Should the Brewers Extend Luis Urias?

I would love to lock Urias down, I think his floor is being a high end super utility player and for the last 2 years he's been an above average starter. Extending him seems fairly low risk and wouldn't require breaking the bank. 

I'd definitely try to extend Urias. Lock him down for 1 or 2 FA years would be a good move to provide stability over the next 4 years.

I consider extensions once a guy's into his arby years akin to signing free agents, as you aren't going to get too much of a discount for the free agent years. Therefore, I think you have to ask "if this guy was a free agent, would we realistically be going after him?" For guys like Burnes and Woodruff, that's a resounding no. Urias is a definite maybe.

Urias has a decent bat and positional flexibility, so there should be a role for him even as some of the prospects make their way to the majors. If the Brewers could get a little bit of a discount for taking some risk off the table for Urias, an extension is worth exploring. 

By giving him financial security now, you are taking away his incentive to keep getting better.  Some guys will continue to work just as hard but many don't.  Some White Sox fans I know believe the Sox locking up most of their promising young everyday players has led to a lot of complacency which is part of the reason for their disappointing performance in 2022. Remember these are guys in their mid twenties getting money most people just dream of.  Even older players are not immune,  

10 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

If the Brewers aren't going to extend any of the big three, I like the idea of gaining an extra couple of years from some of their second tier players like Urias, Tellez, Lauer, etc.

And the moment Chourio hits the majors, I want to see him locked down for 8-10 years.

Chourio is an interesting case... if I'm the Brewers, if he extends, great.

If not... maybe the Trent Grisham strategy might be the right move. Controversial at the time, but is anybody complaining now?

Chourio is not in any way a comparison to Grisham.  I mean, those two guys are on totally separate planets.

10 hours ago, TURBO said:

Chourio is not in any way a comparison to Grisham.  I mean, those two guys are on totally separate planets.

I agree, but at the same time, it never hurts to plan for contingencies - like not being able to get an extension in place.

Just now, clancyphile said:

I agree, but at the same time, it never hurts to plan for contingencies - like not being able to get an extension in place.

The interesting thing is this is always easier to say in hindsight

For example, if he has a first season like a top tier talent, he's unlikely to accept a real low offer, though could maybe get 1/2 extra seasons due to his likely young starting age in the big leagues.

However on this basis, we also could've offered Hiura a long contract based on his first year, and that wouldn't have turned out so well.

I think the Brewers could do it when he turns up in the bigs immediately, but even then there's some risk, as there has to be some uncertainty over future earnings to get a deal like this that's team friendly

2 minutes ago, Jake McKibbin said:

The interesting thing is this is always easier to say in hindsight

For example, if he has a first season like a top tier talent, he's unlikely to accept a real low offer, though could maybe get 1/2 extra seasons due to his likely young starting age in the big leagues.

However on this basis, we also could've offered Hiura a long contract based on his first year, and that wouldn't have turned out so well.

I think the Brewers could do it when he turns up in the bigs immediately, but even then there's some risk, as there has to be some uncertainty over future earnings to get a deal like this that's team friendly

It's a tough call - why Doug Melvin, David Stearns, and now Matt Arnold get the big bucks. Knowing you not only need to keep putting the best team you can on the field, but also to keep the team profitable.

I'm not sure how long any of us could manage that level of stress.

We all know the team has some major personnel decisions to make in the near future. As it stands now, Urias' team control goes through 2025, which is his 4th arby year. He's set to make $4.7M this year (year two arby), so I think it'd take more than the 4 year/$25M contract proposed in the article, but it wouldn't break the bank.

In 2026, the only players from the current team who will still be around are Yelich (through '28 + '29 option), Ashby (through '27 w /'28 & '29 options), Toro (final arby year in '26), and our pre-arby guys which are pretty much Taylor, Mitchell, Contreras and some role players.

Guys who could debut this year (Frelick, Turang, Wiemer, Chourio) could hit arby in '26 or '27, depending on when they're brought up. Depending on what other decisions are made, that could give us a fairly inexpensive lineup for a year or two. Someone like Urias could give us a decent veteran option for the '26 and '27 seasons when he should be able to fit into the budget while the current prospects are making their way through pre-arby and into their early arby years.

Of course, I would like to see them extend as many of the current top prospects as possible early on, in which case Urias would be a nice complementary piece to the guys who will be our core players for most of the next decade.

My one concern with extending him is that he was underperforming until Adames joined the team. I recall an article stating that he prefers to kind of play in the shadows rather than being the center of attention, and Adames' personality took the spotlight off of Luis. I have no idea how Urias' play will be effected when Adames is gone, which could be after this season. The team has a lot more insight into that than any of us ever will.