LambeauLeap1250 WSSP


  
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next  [ 107 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply

Thames

Author Message
Offline  Re: Thames
#21

Posted: April 17, 2017, 1:55 PM Post
Posts: 6356
Location: Kenosha, WI
I Heart Brewers said:
Still early but this is exciting. Keep mining those outlets for serviceable position players Mr. Stearns.

I mean if Thames, Peralta, and Feliz keep this up they could net some decent prospects, correct?


If these guys keep it up we shouldn't be thinking about trading them cause we will be competing and really should be looking to do that next year. At some point you gotta stop trading every person who isn't controlled 5+ years. If this team is flirting with .500 at the end of the year it is time to consider adding guys from outside the organization and stop trading them away.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#22

Posted: April 17, 2017, 2:18 PM Post
Posts: 5794
No, that was the approach the last two times they made the playoffs. Tried to win that year, so buyers instead of sellers. Not even saying I disagree with that, a t the time it seemed worth it to go for it after 20+ years of mediocrity.

But it's different now. There is a real possibility this team can compete over an extended period of time, especially if they add even more top-end young talent. For those that want to go for it, I don't think you're wrong. It's just that I rather have a roster that can be a true contender for multiple years, rather than try to go for it this year or next year.

Could they add Hader and a couple other pieces and have a shot at the WC next year? Sure. But do we really believe this rotation, even with Hader, could compete for it all? I really want to believe that, but I can't. Hader is nowhere near being able to throw that any innings in a season, he will not be ready even next year to pitch in October.

I'm looking at 2020-2025 and beyond as the time they can really be a true contender. Maybe they can sneak up and make some noise before then, and that would be great. In the meantime though, I would not stop trading 30+ year olds, bullpen arms, and mid-rotation starters for a big haul.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#23

Posted: April 17, 2017, 2:33 PM Post
Posts: 6356
Location: Kenosha, WI
FVBrewerFan said:
No, that was the approach the last two times they made the playoffs. Tried to win that year, so buyers instead of sellers.


I don't think I ever said we should trade the farm etc. etc. All I said is we should not be looking to trade every single thing that does good. Every single player that has broken out so to speak over the last year has a trade thread. Villar does, Thames does, all our controllable starters do, Broxton does...I mean that is a bit ridiculous. When do we think controllable piece for the next contending team and not trade bait?

By all means if we get some ridiculous trade offer for PeraltaNelson/etc. and net an Addison Russell go for it. However for some ok deal? We have some big time prospects coming up this year and more 3 years from now to keep things going when our veteran pieces are moving out. Add in some other guys along the way from other means and you can put together some solid teams.

The rebuild is over and this team is on the rise whether it continues to show in the W/L columns. Unless you get a fantastic trade offer keep anyone controllable 3+ years.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#24

Posted: April 17, 2017, 2:42 PM Post
Posts: 5794
When do we think controllable piece for the next contending team and not trade bait?


My answer for that starts with Hader, Woodruff, Brinson, and that group. Anyone who is currently on the 25 man can be moved if you get top prospects in return. Anyone.

And the thing is, the more Stearns sells, the better they seem to get in the short term too. Funny how Lucroy seemed like a huge loss, early on he hasn't been. Gomez and Fiers get traded, no loss. Jeffress, Smith, Thornburg leave, BP hasn't missed a beat. They don't bring Carter back, better off there too.

That's why I'm confident selling is the way to go. They're actually getting marginally better in the short term, and positioning to be way better in a couple years.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#25

Posted: April 17, 2017, 3:01 PM Post
Posts: 69
FVBrewerFan said:
No, that was the approach the last two times they made the playoffs. Tried to win that year, so buyers instead of sellers. Not even saying I disagree with that, a t the time it seemed worth it to go for it after 20+ years of mediocrity.

But it's different now. There is a real possibility this team can compete over an extended period of time, especially if they add even more top-end young talent. For those that want to go for it, I don't think you're wrong. It's just that I rather have a roster that can be a true contender for multiple years, rather than try to go for it this year or next year.

Could they add Hader and a couple other pieces and have a shot at the WC next year? Sure. But do we really believe this rotation, even with Hader, could compete for it all? I really want to believe that, but I can't. Hader is nowhere near being able to throw that any innings in a season, he will not be ready even next year to pitch in October.

I'm looking at 2020-2025 and beyond as the time they can really be a true contender. Maybe they can sneak up and make some noise before then, and that would be great. In the meantime though, I would not stop trading 30+ year olds, bullpen arms, and mid-rotation starters for a big haul.


If things go well this year, I could see this as a definite yes, even if we trade more of our veterans.

If I look at things optimistically (maybe too optimistically), it's possible Nelson, Peralta, and Anderson have turned the corner and finish this year like they have started, Davies rebounds to put up a good year like last year, and Guerra come back to pitch similar to what he did last year. That's maybe one #2, three #3 and a #4 starter. Trade one away at the deadline or off season and let Hader take the 5th spot. If all perform well, that's a solid (not great) rotation with Woodruff, Ortiz, Lopez ready to fill in for injuries in 2018.

As for the starters without trades, we have Braun, Broxton, Santana, Shaw, Villar, Arcia, Thames and Pina. Trade Braun, move Thames to LF and let Aguilar start at 1B (and probably get one more starting pitcher into the mix above). If one of Aguilar/Santana/Broxton falter, bring up Brinson and move them around accordingly. If most everyone performs either the way they did last year (Villar, Broxton, Braun), the way they are doing this year (Thames, Santana, Pina) or step-up/progress (Shaw, Arcia), that is a good (if not potentially great) set of starters. Not too mention they will have ready replacements in Dubon, Phillips, Cordell for 2018.

Put together a good bullpen and you have a team competing for the Wild Card, that is built for the long haul and has a wave of replacements likely in AA (Ray, Clark, Ecreg, Diaz, Gatewood, Diplan, Peralta, Ponce, and more). At that point you are able to handle trading away an established starter from almost any position for a monster package (i.e. Thames, Guerra, Broxton, Villar, whoever). But again, this is an optimistic (but not unreasonable) look at the future.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#26

Posted: April 17, 2017, 3:16 PM Post
Posts: 5794
Yea, I think you're too optimistic on the rotation. I mean, even in a few years from now I doubt the Brewers will have an outstanding rotation. And that's ok, if they're just really solid there and really good offensively and defensively.

But to think Peralta, Nelson, and Anderson have turned the corner and they will be this good the rest of the year, and next year? No, I'm not buying it. Then IF Guerra can repeat his numbers this year and next, Davies can return to form, you get anything at all from Lopez.... I mean I just don't see all those "ifs" turning into a WS contending rotation this year or next.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#27

Posted: April 17, 2017, 3:51 PM Post
Posts: 6356
Location: Kenosha, WI
FVBrewerFan said:
Anyone who is currently on the 25 man can be moved if you get top prospects in return. Anyone.


Well of course you will trade average-like players if we can get more Hader/Brinson in the system. I just don't think getting into those dream scenarios is all that likely. Are teams really going to sell the farm for Wily Peralta? Anyone who started arbitration this year or before I probably wouldn't be too scared to trade for a good offer, but guys controllable 2020 or beyound I would want a pretty phenominal offer. Those guys can be veteran cogs in a few years for us.

Of course this depends largely on a player by player basis and we are talking about this very generically as a whole.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#28

Posted: April 17, 2017, 4:01 PM Post
Posts: 5794
Yea, every case is different. It's why Peralta and Nelson are still here. I'm sure there were offers, but if the offer is a couple mediocre prospects, no point in that anymore. But someone like Thames....man if he keeps hitting close to this (let's say .950ish) and someone offers a package similar to what we got for Gomez/Fiers or Lucroy/Jeffress, I would jump on that.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#29

Posted: April 17, 2017, 7:05 PM Post
Posts: 202
Another Bomb!!! Seriously, this guy could hit 50+ this year. Unreal....


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#30

Posted: April 17, 2017, 7:39 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 312
Reminds me of Joey Bat's resurgence in 2010. This gets me thinking though. You guys think Wladimir Balentien gets a shot now based on E.T.'s success (so far)?


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#31

Posted: April 17, 2017, 8:05 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 6419
MilwaukeeBeers said:
Reminds me of Joey Bat's resurgence in 2010. This gets me thinking though. You guys think Wladimir Balentien gets a shot now based on E.T.'s success (so far)?


I was wondering about him too after the WBC. He was locked in. Just did a quick Google of him to find his age (he's 31 going on 32) but he's got some domestic violence in his past. Not that that would prevent me from signing him but I wonder if that might be why his name is never brought up in rumors.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#32

Posted: April 17, 2017, 10:16 PM Post
Posts: 202
Would not surprise me if the Stearns revisits the Braves mid July and offer Thames for whatever Braun vetoed.

Mike Soroka?!?!


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#33

Posted: April 17, 2017, 10:52 PM Post
Posts: 10255
HighHeat19 said:
Would not surprise me if the Stearns revisits the Braves mid July and offer Thames for whatever Braun vetoed.

Mike Soroka?!?!


Given that the Braves have Freeman, I'd say no that really doesn't work.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#34

Posted: April 18, 2017, 12:41 AM Post
Posts: 3551
At this point with Thames' production, trading him should come with Stearns firing. You get an A player and walk away for Multiple B/C players you wish in the future, one turns in to an A.

Stearns has a solution with Thames' and advocating he create a problem because of age, or because Melvin's history for solutions didnt work out. Just going crazy here. 1b bats arent like they used to be. Getting an A player there to plug in the next 4years is essential for the rebuild. At this point, with his cost, and projecting that bat line forward, trade discussions are over. You have a winner. Aguilar should be the trade discussion. Remember what Jason Rogers brought back for nowhere near the success Aguilar is showing?


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#35

Posted: April 18, 2017, 6:40 AM Post
Posts: 10118
brewcrewdue80 said:
At this point with Thames' production, trading him should come with Stearns firing. You get an A player and walk away for Multiple B/C players you wish in the future, one turns in to an A.

Stearns has a solution with Thames' and advocating he create a problem because of age, or because Melvin's history for solutions didnt work out. Just going crazy here. 1b bats arent like they used to be. Getting an A player there to plug in the next 4years is essential for the rebuild. At this point, with his cost, and projecting that bat line forward, trade discussions are over. You have a winner. Aguilar should be the trade discussion. Remember what Jason Rogers brought back for nowhere near the success Aguilar is showing?


I'm not really advocating for Thames to be traded, I think the points for keeping him are good ones. But I think if Stearns signed an unknown from Korea for 5M a year, and then flipped him for top prospects months later, he'd be hailed as a genius, not fired.

I'm not sure Aguilar is worth anything. He's cooled off a lot since the start of the year, so there isn't much to go off on him other than a great spring. He's still a guy who was DFA a few months ago. Just because we suckered the Pirates with Jason Rogers doesn't mean a similar deal will be available again.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#36

Posted: April 18, 2017, 7:15 AM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 7330
endaround said:
HighHeat19 said:
Would not surprise me if the Stearns revisits the Braves mid July and offer Thames for whatever Braun vetoed.

Mike Soroka?!?!


Given that the Braves have Freeman, I'd say no that really doesn't work.


If they aren't worried about defense, Thames can play outfield.

"Dustin Pedroia doesn't have the strength or bat speed to hit major-league pitching consistently, and he has no power......He probably has a future as a backup infielder if he can stop rolling over to third base and shortstop." Keith Law, 2006


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#37

Posted: April 18, 2017, 10:25 AM Post
Posts: 5794
brewcrewdue80 said:
At this point with Thames' production, trading him should come with Stearns firing. You get an A player and walk away for Multiple B/C players you wish in the future, one turns in to an A.

Stearns has a solution with Thames' and advocating he create a problem because of age, or because Melvin's history for solutions didnt work out. Just going crazy here. 1b bats arent like they used to be. Getting an A player there to plug in the next 4years is essential for the rebuild. At this point, with his cost, and projecting that bat line forward, trade discussions are over. You have a winner. Aguilar should be the trade discussion. Remember what Jason Rogers brought back for nowhere near the success Aguilar is showing?


Sorry, but I don't agree with...well...any of that. Thames has been an A player (A + actually) for 3 weeks. If he's near this good in a few months, no, you don't trade him for B/C prospects. You trade him for A prospects. Guaranteed they'll become A MLB players? Of course not. But I can guarantee Thames won't be hitting .950 5 years from now.

I've listed players above who could play 1B, not to mention various options that present themselves. After all, Stearns has found three 1B the last two years. Stearns shouldn't call anyone about Thames. But if the phone rings with a serious offer, you take the call. (Unless it's from the Mets, then you put them on hold and leave for the day.)


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#38

Posted: April 18, 2017, 11:04 AM Post
Posts: 3551
A prospects may be like 2/3rds of the top 25 maybe even half. At that point you drop to B prospects sprinkled with some who may have a ceiling to be an A, or are just solid bets to remain a B. But none are sure things. If Thames is about to emerge with 45+ HR ability and a .300 avg ability nvm the OB, what are you searching for trading him? To cycle Talent sure. But we have him for 4years. Let's enjoy 3years of this with maybe a WS and come back to cycle talent with him when he'll be a FA to be. Weve got Prince Fielder bat it seems to bat behind Braun. You xant ask to find a higher talent than that to compliment Braun.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#39

Posted: April 18, 2017, 11:19 AM Post
Posts: 5794
brewcrewdue80 said:
Weve got Prince Fielder bat it seems to bat behind Braun. You xant ask to find a higher talent than that to compliment Braun.


And what happened to Prince Fielder? That's why I would trade Thames. Far from remotely close to automatic that Thames can do this for a year, much less four. And no, I don't want anyone to compliment Braun, want to trade him too.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: Thames
#40

Posted: April 18, 2017, 1:18 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 6325
So we should just trade everyone because of what happened to Prince Fielder? That doesn't seem like very sound logic.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next  [ 107 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply
  


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

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