Time to start looking at Melvin?

[danzig6767]

So does anyone give Melvin credit for bringing us from a 60 win team to an 83 win team in 5 years? What GM would have done better under the same circumstances?

 

Not only is five years a pretty long time, you're just assuming it was almost all Melvin's doing. Doug not only inherited Sheets on the big league roster, he needs to give great thanks to the drafting skills of Jack Zduriencik who found most of the higher skilled players on the roster who also happen to be cheap and thus allows Melvin to spend money elsewhere.

 

I think Melvin has done a solid job overall, but nothing overly special either. After the Brewers went so long with poor GM's like Bando and Taylor, i think some fans overrate the job Melvin has done to a degree. Kinda like if you've been forced to eat nothing except plain rice everyday for years straight and then you're given a sirloin steak, that steak will taste heavenly even though it's not top of the line steak.

 

I'm by no means calling for him to be canned, but getting a team from that 82-85 win range is the real tough job for a GM in baseball without of huge payroll. It's getting around that time for Doug to show he can build a team that makes that next step from now respectable to playoff team.

[Thurston Fluff]

he needs to give great thanks to the drafting skills of Jack Zduriencik who found most of the higher skilled players on the roster who also happen to be cheap and thus allows Melvin to spend money elsewhere.

 

If you give Zduriencik crdit for finding the higher skilled players you then also have to blame him for not being able to find enough high end pitching talent to go along with the position ones. I like Z but I'm not ready to put him at the head of the class when it comes to drafting players quite yet.

[Fatter than Joey]

At the time, it was probably a fair trade for both sides, and now in retrospect, the D-Backs gave up a very large sum for 90 AB's.

 

Fair enough -- I am sure that things didn't work out like the D-backs planned.

 

So does anyone give Melvin credit for bringing us from a 60 win team to an 83 win team in 5 years?

 

Sure -- However 83 wins is not the ceiling of the "5 year plan" I would hope.

[THEbrewguru]

So do you want Doug to base trades off of fan perception?

So the coming decline of Sexson is irrelevant to any argument - but the Texas Ranger's fan's opinion of Cordero is relevant?

You are taking everything I say out of context. Now I know how Charles Barkley felt when he said he was misquoted in his autobiography. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

No, fan perceptions are wrong a lot of the time (as I said, witness the perception about Derrick Turnbow 2007). I mentioned that because Cordero was relegated to middle relief in Texas and Rangers' brass couldn't wait to get rid of him.

 

The decline of Sexson, AGAIN, is irrelevant. He was a 28-year old first baseman with 3 straight very good to great years. Find me one scouting report, one scout, one fan, who thought Sexson would flame out by 31.

 

There isn't one.

So does anyone give Melvin credit for bringing us from a 60 win team to an 83 win team in 5 years? What GM would have done better under the same circumstances?

Dave Dombrowsky.

You can't say that Sexson's production after the trade is irrelevant while at the same time criticizing the performance of the acquired players since the trade. It's not apples to apples. You have to look at their value at the time of the trade if you're going to look at Sexson's value at the time of the trade. At the time the trade happened' date=' they got an All-Star 2nd baseman, one of the top pitching prospects in all of baseball, a young catcher that looked somewhat promising, a young lefty starter coming off TJ surgery who had dominated at AAA and a young first baseman that was Major League ready but unproven, and essentially a salary throw-in in Counsell.[/quote']OK, let's look at the time of the trade in December, 2003:

 

Junior Spivey: All-star in '02, greatly declined in '03.

Jorge DeLaRosa: A prized pitching prospect.

Chad Moeller was never considered a promising catcher. He platooned with Rod Barajas, of all people, in '03.

Chris Capuano: Coming off surgery, but never dominated in the minor leagues (as stated).

Lyle Overbay: A doubles hitting first baseman to be the bridge to Fielder.

Craig Counsell: Real fans hated this acquisition, especially when they named him the full-time shortstop. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

OK, I'll come off it now. DeLaRosa was probably the key to the trade, but he just didn't pan out.

 

Edit: Please do not make back-to-back-to-back posts. Condense your thoughts/replies into one post.

[twobrewers]

The decline of Sexson, AGAIN, is irrelevant. He was a 28-year old first baseman with 3 straight very good to great years. Find me one scouting report, one scout, one fan, who thought Sexson would flame out by 31.

I'll be content just to hear you explain how Sexson's performance after the trade is irrelevant - but the performance of the players obtained (Capuano, Overbay etc.) after the trade is relevant.

[Postseason2006]

If this is the case, let's start looking at the Leinbrink trade...

[PeaveyFury]

Coming off surgery, but never dominated in the minor leagues (as stated).

 

Actually, I said: "who had dominated at AAA"- Cappy had a 2.72 ERA in AAA in 2002 and a 3.34 ERA in 2003, in the hitter-friendly PCL Pacific divisions. For reference, Gallardo put up a 2.90 ERA in the more pitcher-friendly American divisions of the PCL.

 

Chad Moeller was never considered a promising catcher.

 

He had a .852 OPS and a .770 OPS in his two full-ish seasons with Arizona. He wasn't going to be a world beater, but he certainly wasn't expected to put up the .568, .624, and .507 OPS' that he hit in his three seasons with Milwaukee.

DeLaRosa was probably the key to the trade, but he just didn't pan out.

 

I think that's probably accurate. If we'd have known at the time of the trade that Cappy would be the more effective of the two pitchers by far as we do now 5 years later, it would have been a pretty big surprise.

[zzzmanwitz]

Melvin has been brought up in another thread, I thought I would bump this up if there was further discussion.

[giffted1]

If this is the case, let's start looking at the Leinbrink trade...

We're going to have to wait about four years to discuss this one.

 

[craigharmann]

Melvin getting the Brewers to 83 wins in 5 years (with a readily rising payroll, and farm system stocked full of cheap talent) isn't as remarkable as many here want to believe. In fact, compared to what other teams have done under similar circumstances (the Rockies and D-Backs have had significantly less payroll money to work with), Melvin's improvement of the Brewers has been somewhat plodding and unimpressive.

Yeah, but it's been better than Sal Bando and Dean Taylor's "improvement" of the team.

 

[Crewin06]

Does it matter that the picks that Arizona received for Sexson turned into what appears to be Micah Owings and a AAA pitcher Matt Tora that appears to finally have gotten into a decent groove?

[ozzybourne]

Melvin getting the Brewers to 83 wins in 5 years (with a readily rising payroll, and farm system stocked full of cheap talent) isn't as remarkable as many here want to believe. In fact, compared to what other teams have done under similar circumstances (the Rockies and D-Backs have had significantly less payroll money to work with), Melvin's improvement of the Brewers has been somewhat plodding and unimpressive.

 

--------------------

 

well said doug. i'd like to add that melvin and yost "had a plan", and that was to wait for weeks, hardy,and fielder (hart and hall never got much credit, and braun was not a part of it early on).

 

this plan actually delayed more immediate improvement a few years ago, and has really put this season into 'an all or nothing' scenario for melvin and yost because of the plan. so far so good this season.

 

[lukevan]

this plan actually delayed more immediate improvement a few years ago, and has really put this season into 'an all or nothing' scenario for melvin and yost because of the plan. so far so good this season.

 

I'm not sure how this is an all-or-nothing season. We'll still have all these players (if we don't trade any) for 3 or so more years.

 

IMO, we're not going to get a good sense of the job Melvin has done until Weeks/Fielder/Hardy are through most of their arbitration years.

[Postseason2006]

If this is the case, let's start looking at the Leinbrink trade...

We're going to have to wait about four years to discuss this one.

 

 

Why should we wait, Inman is pitching in the futures game and Linebrink caughed up the game the other night against the Cubs? The two draft picks were reaches and the one is older than Garrison and Inman.

[TooLiveBrew]

Does it matter that the picks that Arizona received for Sexson turned into what appears to be Micah Owings and a AAA pitcher Matt Tora that appears to finally have gotten into a decent groove?

I think the answer to this is "Yes & no". "Yes", because it highlights the potential to reap good young players from departing FAs. "No", because you can't project that both comp. picks will wind up being players that 'make it.' I for one really love the sandwich round compensation for FAs. It's really enjoyable to me, since (like any other draft pick) it's really hit or miss.

 

Thanks for pointing that out, Crewin06. I hadn't ever looked into who the DBacks got with those picks.

[zzzmanwitz]

Why should we wait, Inman is pitching in the futures game and Linebrink caughed up the game the other night against the Cubs? The two draft picks were reaches and the one is older than Garrison and Inman.

 

Inman hasn't even sniffed the majors yet. There are plenty of "can't miss" prospect that did in fact miss. Inman is not a "can't miss." Ben Hendrickson dominated the minors and couldn't get a guy out in the majors. Linebrink is having a great year, 1.45 ERA. Making judgements on a player for one game is just silly.

 

If we are giving Melvin the credit for this statement, we might as well credit the parents, his teachers, and high school coaches. Again, Jack Z put these guys together. Melvin pissed away 20 million this year on washed up talent.

 

This argument is used too much. Sure, Melvin didn't hire all the scouts and Jack Z, but why replace someone if they do a good job? He has built, both through hiring and keeping those already hired, a great scouting team that has done wonders on our farm system. Saying Melvin gets no credit for that is like saying Bill gates gets no credit for running Microsoft.

 

Who exactly are these players that Melvin "pissed" 20 million away on? I count 1, Gagne, and that was 10 million. It was risk that had to be taken though. Not many people could have predicted Torres to perform this well.

[giffted1]

Why should we wait, Inman is pitching in the futures game and Linebrink caughed up the game the other night against the Cubs? The two draft picks were reaches and the one is older than Garrison and Inman.

We should wait because minor league numbers mean nothing for the Brewers or Padres. We can't really evaluate the trade until we see how Inman, Garrison, Frederickson, and Dykstra do in the majors if they even reach the majors. And it's interesting that you would want to bring Linebrink into the conversation because he's been lights out this season.

[TooLiveBrew]

minor league numbers mean nothing

 

I always kinda shake my head when I see people saying this. It's like every MLB star was just born at age 22, and immediately started mashing MLB pitching.

[homer]

I think the point is that they don't mean anything until a guy proves it in the majors. Plenty of dudes raked in AA only to bust up or be average in the majors.

[TooLiveBrew]

Yes, but plenty of guys raked in AA & it was a good indicator of talent & future success. I just don't like the way minor-league numbers tend to get viewed as meaningless or 'made up'. Plenty of ballplayers tore up MLB only to flame out, so it's not like there's no precedent there either.

[zzzmanwitz]

Here are some rosters from past future's games, sure some of the guys panned out, but just because he is on the roster doesn't make him a lock to be average.

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/minors/03futuresgamerosters.html

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/minors/040428notebook.html

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/minors/050622fgrosters.html

[Bucky Rules]

Why should we wait, Inman is pitching in the futures game and Linebrink caughed up the game the other night against the Cubs? The two draft picks were reaches and the one is older than Garrison and Inman.

Well... it is a bit early to see how good the guys we just drafted are. But, it's not too early to see that Linebrink did nothing for us, and Inman and Garrison (and Thatcher, too right?) look like they have a legit shot.

[logan82]

Wasn't Inman in AA last year as well? I would think the fact he is still in AA instead of getting a promotion to AAA is at least some indication of how good he is.

[giffted1]

Yes, but plenty of guys raked in AA & it was a good indicator of talent & future success. I just don't like the way minor-league numbers tend to get viewed as meaningless or 'made up'. Plenty of ballplayers tore up MLB only to flame out, so it's not like there's no precedent there either.

Minor league numbers aren't meaningless but I don't think they should be used to show whether a trade was good or bad for the teams involved.

[TheCrew07]

Wasn't Inman in AA last year as well? I would think the fact he is still in AA instead of getting a promotion to AAA is at least some indication of how good he is.

Well by that logic then Escobar and Brantley don't have a future either, since each is also repeating AA... Struggling in your first go round at AA as a very young player for the league doesn't mean much about their ability level. I'm still not sold on Escobar's bat, but he's having a tremendous season thus far.