Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 29 of 29
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,132
    I'm not a big fan of the greinke deal. Even if the dbacks eat $5mill per year, you're still paying him $27 mill per year for 3 years. And while next year will technically be his age 35 season, he's already turned 35 so he's on the older end of 35. And while his results are still good, he has some concerning peripherals. His velocity is at an all time low. His strikeout rate has been dropping consistently outside of a tick up in the year prior to last. His luck metrics were decent last year as his babip and strand rate were better than normal.

    Greinke might have a good year or two left. And he's the type of guy who should age okay given he's more of a finesse guy that mixes his stuff. But he's older, expensive and trending in the wrong direction. It wouldnt surprise me at all if he drops off quickly and I don't want to be the one paying him when he does. I'd much rather spend that money on the open market and keep the assets in Ray, Anderson and whoever else would have been included.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,766
    My line of thinking with Grienke is that by the D-backs taking 5 and then putting Anderson in the deal brings it down to like 21 because Anderson makes like 6. I just looked at his velocity and it is worrisome that he has lost about a mph per year. I feel like the cost and risk of the other available ace caliber starters is similar, Corbin will likely cost over $100, Kuechel has been inconsistent and will likely get $20, Morton would be interesting but I'm not fully sold on him, and trade targets like MadBum and the Mets guys would likely cost more prospect value(I'm not ready to call Wheeler and ace type but he would be close). I would be fine putting Morton as a free agent for like 2/35 and a team option or a trade for Zach Wheeler if we don't have to give up one of our top 5ish prospects for him.

    I love Whit Merrifield but not for us anymore, unless we just trade Huira for him straight up. If he could play some SS I would be all for it but he will likely cost 3 really good pieces and with Huira close and the OF likely shored up there isn't a place for him. I like Matt Duffy more because he will be cheaper and the Rays have Robertson, Adames, and Wendle to play IF so he should be available.

    I would say our wishlist has to be 1)Get an ace 2)Find a 2B who can bat in the 2 hole and play utility if/when Huira is ready 3)Bullpen depth 4)Upgrade catcher (if not to expensive) 5)Turn some spare parts in minor league depth

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,132
    I was messing around in the main. Here's what I came up with for an potential off-season plan. What do you guys think?

    Brewers:
    Let Moose, Soria, granderson, Miley and Gio walk.

    Non tender Schoop.

    Trade: Anderson, Davies and thames for mid to low tier prospects to rebuild the farm depth and get some cash releif or trade one for a middle relief guy. (thames may be the toughest of the bunch to move for any value.)

    Sign catching help, either Ramos or grandal.

    Sign a 2nd tier starter, targeting say eovaldi.

    Sign or trade for (using the above trade guys or maybe a broxton type) some middle relief help.

    Sign a decent utility If who can man 2nd until Keston hiura is ready. Ideally this player can play 2nd and 3rd. So he can be a utility guy when/if hiura gets the call next year. Thinking a descalso or Harrison type if they are willing to sign a 1 yr cheapish deal.

    C-ramos or grandal/pina
    1B:Aguilar (Braun)
    2B:FA/perez (hiura at some point)
    SS: Arcia/saldino (guy like saldino until hiura is up)
    3B:shaw
    OF:yelich/cain/braun/Santana/broxton

    SP: chacin/FA (eovaldi)/burnes/woodruff/Nelson or Peralta
    RP:hader/jeffress/Knebel/FA or trade target/cedeno/Williams/Jennings or other minor leaguers/low level FAs battling for the last 2 spots.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    7,213
    I agree with the top two points. I would not bring any of those guys back.

    I think the brewers will definitely pursue trading Thames and Anderson to shed their salary even if it means not bringing back anything in return other than salary relief. Davies I would keep and pencil him into the rotation for 2019. He’s still cheap and effective.

    I like the idea of Grandal, but likely too expensive. I’ve seen varying opinions on how much Ramos will get, but if it’s on the lower end of predictions I’d be all for it.

    Eavoldi is interesting. In general I don’t think the Brewers will be players for any SP on multi year deals. Probably more likely to see a Miley/Gallardo deal, but this is influenced by me wanting Davies in the rotation.

    I agree that they’ll probably bring in some bullpen competition arms, but they’re already stacking up to have 5 guys pretty locked into that pen (Hader JJ Knebel Guerra and probably one of Woodruff/Nelson). Then also guys like Albers who has guaranteed money so they’re likely to keep him to at least start 2019. Houser is out of options. Barnes and Williams both have options. Peralta maybe too if he’s not in the rotation/aaa.

    I definitely agree with making a utility player upgrade over Pérez. I like Harrison and Descalso as well. If they move on from Pérez, it would make sense to tender Saladino since he will be cheaper and you still need a second ss.

    Overall I don’t think anything you proposed is off base. To make those free agent signings they basically need to find takers for Anderson and Thames though.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,132
    I kbow things can change, but last year even after the Cain signing, we were allegedly still checking in on the big name pitching. So I wouldn't at all be surprised if we are in conversations for a starter.

    Last years free agency makes me intrigued this year. I can't tell if that was just a perfect storm of a relatively bad class coming at a time where multiple big market teams wanted to stay under the luxury tax or if it actually is a harbinger of things to come. If it turns into a trend, where the money (outside of the huge names) isn't what it used to be, I can see us being players. If last year was a blip on the radar and free agent contracts jump, we might sit still.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    7,213
    I wonder if your average veteran position players will sing early in reaction to last season in fear of winding up with a deal like Moustakas and Walker.

    If not, I’d try to take it slow in free agency unless there’s really a guy they love.

    I just fear that this team tops out around $110m for the opening day payroll though. I’ll be happily surprised if they go much higher.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,132
    Quote Originally Posted by long ball View Post
    I wonder if your average veteran position players will sing early in reaction to last season in fear of winding up with a deal like Moustakas and Walker.

    If not, I’d try to take it slow in free agency unless there’s really a guy they love.

    I just fear that this team tops out around $110m for the opening day payroll though. I’ll be happily surprised if they go much higher.
    While that number has been generally true. The fact they last year at least seemed willing to spend $20+ mill per year on a guy like darvish even after signing Cain leads me to believe theyd be willing to do it again. We did take on some money over the 2nd half last year, but we also had to make more money than reasonably expected with a nlcs run. And no one else's contract situation changed drastically. Sure, some guys are due to arb raises, but we knew that last year too. I don't thibk anyone is scheduled to blow away the raise we expected them to get when long term forecasting last year.

    And the TV contract expires after next year. Last time we signed it was 2009, which was on the backend of the recession I believe. So our contract is not good. You can to think we can at least some boost in that department. And the previous years of lower salary could have put some money in the coffers as well.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    7,213
    They made capital expenditures elsewhere though. They’re rehabbing Maryvale. They bought the Carolina Mudcats.

    They’ll want to leave room in the budget for in season acquisitions and player bonuses.

    Moving Thames and Anderson might be necessary in order for them to be players in free agency. Non-tendering Schoop is probably a must if they’re looking at free agent upgrades. Like I mentioned before, They’re already at ~$105m in payroll before the Schoop decision.

    I just don’t want to get my hopes up. I’m setting low expectations for free agent spending.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,132
    Setting expectations low is probably a good plan. But I do think there's money to be spent here. And we should see a fairly substantial gain in TV revenue. The Brewers current deal according to fangraphs pays about $25 mill per year. It was signed in 2009 which was an awful time to sign a TV deal. Using just similarly sized markets like Minnesota and Cleveland, they both make between $37-$40 mill. Those deals are also going to be 5 years old by the time we negotiate ours. So I don't think it's unreasonable to think we could meet or maybe exceed those deals. That alone could add $20 mill to the payroll.

    And if we want to look at it a different way. The bucks negotiated a deal worth $26 mill per year. Looking at TV numbers, the bucks draw an average of 20,000 households per game on fox sports WI. The Brewers on the other hand drew 48,000 per game this year. That was up 35%, so even if they negotiate off of 2017 numbers, we're talking between 35,000 and 36,000 viewers. The bucks contract valuation badically says each household is worth $1,300. Even if the brewers negotiate off of the 35,000 household number, that leaves the Brewers new contract at around $45 mill per year. Obviously they are different sports with different amounts of games. But it's a 2nd way to show how bad our current deal is.

    Also, according to some folks on the main, teams typically spend between 40-45% of revenue on player payroll. At the 43% number, our payroll would be about $110 million from 2017 revenue numbers. If we saw a bump in 2018, that number could increase.

    So my long and short of it is if we place our base payroll prior to a TV deal increase at $110-$115, you could theoretically increase payroll to $125-$130 somewhat consistently (as long as you're competitive) as soon as the year after next. That leaves us with a gap year this year. But my thought would be that the money we banked from previously fielding the cheapest team in baseball for 2 seasons shoudl allow us to cover the additional spending next year.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,132
    Some rumor reports coming out is that this off-season is expected to be different than last. Gms are expecting more spending and a quicker process.

    Teams are expecting the gm meetings this week as good conversation starters and that we'll have more activity by the winter meetings. If I remember correctly, the day in late January where the Brewers got Cain and yelich was one of the first major days. Most guys dialed into the league think it'll happen much earlier than that this year.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,766
    I can't see us spending big on a pitcher for more than 3 years. Down the road we will have Yeli to pay, Cain, hopefully bigger arby guy near free agency (Hopefully Nelson, Shaw, Aggy, and some of the other young guys keep it up). If we sign Kuechel or Corbin it would be tough to keep all those guys. I didn't think of it but Jed Lowrie would be a perfect 2B who could play utility or SS in a pinch. I think he will get at least 2/24 or 3/33 which is to much if Huira plays well and Lowrie is a utility man.

    I think it would be a great idea to try and negotiate with Yeli. He is owed 51.25 the next 4 years (his 30 year old season). I would attempt to add 3 years to that at 25 million per year and then spread it over the 7 years. making a total of 126.25 for 7 years. Which would be about 18 million per year, then at 33 or 34 we could move on or sign him to another deal.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,132
    I dont think I'd add on to yelich deal. We basically did that with Braun and it backfired. You never know what could happen over the next 2-4 years. We have him under contract for a cheap salary for the bulk of his prime years. We should take advantage of that and spend now.

    As a small market team, it's virtually impossible to compete for a 10 year window. Your best bet is to try to maximize 3-5 year windows. That's what I'd be trying to do right now. Every move you make should basically be to build the best roster you can for the next 3 years.

    Right now we basically have yelich, Aguilar, Hader, shaw and hopefully (asusming they take a step) guys like burnes and woodruff on well below market deals. Instead of saving money for when they are due up, I'd rather maximize and try to spend the money to get those extra few wins and compete, even if that means we can't afford to pay them all when they hit FA, which is a few years off for most of them.
    Last edited by crewfan13; 11-05-2018 at 05:45 PM.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,766
    I like the idea of the Yeli extension because if we have to re-build in 3-4 years he would get a huge prospect return based on his contract. If he does get hurt or has issues it would still likely be a deal we could move as long as he doesn't do roids. I think the reward far outwieghs the risk.

    I loved the TV contract post crewfan, I didn't know that we should have that money available. Based on that I am way more open to pursueing Corbin, Keuchel, or any other longer term players.

    What about possibly steering into the curve to say and spending on relief options. I don't really like spending on pen options because I feel like they are more vulnerable to falling apart as they get older. However if the top pitchers, Ramos, and the other top targets sign or get traded for to much I could see shorter term deals on relievers making some sense. Say we sign Andrew Miller to 2/20 with lots of incentives and another big name reliever like Familia, Herrera, Robertson, or Allen to something like 2/20 ish. Those to relievers would basically equal an ace if they throw 150 innings combined and would be as long term. Again I don't really like it but our pen would be all time great if we go Knebel, Hader, Jeffress, Miller, Robertson, and extras.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,132
    Mlb and fox have signed a new national TV deal as well. It doesnt kick in until 2022, so 3 seasons from now. Bit that should add about $25 mill in revenue per team if I'm reading everything correctly. Add in a possible $15 mill per year on a TV deal and you're looking at an additional $40 mill per year in revenue by 2022.

    Our 2017 revenue was $255 mill. 2018 should grow that number alone. So I don't think it's crazy to expect revenues of around $310 mill by 2022. According to jeffy on the main forum, teams often times spend between 40-45% of revenue on payroll. That puts our high end payrolk in the upper $130 to lower $140 range. Any additional revenue would help.so more playoff runs likely means more cash.

    Now that $140 target wouldnt be until 2022. But my hope is that with our bottom of the league payroll for 2 years prior to this, that we banked some extra cash to allow us to bridge that gap a little and get us closer to that $130-$140 mark sooner than that. But that's all speculation by me.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •