MLBTR Mailbag

Last week’s edition of the MLBTR Mailbag saw Jeff Todd field questions about the Jonathan Lucroy trade, the Phillies’ hopes in 2017, the Yankees’ offseason and park-adjusted/context-neutral metrics such as wRC+ and OPS+.

If you have a question on the upcoming offseason, free agency, the playoff race, Cy Young/MVP/Rookie of the Year voting or anything else and would like to hear MLBTR’s take, let us know: mlbtrmailbag@gmail.com. We can’t get to every question, of course, but we’ll try to diversify the teams/subject matter as best we can. If you miss out on having your question answered, remember that you can always ask during one of our three weekly live chats — Tuesday at 2pm CT with myself, Wednesday at 6:30pm with Jason Martinez and/or Thursday at 2pm with Jeff. Mailbag questions are welcome throughout the week, so feel free to send them in at any time.

Thanks as always for this week’s mailbag questions! We can’t answer ’em all, but be sure to join us for a chat — Steve (Tuesday, 2pm CST); Jason (Wednesday, 6:30pm CST); Jeff (Thursday, 2pm CST) — if we didn’t get to yours below.

Now that the PTBNL has been announced, how would you value the package that Texas gave up as opposed to what Cleveland had in place for Jonathan Lucroy? – Jonathan R.

With outfielder/infielder Ryan Cordell going to the Brewers, he bolsters a package that already included outfielder Lewis Brinson and right-hander Luis Ortiz. All three were considered top-ten prospects on a solid Texas farm, with Brinson and Ortiz also carrying consensus top-100 leaguewide billing. Remember, though, that this group of players also landed the Rangers right-hander Jeremy Jeffress, who was a quality asset in his own right.

By comparison, reports pegged the prospective deal with the Indians as involving a four-player package: catcher Francisco Mejia, shortstop Yu-Cheng Chang, outfielder Greg Allen, and righty Shawn Armstrong. By the prospect rankings, this group isn’t quite as impressive: only Mejia has been placed in the top-100 among all the game’s pre-MLB talents (in his case, only by Baseball Prospectus).

There are a couple of things to bear in mind here, though. First and foremost, prospect valuation is always-changing and is highly dependent upon any given team’s assessment. Both Brinson and Ortiz had their share of difficulties adapting to the upper minors; though they have had better results since the deal, the former doesn’t walk much and the latter hasn’t yet produced a lot of swings and misses. There’s a ton of upside there, but also some risk, even if Brinson’s glove props up his floor. Meanwhile, Cordell is already 24 and still seems to have some development ahead of him.

The other bunch represents a different mix of assets. Meanwhile, Mejia has had a breakout offensive year. Chang’s name came up in the Aroldis Chapman talks, and he has displayed emerging power this year. Allen delivers outstanding plate discipline, while Armstrong has a promising K rate and could step right into a big league pen.

Ultimately, the inclusion of Jeffress makes it hard to make a direct comparison. Certainly, the Indians package wouldn’t have delivered a headliner on the order of Brinson. But it’s not difficult to see why Milwaukee was intrigued by the return it had lined up — which included some rising prospects who seemingly fit well with the organization’s needs and philosophies. And it’s always wise to remind oneself of just how much you don’t know when it comes to prospects (generally and specifically!).

The Phils will go from worst record last year  to almost breaking out of bottom 10 this year. If they add a veteran bat to go along with Maikel Franco, Odubel Herrera, Tommy Joseph and other youngsters can they get to the .500 mark and possibly challenge for a Wild Card in 2017? – Joe P.

You can never rule out a quick turnaround, especially for an organization that has huge spending power and no guaranteed money on the books beyond the remnants of the Ryan Howard and Matt Harrison contracts. Still, though, it’s asking a lot for the club to move into contention in 2017.

A few major free agent signings could change that, of course, but where’s the incentive for the new-look front office? Fans are already aware that a rebuild is underway, with the focus on developing a new core that has shown plenty of promise. And the coming free agent market is not only largely devoid of pitching talent, but lacks for particularly youthful, high-end hitters.

There’s little doubt that the Phils will at least look into adding a productive veteran or two, with aims of bolstering their lineup and clubhouse without hamstringing the team’s future. But it’s probably too soon to wish for a dedicated effort at building out the major league roster through free agency or trade. There are just too many holes to plug, young players who’d have to immediately maximize their talent, and pitching questions (including the health of Aaron Nola and Vince Velasquez and filling out the rotation and pen) that would need to turn out favorably to make contention likely.

With the Yankees still being the Yankees, and their relief corps seeming to be imploding as of late, is a guy like Aroldis Chapman or Kenley Jansen more likely to be targeted in the off season, or are more smaller upgrades in order if any at all? – Nick A.

Are you sure they are still really the Yankees of old? GM Brian Cashman didn’t sign a single major league free agent last winter, and they just sold off parts at the deadline despite having a shot at cracking the postseason!

Honestly, I wouldn’t expect a win-at-all-costs spending spree this winter, on relievers or otherwise. That doesn’t mean the organization won’t utilize its financial advantage in its quest to add arms, but I’d bet on a thoughtful application of the cash. Though some big contracts are leaving the payroll, there’s already nearly $150MM on the books for 2017, so now may not be the time to take on many new entanglements.

For the Yankees, generally, I foresee efforts aimed at building out the current roster while avoiding parting with young talent or committing too much future payroll. For instance, signing a qualifying-offer-bound free agent may not be appealing, but taking on a relatively expensive, but short-term contract may be palatable.

Ultimately, building up the pen while also addressing the arguably-greater need in the rotation will require a multi-part strategy. Of course, with Andrew Miller joining Chapman in departing at the trade deadline, the idea of striking for a top-tier reliever is all the more appealing. But that approach likely wouldn’t be dictated by the relief unit’s current performance or be pursued in isolation.

How do y’all feel about park-adjusted stats?  I feel like Carlos Gonzalez is hyped, but he benefits a great deal from playing at Coors Field. How does that impact his value? – Deke

I’ll speak only for myself, though I expect our other writers would feel similarly. Teams don’t simply look at the back of the baseball card, so neither do I. They want to look beyond the results, which includes adjusting for park, situation, and other factors but also quite a bit more — ferreting out useful information from underlying statistics, incorporating scouting analysis, considering softer factors, etc.

That is to say: yeah, I think you have to adjust his numbers to account for the fact that he plays at a launching pad. If only we had an easy way to … oh, wait, Fangraphs (wRC+) and Baseball-Reference.com (OPS+) are among the places to go to find fully adjusted and scaled (to a league mean of 100) batting statistics.

Personally, I find that more useful than just looking at home/road splits. What people don’t seem to realize is that Coors (and other hitter-friendly parks) “help” a player regardless of whether they end up with better or worse results there. (In theory — if we could fully isolate simple good fortune and differences in fielding, pitching, etc. — a poor batting line would have been even worse if the plate appearances occurred at a pitcher-friendly facility.)

So, what do the numbers say about CarGo? Though he owns a shiny .284/.338/.527 batting line over the last two seasons, with 65 home runs in 1,195 plate appearances, that’s not even quite 15% above the league average. Now, the power production is always going to draw some added attention, but Gonzalez’s overall batting effort is largely commensurate with the sort of offensive production that Josh Reddick has produced in recent years — though his line doesn’t seem nearly as impressive since he has spent so much time at the Coliseum — and isn’t anything close to the monster numbers of, say, Edwin Encarnacion.

I’ve always been a bit bearish on Gonzalez’s value, myself, not only because of those considerations but due to his extensive injury history and declining speed on the bases. Perhaps that’s one reason that the club hasn’t received huge offers for his services despite a fairly reasonable contract. It’s fair to note, though, that metrics liked his glovework this year, and the $20MM he is owed for 2017 is especially appealing since it comes in a rental scenario. (An acquiring team would be taking a much more limited risk.) The bottom line is that there’s real value in CarGo’s contract, just not as much as you might expect when looking at the counting stats and triple-slash.

Last week’s MLBTR Mailbag featured questions on Clayton Richard’s surprising performance since signing with the Padres, the Mets’ likelihood of retaining a trio of free agents, potential free-agent targets for the Giants and Ivan Nova’s earning power on the heels of his incredible run with the Pirates.

If you have a question on the upcoming offseason, free agency, the playoff race, postseason awards or anything else and would like to hear MLBTR’s take, let us know: mlbtrmailbag@gmail.com. We can’t get to every question, of course, but we’ll try to diversify the teams/subject matter as best we can. If you miss out on having your question answered, remember that you can always ask during one of our three weekly live chats — Tuesday afternoons with myself, Wednesday evenings with Jason Martinez and/or Thursday afternoons with Jeff Todd. Mailbag questions are welcome throughout the week, so feel free to send them in at any time.

In last week’s edition of the MLBTR Mailbag, Jeff Todd tackled questions on the Phillies’ chances of landing a veteran bat in free agency, the possibility of the Dodgers re-signing Kenley Jansen and/or Justin Turner, targeting prospects in trades, the notion of trading Mike Trout and contract projections for the Blue Jays’ trio of sluggers that will hit free agency this winter.

If you have a question on the upcoming offseason, free agency, the playoff race, postseason awards or anything else and would like to hear MLBTR’s take, let us know: mlbtrmailbag@gmail.com. We can’t get to every question, of course, but we’ll try to diversify the teams/subject matter as best we can. If you miss out on having your question answered, remember that you can always ask during one of our three weekly live chats — Tuesday afternoons with myself, Wednesday evenings with Jason Martinez and/or Thursday afternoons with Jeff Todd. Mailbag questions are welcome throughout the week, so feel free to send them in at any time.

Thanks as always for your questions. We’ll never get to them all, but remember to join our weekly chats if yours wasn’t covered here. (Steve Adams at 2pm CST on Tuesday; Jason Martinez at 6pm CST on Wednesday; and myself at 2pm CST on Thursday.)

We’re at the stage of the season where trades are scarce, and while extensions remain a possibility, free agency seems increasingly to be occupying our readers’ transaction-related baseball attention. Here are this week’s

What do you think the odds are that the Phillies can sign a big bat in the off season and speed up the rebuild? Would a high profile player have interest in going to Philly at this stage? – Anonymous

I don’t think the Philly front office will see free agency as an opportunity to speed up the rebuilding process so much as a chance to take advantage of the team’s relative resources. Philadelphia has to finish paying off a few veterans, but has basically completely cleared its ledger for future seasons. And this is the same organization that was not only one of the league’s biggest spenders not long ago, but recently inked a sizable new television deal.

My expectation is that the Phils will be looking at two types of players: First, undervalued, reasonably young players who could be signed to somewhat longer-term deals. Remember when the Twins snatched Phil Hughes for three years and $24MM? Perhaps a similar strike could allow the Phillies to fill a near-term need while delivering some upside. And second, low-cost bounceback candidates — something on the order of what they did in acquiring Jeremy Hellickson, Charlie Morton, and David Hernandez last winter.

But look, that’s not who you’re asking about! You want to know if they will challenge for a truly premium free agent. I honestly think they could pull it off if they wanted to, since they’d likely be pursuing multiple such targets and could pitch them all on the same vision. Agents would know the organization has the assets to make it happen. But this just isn’t the right time to do that. There have been positive and negative developments from young talent, as you’d expect, but the existing roster doesn’t look like a 2017 contender unless you put on your rose-colored glasses. And it isn’t as if this market is full of the kind of younger, premium free agents that would allow for a reasonable gamble.

At the end of the day, Matt Klentak and co. aren’t likely to make any decisions now that have any potential to seriously gum up the finances a few years down the line. That means no Yoenis Cespedes, in my view.

Do you think that the Dodgers will sign their top free agents such as Kenley Jansen and Justin Turner? Or will they go bigger and better for Aroldis Chapman, etc.? – Jacob M.

Reports suggest that Los Angeles has real interest in pursuing Jansen, Turner, Chase Utley, and Rich Hill (more on Hill here), so there’s every reason to believe that they’ll be targeted to some extent. That being said, as the team’s decision not to match the D-Backs on Zack Greinke shows, there will likely be stopping points in the Dodgers’ efforts to re-sign these players or pursue alternatives.

To me, the interesting aspect of this question relates to the relievers. For one thing, Jansen has a combination of relative youth and premium talent that the other major Dodgers free agents don’t. Comparing him to Chapman, moreover, you’d be hard pressed to identify one or the other as the more appealing investment, particularly when one considers that L.A. already pulled back from a chance to add Chapman over his domestic violence situation. And teams are generally more successful at bringing back their own free agents, though that may be attributable mostly to the fact that they have better information when they decide to pursue them.

Regardless of what happens, Jansen’s situation ought to tell us something about the Dodgers. Since Andrew Friedman took over, the club has signed only one pen arm — Joe Blanton — to a reasonably significant contract (one year, $4MM). But as the halted agreement to add Chapman shows, the Dodgers believe in the value of premier late-inning arms. Jansen has spent his entire career in the organization and is as steadily dominant as you could hope. Perhaps he’ll be the type of reliever that even this Dodgers front office is comfortable with paying absolute top dollar to retain?

Do teams actually target specific prospects when looking to trade players away? Were the Yankees actually looking for Gleyber Torres or Dillon Tate, for example, or did those just end up being the best prospects/packages on the market? It seems more likely to me that trades would be driven from the demand side, even if the club says afterward that they got who they wanted. – Anonymous

When general managers are asked about trade possibilities as the trade deadline begins to approach, you’ll often hear platitudes from prospective buying organizations about looking at all options and considering many different ways to improve. But they’ll also acknowledge that their scouts are trying to pin-point exactly who is playing well and can help fill the biggest needs.

We tend not to hear about this from the sell side, but really it’s a similar process. The major difference is that, except with regard to some upper-level prospects, the point isn’t to fill a need so much as it is to achieve prospect value. That means assessing the talent levels of various young players to facilitate negotiations when the time comes.

So, are those particular players targeted, or is it more the case that the selling organization picks the package it most values? It’s probably highly situation-dependent. But teams with major veteran MLB trade assets, especially, have some ability to aim for certain prospects they want to pursue — so long as they are playing for organizations that will make a worthwhile match. Consider these comments from Brewers GM David Stearns early in July, which suggest that the process requires identifying which rival organizations are most likely to be interested so that their best pieces can be identified: “You try to get a sense of what other clubs are doing, where you might have fits, so you can begin to do additional target work on certain target organizations.”

The Angels need to trade Mike Trout this winter. They have him and will finish 4^th or last in their division.  They could finish there without him so why not get full value for him while you can? What is a prospective trade that you think would actually get it done? – Jeff D.

Sorry, but I am not going to get baited into trying to piece together a trade for the single most valuable player/contract asset in baseball! And really, I’m not sure that the Angels should be looking to trade away a player who might end up as one of the greatest in history. This is a large-market organization that can find other ways to deal with its many needs.

That being said, I actually think that some who have tried to guess at Trout deal scenarios are failing to recognize his true worth. At any given point in time over the last several years, there were perhaps a handful of players who seemingly approached him in terms of on-field ability and overall contract value. And yet, it is Trout who is always there right at the top of the leaderboards, even as the would-be contenders change season by season. Much like Clayton Kershaw, that is what sets him apart.

Interestingly, only Josh Donaldson comes anywhere near to Trout in terms of fWAR since the start of 2014. Looking back to the true start of Trout’s career in 2012, though, it’s a total landslide — he has been nearly 50% more productive than anybody else in that span. And Trout just turned 25 a month ago, so he still has many prime years left to go. Really, it’s all just astounding — he has already out-WAR’ed all but 211 position players since the game of baseball was invented. He’s a unique player who would require a unique trade package to acquire at this point — you’d have to start with any other team’s best young trade pieces and add loads of talent from there — in the unlikely event that the Halos are even willing to listen.

What are your current salary projections and length of contracts that will be needed for the Blue Jays to re-sign the trio of Edwin Encarnacion, Jose Bautista, and Michael Saunders? And which, if any do you think will resign with Toronto? – Matthew H.

I wasn’t going to answer this question at first — you want contract projections for three guys with a month of the season left to go?! — but I think it’s worthwhile to address. In my view, the general market standing of Encarnacion and Bautista is relatively static at this point, while that of Saunders is an utter wild card.

EE has now established himself as one of the truly elite sluggers in the game. There have been a few in-season ups and downs, but he hasn’t strayed very far from the ~.900 OPS level over the last five seasons. At 33 years of age, Encarnacion is younger than Victor Martinez was when he locked down four years and $64MM and is about the same age that Nelson Cruz was when he got $57MM over four seasons. But the Blue Jays star has a far more consistent and impressive track record than either of those power hitters did when they signed. The recent lawsuit against him poses some real questions, but from a purely on-field perspective, I think he will come close to — but perhaps not quite reach — the Hanley Ramirez contract (which was 4/$88MM).

You might think that Bautista is more variable, but in my view the biggest impact of his relatively mediocre, injury-riddled campaign is in the number of years he can expect to command. Heading into his age-36 season, Bautista looks like a classic three-year candidate. He still has impeccable plate discipline, and his drop in power can be explained by the injuries and a bit of bad luck (.242 BABIP). Plus, he has a .200+ ISO, has popped 17 home runs in 408 plate appearances, is producing plenty of hard contact, and comes with a highly-regarded work ethic. I’m not necessarily ready to put a specific price tag on Joey Bats, but I think it’s fair to expect that he’ll come in around the general range of Encarnacion on an annual basis with one less guaranteed season. Things only get really interesting if you start considering opt-out scenarios; he may find that appealing, but would need to sacrifice the total promised money to get it done.

That brings us to Saunders, who has an impressive overall batting line but carries only a .194/.300/.411 slash in his last 150 plate appearances. He has actually hit opposing southpaws quite well, albeit in limited action. One major remaining question is whether he’ll receive a qualifying offer; if one is issued, he’d have to strongly consider it, as it could really hurt his market. Given that uncertainty, and the importance of the final month for a player who has not been healthy enough to post full seasons of late, it’s too soon to offer any real predictions.

(Oh, and this is just my hunch, but I’m betting that all three find new homes this winter.)

Last week’s edition of the MLBTR Mailbag took a look back at some historical waiver claims, examined J.D. Martinez’s chances at a mega-contract following the 2017 season, looked at the Tigers’ chances of upgrading the rotation and discussed Josh Hamilton’s release from the Rangers (as well as his likely minor league signing this winter).

If you have a question on the upcoming offseason, free agency, the playoff race, postseason awards or anything else and would like to hear MLBTR’s take, let us know: mlbtrmailbag@gmail.com. We can’t get to every question, of course, but will try to diversify the teams/subject matter as best we can. If you miss out on having your question answered, remember that you can always ask during one of our three weekly live chats — Tuesday afternoons with myself, Wednesday evening with Jason Martinez and/or Thursday afternoons with Jeff Todd. Mailbag questions are welcome throughout the week, so feel free to send them in at any time.

Today represents the end of the August revocable waiver trade period. While players can still be dealt to new organizations tomorrow, such players will not be eligible to play in the postseason with their new organizations. That rule plays a role in a few of this week’s mailbag responses …

In honor of Yasiel Puig [who has reportedly been claimed on revocable waivers], I am curious: who was the last player to be placed on revocable waivers where the claiming team was just allowed to assume the contract? Has placing a claim ever backfired on an organization, claiming a player to block a rival just to get stuck with the player’s bad contract? — Anthony C.

The last instance that I can recall of that happening is 2014, when the Nationals claimed Matt Thornton off waivers from the Yankees, and New York simply elected to let the remainder of Thornton’s two-year, $7MM contract go to the Nats. Thornton was a great pickup for them in 2014, tossing 11 1/3 shutout innings in the regular season, and he posted a 2.18 ERA for them in 41 1/3 innings the following season as well. The largest contract that’s changed hands that way in recent history is Alex Rios, whom the White Sox claimed from the Blue Jays back in 2009 when he had roughly $60MM remaining on his contract. Rios had an up-and-down career with the ChiSox but ultimately played pretty well in Chicago and netted the team a controllable utility option in Leury Garcia when he was finally traded.

Is J.D. Martinez the type of player who will be in the 175-200 million dollar range? Or does his age, defense, and injury history limit his earning potential? — Jason

Martinez’s age won’t be much of a detriment to his free agency. He’ll play next season at age 29 and enter the open market in advance of his age-30 season. (He’ll turn 30 late next August.) That’s a pretty reasonable age for a free agent, though it might prevent him from garnering the leverage of an opt-out clause in a free agent deal, as we’ve typically seen younger hitters secure those provisions in lengthy contracts.

At any rate, if Martinez keeps hitting like he has since his 2014 breakout, I do think he can land a contract worth something in the vicinity of $150MM. Obviously a lot needs to go right between now and then, and injuries or continued defensive decline could make that a difficult scenario to come to fruition, but in a best-case-scenario, it’s possible. We don’t know what will come of the qualifying offer system and if there will be a new, more limiting (or less limiting) stipulation for free-agent compensation attached to players by that point, so there’s no need to make absolute statements one way or another. But, we’ve seen a 31-year-old Shin-Soo Choo land $130MM in recent years, and Chris Davis pulled in $161MM on the brink of his own age-30 season last offseason.

Do you think you could see the Tiger’s picking up Ervin Santana? I see starting pitching as a need and I see Santana as a good addition. — Jason K.

Santana would be a fine addition for the Tigers given his reasonable contract, recent excellence on the mound and the Tigers’ struggles at the back of the rotation. But, the Twins aren’t interested in parting with him for anything shy of a significant return, and that would mean asking for high-end talent in return from a Detroit club that is lacking in the way of impact, MLB-ready talent at the upper levels of its minor league system. The Twins have the worst record in the American League, so the Tigers could technically deal any of their young starters — e.g. Daniel Norris, Matt Boyd — to Minnesota in order to acquire Santana, but that’s a steep price to pay for two years (or possibly three, depending on his option status) of Santana, who will turn 34 in December and isn’t necessarily an enormous upgrade over the younger, cheaper arms Minnesota would covet in return.

Since the Texas Rangers released Josh Hamilton are the Angels still on the hook to pay part of his salary? — Andrew T.

Yep. Hamilton’s release doesn’t impact what he’s owed by either the Angels or the Rangers. The move was a procedural one anyhow, as multiple reporters covering the Rangers reported at the time that he’d be re-signed to a minor league deal this offseason. That may sound counter-intuitive, but it’s effectively just a measure to let him play with Texas early in the 2017 season if he’s healthy. MLB rules stipulate that a player released after Sept. 1 can’t return to the Majors with the team that released him until May 15 or later of the following season.

Thanks to everyone who wrote in with mailbag questions this week. If yours wasn’t answered, you can ask again in this week’s two remaining MLBTR chats — this evening with Jason Martinez (6pm CST) or tomorrow with Jeff Todd (2pm CST).

On to the Q&A:

What kind of contract is Justin Turner looking at in free agency? Do you think the Dodgers will pay to keep him? — John T.

Turner’s production alone looks like the type that could result in a five-year deal for most free agents, but he’s never played more than 126 games in a season (he figures to do so this year) and will be 32 on Opening Day next year — both of which will work against him in free agency. Jeff discussed all of that in detail in a recent assessment of Turner’s likely free agent standing.

Despite the drawbacks, there’s enough appeal with Turner that four years aren’t just on the table but are a likely outcome. Chase Headley parlayed a rebound second-half with the Yankees in 2014 into a four-year, $52MM pact in free agency that winter, and a much older Ben Zobrist secured a four-year, $56MM contract with the Cubs this past offseason. I’d imagine both of those marks will be targets that Turner’s camp looks to surpass, and my expectation is that they’ll do just that. I’m stopping short of a fifth year for now, but with a big finish and/or postseason performance, it’s not unthinkable.

I’m wondering if and when the Marlins will get some pitching help? Time is running out and if they want to make a run of this, they need to get pitching. — Lou

Any pitching the Marlins get in August isn’t going to be the type that fuels a miraculous turnaround in the rotation, but it’s also not entirely clear that they need one. David Phelps has gone from out-of-the-blue dominant setup man to out-of-the-blue dominant starter in his first four outings in the rotation, and the Marlins could yet get Wei-Yin Chen and/or Adam Conley back before season’s end. I doubt they’d be able to acquire a starter that would pitch in their playoff rotation at this point, but picking up someone like Jorge De La Rosa to supplant Jose Urena for the time being  would make some sense. Plus, while the team says that Jose Fernandez’s innings won’t be an issue going forward, it wouldn’t hurt to be able to give him added rest if it’s possible to do so without jeopardizing the club’s post-season chances.

I’m just curious, where do you think the Milwaukee Brewers are in their rebuild? When the Astros and Cubs started their rebuilds, they basically started with weak farm systems and many overpriced veterans. It took the Cubs 5 years to finish their rebuild and the Astros 6 years. The Brewers rebuild started only last year, and they already have the top rated farm system in baseball (it was 25th beginning of the 2015 season) and many near MLB ready prospects. Will this be a short rebuild? — Hunter M.

They seem to be getting to a nice position, as you said, but there are at least a pair of rotation spots that need to be filled/improved upon (Wily Peralta, Matt Garza), and nothing has yet been proven at the MLB level by the players that the organization hopes will handle catcher, center field and shortstop. Meanwhile, Jonathan Villar will be hard-pressed to repeat his 2016 success (.400 BABIP, 25.8 percent strikeout rate). Some from the group of Andrew Susac, Lewis Brinson, Brett Phillips, Orlando Arcia, Josh Hader, Luis Ortiz, Phil Bickford and others will pan out, of course, but there figure to be some misses within the upper ranks of their well-stocked farm system, as is the case with any club. The Brewers also face the unenviable task of trying to leapfrog not only the division-leading Cubs but also the perennially excellent Cardinals and talent-laden Pirates.

Bottom line: Milwaukee is in good shape, and GM David Stearns and his predecessor Doug Melvin both deserve credit for the young talent they’ve accumulated, but they’re still a long shot to contend in 2017 from my vantage point.

If the Diamondbacks fire La Russa and Stewart, how has this disarray affect their ability to pursue quality front office personnel. If I was a GM candidate, I would not touch this job with a ten foot pole. — Doug B.

That’s a significant “if” at this point, as we still don’t know anything definitive about the fate of Arizona’s baseball ops staff. That said, most aspiring general managers in the game would surely leap at the opportunity to head up a team and attempt to build around Paul Goldschmidt, A.J. Pollock, Jake Lamb and Zack Greinke. The D-backs just signed a $1.5 billion television contract in 2015, and they’re pursuing a new stadium as well. Setting aside that there are only 30 positions in the game for those who aim to head up a baseball operations department, there’s plenty of appeal to the D-backs gig.

Is Eric Thames a top 50 free agent if he is made available? The way KBO hitters have fared lately doesn’t seem to do him many favors. — Jake

For those that aren’t aware of Thames’ success overseas, the former Blue Jays/Mariners/Orioles outfielder has batted .355/.458/.737 with 120 homers in 367 games playing for Korea’s NC Dinos over the past three seasons. Thames’ ability to translate anything resembling that level of production to the majors will be met with extreme skepticism, of course, but if he hits the market this winter he’ll absolutely have a spot on our Top 50 free agent list. We determine that list based on earning power, so anyone with a chance at earning a two- or three-year deal with decent annual salary typically makes the cut. Thames’ market will be quite difficult to predict, but he’ll only turn 30 this winter, so he’s coming off some eye-popping production while still in the midst of his prime years.

As to the performance of players moving here from the KBO, there have obviously been some ups and downs, as you’d expect from any group of hitters, but the overall record is pretty good. While Byung Ho Park has struggled to adapt, he has at least shown that his power can play in the majors. And both Jung Ho Kang (.243/.326/.481) and Hyun Soo Kim (.317/.397/.432) have been quite productive this year.

Last week marked the return of the MLBTR Mailbag, as Jeff Todd tackled questions on the Mariners’ August needs, Padres prospects, potential Braves moves and the White Sox’ offseason.

If you have a question on the upcoming offseason, the playoff race, the remaining nine days or so of the August trade season or anything else, let us know: mlbtrmailbag@gmail.com. Note that we, of course, can only get to a small fraction of the questions we’ll receive, but readers are encouraged to participate in one of three weekly chats with myself (Tuesday afternoons), Jason Martinez (Wednesday afternoons) and Jeff Todd (Thursday afternoons). Mailbag questions are welcome throughout the week, so feel free to send them in at any time.