What to do with Brandon Woodruff?

[Lathund]

On 6/17/2022 at 5:31 PM, nate82 said:

The third year for Wong is a team option with a $2m buyout.  The buyout is probably a 100% going to happen as Wong’s 3rd year option is at $10m.  I fully expect Turang or Peterson to be the starting 2B in 2023.  

$10m for Wong is not a bad deal at all, but if the team plans to retain their core and keep trying to compete that'll come with some serious salary increases in arbitration to Burnes, Woody, Lauer, Hader, Williams, Adames, Urias, Tellez and others. There are a ton of arbitration eligible players on there. And I don't think we can expect to see the payroll budget go up much, sadly. So they either need to trade a high earner or two, or they need to do things like decline the option on Wong. 

[Jopal78]

3 hours ago, Lathund said:

$10m for Wong is not a bad deal at all, but if the team plans to retain their core and keep trying to compete that'll come with some serious salary increases in arbitration to Burnes, Woody, Lauer, Hader, Williams, Adames, Urias, Tellez and others. There are a ton of arbitration eligible players on there. And I don't think we can expect to see the payroll budget go up much, sadly. So they either need to trade a high earner or two, or they need to do things like decline the option on Wong. 

I suppose it depends which version of Kolten Wong they get for the rest of the year. I agree $10 million dollars in today's game is actually cheap for an everyday player. 

In an article on The Athletic, Stearns was just reiterating they are a built as a "run-prevention" team; thus if Wong finishes the year as the perennial gold glover he has been, it's likely they pick up his option due to his value in "run prevention". If he continues to pile up errors, go down with nagging injuries, and swing a weak bat, he'll be looking for a new club next year. 

The Brewers are actually in good shape for next year with only 32 million dollars already guaranteed. Just holding the line on their overall payroll they should be able to bring back whatever players they choose regardless of salary. 

[LouisEly]

I think it depends on how many more games Wong misses this year.  Wong missed 46 games last year and has already missed 16 games this year.  They can platoon Brosseau and Peterson in-house and keep Turang at AAA.  I can easily see them letting Wong walk simply because of lack of availability if he misses significantly more games.

[Jopal78]

17 hours ago, LouisEly said:

I think it depends on how many more games Wong misses this year.  Wong missed 46 games last year and has already missed 16 games this year.  They can platoon Brosseau and Peterson in-house and keep Turang at AAA.  I can easily see them letting Wong walk simply because of lack of availability if he misses significantly more games.

You could be right regarding Wong and injuries. However, Jace Peterson is also a free agent, and as a 1.5 WAR utility player so far this year (and nice overall numbers with Milwaukee), he's likely going to be looking for a multi-year guarantee somewhere, which doesn't rule out anything of course, but does make it less likely he'll be back next year. 

[StearnsFTW]

Payroll with what's already committed plus all arb-eligible players is going to be around $130,000,000 depending on what happens the rest of the season.  That number is for 19 players.

 

There is no chance they can keep everyone.  Somebody significant (and probably multiple somebodies) is going to have to go.

[wallus]

10 hours ago, StearnsFTW said:

Payroll with what's already committed plus all arb-eligible players is going to be around $130,000,000 depending on what happens the rest of the season.  That number is for 19 players.

 

There is no chance they can keep everyone.  Somebody significant (and probably multiple somebodies) is going to have to go.

Yep, you are correct. Here is my most likely to get traded in the off-season.

1. Hader

2. Houser

3. Woodruff

 

 

[Robocaller]

The only reason to trade Woodruff before the end of 2024 season is if the brewers are out of the playoffs and they are offered something exceptional for him.

We'll have him under control through his age 31 season. His peak may have been last year. Let someone else pay him in 2025. 

[PlayerHader]

On 6/30/2022 at 3:50 AM, Robocaller said:

The only reason to trade Woodruff before the end of 2024 season is if the brewers are out of the playoffs and they are offered something exceptional for him.

We'll have him under control through his age 31 season. His peak may have been last year. Let someone else pay him in 2025. 

I don’t think anybody is suggesting testing guys just for the sake of doing so. That said, there absolutely are reasons to trade him for a fair offer.

[SandyTolan]

Yeah, I think Wong and Peterson will both be gone next year, unless Jace wants to be back and can't find a decent multi-year deal as a 32-year-old.  But I suspect the super-utility guy will be Turang or maybe Mathias, with the Brewers trading for a 2B or 3B-man, and Urias sliding over to 2B or staying at 3B.  (There's not much on offer for 2023 in the way of FAs at either position.)

[monty57]

I got bored a few weeks ago, and did a spreadsheet of an estimate of the Brewers' 2023 salaries. These are rough guesses, and could be way off, but I figured that after losing McCutchen, Narvaez & Peterson to free agency, they could field a team for around $132M (opening day payroll 2022 was $131.9) consisting of:

OF: Yelich, Taylor, Renfroe, Davis
IF: Tellez, Wong, Adames, Urias, Brosseau, Hiura
C - Caratini, Severino

SP: Burnes, Woodruff, Peralta, Houser, Lauer, Ashby
RP: Hader, Williams, Suter, Boxberger, Gott, Cousins, Milner, Topa

Note that this is 14 pitchers, so there would need to be one less pitcher and one more position player. This is simply using the guys who were on the roster at the time. For sake of the model, it'd be pretty easy to drop off Topa, who is making $720,000 this year.

In my opinion, this would keep the salary around where it is today, but we'd be without McCutchen, Narvaez and Peterson, who have already combined for 778 PAs for the Brewers this year. That's a lot of PAs to make up.

I expect they will not exercise Wong's option, which would save them $8M. I'd guess they'll replace him with Turang for league minimum. They could let Hiura go, saving around $1.25M from my estimate of his first year arby number. Combined, these moves would allow for another McCutchen-type addition. The plan may be to keep Severino and Caratini to make up for the loss of Narvaez, and that may be why they're willing to stick with three catchers at this point. These moves would leave us around equal to this year - probably a little less talented, but with most of the same pieces in place.

However, if they do this they will lose Hader, Renfroe, Suter, Gott, Caratini, and Severino as free agents at the end of the year. That's a lot to lose "for nothing," but maybe more importantly they would be going into the offseason following the 2023 season with one year remaining on Woodruff, Burnes, Adames, Houser, and Lauer. 

That is why this thread hits on a very important decision. Does the team start trading away guys this offseason, do they do an all-out firesale after the 2023 season, or do they "go for it" for a few seasons and lose an immense amount of talent to free agency, no doubt sending the team into a long, cold winter.

My guess is that they will shop Hader and Woodruff this offseason. Unless the market is extremely dry, I think Hader is very likely to be traded, and there is a very good chance that Woodruff is traded. That should bring back a ton of talent, and allow for us to have some funds to spend to remain competitive with a rotation of Burnes, Peralta, Lauer, Houser, and Ashby with Williams moving to the closer role, and our prospects getting one year closer to the MLB.

Then I believe they will trade Burnes and Adames the following season, and decide what they want to do with Lauer and Houser. Again, they will bring back a ton of talent, and hopefully with our current prospects advancing, along with the mounds of talent we'd get back in all these trades, and some free agent pick-ups with the money we'd save, we could maintain the "continually competitive" stance Attanasio has preached since hiring Stearns. 

It's a lot to hope for, and they have to hit on the trades, but I don't believe that Attanasio will ride these guys to free agency, get nothing in return, and go into 2025 bereft of talent and looking at years and years of futility. Our chance at a World Series by "playing it out" isn't high enough to risk that outcome.

[Jopal78]

15 hours ago, monty57 said:

I got bored a few weeks ago, and did a spreadsheet of an estimate of the Brewers' 2023 salaries. These are rough guesses, and could be way off, but I figured that after losing McCutchen, Narvaez & Peterson to free agency, they could field a team for around $132M (opening day payroll 2022 was $131.9) consisting of:

OF: Yelich, Taylor, Renfroe, Davis
IF: Tellez, Wong, Adames, Urias, Brosseau, Hiura
C - Caratini, Severino

SP: Burnes, Woodruff, Peralta, Houser, Lauer, Ashby
RP: Hader, Williams, Suter, Boxberger, Gott, Cousins, Milner, Topa

Note that this is 14 pitchers, so there would need to be one less pitcher and one more position player. This is simply using the guys who were on the roster at the time. For sake of the model, it'd be pretty easy to drop off Topa, who is making $720,000 this year.

In my opinion, this would keep the salary around where it is today, but we'd be without McCutchen, Narvaez and Peterson, who have already combined for 778 PAs for the Brewers this year. That's a lot of PAs to make up.

I expect they will not exercise Wong's option, which would save them $8M. I'd guess they'll replace him with Turang for league minimum. They could let Hiura go, saving around $1.25M from my estimate of his first year arby number. Combined, these moves would allow for another McCutchen-type addition. The plan may be to keep Severino and Caratini to make up for the loss of Narvaez, and that may be why they're willing to stick with three catchers at this point. These moves would leave us around equal to this year - probably a little less talented, but with most of the same pieces in place.

However, if they do this they will lose Hader, Renfroe, Suter, Gott, Caratini, and Severino as free agents at the end of the year. That's a lot to lose "for nothing," but maybe more importantly they would be going into the offseason following the 2023 season with one year remaining on Woodruff, Burnes, Adames, Houser, and Lauer. 

That is why this thread hits on a very important decision. Does the team start trading away guys this offseason, do they do an all-out firesale after the 2023 season, or do they "go for it" for a few seasons and lose an immense amount of talent to free agency, no doubt sending the team into a long, cold winter.

My guess is that they will shop Hader and Woodruff this offseason. Unless the market is extremely dry, I think Hader is very likely to be traded, and there is a very good chance that Woodruff is traded. That should bring back a ton of talent, and allow for us to have some funds to spend to remain competitive with a rotation of Burnes, Peralta, Lauer, Houser, and Ashby with Williams moving to the closer role, and our prospects getting one year closer to the MLB.

Then I believe they will trade Burnes and Adames the following season, and decide what they want to do with Lauer and Houser. Again, they will bring back a ton of talent, and hopefully with our current prospects advancing, along with the mounds of talent we'd get back in all these trades, and some free agent pick-ups with the money we'd save, we could maintain the "continually competitive" stance Attanasio has preached since hiring Stearns. 

It's a lot to hope for, and they have to hit on the trades, but I don't believe that Attanasio will ride these guys to free agency, get nothing in return, and go into 2025 bereft of talent and looking at years and years of futility. Our chance at a World Series by "playing it out" isn't high enough to risk that outcome.

The Brewers are a team that despite all their faults they’re in first place and have been nearly all season. Anything can happen in the 2nd part of the season, however if they finish in first place they’re not going to break up their team because of “costs”. 
 

Let’s be honest there is no way to trade Woodruff, Hader, Burnes etc, and yet improve the team in the short run. The Brewers don’t have a bunch of killers breaking down the door to the major leagues. They trade Woodruff a player like Alexander goes from being a injury fill in to being counted on to give them 30 starts. Sure Williams would step into the closer role if Hader left but everyone else in the bullpen takes a step forward too and suddenly they’re relying on a Trevor Kelley type to give them 60 innings out of the pen. 
 

If they’re not a first place club, the paradigm changes but they’re not going to break up the best run the team has had in 50 years over money or fear of losing players to free agency. It’s not only bad for the product on the field, but it would be terrible for their brand as well.

[monty57]

3 hours ago, Jopal78 said:

The Brewers are a team that despite all their faults they’re in first place and have been nearly all season. Anything can happen in the 2nd part of the season, however if they finish in first place they’re not going to break up their team because of “costs”. 
 

Let’s be honest there is no way to trade Woodruff, Hader, Burnes etc, and yet improve the team in the short run. The Brewers don’t have a bunch of killers breaking down the door to the major leagues. They trade Woodruff a player like Alexander goes from being a injury fill in to being counted on to give them 30 starts. Sure Williams would step into the closer role if Hader left but everyone else in the bullpen takes a step forward too and suddenly they’re relying on a Trevor Kelley type to give them 60 innings out of the pen. 
 

If they’re not a first place club, the paradigm changes but they’re not going to break up the best run the team has had in 50 years over money or fear of losing players to free agency. It’s not only bad for the product on the field, but it would be terrible for their brand as well.

That is why I think the "breakup" should be done over 2-3 years rather than trying to do it all at once.

There is no doubt that there will be some pain felt by the fanbase. Attanasio's stated goal since he hired Stearns has been to build a franchise to maintain continued success, so I do not think there is a chance they will sit back and let all of their talent walk away as free agents and get nothing in return. Therefore, I try to look at what might be the best road to take when none of the choices seem ideal.

They can trade some this offseason, and some next offseason, or they can try to hold them together one more year and then try to trade everyone in the same offseason. I think the best chance to limit the pain and have a shot at remaining competitive is to do the trades over a few seasons, and not try to do it all in one year.

If they are able to make some moves, then it also opens the possibility of extending some guys. I think the superstars (Burnes, Hader, and Woodruff) have priced themselves out of Milwaukee, but that doesn't mean other lower-priced players couldn't be extended to maintain some stability. It also opens up some money to add some FAs to fill in some holes in the roster.

There are a lot of teams that would like Hader, so I think that trading him prior to his final arby year is very likely. Woodruff is a harder pill to swallow, but might be necessary if they want to "maintain continued success" and try to avoid an extended rebuild.

It's a tough decision, and I'm interested to see what path the Brewers take. What I laid out is just my opinion on what might be the best path.

[Jopal78]

29 minutes ago, monty57 said:

That is why I think the "breakup" should be done over 2-3 years rather than trying to do it all at once.

There is no doubt that there will be some pain felt by the fanbase. Attanasio's stated goal since he hired Stearns has been to build a franchise to maintain continued success, so I do not think there is a chance they will sit back and let all of their talent walk away as free agents and get nothing in return. Therefore, I try to look at what might be the best road to take when none of the choices seem ideal.

They can trade some this offseason, and some next offseason, or they can try to hold them together one more year and then try to trade everyone in the same offseason. I think the best chance to limit the pain and have a shot at remaining competitive is to do the trades over a few seasons, and not try to do it all in one year.

If they are able to make some moves, then it also opens the possibility of extending some guys. I think the superstars (Burnes, Hader, and Woodruff) have priced themselves out of Milwaukee, but that doesn't mean other lower-priced players couldn't be extended to maintain some stability. It also opens up some money to add some FAs to fill in some holes in the roster.

There are a lot of teams that would like Hader, so I think that trading him prior to his final arby year is very likely. Woodruff is a harder pill to swallow, but might be necessary if they want to "maintain continued success" and try to avoid an extended rebuild.

It's a tough decision, and I'm interested to see what path the Brewers take. What I laid out is just my opinion on what might be the best path.

I guess my point is: there is no way to trade Hader, Woodruff, Burnes or anyone else and have continued success (assuming we are defining continued success as being a favorite to win their division and play in the postseason).

In today's league, any trade involving their star pitchers, is not likely going to yield major league ready blue chippers  who will immediately step in an maintain (or increase) the overall talent level of the club. Thus, trading any one of Milwaukee's star pitchers most likely ends the current cycle of "continued success". The easiest course, and therefore most likely course,  in the future is to cut corners elsewhere on the roster in order to keep the star pitchers they have together as long as possible. 

[Oxy]

17 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

I guess my point is: there is no way to trade Hader, Woodruff, Burnes or anyone else and have continued success (assuming we are defining continued success as being a favorite to win their division and play in the postseason).

In today's league, any trade involving their star pitchers, is not likely going to yield major league ready blue chippers  who will immediately step in an maintain (or increase) the overall talent level of the club. Thus, trading any one of Milwaukee's star pitchers most likely ends the current cycle of "continued success". The easiest course, and therefore most likely course,  in the future is to cut corners elsewhere on the roster in order to keep the star pitchers they have together as long as possible. 

Why?

If our scouting department is as good in the near future as it has been in the last 5 years, there is no reason we shouldn't be able to continually reload and stay competitive- a la the Rays.  It's not like we would be trading away peanuts and a few bratwurst, we'd be trading away Cy Young candidates and the best reliever in baseball.  That SHOULD command a SIGNIFICANT return that might impair the quality of the big league club for a year or so but will make it a lot better the 5-8 years after that. 

We might go from a true talent 95 win team to a true talent 85 win team for one year or so, but that is still competitive and likely a playoff team.

[Jim French Stepstool]

43 minutes ago, Oxy said:

Why?

If our scouting department is as good in the near future as it has been in the last 5 years, there is no reason we shouldn't be able to continually reload and stay competitive- a la the Rays.  It's not like we would be trading away peanuts and a few bratwurst, we'd be trading away Cy Young candidates and the best reliever in baseball.  That SHOULD command a SIGNIFICANT return that might impair the quality of the big league club for a year or so but will make it a lot better the 5-8 years after that. 

We might go from a true talent 95 win team to a true talent 85 win team for one year or so, but that is still competitive and likely a playoff team.

Agreed. The key is identifying what is the best offer when you do sell, and continuing scout & draft well. As far as the latter is concerned I think we're in the best shape we've been in since Jack Zdurencik was here if not ever. My only bugaboo has been on the player development side, but hopefully that was more an effect of the drafting before the mentioned 5-yr period.

[monty57]

1 hour ago, Jopal78 said:

I guess my point is: there is no way to trade Hader, Woodruff, Burnes or anyone else and have continued success (assuming we are defining continued success as being a favorite to win their division and play in the postseason).

In today's league, any trade involving their star pitchers, is not likely going to yield major league ready blue chippers  who will immediately step in an maintain (or increase) the overall talent level of the club. Thus, trading any one of Milwaukee's star pitchers most likely ends the current cycle of "continued success". The easiest course, and therefore most likely course,  in the future is to cut corners elsewhere on the roster in order to keep the star pitchers they have together as long as possible. 

That's an understandable position, and one that I think a lot of fans will support. I'll look at three scenarios that I think kind of fit the current situation:

1) "The Rays": This has been brought up a lot, and I think there is merit. Despite a low payroll, and continually trading away key players, they are able to constantly bring in quality young players so they're always relevant, even in one of the toughest divisions in baseball. It's not often I say this, but the Brewers actually have an economic advantage over the Rays, so I'd like to think that we could be more of a "Cardinals model," where we can occasionally extend players and bring in free agents, but it's still important to trade away guys who are nearing free agency (and who aren't going to extend) to bring in the young talent that will sustain the team.

2) "The A's": This past offseason, the A's found themselves in the situation the Brewers will be in next year if they don't trade away some players this offseason. They had a ton of talent, but they were in their arby years and they couldn't afford them, so they did a firesale and are now pretty weak at the MLB level. They did trade everyone that was nearing free agency rather than lose them "for nothing," so the downswing might not be as long and painful, but they're pretty bad at the MLB level right now. 

I went into some detail in an earlier post, so I won't rehash it all here, but the Brewers' arby raises are getting pretty steep, so even though they could keep a good portion of the team together next year, I doubt they'd be able to afford to keep everyone in 2024. Regardless of desire, I think finances will force them into trading some guys before then.

3) "The Cubs": At any point in the past few years, the Cubs could have traded one or two of their pieces away. Instead, they held onto everyone until the last minute. Every year, you could see the team was a little less talented than the prior year, as the key guys got more expensive so they had less money for the remaining guys on the 26-man. As guys walked, they were replaced with lesser talent, and finally they were an average team with a high-payroll that was set to lose most of it's talent at the end of the year. They were able to trade the guys, but I would assume it was for far less than they would have gotten if they had more "team control" left. They're now in the unenviable position of having a below average (but not horrible) team at the MLB level that looks like it will tread water for quite a while without a clear path to becoming a good team in the foreseeable future.

This is where I see the Brewers if we try to hold onto everyone through free agency. This year, we'll lose McCutchen, Peterson, Narvaez and probably Wong. Next year, it will be Hader, Renfroe, Suter, Severino, Gott, and Caratini. Other than Hader, these aren't our "superstars," but they play vital roles on the team, and their salaries will be eaten up with arby raises to the guys we're holding onto. Unfortunately, as the Cubs found out, the superstars aren't enough to take you to the playoffs. You need solid guys around you, and when all of your payroll is taken up with the star players, the your role players just aren't good enough to get you to the playoffs. 

The Cubs got lucky in that the team fell apart in the final year. Imagine where the franchise would be if they were in the playoff hunt and didn't trade away Bryant, Rizzo, Baez and Kimbrel. If the Brewers hold their guys to free agency and they're somehow still a playoff team in 2025, we will be left with nothing in 2026. We would be in far worse shape than the current Cubs team.

 

No doubt we would lessen our chances at the playoffs in 2023 if we trade Woodruff and Hader, but we would get talent in return, and we'd have money for upgrades elsewhere on the roster. If things are done right, I think we'd have as much chance at the playoffs in 2024 if we trade guys as we would if we try to hold onto everyone we can afford, as I don't think a team with a few stars but little talent around them would be that good. I think our chances at the playoffs beyond 2024 are far greater if we trade some impending free agents for young talent than they would be if we lose all of that talent to free agency.

Finally, in a scenario I don't think is realistic, I think we'd deeply regret signing Burnes to a long-term deal, as having him and Yelich eating up a big chunk of our payroll would be far too limiting for our small market to handle.

[Jopal78]

2 hours ago, monty57 said:

That's an understandable position, and one that I think a lot of fans will support. I'll look at three scenarios that I think kind of fit the current situation:

1) "The Rays": This has been brought up a lot, and I think there is merit. Despite a low payroll, and continually trading away key players, they are able to constantly bring in quality young players so they're always relevant, even in one of the toughest divisions in baseball. It's not often I say this, but the Brewers actually have an economic advantage over the Rays, so I'd like to think that we could be more of a "Cardinals model," where we can occasionally extend players and bring in free agents, but it's still important to trade away guys who are nearing free agency (and who aren't going to extend) to bring in the young talent that will sustain the team.

2) "The A's": This past offseason, the A's found themselves in the situation the Brewers will be in next year if they don't trade away some players this offseason. They had a ton of talent, but they were in their arby years and they couldn't afford them, so they did a firesale and are now pretty weak at the MLB level. They did trade everyone that was nearing free agency rather than lose them "for nothing," so the downswing might not be as long and painful, but they're pretty bad at the MLB level right now. 

I went into some detail in an earlier post, so I won't rehash it all here, but the Brewers' arby raises are getting pretty steep, so even though they could keep a good portion of the team together next year, I doubt they'd be able to afford to keep everyone in 2024. Regardless of desire, I think finances will force them into trading some guys before then.

3) "The Cubs": At any point in the past few years, the Cubs could have traded one or two of their pieces away. Instead, they held onto everyone until the last minute. Every year, you could see the team was a little less talented than the prior year, as the key guys got more expensive so they had less money for the remaining guys on the 26-man. As guys walked, they were replaced with lesser talent, and finally they were an average team with a high-payroll that was set to lose most of it's talent at the end of the year. They were able to trade the guys, but I would assume it was for far less than they would have gotten if they had more "team control" left. They're now in the unenviable position of having a below average (but not horrible) team at the MLB level that looks like it will tread water for quite a while without a clear path to becoming a good team in the foreseeable future.

This is where I see the Brewers if we try to hold onto everyone through free agency. This year, we'll lose McCutchen, Peterson, Narvaez and probably Wong. Next year, it will be Hader, Renfroe, Suter, Severino, Gott, and Caratini. Other than Hader, these aren't our "superstars," but they play vital roles on the team, and their salaries will be eaten up with arby raises to the guys we're holding onto. Unfortunately, as the Cubs found out, the superstars aren't enough to take you to the playoffs. You need solid guys around you, and when all of your payroll is taken up with the star players, the your role players just aren't good enough to get you to the playoffs. 

The Cubs got lucky in that the team fell apart in the final year. Imagine where the franchise would be if they were in the playoff hunt and didn't trade away Bryant, Rizzo, Baez and Kimbrel. If the Brewers hold their guys to free agency and they're somehow still a playoff team in 2025, we will be left with nothing in 2026. We would be in far worse shape than the current Cubs team.

 

No doubt we would lessen our chances at the playoffs in 2023 if we trade Woodruff and Hader, but we would get talent in return, and we'd have money for upgrades elsewhere on the roster. If things are done right, I think we'd have as much chance at the playoffs in 2024 if we trade guys as we would if we try to hold onto everyone we can afford, as I don't think a team with a few stars but little talent around them would be that good. I think our chances at the playoffs beyond 2024 are far greater if we trade some impending free agents for young talent than they would be if we lose all of that talent to free agency.

Finally, in a scenario I don't think is realistic, I think we'd deeply regret signing Burnes to a long-term deal, as having him and Yelich eating up a big chunk of our payroll would be far too limiting for our small market to handle.

There are exceptions to every rule which may be the case with the Rays, however its not really apples to apples. After breaking up the Zobrist, David Price et al. teams in 2013 they did go through four seasons of losing baseball before the rise of the current group of players.

As for the A's their sell-off involves larger issues than just the team. They are attempting to pressure the City of Oakland to cut red tape for a new stadium and/or provide public financing for a new stadium this year. Running out a perennial playoff team while arguing their current stadium makes it impossible for them to compete does create an interesting juxtaposition. 

The main issue is with the statement: "If things are done right, I think we'd have as much a chance in the playoffs in 2024 if we trade guys as we would if we try to hold onto everyone we can afford.." This just isn't true in today's game. Can't miss, major league ready prospects simply are not traded any more. The best the Brewers would be looking at is a package of AA and A ball players from another team, or maybe major league ready players like Nick Madrigal (a former high draft pick who has been a disappointment in limited playing time) neither of which will keep the ship afloat in the short run. 

There's a rebuild coming to some degree no matter what. The question is would you rather not ever lose 90+ games but at the same time not be a serious contender, or alternatively have a chance to win a pennant but then lose a pile of games for multiple seasons. 

[Oxy]

1 hour ago, Jopal78 said:

The main issue is with the statement: "If things are done right, I think we'd have as much a chance in the playoffs in 2024 if we trade guys as we would if we try to hold onto everyone we can afford.." This just isn't true in today's game. Can't miss, major league ready prospects simply are not traded any more. The best the Brewers would be looking at is a package of AA and A ball players from another team, or maybe major league ready players like Nick Madrigal (a former high draft pick who has been a disappointment in limited playing time) neither of which will keep the ship afloat in the short run. 

I guess it depends what you mean by "can't miss." Last year Josiah Gray, Keibert Ruiz, Jesus Luzardo, Ezequiel Duran and Josh Smith were traded and those were deadline deals for rentals (not to mention Drew Rasmussen and JP Feyereisen).

You are correct though in that if you want higher ceiling prospects you'll likely need to wait a couple years after the trade to see the results on the big league field.

[SandyTolan]

I agree a staggered trading strategy makes the most sense.  I would not trade Hader now - he'll need to build his trade value after his recent meltdowns, and let's face it the Brewers need Good Hader if they're going to go anywhere in the postseason.  So I'd trade him this winter with one year left.  That may not bring max value, but pretty close.

Then I'd trade Woodruff in winter 23/24, with one year left before free agency.  Same with Burnes/Adamaes, a year later ie 24/25.

Of course if someone comes along with incredible offers for any of these guys - offers that would include MLB ready players - they could elect to trade these guys sooner.  But bottom line, this should be a reload rather than rebuild strategy.

[monty57]

3 hours ago, SandyTolan said:

Then I'd trade Woodruff in winter 23/24, with one year left before free agency.  Same with Burnes/Adamaes, a year later ie 24/25.

Burnes, Woodruff, Adames, Houser, and Lauer are all free agents at the same time. 2024 is the final year of team control for all of them. Gustave is too, but he's not quite at the same level. 

Peralta is the only one of this year's opening day starting rotation who will be around in 2025, and that is the final (option) year of his contract. That's why guys like Ashby and Small are so important, and any thoughts of trading them away sends shivers down my spine.