LambeauLeap1250 WSSP


  
Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next  [ 46 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply

Brewers sign Arcia- 1 Year $2.2 Million

Author Message
Offline    Brewers sign Arcia- 1 Year $2.2 Million
#1

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:12 PM Post
Posts: 7243
https://twitter.com/haudricourt/status/ ... 24417?s=21


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#2

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:15 PM Post
Posts: 785
I'm a little surprised he's back. It will be interesting to see how the infield shakes out and if Arcia plays multiple positions or if he will mainly play SS and force other players to shift around when he's in the line up.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#3

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:18 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 984
Hernan Perez role, just in a different way. Arcia plays short when someone needs a day and Urias moves around. Now just need someone with the versatility to play the corner IF spots.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#4

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:21 PM Post
Posts: 1052
long ball said:
I'm a little surprised he's back.


I'm not. I saw two routes with Arcia; either trade him or keep him. If there was no real trade interest, it didn't make much sense to just release him. I don't have much hope of Arcia ever finding "it", but I also don't rule out the possibility. I believe he still has option(s) remaining, so won't create a 25-man roster issue. As a defensive sub for Hiura (With Urias moving to 2B), a backup plan for Urias or trying him out in a utility role it makes sense. Ideally for less than $2.2m, but it's not too bad. Definitely last chance saloon though, another season like this and it's at best minor league contract time.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#5

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:22 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 3521
Makes sense. Gives us a cushion to ease Urias into the starting job, and at worst Arcia can be a defense-first utility guy like Saladino (who may be gone based on this).


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#6

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:30 PM Post
Posts: 7243
Who could still be traded. He could still beat out Urias and since Urias has options that is also a route they could take......or he could be a guy off the bench.

Lots of off season left.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#7

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:30 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 984
SRB said:
Makes sense. Gives us a cushion to ease Urias into the starting job, and at worst Arcia can be a defense-first utility guy like Saladino (who may be gone based on this).


Agreed, no surprise on this one.

On the flip side, tendering any of Shaw, Nelson, or Guerra would be a surprise to me. I think all 3 are goners.


Last edited by True Blue Brew Crew on December 02, 2019, 6:36 PM, edited 1 time in total.

 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#8

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:32 PM Post
Posts: 7243
Guerra was already leaked that he is gone.

I hope they find away to bring Jimmy back on some sort of reduced deal.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#9

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:36 PM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 7160
I hope the trade for Urias lights a fire under Orlando, and he forces himself into the lineup. Competition can do wonders for some players.

We shall see.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#10

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:39 PM Post
Posts: 1052
True Blue Brew Crew said:
SRB said:
Makes sense. Gives us a cushion to ease Urias into the starting job, and at worst Arcia can be a defense-first utility guy like Saladino (who may be gone based on this).


Agreed, no surprise on this one.

Now tendering any of Shaw, Nelson, or Guerra would be a surprise to me. I think all 3 are gone.


I have been expecting Nelson to avoid arbitration by signing a contract below the arbitration estimate, perhaps with an option. The kind of contract that happens when both sides know a non-tender is the alternative. But it hasn't happened yet and time is running out.

However it's always worth remembering that arbitration contracts aren't fully guaranteed. If a player is released before opening day, the team pays something like 1/6-1/4 of the amount depending on when they're released. So think of it like having a $5m option with a $1m buyout, where a decision has to be made in spring training. If the team is feeling hopeful about Shaw and/or Nelson, that could be one rationale behind offering them arbitration.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#11

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:43 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 984
Lathund said:
True Blue Brew Crew said:
SRB said:
Makes sense. Gives us a cushion to ease Urias into the starting job, and at worst Arcia can be a defense-first utility guy like Saladino (who may be gone based on this).


Agreed, no surprise on this one.

Now tendering any of Shaw, Nelson, or Guerra would be a surprise to me. I think all 3 are gone.


However it's always worth remembering that arbitration contracts aren't fully guaranteed. If a player is released before opening day, the team pays something like 1/6-1/4 of the amount depending on when they're released. So think of it like having a $5m option with a $1m buyout, where a decision has to be made in spring training. If the team is feeling hopeful about Shaw and/or Nelson, that could be one rationale behind offering them arbitration.


True but you don't budget the rest of your offseason around a player not panning out. So allocating 5 million here, 5 million there, and 5 million there cuts into what you have left to spend. If you're anticipating cutting these guys in ST why bother?


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#12

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:47 PM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 2546
I'm not a fan of Arcia, but I think this is a good signing. He's still young enough to improve and they do need to fill out the roster.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#13

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:57 PM Post
Posts: 1052
True Blue Brew Crew said:
Lathund said:
However it's always worth remembering that arbitration contracts aren't fully guaranteed. If a player is released before opening day, the team pays something like 1/6-1/4 of the amount depending on when they're released. So think of it like having a $5m option with a $1m buyout, where a decision has to be made in spring training. If the team is feeling hopeful about Shaw and/or Nelson, that could be one rationale behind offering them arbitration.


True but you don't budget the rest of your offseason around a player not panning out. So allocating 5 million here, 5 million there, and 5 million there cuts into what you have left to spend. If you're anticipating cutting these guys in ST why bother?


It's not about budgeting around them not panning out or anticipating cutting them, you wouldn't make that decision for someone you thought unlikely to prove worth it. It's the other way around, it's if you believe in a player but there's some questions about them, or you want more time before making a decision, want them to prove something. So you anticipate spending $5m, but can cut your losses down to $1m if it doesn't work. 2017-2018 Shaw is a steal at $5m, if the team thought it was a fixable issue it could be worth the $1m committment to see if he looks like his old self in ST or not.


Last edited by Lathund on December 02, 2019, 6:57 PM, edited 1 time in total.

 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia- 1 Year $2.2 Million
#14

Posted: December 02, 2019, 6:57 PM Post
Posts: 1926
Yuck....they couldn't have found a better hitting SS/Utility INF in FA for about the same amount of $$??


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia- 1 Year $2.2 Million
#15

Posted: December 02, 2019, 7:01 PM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 8450
Brewcrewin07 said:
Yuck....they couldn't have found a better hitting SS/Utility INF in FA for about the same amount of $$??


Considering they paid Saladino/Spangenberg $2 million last year, probably not.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#16

Posted: December 02, 2019, 7:02 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 984
Lathund said:
It's not about budgeting around them not panning out or anticipating cutting them, you wouldn't make that decision for someone you thought unlikely to prove worth it. It's the other way around, it's if you believe in a player but there's some questions about them, or you want more time before making a decision, want them to prove something. So you anticipate spending $5m, but can cut your losses down to $1m if it doesn't work. 2017-2018 Shaw is a steal at $5m, if the team thought it was a fixable issue it could be worth the $1m committment to see if he looks like his old self in ST or not.


So then they all play great in ST and all are kept. Unless you're suddenly willing to go $15 million over budget, that money committed today most certainly affects how you spend money in free agency. That's why I say, the out in ST is great but not the safety net some here are making it out to be. Sure it's cool that you can save some money if a player flops but the downside is you now have a huge hole with no way to fill it. If they tender Shaw, Nelson, and Guerra that's $15 million out of the budget no matter the fact they can cut their losses later. Like I said, you don't tender these guys under the assumption they'll fail. Because if they don't and you spend elsewhere under the premise of these outs, then you're suddenly way over budget if none of them flop.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#17

Posted: December 02, 2019, 7:10 PM Post
Posts: 8110
JimH5 said:
I'm not a fan of Arcia, but I think this is a good signing. He's still young enough to improve and they do need to fill out the roster.


As I pointed out in another thread, at this point in his career he has out-performed Carlos Gomez at the same age.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#18

Posted: December 02, 2019, 7:16 PM Post
Posts: 1052
True Blue Brew Crew said:
Lathund said:
It's not about budgeting around them not panning out or anticipating cutting them, you wouldn't make that decision for someone you thought unlikely to prove worth it. It's the other way around, it's if you believe in a player but there's some questions about them, or you want more time before making a decision, want them to prove something. So you anticipate spending $5m, but can cut your losses down to $1m if it doesn't work. 2017-2018 Shaw is a steal at $5m, if the team thought it was a fixable issue it could be worth the $1m committment to see if he looks like his old self in ST or not.


So then they all play great in ST and all are kept. Unless you're suddenly willing to go $15 million over budget, that money committed today most certainly affects how you spend money in free agency. That's why I say, the out in ST is great but not the safety net some here are making it out to be. Sure it's cool that you can save some money if a player flops but the downside is you now have a huge hole with no way to fill it. If they tender Shaw, Nelson, and Guerra that's $15 million out of the budget no matter the fact they can cut their losses later. Like I said, you don't tender these guys under the assumption they'll fail. Because if they don't and you spend elsewhere under the premise of these outs, then you're suddenly way over budget if none of them flop.


You're the only one talking about committing to being $15m over budget. You're also the only one who has mentioned tendering them under the assumption they'll fail. You tender them (Or more likely just one) under the assumption that they'll succeed, and you budget accordingly. And yes that affects how you spend money going forward, just as signing any player to a $5m 1-year deal would. If it works out and the player is kept, it's like any other contract. If not, you have $4m more for in-season acquisitions. Which is, again, why you do this if you believe in the player in question but there's some lingering doubts. It could be waiting to see if an injured pitchers' velocity is back to normal ST levels or not. Or perhaps with Nelson it's seeing if the command issues are still plagueing him. If you're assuming they'll fail, then you don't tender them in the first place. It's simply a risk-management tool from a teams perspective. Again not dissimilar from signing a player to a 1 year contract with a team option vs a 2 year contract.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia- 1 Year $2.2 Million
#19

Posted: December 02, 2019, 7:17 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 984
Brewcrewin07 said:
Yuck....they couldn't have found a better hitting SS/Utility INF in FA for about the same amount of $$??


I'm sensing a pattern in your reaction to each and every decision they make this offseason.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Brewers sign Arcia
#20

Posted: December 02, 2019, 7:21 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 984
Lathund said:

You're the only one talking about committing to being $15m over budget.


Then I'm apparently the only one who understands the reverberations if they tender these guys today. I doubt I'm the only one who gets this though. Chance to get out of the deal for a fraction or not, it's $5 million each subtracted from the budget for any of those 3 if they're tendered. That's up to $15 million that won't be spent to improve the roster in other ways. You simply don't tender players with their failing in mind. If they play well in ST, you're spending that $15 million.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next  [ 46 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply
  


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BlazingGunz, ClosetBrewerFan, jason21nl, MrTPlush, Mudville9, Zad Fnark and 18 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search this forum (phpBB search):
Jump to:  
Search entire board (Google search):
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Test