Brewers & Mariners

Trades

Players

Back

Brewers & Mariners

February 3, 2021

Brewers

Name Age Level P1 P2 Availablility Years AFV Salary Surplus Low Median High
Gonzales 29 Majors SP Low 5.0 62.7 29.0 33.7 30.3 37.1 43.8

Mariners

Name Age Level P1 P2 Availablility Years AFV Salary Surplus Low Median High
Feliciano Minors C 9.6 7.7 9.6 11.5
Fernandez Minors OF 0.9 0.7 0.9 1.1
Urias 24 Majors SS 2B Low 5.0 39.4 12.8 26.6 21.3 26.6 31.9
4 Comments
  1. Andrew Codding

    With the signing of Kolten Wong, the Brewers no longer have a need for Urias (he played 2B for them). If they’re gonna contend with the Cardinals, they’re gonna need pitching. The Mariners, who are nowhere near close to contention, could trade Gonzales and get a long term building block to partner with J.P. Crawford up the middle for decades, along with a future catcher and a throw-in outfielder.

    • allotta memes

      Luis Urias can play 2B, SS, and 3B, so the Brewers still kind of need him.

  2. Cameron Nordstrom

    This is the opinion of a Mariner’s fan so there’s bound to be some bias, but I think this is a bad trade for both teams.

    I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that the Mariners are no where close to competing. Even if last year was an overperformance, there’s no reason not to think they can’t start to contend in the next two years. Not only are their high end prospects (i.e. Kelenic, Rodriguez, Raleigh, Gilbert, Trammell) getting close to contributing to the big league team, but the rest of the AL West is either on the decline or stagnant. Texas has little latent on the big league roster, dead money tied up in bad contracts, and a history of failing to develop their prospects, particularly pitchers. The Angels have a lot of talent and money, but again, they’ve failed to build a stable future through their farm system. This has led them to buoy their roster by signing huge extensions and free agent contracts that ends up limiting their future spending and biting them later, for example Pujols and Upton. They’ve also refused to spend on pitching, preferring to work with reclamation projects, which is a huge gamble. For every Dylan Bundy they’ve gotten, they’ve also had a fair share of Julio Teherans and Trevor Cahills. The Astros are still competitive, but are on a clear downswing. The costly veterans on their roster are starting to show their age, and their thin farm system is struggling to fill the voids left by their departing stars. This then causes them to tie up more money on free agents. And Oakland’s current roster looks competitive, but next year will look much different. Chapman, Olson, Manaea, Montas, Bassitt, and Laureano all due for raises in arbitration, expect a few of those names to end up on different rosters. This gives them a similar problem to Houston, they do not have a farm system capable of replacing their stars once they’re gone. Combine that with their embarrassment of an owner that refuses to spend in free agents, and Oakland’s competitive window is closing rapidly. Seattle thus has a clear path to contention, along with a strong farm system and little money tied up on expensive veterans.

    On a specific note about Marco’s value to the Mariners, he has become a clear mentor and leader for a young Seattle team. Justus Sheffield has attributed much of the success he saw last year to advice from Marco, and with more young arms nearing the MLB team, a veteran like Marco will be extremely valuable in helping them adjust to pitching at the highest level. As well, trading him would be a bad sign to their upcoming players that they’ll try to sign to extensions. Part of the purpose of an extension is to give a player security in knowing, and well as a motion of trust between a player and the front office. If the Mariners’ traded Marco after extending that arm of trust, what do think that would do to level of trust that their future players have in the organization?

    And from Milwaukee’s perspective, as beneficial as Marco would be to their rotation, they’re giving up pieces that impact both their present ability to contend and their future. The Brewers catching depth is unimpressive. At the big league level they have Narvaez for the next two seasons (assuming he bounces back), with Pina and Nottingham as acceptable backups. Already, that’s not the most promising group, and the depth after that trio is even thinner. Henry, Quero and Kahle will probably top out as backups ala Nottingham/Pina, and Warren probably won’t even stick behind the plate. Feliciano is the closest thing they have a catcher of the future, and giving him up in a trade adds more uncertainty to an already uncertain future in Milwaukee. Similarly, who do the Brewers plan on playing at 3B this year? I have always that thought that the plan for Urias since acquiring him was to have him play 3B. And indeed, this past season he played half of the teams games at 3B, as opposed to 10 at 2B. The only reason he ended up playing 2B was because the NL had the DH, and the Brewers could hide Hiura there. Giving up on Urias means that the Brewers will have to spend more money on a replacement, since their depth at 3B is even worse than at catcher.

    • Andrew Codding

      Whoa. You have clearly put a lot of thought into the Mariners’ future, and I respect that. I had not thought of the weakness of the division, though that is a big factor. For every NL East, there’s an NFC East (NFL). The Mariners aren’t that good on paper compared to the rest of the league, but to the rest of their division, they certainly have a chance. Kudos to you for caring about your team this much, and for bringing up points that I had not considered. I strictly saw this trade as a number matching number trade, not factoring for the personal links. You brought up great points about Gonzales, and you have swayed me against my own trade! Good job!

Submit a Comment