Model Franchise/best GM

[Tbadder]

Sorry for the double post. I do agree that there will never be another great small market team. You just got to stick to your guns and get lucky once in a blue moon.

[Invader3K]

The CC trade absolutely didn't work. We didn't win the World Series. Just a difference in expectations I guess. Cool.

Yeah, I guess if you expect every major trade or FA signing to guarantee a World Series Championship, you'll be disappointed more times than not.

[TheCrew07]

The CC trade absolutely didn't work. We didn't win the World Series. Just a difference in expectations I guess. Cool.

Yeah, I guess if you expect every major trade or FA signing to guarantee a World Series Championship, you'll be disappointed more times than not.

 

Or maybe like some of us have been saying all along, the CC trade only works in the short term, we didn't even get a 1st round compensation pick from him, and going into that last week in Sept it looked like the Brewers were going to miss the playoffs all together. It did work out in the end, and I'm happy for those that needed the validation of a playoff appearance. However, it seems very disingenious to me for people that supported that trade to be calling out Melvin now about the state of the rotation. You can't dump depth for a short term solution and then hope that a starter magically falls into our lap. The majority of the same people that supported the Sabathia trade didn't want to move Hardy this off season either... Melvin moved for a short term solution and kept the player most everyone wanted to keep even though he was at his peak trade value. Without going for a long term pitching solution in either situation, how was he going to plug the holes in the rotation?

 

I've been extremely critical of Melvin's inactivity in regards to a legit high ceiling pitching acquisition since 2003 but even I understand that the preceding moves he's made have put us in the current position. He traded for a rental we couldn't possibly resign and kept our most valuable/replacable trade piece on the team... how else was going to acquire a good starting pitcher? I would have loved a Hart for Jackson swap, Edwin Jackson was the top pitching prospect when I first started following the minors, but I'm not sure Melvin was even talking to the Rays about who they'd be willing to part with. Again I say this pitching situation shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone, it was a very long time in coming and very obvious. It's not about injuries or bad luck, it's about making short term moves and not aggressively persuing talented pitchers. Everyone on this site knew that Sheets was going to be FA after 2008 and that we had no legit quality starting pitching depth in the minors. Either Melvin was going to address the situation in a long term manner or he wasn't, this isn't revisionist history, the majority of posters on the site welcomed Sabathia, wanted to retain Hardy, and no one cared when Jackson was traded which left Melvin with one move... the obvious averagish FA pitcher acquisition in Looper.

 

All these topics revolve around the same root issue, what's the best way for Milwaukee to build it's team? What's the best way for the Brewers to manage the roster and payroll? Many people want Melvin to operate plugging holes through FA like the large markets do, prefer to go to year to year in arby and retain our players when they hit FA. I'm the opposite, I'd rather he identify core players prior to arbitration and lock them up with long term contracts buying out 2 years of FA, pay the most talented players on the team the most money, aggresively persue cost effective top of the rotation talent, and finally plug positional holes with averagish players in FA. I think signing FA pitchers to market value contracts is a horrible idea because it limits payroll flexibility as evidenced by Suppan, and signing relievers is even worse value, why should the Brewers spend 7 million on 50-60 IP for a closer? How many extra wins are we truly picking up in so few innings pitched? My only concerns are maximizing talent and value, and I just don't see how that's being done moving assets for rentals and signing FA pitchers.

[Invader3K]

I don't know why you're connecting Haryd and Sabathia, as the two issue are completely separate.

 

I do agree with the sentiment in your final paragraph. I think the Brewers will have to stop going "half way" in their approach to the roster. There's going to have to be some quicker turnover in the roster if they want to continue being successful. We'll be going into year five (or six) with some of the "youngsters" on the roster, some of whom have lost a lot of their shine and luster already. They made the right move signing Braun long term, but its' too bad they haven't been able to do something similar with Fielder or Gallardo. Melvin (or whoever the next GM is) will have to ignore fan sentiment in the future and flip some of these guys sooner for key pieces. It will be hard to see for many fans, but that ties in more with what is being discussed in the "Competitive Balance" thread.

[danzig6767]

The Twins are falling apart without Tery Ryan. Their farm system is getting weak in a hurry, and their big league club is getting expensive. The Phillies are ultra-imprssive.

Is Pat Gillick still the Phillies GM?

[TooLiveBrew]

No, Ruben Amaro Jr. assumed that role this past offseason. Gillick retired, though I believe he may still be an advisor.

 

 

I believe Epstein and the Red Sox are the model GM/franchise. Yes they have money and can spend, but they spend smart. Unlike a lot of the Yankees spending. Also they develop players and don't trade all of their prospects. And when they do trade them the trades usually work out well. Two World Series titles the last five years also helps.

 

There are just too many blanket statements in praise of the Red Sox for my tastes. I'm sorry to pick on your quote, as this isn't aimed exclusively at you.

 

The Red Sox are a perfect example of what rluz was getting at in his "cold hard cash" comment. The ability to eat bad signings (Smoltz -- for BOS --, Penny, etc.), pony up record posting fees (Matsuzaka), sign expensive free agents, & re-sign your own potential free agents really has little to do with GM skill. I think BOS gets too much credit in general, and specifically with the comment that they "spend smart". I really don't think they spend much wiser or less wisely than any big-money payroll.

 

As for the Yankees, I think you have to look at this past offseason & say they spent wisely. That organization's literal goal, every season, is to win the WS. So they spent money -- that they won't have to worry about once their big stars are getting old & declining -- in order to absolutely load up for 2009 (& I think reasonably '10 & maybe '11 as well). The Yankees targeted the 2009 offseason as one for which they'd roll out the loot years in advance. I think that's pretty smart spending when you have the resources. Teams like BOS & NYY just don't suffer the same consequences as a team like MIL does in signing someone like Suppan (or Pavano). Yes, they lose the money, but it doesn't affect their ability to continue to sign expensive players -- and don't forget that includes the draft & international signings too. Mega-rich teams can afford to sign someone like Strasburg & not have the drama unfold the way WAS did this year.

 

I'm rambling at this point... so I'll stop. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif I'll also admit that I probably omitted some subtleties there, but I just always cringe when BOS gets praised so much. I think Epstein is a good GM, but I don't think BOS (or any big-market franchise) should be the 'model'. Imho 'the model' implies something that any franchise could/should follow, and a team like the Brewers will never be able to follow Boston's model.

[LouisEly]

The model franchise has to be the St. Louis Cardinals. They get 2.9 -3.4 million in attendance every year. They do this in one of the smaller markets.

 

I'll agree with the marketing/attendance portion of that statement. I think they are a little overrated though because they benefit from having the best pitching coach in the majors. Looking at their pitching staffs the last few years, I'm hard pressed to come up with one good pitcher that was homegrown. Carpenter, Wainwright, Piniero, Lohse, Franklin - all brought in from outside the organization, almost all having career resurrections under Duncan. Hell, Duncan made Looper look good. Much like the Brewers they haven't been able to develop pitching internally, and I don't see their homegrown position players (other than Pujols) being much better. To that extent I have to give credit to their GM for bringing in pitchers who can flourish under Duncan, but if they didn't have Duncan those pitchers wouldn't have been nearly as successful.

 

Overall I'd say in no particular order the best organizations are Philadelphia, Atlanta, Anaheim, Florida, and Minnesota.

[logan82]

St. Louis has a TV market a third bigger than Milwaukee. The greater St. Louis area has a population of 2.8 million. Milwaukee and the surrounding area 1.7 million. It has little to do with marketing and more to do with just being a bigger market. They are going to pull in more fans if they stick around .500 or better, just like Milwaukee. Their attendance in 2002 when they won 95 games barely cracked 3 million.(3, 011,756) If Milwaukee had sustained success, the promise of being in the playoff hunt most years, they would draw over 3 million easy. In fact I would say St. Louis draws worse than Milwaukee given their population advantage.

[Flood Pants]

The Red Sox are a perfect example of what rluz was getting at in his "cold hard cash" comment. The ability to eat bad signings (Smoltz -- for BOS --, Penny, etc.), pony up record posting fees (Matsuzaka), sign expensive free agents, & re-sign your own potential free agents really has little to do with GM skill. I think BOS gets too much credit in general, and specifically with the comment that they "spend smart". I really don't think they spend much wiser or less wisely than any big-money payroll.

True, Boston can outspend most teams, which gives them an inherent advantage. However, that was the case for many years, and it didn't get them a championship. They spent big money on flawed teams. The key difference for them was adopting a stat-minded approach to player analysis and then hiring Epstein to implement it. They analyzed their game plan, realized that it wasn't working, and changed. (remember, they were about to hire Billy Beane as their GM. They learned their business plan from the smallest of small budget teams). This is why they are a model franchise. They built their championship teams on some strong draft picks (ex. Youkilis), jumping on some undervalued talent (Ortiz), and making some shrewd trades (Schilling, Beckett, Lowell). The money has certainly helped keep them on top, as they've been able to largely keep their team together. But they didn't build their team by throwing money around. The Brewers will never be able to spend money like Boston, but they certainly can learn to analyze talent like they do.

[rluzinski]

I think the Red Sox are a great example to show that money and a good front office might be 50/50? Money is at least 50%, IMO.

[LouisEly]

You make some good points Flood Pants, and welcome to the board. I think the Red Sox were one of the first teams to recognize the value of free agent comp picks, which helped build the value of their drafts. I do think that some of the trades (specifically Beckett and Lowell) were taking advantage of the Marlins shedding salary, and it cost them Hanley Ramirez, a potential MVP candidate. They were one of the few teams who had the ability to take on the salary of Beckett and Lowell, so they were one of the few teams who could take both off their hands in one deal. A classic case of a trade that helps both teams, but if they didn't have the finances they do they wouldn't have been able to pick up both.