When is the time to start selling?

[Funketown]

I know a lot of you are going to hate me saying this, but they sit only 8.5 games back now. With 73 games left, including 12 against the team you are chasing, they aren't quite dead yet. Just when I think they are done, they keep pulling me back in. Cincy is starting to scuffle a little bit. I think you have to wait until at least the next road trip is over (of which 4 are in Pittsburgh). There is also conveniently a 3 game stretch against the Reds at home right before the deadline.

That's a pretty huge margin, especially given that both of those teams are better than the Brewers and the Cubs are about as good as the Brewers.

[Invader3K]

Saw a Baseball Tonight segment earlier today. The Cards and Reds have two of the easiest schedules the rest of the way. The Crew does not. I hope people don't really think we can get back in this at this point.

[BrewCityUnit]

The reason the Reds schedule is so easy is because they have 12 games left against us (which equates to 12 games vs. a team 9 games under .500).

 

We are not out of the playoff race by anymeans. Our chances are not great but we still have a realistic chance to get within 3 or 4 games by the end of August. The remaining games in July will determine if we are still alive.

 

There is no way you can call a team who is 8 games back with 12 weeks to play out of it.

[logan82]

Even going 9-3 in those 12 games only gets us 6 games closer. Calling our chances not great is being very generous. Our chances are very very bad. Of course it is possible to get into the playoffs. Playing the odds that we will get into the playoffs is setting us up as the Astros. Their organization is a wreck due their failure to admit their chances at the playoffs were slim to none yet still acting like they had a good chance at the playoffs. If you want to cheer for them to make the playoffs and still think they have a chance, fine. I believe they have no realistic shot. We just are not a good team and sweeping the Pirates certainly will not change my mind. We barely beat them.

[RockCoCougars]

I'll give you that the chances are not great, but there is still a small chance. Going further, all of the guys mentioned in rumors (Hart, Weeks or Fielder) are under team control next year, so it's not a move them or lose them scenario. There is no urgency whatsoever to move them. I think it's asinine to move any of them now for low level prospects because that can be done next year. If someone wants to blow the Brewers away with some guys that contribute next year, I'm willing to listen- otherwise, I'm not willing to begin another rebuilding process, at least not until after next year.

[RU Rah Rah]

I looked at three different web sites listing post-season odds. One listed the Brewers' current chances of making the playoffs as 0.1%; another, 0.7%; another, 0.6%. So that's the kind of "chance" we're talking about here. (Next to none, basically.)

[wibadgers23]

Yeah, it's one thing having to catch one team, but we have to hope that both the Reds and Cardinals start losing a bunch. I still think the Cardinals with that pitching staff and Albert Pujols will pull away from the Reds at some point. We swept one of the worst teams in baseball at home. I wouldn't get too excited just yet.

[RockCoCougars]

I looked at three different web sites listing post-season odds. One listed the Brewers' current chances of making the playoffs as 0.1%; another, 0.7%; another, 0.6%. So that's the kind of "chance" we're talking about here. (Next to none, basically.)

So best case, the odds are about 140 to 1 according to these sites. I'd make that bet. I'm not saying they have a very good chance at all, but they have to be better than that (probably closer to 50 to 1 or something). I've never been able to figure out how these sites are able to quantify things like this.

[logan82]

all of the guys mentioned in rumors (Hart, Weeks or Fielder) are under team control next year, so it's not a move them or lose them scenario.

 

Sure we have control of them but holding onto them isn't going to make us good enough to make the playoffs next year. We would still be a low 80's win team. If we are not going to make the playoffs with them we either need to extend them or trade them(provided we get a good enough return). I think Weeks is the only one of the three it really makes sense to extend.

[pebadger]

The reason the Reds schedule is so easy is because they have 12 games left against us (which equates to 12 games vs. a team 9 games under .500).

The reason their schedule, and the Cards schedule, is so easy isn't just the Brewers. In the scheme of the NL Central the Brewers are one of the tougher nuts. Third place with 40 wins at the break, and with three teams wishing they were as good as you. Nice.

 

Agree that a playoff run is highly unlikely, but 20 of the next 27 games are against team with worse records than the Brewers. Three of the other 7 are against the Reds. Find a way to pick up a game a week (maybe cut the deficit in half) in that stretch and suddenly you give yourself at least the illusion of a fighting chance.

 

@ATL (4)

@PIT (4)

WAS (3)

CIN (3)

@HOU (3)

@CHI (3)

HOU (3)

ARI (4)

[monty57]

I looked at three different web sites listing post-season odds. One listed the Brewers' current chances of making the playoffs as 0.1%; another, 0.7%; another, 0.6%. So that's the kind of "chance" we're talking about here. (Next to none, basically.)

So best case, the odds are about 140 to 1 according to these sites. I'd make that bet. I'm not saying they have a very good chance at all, but they have to be better than that (probably closer to 50 to 1 or something). I've never been able to figure out how these sites are able to quantify things like this.

They "quantify things like this" with the same statistics that oddsmakers use in Vegas. You say you'd make that bet, but it's one thing to be willing to throw $5 on that bet, and another to bet your house on it.

 

What we do personnel-wise prior to next season will be very important to the success of our team for years to come. Since 1.5 years of Prince is greater than 0.5 years of Prince, it seems logical that we'd get more trading him either this season or this offseason as opposed to waiting until next year's trade deadline. Hart has been a very up-and-down player in his career, so we could very easily see his trade value fall to almost nothing at next season's trade deadline. We also have leverage right now, as we don't "have to" trade them, whereas if we are in a similar situation next year, teams will know they have us between a rock and a hard place. Melvin has to look at what's best for the franchise, not only this year, but into the future. Making bets with the odds stacked against him is not the best way to do this.

 

[joepepsi]

What were the Brewers' odd to make the playoffs at the beginning of the season? With the exceptions of the big market Yankee/Red Sox types, most teams start the year with crappy odds. At baseball prospectus the first and second place teams in each division have pretty good odds and every other team has Brewerlike odds. So, the odds mean little. They have to get to 2nd place before any consideration of a playoff run can be taken seriously. I think they have a shot to do that by mid-August, but everything has to go really well!

[JohnBriggs12]

What has trading off guys prior to FA done for the Cleveland Indians?

 

For Sabathia and Lee, the Indians received 8 players: Michael Brantley (.568 major league OPS), Matt LaPorta (.735 major league OPS), Zach Jackson (sold to Toronto), Rob Bryson (still in A ball), Jason Knapp (injured missed all of 2010, never pitched above low A), Carlos Carrasco (0-4, 8.87 ERA in 5 ML starts), Jason Donald (.754 OPS as 25 year old rookie SS), and Lou Marson (.530 OPS).

 

So lets sum this up. The Indians got an average SS in Donald, a below average 1B/OF in LaPorta, some arms that haven't yet done anything in the ML, and 2 busts so far in Brantley and Marson. None of these guys figure to lift this team to .500 in the future, much less be the core of a championship team.

 

For this, they threw in the towel in 2008 and 2009 at mid season and sacrificed 4 high draft picks.

 

Attanasio has a point that trading off core players is starting over and prematurely at that.

 

It's extremely doubtful that any return for Fielder, Hart or Weeks will lead to more wins in 2011 than keeping all 3 would. By 2012, the arms and bats presently progressing in the system may have as much impact as the guys they'd get in trades, plus they'd add multiple high draft picks for 2012 to keep feeding the flow of talent.

[joepepsi]

What has trading off guys prior to FA done for the Cleveland Indians?

Good point. There haven't been a lot of great deadline deals in recent years. Organizations realize young top prospects are their most valuable asset. I suspect LaPorta will be a fine major leaguer, and Brantley could have a major league career as a reserve. But a 1B with moderate power and a 4th OF'er isn't much in return for CC.

[monty57]

What were the Brewers' odd to make the playoffs at the beginning of the season? With the exceptions of the big market Yankee/Red Sox types, most teams start the year with crappy odds.

 

That's why you wait until July to make decisions. Now you try to find someone who values wins this season more than they value "potential future wins" and make a deal. Other GMs are starting to get desperate and hopefully Melvin can use that to his advantage. Holding Prince and Hart to the offseason wouldn't be terrible, but it may reduce their trade value. Trading our future (minor leaguers) to add wins this year would be terrible, as we occasionally need to re-stock our minors, which we failed to do last season in a similar situation.

 

What has trading off guys prior to FA done for the Cleveland Indians?

 

For Sabathia and Lee, the Indians received 8 players: Michael Brantley (.568 major league OPS), Matt LaPorta (.735 major league OPS), Zach Jackson (sold to Toronto), Rob Bryson (still in A ball), Jason Knapp (injured missed all of 2010, never pitched above low A), Carlos Carrasco (0-4, 8.87 ERA in 5 ML starts), Jason Donald (.754 OPS as 25 year old rookie SS), and Lou Marson (.530 OPS).

 

...and what is their opportunity cost? They were going to lose Sabathia anyway (they'd have gotten the same supplemental and 2nd rounder we got), so they'd be sitting with Cliff Lee pitching for a losing team this year.

 

I think you know that basing this trade off of what the young players are doing right now is really short-changing their value. They're minor leaguers and rookies right now, and will likely get better. I don't think LaPorta's a bust because he's hitting .735 OPS in his first MLB season. Sure, they "punted" this season, but they were at 4th-and-30 on their own 1-yard-line. In other words, they'd be bad this year if they made the trades or not. Now, at least they have some players who are near MLB-ready who will help them much sooner than the draft picks would have. They made a run when they had the high-caliber pitching, and now they're on a downswing, but will probably be back in a couple seasons. That happens to small/mid market teams. Now, if they had the Yankee's money, they could have simply extended Sabathia and Lee and kept on winning, but we both know that wasn't an option. We could get into how unfair the monetary situation is in baseball, but until that changes, teams have to do what's best for their franchise, which occasionally means trading away players you'd rather extend.

[RU Rah Rah]

I looked at three different web sites listing post-season odds. One listed the Brewers' current chances of making the playoffs as 0.1%; another, 0.7%; another, 0.6%. So that's the kind of "chance" we're talking about here. (Next to none, basically.)

So best case, the odds are about 140 to 1 according to these sites. I'd make that bet. I'm not saying they have a very good chance at all, but they have to be better than that (probably closer to 50 to 1 or something). I've never been able to figure out how these sites are able to quantify things like this.

They "quantify things like this" with the same statistics that oddsmakers use in Vegas. You say you'd make that bet, but it's one thing to be willing to throw $5 on that bet, and another to bet your house on it.

Exactly. It would be horrible to wager anything significant on 140-to-1 odds. ($5 in a bar? Sure, I do that.)

 

The sites I referenced explain their methodology pretty clearly. I'm not saying that I completely buy it, but I'm reluctant to argue with a consensus of objective observers who conclude that the team has less than a 1% chance of making the playoffs.

[RockCoCougars]

So best case, the odds are about 140 to 1 according to these sites. I'd make that bet. I'm not saying they have a very good chance at all, but they have to be better than that (probably closer to 50 to 1 or something). I've never been able to figure out how these sites are able to quantify things like this.

They "quantify things like this" with the same statistics that oddsmakers use in Vegas. You say you'd make that bet, but it's one thing to be willing to throw $5 on that bet, and another to bet your house on it.

Exactly. It would be horrible to wager anything significant on 140-to-1 odds. ($5 in a bar? Sure, I do that.)

 

The sites I referenced explain their methodology pretty clearly. I'm not saying that I completely buy it, but I'm reluctant to argue with a consensus of objective observers who conclude that the team has less than a 1% chance of making the playoffs.

I'd be willing to bet that no where in Vegas (if I could find future odds) could I get anything remotely close to 140:1 future odds on the Brewers to win the central division in 2010. You'd find maybe 50 to 1 if you were lucky, futures bets are pretty much sucker bets anyway, but I digress. If I could get 1,000 to 1, like the one website suggests, I would lay down 100 bucks in a heartbeat.

[monty57]

Right, but would you bet your house, even if the potential return were 140 houses? You win, you're set for life, you lose, you're broke for life. That would take a lot of guts, and I hope our GM doesn't play those odds.

 

btw, Vegas doesn't put those odds because they can pay a lot less and people will still place bets. Why pay someone 140x their money when they'll be willing to put the same bet down on the possibility of getting 50x their money. It truly is a sucker bet when you put money down on 50:1, when the true odds (what you should be paid) are 140:1. But, that's Vegas.

 

Every team should start the year with a 1 in 30 (3.33%) chance of winning the World Series. Of course, all teams aren't created equal, so some teams are going to be over that and some under. That's where the actuaries / oddsmakers come in (rluzinski could probably give you a very detailed write-up of how these numbers are derived). By the time half the season's over, the probability of overcoming bad starts gets pretty slim, which is when teams who are out of it should get smart and use someone else's desparation to help increase their odds of winning in the future.

 

Ironically, being a buyer should be the more difficult decision, as in reality you're probably increasing your odds from something like 10% to 10.5%, while "selling" (done correctly) would probably decrease the Brewers' odds from something like 0.5% to 0.48%. But, most people would rather buy than sell. I guess that's why people flock to Vegas even though the odds are they will leave with less money than they came with. We're a nation of gamblers, so people who want to use that to their advantage can make a lot of money.

[MJLiverock]

The Brewers weren't a very good team last year, they aren't a very good team this year and if they hang onto to the same team again I would wager they aren't going to be a very good team next year. The 2011 Brewers won't be anymore of a contender than the 2010 Brewers by trotting out the same team. At the end of the 2011 campaign Fielder, Hart and Weeks are all able to walk away as free agents. The only compensation for them will be draft picks which are a more uncertain return than any prospects that could be potentially recieved this year. The Brewers may be able to sign Weeks but he may want out as well. Fielder will be gone and Hart and his agent have been driving a hard bargain as well.

 

I view trading any of them as maximizing their value and limiting risk. None will be worth as much next year and in the end, either trading them this year or next, the Brewers aren't a contender in either case. That doesn't mean trade them for a sack of peanuts or that all three have to go immediately but the front office should realize this team as constructed is not a playoff team. Calling up a few more back of the rotatin guys to fill in inning next year won't change it then either.

[Thundercat32]

I think that the conversation of "trade or sign Fielder" needs to stop. He will become a free agent. That is what Scott Boras guys do.

I agree it makes it more likely Prince will test the free agent waters first. However, history shows some Boras clients are traded while with their team and under contract see A-Rod. Now true that was to the Yankees and it doesn't appear the Yankees need Prince's services, but Edwin Jackson is a Boras client and he's hot and heavy on the rumor mill to be dealt. So I don't know thats necessarily true.

[rluzinski]

What were the Brewers' odd to make the playoffs at the beginning of the season? With the exceptions of the big market Yankee/Red Sox types, most teams start the year with crappy odds. At baseball prospectus the first and second place teams in each division have pretty good odds and every other team has Brewerlike odds. So, the odds mean little. They have to get to 2nd place before any consideration of a playoff run can be taken seriously. I think they have a shot to do that by mid-August, but everything has to go really well!

I don't follow your logic. Whatever the Brewer's chances of making the playoffs were before the season started, they are now over easily 10 times less. The Brewers would have to finish 45-28 just to get to 85 wins and that STILL would almost certainly not be enough to make the playoffs! I won't argue with anyone over what constitutes "still having a shot" but I hope we can all at least argree that the odds are something like "once every century."

 

One thing I seem to notice is that fans tend to not appreciate how much more difficult it is to catch two teams, as opposed one. We focus on "games back" but it is just a horrible proxy for "odds of winning the division". With the Brewers being 8.5 back to the Reds and 7.5 games back to St Louis, that's comparable to being something like being 13+ games behind one team. Remember, you don't add together the odds of the Reds and Cards falling apart, you mutiply them together. Odds of concurrent events occuring can get nnnnnasty.

 

 

[monty57]

You also have to throw in that even in the highly unlikely case the Cards and Reds both collapsed, the Brewers would still have to outplay the Cubs, who have as much chance of "getting hot" in the second half as the Brewers. Just another wrench in the works. I'd much rather be the optimist, but sometimes you have to be a realist.

 

Since I'm an optimist by nature, my optimistic side says the Brewers have in their power the ability to make a few roster moves that could set them up fairly nicely for the future. Corey Hart's season has been unbelievably fortunate for the Brewers... instead of having to rely on trading Fielder for pitching we'll need, now it appears Hart may be able to be traded for someone along the lines of Wade Davis or Minor. That's huge, as it would open the door for us to have some flexibility in looking at Fielder trades. We are also able to use this season to see what we have in some players who might not otherwise get a chance to sink or swim.

 

I still think we can be competitive next season if we play our cards right. But it appears more and more certain that the worst move would be for the Brewers to sell off minor leaguers for extra wins this season, and the better move is to realize that we aren't going to the playoffs this year, so we should build for next year and beyond. I'm happy to see the Front Office appears to be headed in that direction.

[DougJones43]

I'm happy to see the Front Office appears to be headed in that direction.

What exactly have they done so far that indicates they're headed in that direction? They haven't traded anyone yet, and what they're saying (whether it's posturing or not) indicates they still think they have a chance to go for it this year.

[endaround]

Trading Hart, Fielder and/or Weeks isn't giving up on just this year but next year too. And that's where the issues come up. Yes Cain might replace Hart but more likely he'll take time to adjust and is unlikely to give you what Hart would next season. Yes you might get someone who can help next year in trade but if you want true impact talent that likely will be a guy in AA who could use more time in the minors.

[Invader3K]

Well, I think the franchise has to look beyond this year and next though. If Fielder and possibly Hart are almost certainly gone after next season, isn't it best to plan ahead?