded for Nelson Cruz on Thursday to bolster their lineup.

 

Which utilizing this strategy continuously means also that "hope" is part of your strategy as well.

 

Every time the Cardinals won the world series over the last 20 years, they were definitively not the best team on paper. I'm pretty sure one year they were barely 500 and won it all(David Freese...barf). They just kinda always are around during playoff time and were fortunate to catch lightning in a bottle a couple times.

[Dresden files]

Everyone knows that winning the World Series is really hard. Its really hard for the Yankees and Dodgers to do. You cant go in every time you are in the playoff hunt everyone he I think agrees on that. I do think that this year with 3 controllable Aces it is the time to reach much more then normal. Most likely if we make no moves we still win the division this year and are probably 3rd favorite to win the NL.

 

I think it is a great year to make a bigger splash since most likely if we dont win the Series this year we still have a really good chance of being the best team in the Division next year with our pitchers back. That way we still keep that 10% chance next year but this year maybe its 25%.

 

We have great pitching for the next couple years and maybe our farm is weaker but when our pitchers price out in FA we flip them to rebuild the farm right away.

[Brewcrewin07]

Which utilizing this strategy continuously means also that "hope" is part of your strategy as well.

 

How would mortgaging your future for a bunch of "all-in" moves not be considered "hope", though. I think you are focusing on the wrong word there. All these strategies have different levels of hope tied to them.

 

Sure, I don't disagree with that, there are elements of "hope" tied into all of them. That being said, you can't predict the future. What if next year, the big 3, don't perform anywhere near as well?? What if one or two of them have career threatening injuries?? Taking as many bites of the apple is all well and good, BUT, that's making a lot of projections that are impossible to do.

 

What we do know now, right here, today is the staff is healthy, and they have the best three pitchers they have ever had. To not TRY to take advantage of that right now while you can, and just casually say "well, let's be conservative and if we don't succeed, we can try again next year", is a total disservice IMO.

 

What they do may not work this year either, and of course there's "hope" tied into it, but..it's betting on the "known"(all three pitchers healthy and good) now, as opposed to the "unknown", the future.

[brewerfan82]

Perhaps we make a new thread for Trade Deadline Philosophies? This conversation is getting tiresome when all I want is to see if there are any new actual rumors in this thread.

[IntentionalHBP]

“ It looks like if Eric Hosmer goes, so does one of the Padres’ top four prospects.

That’s what is being discussed.”

 

 

Depending on which prospect I may want to take this deal.

 

Although it has been previously stated that Milwaukee was on his no trade clause.

Edited July 27, 2021 by IntentionalHBP

[mlloyd10]

“ It looks like if Eric Hosmer goes, so does one of the Padres’ top four prospects.

That’s what is being discussed.”

 

 

Depending on which prospect I may want to take this deal.

 

Plus, i don't know exactly what is in his contract, but he can opt out after next season

[PeaveyFury]

Perhaps we make a new thread for Trade Deadline Philosophies? This conversation is getting tiresome when all I want is to see if there are any new actual rumors in this thread.

 

 

Yeah, let’s try to keep this a discussion of actual potential targets. We’re just repeating the philosophy discussion over and over anyway.

[umphrey]

I find it kind of crazy but according to Vegas prop bet odds we are 3rd most likely to get Scherzer behind Dodgers and Mets. 1 in 4.

[monty57]

I actually hate this time of year...you hear about the Brewers inquiring about Donaldson, you hear them inquiring about Story, or other big names at the deadline, and they end up making some puddle jumper moves instead. Mostly because I assume they consider the price "cost prohibitive". Listen, in a year like this when you have the pitching you have, and the window you have, nothing should be too prohibitive. It's not like you'll have to give up one of the 3 pitchers, or any other untouchables in a deal. It just comes down to them being gun shy.

 

The bolded part is how people get themselves in lots of trouble, and not just in baseball. It's why people say "I want that new sportscar," and the payments end up sending them into bankruptcy.

 

The Brewers have a limited budget, and with arby raises and contract escalations, we're probably already near the point that we won't be able to add any salary next season unless we find a way to get rid of some contracts. That means we need as many good pre-arby guys as we can get over the next couple of years. Trading away any of the guys who could help us for league-minimum in the next few years could cost us a lot of future playoff appearances.

 

We could possibly take on a "rental" player who costs mostly money instead of prospects this season with no future commitments, but I don't see us taking on a big multi-year deal (like Hosmer) or giving up good prospects. We made our "splash" move when we traded for Adames, and kudos to Stearns for getting it done early rather than waiting for the deadline, as that's a big reason we're in the position we're in.

 

I think Stearns will find a way to acquire a decent reliever, but I don't expect anything "flashy." The good thing is, that strategy is probably why we're odds on favorites to be heading into our fourth straight playoffs, with most of this team set to return in hopes of extending our winning ways well into the future.

[roadcrew3]

I find it kind of crazy but according to Vegas prop bet odds we are 3rd most likely to get Scherzer behind Dodgers and Mets. 1 in 4.

 

His contract and the deferred money I think helps the Brewers chances. If the Brewers were to trade for him, I wonder if it makes Cain or JBJ a likely part of the package going back to the Nats just to slightly offset that.

[monty57]

I find it kind of crazy but according to Vegas prop bet odds we are 3rd most likely to get Scherzer behind Dodgers and Mets. 1 in 4.

 

His contract and the deferred money I think helps the Brewers chances. If the Brewers were to trade for him, I wonder if it makes Cain or JBJ a likely part of the package going back to the Nats just to slightly offset that.

 

I think the most likely way we could be in on a higher-priced guy who would be controlled beyond this season would be to include a big contract back in the deal. Of course, that would mean that we'd either not get "one of the Padres' top four prospects" by taking on Hosmer's contract, or we would have to give up a whole bunch of extra prospect talent in order to get Scherzer.

 

Of course, Attanasio could see Scherzer as such a prize that he would be willing to raise the payroll and risk losing money in future years in order to get him. He's shown that attitude in the past, so it could be possible.

[Eye Black]

“ It looks like if Eric Hosmer goes, so does one of the Padres’ top four prospects.

That’s what is being discussed.”

 

 

Depending on which prospect I may want to take this deal.

 

Although it has been previously stated that Milwaukee was on his no trade clause.

In a vacuum it’s sort of incredible that the Padres are going to give up a better prospect to move Hosmer than they gave up to acquire Yu Darvish… And yes, I understand why.