Houser, Lauer

[StearnsFTW]

Trade Lauer to the Padres for Trent Grisham.

 

 

Eh. Maybe.

[pacopete4]

Trade Lauer to the Padres for Trent Grisham.

 

 

Eh. Maybe.

 

Starting Pitching >>>>>>> outfielder

[wallus]

HOUSER, it's HOUSER...

 

Ritchie Sexton approves.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Trade none and just pound teams series after series with a 6-man rotation.

 

Woody

Peralta

Lauer

Burnes

Houser

Ashby

 

When Small is ready, you think about trading OR stick Houser in the pen and have at it. Keep the arms and continue to keep winning a lot of baseball games.

 

Put Small in the pen and bring him along the same way they've done with the rest of these successful starters they're developing. Keep Houser, a good mid to back end of the rotation guy in the rotation until the results show he's not suited for that role.

[pacopete4]

Trade none and just pound teams series after series with a 6-man rotation.

 

Woody

Peralta

Lauer

Burnes

Houser

Ashby

 

When Small is ready, you think about trading OR stick Houser in the pen and have at it. Keep the arms and continue to keep winning a lot of baseball games.

 

Put Small in the pen and bring him along the same way they've done with the rest of these successful starters they're developing. Keep Houser, a good mid to back end of the rotation guy in the rotation until the results show he's not suited for that role.

This also is a great option. Just smother teams series after series with very good to great pitchers. Don't let opponents breathe.

[PeaveyFury]

It's very similar to the Braves' model in the 90s. Passable offense coupled with rotations/staff that were absolutely devastatingly effective. Won them a WS and got them a bunch of additional swings at it....

[Fear The Chorizo]

Stearns and company have turned the Brewers' organization from one that needed to either trade tons of prospect capital for quality starting pitching or shell out large portions of their payroll budget for middling veteran starters to fill out a serviceable rotation surrounding a homegrown core of hit first position players into the exact opposite.

 

It wasn't long ago when we as Brewer fans lamented the organization not being able to develop or acquire even average pitching talent that would reach Milwaukee with multiple seasons of team-friendly pre-arbitration control. One thing to add to the Braves comparison is having a good defense behind that pitching staff.

[pacopete4]

A ripple effect of having the starting pitching and pen that we have is that we may have some players, who might not otherwise, consider playing in Milwaukee. If you know going into a season that your pitching is top 3 in the league, you have a shot at some great things.

[JohnBriggs12]

Trade Woodruff for a mega deal and keep Lauer and Hauser

 

I am willing to pull this trigger, as long as we get the haul. I think Burnes, Peralta, Lauer, Houser, Ashby would still be a top starting rotation in 2022 with Small/Lindblom/Bettinger/Hardy as emergency starters and the next man in. Plus you can probably include an almost MLB ready pitcher in the trade if you have concerns.

 

After Small, I'd put File next in line. But if you trade Woodruff, you will likely get a starter who's close to the major leagues as part of the deal. Maybe not a top 75 type prospect but certainly a guy who projects as a 4-5th starter perhaps as soon as mid 2022. Woodruff should have tons of value given record, age and control not to mention durability.

[TURBO]

If we can only get a pitching prospect that projects as a #4 or #5, we better damn well be getting a prospect that projects REALLY HIGH on offense.

 

#4 and #5 guys are not guys I'd consider as big pieces in a Woodruff trade. They'd need to be throw ins at this point.

[pacopete4]

If we can only get a pitching prospect that projects as a #4 or #5, we better damn well be getting a prospect that projects REALLY HIGH on offense.

 

#4 and #5 guys are not guys I'd consider as big pieces in a Woodruff trade. They'd need to be throw ins at this point.

 

Yep, that list for players we trade for starts and ends here.

[CheezWizHed]

You should be building around Woodruff, Burnes, and Peralta, not trading them away. Remember all the years trying to get TOR starters? Why are we trying to get rid of them to keep Houser and Lauer?

 

When Houser starts getting expensive (and hopefully he does because it means he is pitching well), you trade him and keep backfilling with Ashby, Small, etc...

 

Spend the $$ on the top tier players, fill around them for the rest.

[OldHeidelberg]

I don't see them trading Woodruff, Burnes or Hader unless the wheels come off and they are selling at some trade deadline. That could happen as soon as next season but doesn't see likely, even then you only trade them for a monster return and only one of Burnes/Woodruff. We have waited too long to develop pitchers, we should be talking about taking the payroll to $140-150 million if needed over the next 3 years rather than trading these guys. Houser/Lauer? Only as part of a deal that brings back major league talent to fill holes.

[adambr2]

Trade Lauer to the Padres for Trent Grisham.

 

 

Eh. Maybe.

 

Starting Pitching >>>>>>> outfielder

 

I mean Grisham is worth far more than Lauer given WAR and service time. The Padres would never do it anyway, although it would be hilarious. You could not possibly be selling higher on Lauer if DS pulled off a deal like that.

 

I get what you're saying in a vacuum but obviously it depends on the quality of both players plus salary, service time, all those other things.

[monty57]

You should be building around Woodruff, Burnes, and Peralta, not trading them away. Remember all the years trying to get TOR starters? Why are we trying to get rid of them to keep Houser and Lauer?

 

When Houser starts getting expensive (and hopefully he does because it means he is pitching well), you trade him and keep backfilling with Ashby, Small, etc...

 

Spend the $$ on the top tier players, fill around them for the rest.

 

It really depends on how the money shakes out. We'll have Yelich on the books throughout the timeframe of "The Big Three" pitchers, making $26M/year. Peralta will be making $2.48M, $3.7M, and $5.7M so he's helping the payroll picture.

 

Among others, Adames and Burnes will enter year 1 arby next year, and Woodruff will be entering his 2nd (of 4) arby year. If they continue their MVP/Cy Young performances, they could be making a lot of money by 2023 to go along with Yelich's $26M plus the arby raises of the rest of the team.

 

So, money is a big factor as to why they may trade star players while they are still in their arby years. The other reason is that after 2024 we would lose Peralta, Adames, Burnes and Woodruff for nothing more than a comp pick (assuming the new CBA still allows for the comp pick). Holding all of them to free agency would be the ultimate of "window" strategies, and we would be a basement dweller for years if we went that route.

 

I would be surprised if any of our pitchers are dealt this offseason. We'll lose Anderson to free agency, and go into 2022 with a very strong rotation and Asby and Small waiting in the wings as insurance. After next year, I'm sure there will be some desire to make a trade, especially if everyone is still pitching well and Ashby and Small are ready. By 2023, I think at least one of Burnes / Woodruff will be traded for a big return, and the other will probably be traded prior to their final arby year, as I don't see either of them signing an extension. If they keep pitching well, both of them will bring back a load of young talent that will keep the Brewers in contention for a long time.

 

As to trading Lauer or Houser this offseason, you need to have a lot of depth to make it through an MLB season, and the 2022 Brewers should have it. After losing Anderson to FA, trading either of Houser or Lauer would be risky, as it would take away that depth. It would take a huge return for it to make sense, so I think both of them will remain on the team, and Ashby and Small will start next year in AAA. There will be injuries, and Ashby will get a lot of MLB starts even if we retain all of our starting pitchers.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I mean Grisham is worth far more than Lauer given WAR and service time. The Padres would never do it anyway, although it would be hilarious. You could not possibly be selling higher on Lauer if DS pulled off a deal like that.

 

I get what you're saying in a vacuum but obviously it depends on the quality of both players plus salary, service time, all those other things.

 

Grisham is basically a year younger than Lauer and has one extra year of arb control. Those factors do provide value, but I don't know if they make Grisham worth "far more" than Lauer. It comes down to what a GM values more ... a solid mid-rotation lefty starter (Lauer's safe ceiling) or an centerfielder that may top out as an .800 OPS guy. (pretty safe ceiling for Grisham). And can Grisham stay at CF long term, because his production loses some value if forced to put him in a corner.

[monty57]

I don't see them trading Woodruff, Burnes or Hader unless the wheels come off and they are selling at some trade deadline. That could happen as soon as next season but doesn't see likely, even then you only trade them for a monster return and only one of Burnes/Woodruff. We have waited too long to develop pitchers, we should be talking about taking the payroll to $140-150 million if needed over the next 3 years rather than trading these guys. Houser/Lauer? Only as part of a deal that brings back major league talent to fill holes.

 

You can't just magically raise the payroll. Attanasio has done a lot to get the payroll to higher levels than it has ever been, but there are limits and the Brewers are likely to blow past those limits if our guys continue to play well and get the arby increases that go along with good play.

 

There is a reason the Rays don't just push their payroll up to "put the nail in the coffin" of the Yankees and Red Sox. Small market teams just can't do that.

 

As much as it stinks to think that we'll have to trade away some good players because we can't afford them, the Brewers will need to "act like the Rays" or they'll get swallowed up. The good thing is that the Rays have shown that trading away good players doesn't mean that the team will be bad. The return you get from those trades allows the team to remain continually competitive, which is the stated goal of Stearns and Attansio.

[OldHeidelberg]

I don't see them trading Woodruff, Burnes or Hader unless the wheels come off and they are selling at some trade deadline. That could happen as soon as next season but doesn't see likely, even then you only trade them for a monster return and only one of Burnes/Woodruff. We have waited too long to develop pitchers, we should be talking about taking the payroll to $140-150 million if needed over the next 3 years rather than trading these guys. Houser/Lauer? Only as part of a deal that brings back major league talent to fill holes.

 

You can't just magically raise the payroll. Attanasio has done a lot to get the payroll to higher levels than it has ever been, but there are limits and the Brewers are likely to blow past those limits if our guys continue to play well and get the arby increases that go along with good play.

 

There is a reason the Rays don't just push their payroll up to "put the nail in the coffin" of the Yankees and Red Sox. Small market teams just can't do that.

 

As much as it stinks to think that we'll have to trade away some good players because we can't afford them, the Brewers will need to "act like the Rays" or they'll get swallowed up. The good thing is that the Rays have shown that trading away good players doesn't mean that the team will be bad. The return you get from those trades allows the team to remain continually competitive, which is the stated goal of Stearns and Attansio.

 

I didn't mean to bring up something that I think has probably been beaten to death here but if we can have $50 million payrolls during rebuilds we can have $150 million payrolls during high points. It's not magic, there is no cap and owners can spend their own money and push for a title if they want to. I am sure they can borrow and run in the red if needed too. Losing sure isn't going to increase revenue. I said if needed only to make the point that it has to make sense, we obviously can't outspend the Dodgers. But if we are trading Woodruff or Burnes only because payroll is capped at $100 million and they can't afford them then in my mind fans are justified to walk away and spend their money on Bucks/Packers tickets. Again, I am not trying to start that debate here again, just don't agree that it takes magic to increase payroll in MLB. It's certainly possible we are cursed with owners who just really can't afford to lose money on the team for a few years but I wish they would sell it then.

[PeaveyFury]

I didn't mean to bring up something that I think has probably been beaten to death

 

You've got that right. My usual takeaway is that opinions are opinions, not facts.

[pacopete4]

It's certainly possible we are cursed with owners who just really can't afford to lose money on the team for a few years but I wish they would sell it then.

 

These are things that peeve me. We have watched this ownership group put out the best run of Brewers baseball there’s ever been and still this crap.

[OldHeidelberg]

It's certainly possible we are cursed with owners who just really can't afford to lose money on the team for a few years but I wish they would sell it then.

 

These are things that peeve me. We have watched this ownership group put out the best run of Brewers baseball there’s ever been and still this crap.

 

They went to $125 million in a recent year I believe, my comment you quoted was in response to the idea that they could not go to $140-150 million to make a run behind this rotation if needed. I honestly think they can and would if they felt it would put them over the top. But yes, seeing how you responded that last comment probably should have been left out as the context wasn't very clear.

[adambr2]

There are definitely MLB franchises and owners that sit on piles of cash and don't prioritize winning. That clearly doesn't happen here under Mark A. Does he make money off the Brewers, I'm sure he does. He is a businessman and I certainly don't expect him to operate the franchise at a loss.

 

What they can afford to spend on a year to year basis I will leave between him and his accountants. As long as he is making an earnest effort to invest money and resources in quality players to put a winning product on the field and not solely looking to profit off the team with no intention to invest in a winning team, that is good enough for me.

[reillymcshane]

Trade none and just pound teams series after series with a 6-man rotation.

 

Woody

Peralta

Lauer

Burnes

Houser

Ashby

 

When Small is ready, you think about trading OR stick Houser in the pen and have at it. Keep the arms and continue to keep winning a lot of baseball games.

 

Put Small in the pen and bring him along the same way they've done with the rest of these successful starters they're developing. Keep Houser, a good mid to back end of the rotation guy in the rotation until the results show he's not suited for that role.

 

This is how I see things playing out. Ashby replaces Anderson. That gives you six guys - just like this year. It seems to have worked out pretty well.

 

Small then plays the Ashby role as needed.

 

To me, that's pretty sweet.

 

Now, that said, if someone comes with you with a deal you love in exchange for Lauer or Houser - sure - do it. But otherwise, this is a rotation we can ride. I'd do that - and then sign a bat (such as Escobar).

[clancyphile]

Who says it's impossible to keep the big three?

I wonder if offering Woodruff an 8-year, $120 million deal, with $40 million deferred ($2 million a year for 20 years after the contract) and an option year at $20 million with a $5 million buyout might not be a bad idea.

 

Hear me out - as an 11th round pick, he probably didn't get a huge bonus. He's 28, so why not buy out the arby and some free agency, and at the same time, lock him down with Peralta?

 

It might be a little more difficult with Burnes, since he got around $540K as his bonus as a 4th-round pick and he's younger than Woodruff (26), but could he go for a similar deal?

[MrTPlush]

Who says it's impossible to keep the big three?

I wonder if offering Woodruff an 8-year, $120 million deal, with $40 million deferred ($2 million a year for 20 years after the contract) and an option year at $20 million with a $5 million buyout might not be a bad idea.

 

Hear me out - as an 11th round pick, he probably didn't get a huge bonus. He's 28, so why not buy out the arby and some free agency, and at the same time, lock him down with Peralta?

 

It might be a little more difficult with Burnes, since he got around $540K as his bonus as a 4th-round pick and he's younger than Woodruff (26), but could he go for a similar deal?

 

He has already made $4.4mil in his career. His elbow could blow tomorrow and he would still make another $20mil or so minimum because the Brewers would offer him arby next year to rehab and then the year after when he can pitch again.