What to do with Brandon Woodruff?

[Oxy]

With the success of Ashby and Lauer and even Ethan Small there is a part of me that wants to shop Woodruff around to get some help for the offense.  This is probably more than a bit early, as with 2 more years of arby after this one it makes more sense to play it out this year and shop him in the offseason--but if Boston called and offered Devers and Tristan Casas for Woody and Turang/Mitchell I'm not hanging up on them...

Thoughts?

[Jopal78]

30 minutes ago, Oxy said:

With the success of Ashby and Lauer and even Ethan Small there is a part of me that wants to shop Woodruff around to get some help for the offense.  This is probably more than a bit early, as with 2 more years of arby after this one it makes more sense to play it out this year and shop him in the offseason--but if Boston called and offered Devers and Tristan Casas for Woody and Turang/Mitchell I'm not hanging up on them...

Thoughts?

Why? In my mind since 1992 the homegrown front of the rotation pitchers the Brewers have developed is as follows: Cal Eldred, Ben Sheets, Yovanni Gallardo. Three in nearly 25 years until Woodruff and Burnes. 

They're finally  deep in SP (you can never have too much), and you want to trade one away with two more seasons of control after this one? 

No, nearly the entire staff is under team control through the end of 2023. They should ride it out until they either become uncompetitive or until at least July 31, 2024 before breaking up their pitching.  

[brewerfan82]

7 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

Why?

Because they're possibly legit 7 deep in a 5/6 man rotation and struggle to score on offense. ?‍♂️

I agree that I would be very leery on losing any of that depth, but you certainly have to listen and someone like Devers should at least perk your ears. That said, I think it's one of those situations where you're never going to get the massive haul it would take to part with Woodruff for it to ever actually happen.

Now trading a Houser or Lauer or even a Small... I'd still want something pretty significant back, but I think you're back in the realm of reality again with one of them on the table.

[Jopal78]

16 hours ago, brewerfan82 said:

Because they're possibly legit 7 deep in a 5/6 man rotation and struggle to score on offense. ?‍♂️

I agree that I would be very leery on losing any of that depth, but you certainly have to listen and someone like Devers should at least perk your ears. That said, I think it's one of those situations where you're never going to get the massive haul it would take to part with Woodruff for it to ever actually happen.

Now trading a Houser or Lauer or even a Small... I'd still want something pretty significant back, but I think you're back in the realm of reality again with one of them on the table.

They may very well be that deep, but they also have been very lucky with this group that none has suffered an arm injury yet (Houser had TJ in the minors)  to eat up that depth. More importantly, just compare Doug Melvin's teams which had great hitting and not enough pitching, their cumulative record is right around .500. This group has been winning 85+ games per year with mediocre offense. 

[brewerfan82]

I 100% agree that it's been waaayyyy more successful having a pitching dominant team than it was the other way around. But there's got to be some point where there's diminishing returns on having a 6th, 7th, 8th, etc., really good starting pitcher in the system in comparison to having another good everyday bat in the lineup. You wouldn't trade Adames at this point for another starting pitcher, would you? I can't imagine we need more starting pitching depth at this point at the cost of the offense, and it is quite likely we could be a better overall team at this point losing a little bit of that depth to help out the offense.

All that said, I wouldn't do anything unless it was a very clear upgrade on offense. And I wouldn't make that move until we've had more time to see what we have (and don't have) on the offensive side of things this year as well. I also would be very VERY hesitant to trade any of Burnes, Woodruff, Peralta, or Ashby at this point, but in the case of Woodruff, he will be getting expensive the next couple years and he may bring back a big enough haul where it's worth at least considering. But again, I doubt we get a big enough offer for that to ever actually come to fruition.

[Oxy]

18 hours ago, brewerfan82 said:

Now trading a Houser or Lauer or even a Small... I'd still want something pretty significant back, but I think you're back in the realm of reality again with one of them on the table.

Those guys are cheaper than Woody yet still very good and at least Lauer and Small we'd have under control a lot longer.  Woodruff would command a much higher trade return as well as save more money in the coming years.

What I DO know is that there is almost NO way the Brewers extend Woodruff.  And if they can't/aren't going to extend him then you have to think about trading him at some point.  Right now might be the best time to sell high...

[Brewcrew82]

Absolutely not. The primary reason why this team has as good of a shot to get to (and win) a World Series as any in recent Brewers history is that 1-2 punch at the top of the rotation with him and Burnes. How long have we waited for that as a franchise? And not only that, but you want to potentially trade him IN-SEASON. Please tell me the last time a top contender traded away an ace in the middle of a pennant race....You can get back to me after the season, but this ain't happening now. 

[Brewcrew82]

20 hours ago, brewerfan82 said:

Because they're possibly legit 7 deep in a 5/6 man rotation and struggle to score on offense. ?‍♂️

I agree that I would be very leery on losing any of that depth, but you certainly have to listen and someone like Devers should at least perk your ears. That said, I think it's one of those situations where you're never going to get the massive haul it would take to part with Woodruff for it to ever actually happen.

Now trading a Houser or Lauer or even a Small... I'd still want something pretty significant back, but I think you're back in the realm of reality again with one of them on the table.

Devers has less remaining years of team control than Woodruff, so no. I would probably trade a Lauer or Small for him, but Woodruff ain't happening. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

21 hours ago, Oxy said:

With the success of Ashby and Lauer and even Ethan Small there is a part of me that wants to shop Woodruff around to get some help for the offense.  This is probably more than a bit early, as with 2 more years of arby after this one it makes more sense to play it out this year and shop him in the offseason--but if Boston called and offered Devers and Tristan Casas for Woody and Turang/Mitchell I'm not hanging up on them...

Thoughts?

So you want to trade the Brewers' 2nd best starting pitcher who is indeed getting more expensive but still won't reach free agency until after the 2024 season, plus one of the organization's top position player prospects that may very well be a solid bat in the MLB lineup if given the opportunity a couple seasons from now, for:

a good offensive 3B who will be a free agent after the 2023 season and currently making almost double Woodruff's 2022 salary and one of the Red Sox's other top prospects at a corner IF position?

Yeesh 

[Oxy]

I didn't look into the details of that specific trade, it was just an example of something to get the discussion started, 

The main point is that Woodruff is not likely to be extended--so what is the best way to deal with an asset like that?  And when?  What WOULD it take?

(ALSO: The thread title isn't mine...It was meant more of a "What to do with Brandon Woodruff?" topic rather than a "should we trade him now for hitters?" topic.  No worries though--just a clarification)

[Tbadder]

I’d definitely trade one of the big two if it meant getting a controllable young hitter back. The Brewers are so unbalanced that when it comes playoff time I think they’ll struggle against teams who have two ways of winning instead of one. In addition I don’t see anything in the minors to truly help in the short term. Now if Yeli and Huira came around I’d never consider trading either pitcher; unfortunately that seems like too big of an ask. 

[nate82]

I am not sure you could get full value back by trading Woodruff.

Just to get full value for Woodruff a Yankees Brewers trade would look something like this:

Yankees send Volpe, Dominguez and Judge to the Brewers for Woodruff.

I don’t see the Yankees doing something like this.  They would probably prefer a Judge for Woodruff swap but that leaves the Brewers short about $70m in surplus value.

It would be extremely difficult to trade Woodruff, Burnes or Hader and get back equal or close to equal value back.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 hour ago, Oxy said:

(ALSO: The thread title isn't mine...It was meant more of a "What to do with Brandon Woodruff?" topic rather than a "should we trade him now for hitters?" topic.  No worries though--just a clarification)

The title change was me, I was just trying to make it more informative to encourage click-in. I do it quite a bit, actually.

I changed the title again to more accurately reflect your intention.

[GAME05]

Absolutely in favor of trading Woodruff or one of our other top starters. That's what you do, trade a strength to shore up a weakness, right?

Weirdly good to not be too deep in any one area because that diminishes opportunities for other players to step up and how that they really do belong. It's also an opportunity to get a young bat in here who could be under control for even longer than Woodruff is.

The fan in me never wants to see any good player on another team, but we wouldn't see the biggest drop in production if one of our great starters leave, however our offense would see a big bump. It's your basic gambler's wager: When the potential profit is greater than the perceived loss, you make the bet.

[Brewcrew82]

2 hours ago, Oxy said:

I didn't look into the details of that specific trade, it was just an example of something to get the discussion started, 

The main point is that Woodruff is not likely to be extended--so what is the best way to deal with an asset like that?  And when?  What WOULD it take?

(ALSO: The thread title isn't mine...It was meant more of a "What to do with Brandon Woodruff?" topic rather than a "should we trade him now for hitters?" topic.  No worries though--just a clarification)

Gotcha. Definitely not during the season (as I already stated), but certainly something worth exploring in the offseason if we fall short in the playoffs again due to offensive ineptitude. In that case, I would probably be willing to part with anybody on this team except for Burnes. That guy is a Hall of Fame talent right now, eerily resemblant of a prime Roy Halladay, so he's the one guy I would pull out all of the stops to get extended as soon as possible and even if that should fail, would be very hesitant to part with until he hits free agency. Hader is obviously of similar caliber, however, he's a reliever and I would simply not want to pay him what he's going to get in free agency, which is easily the richest deal ever for a relief pitcher ($150 million at least). 

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 hour ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Gotcha. Definitely not during the season (as I already stated), but certainly something worth exploring in the offseason if we fall short in the playoffs again due to offensive ineptitude. In that case, I would probably be willing to part with anybody on this team except for Burnes. That guy is a Hall of Fame talent right now, eerily resemblant of a prime Roy Halladay, so he's the one guy I would pull out all of the stops to get extended as soon as possible and even if that should fail, would be very hesitant to part with until he hits free agency. Hader is obviously of similar caliber, however, he's a reliever and I would simply not want to pay him what he's going to get in free agency, which is easily the richest deal ever for a relief pitcher ($150 million at least). 

Completely agree on Burnes vs. Hader. The value return just isn't there for a reliever while Burnes is nearly irreplaceable. And while you won't just find a new Josh Hader, finding a "good enough" closer isn't terribly difficult.

Milwaukee - particularly with the Yelich contract - just can't use that much of their payroll on a closer.

[Oxy]

Hader provides a more immediate issue...but I stumped for his trade for like 2 years and it's been discussed ad nauseum around here.  I admit now that I was dead wrong?....the guy just keeps getting better.

[Brewcrew82]

10 minutes ago, Oxy said:

Hader provides a more immediate issue...but I stumped for his trade for like 2 years and it's been discussed ad nauseum around here.  I admit now that I was dead wrong?....the guy just keeps getting better.

Yeah, even with Hader, I might want to hold onto him until he hits free agency just to the sheer dominance and certainty he provides at the end of games. But, as a small market, there is just no way we can justifying committing any resources to him beyond that. It's sad though, because he's another guy that's playing at a Hall of Fame level and how many Hall of Famers have we really been able to call our "own" throughout our history? Yount? Molitor? That's about it....I can't yet imagine having to watch him pitch for the Yankees. 

[TURBO]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

...finding a "good enough" closer isn't terribly difficult.

 

I can't agree with this, nor can about 25 other MLB teams.

Dominant closers are not as easy to find as some might think, which is why there are what, 3-4 in the game?

Losing Hader is going to be a major blow, and until that happens, I don't think we appreciate him as much as we should.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Just now, TURBO said:

I can't agree with this, nor can about 25 other MLB teams.

Dominant closers are not as easy to find as some might think, which is why there are what, 5 in the game?

Losing Hader is going to be a major blow, and until that happens, I don't think we appreciate him as much as we should.

I didn't say it was easy to find a dominant closer like Hader, in fact I said basically the opposite.

But finding an adequate closer isn't particularly difficult, especially if you already have a deep bullpen, which the Brewers do.

[sveumrules]

Woodruff is interesting because he isn’t set to hit FA until after his age 31 season, which probably limits him to like a 4 to 5 year deal tops through his age 35/36 seasons.

I wouldn’t say it makes him signing an extension before FA likely, but I do think Woody would give the most consideration to a fair offer out of him, Burnes (younger/better) & Hader (closer to FA/could set closer $$ record).

[brewmann04]

On 4/10/2022 at 6:24 PM, damuelle said:

The Sounds scored 4 in the 7th inning to pull ahead of the Durham Bulls, 4-3, with a Brice Turang double proving decisive. Then Miguel Sanchez (7 pitches, 1 K) and Luis Perdomo (13 pitches, 3 Ks) made quick work in the 8th and 9th innings to close it out.

I can't help but wonder why Zack Brown hasn't pitched since 1 inning on April 6th, with Luke Barker instead having to work another 1 1/3 innings today. I hope he's fine.

I think they keep Corbin and look to move Woodruff because can’t afford both imo 

[OldHeidelberg]

18 hours ago, sveumrules said:

Woodruff is interesting because he isn’t set to hit FA until after his age 31 season, which probably limits him to like a 4 to 5 year deal tops through his age 35/36 seasons.

I wouldn’t say it makes him signing an extension before FA likely, but I do think Woody would give the most consideration to a fair offer out of him, Burnes (younger/better) & Hader (closer to FA/could set closer $$ record).

Yes, I would be beyond stunned if either Burnes or Hader signed extensions with the Brewers, those guys are superstars and will find their way to the big markets for way more than the Brewers will spend. Woodruff seems like a guy they could get but I agree with the OP that maybe they need to sacrifice some pitching to balance out the roster for the playoffs, having 6-7 starters doesn't help so much then. Would rather trade Houser or Lauer though as I am a big Woodruff fan, we waited so long to develop a top starter in the org and he was the first in a while.

[Lathund]

I'd be open to trading any of our star pitchers (Starting or relief) that's not controllable beyond 2-3 years (So not Ashby or Peralta) if it's not looking like they're open for an extension. But to me that's different to shopping Woodruff, or anyone else, around. These are all guys who could something pretty decent in return even with 1 or ½ a season left on their deals, so there is no rush. Listen to offers, if someone blows you away with an offer then any one of them should be available. If they don't, we just sit tight and enjoy what we have.

I wouldn't want to trade Burnes, but I am curious about what teams would be willing to give up for him. Chris Sale might be the best recent-ish comp for such a trade. That got the #1 prospect in baseball (Moncada) and 3 others. Teams seem more reluctant to trade true top prospects in the years since tho, which is why I'd love to know what kind of value he has. Like if Bobby Witt or Adley Rutschman were on more ambitious teams, would those teams build a deal for Burnes around them? Probably not. Seems like a lot has changed since then, including what people would give for an Aroldis Chapman or Andrew Miller. 

Anyway as for Woodruff, I agree with Sveum above that he might be the most likely (From purely a age/baseball type perspective, their personal preferences will obviously impact this greatly too) of all these guys to sign an extension. And for that reason might be the one we want to keep most. 

But ultimately, we should look to trade anyone we can't extend. That's just the nature of a team whose market/owner limits their payroll to what the Brewers have to play with. But I wouldn't be in any rush to do it. Having 6 excellent starters (And I think Ethan Small is a 7th, but remains to be seen) is fantastic. There will be injuries, there always are. 

[Lathund]

On 4/29/2022 at 11:56 PM, Oxy said:

Hader provides a more immediate issue...but I stumped for his trade for like 2 years and it's been discussed ad nauseum around here.  I admit now that I was dead wrong?....the guy just keeps getting better.

The "dead wrong" part depends on the motivation for the trade. If it was a "sell high" type of argument, expecting him to crater, then yeah it was dead wrong. But depending on what has been, or will be in the future, offered for him a trade could have been the right thing to do regardless of how good he's been since. I was, and am still, a believer in that if a Hader extension isn't happening (And everything this FO has done so far suggests they won't be giving a $100m+ deal to a reliever. And Hader might very well prefer to test the market) they should look to trade him sooner rather than later. The issue is that from the outside we have absolutely no idea what teams have been offering for him. Maybe they made a mistake not accepting some offers for him, or maybe they've been 100% correct all the way in turning down offers.