Brewers pitching development plan (also, curse you Roy Halladay!)

[Thundercat32]

Two things stood out to me in this article and I'm wondering if I can bounce this idea off you fellas. The first is the "maybe the $60 million extra the Yanks offered C.C. played a role in his decision" and the second is the part about Ian Kennedy and Daniel Bard demanding over slot money which lead to the Brewers looking past them on draft day, and instead they end up with Jeffres.

 

When I first signed up here one of my first questions wanting to get to know the Brewers is are they a small market team or can they spend a little money? The consensus was we're not a small market team, but we're not going to compete with the Yankees for free agents. I think thats fine, and you can win championships with that type of budget. Obviously, the Front Office has been lacking over the past decade and the more I get into this team the more I'm in favor of new leadership at the top.

 

Anyways, here's what I'm thinking. You're not going to outbid the Yankees for Cliff Lee so why try? And why take that money and bid on the ugly step sisters of the world? $12 million to Jeff Suppan doesn't make any sense, it only addresses the here and now (and doesn't always do that). I'd rather take that $12 million and scatter it over 5-6 first round draft picks. Go ahead pay them overslot. Rick Porcello is a Tiger because they're the only ones that would agree to pay his high signing bonus demands. Why not roll the dice on a guy you believe has talent, but is asking for a high signing bonus? We took LaPorta that year, even if Porcello turns out to be a total bust (which there is every indication to the contrary) how much worse off would this organization be paying for guys like that and passing on the Jeff Suppans of the world?

 

I think it'd do the Brewers a world of good to develop a reputation as a team thats willing to go over slot for those types. Tanner Scheppers is another one. He lasted til the mid 40s in the '09 draft b/c teams were worried about his arm and about his salary demands. Everyone admitted he was a top 10 talent in the draft, but he was passed over b/c of that? And look at were he is now, now Texas has a pitcher on the verge of making his mlb debut in September and he's rated amongst the best by Baseball America.

 

It just seems like a far better way to spend $12 million as an organization. Another thing I can't figure. Why don't the Brewers have a bigger return in the Latin America and Asian markets? You don't have to be spend with the Yankees in free agency to acquire talent. The Texas Rangers and other teams have practically made a living off of it for the past 30+ years. Besides Yovani who have the Brewers ever scouted and signed south of the border?

 

I'd also like to see an effort made to acquire more 1st and 2nd round draft picks. Of course, I guess you have to have the talent evaluation personnel in place to make those picks worth something, but thats kind of at the heart of the matter isn't it.

[Jimbo]

Here was the thing that stood out to me:

 

"Melvin had his staff compile a list of what he considered the "good, quality pitchers" in baseball and found that 24 of them have no-trade clauses that include Milwaukee. Dan Haren, recently traded from the D-backs to the Angels, had such a clause. "

 

The Brewers are fighting an uphill battle to get guys to want to come here. Because of that they have to overpay, and that's how you end up with Suppan, Looper, and Wolf.

There was a time when nobody wanted to play in Green Bay but once they started winning, Reggie White and everyone else jumped on the bandwagon. Everybody loves a winner!

[FVBrewerFan]

I thought it was comical that Melvin made this public in the first place. It's as if he's a grade school kid convincing his parents "I know I'm geting Cs but I'm really trying!!!" The the content for the most part is comical as well. Other than the revelation that 24 pitchers have no trade clause to Milwaukee. But even that's not as bad as it sounds. I'm sure some of those guys would waive that clause and come to the Brewers depending on the situation, timing, etc.

 

So although Melvin says he's not making any excuses, that's exactly what tis is all about. Classic trick, used in business all the time. "We're not making excuses...but here are all the excuses."

 

Bottom line, what I get out of this is what I've been thiking ans saying all along. The Brewers can't sign a stuf FA pitcher, nor trade for one. The only way they can build a solid rotation is to draft and develop one- something they haven't been very good at to say the least. So we're left with luck. Draft a bunch of guys with a big fastball and plus breaking ball and hope a couple of them pan out.

[MNBrew]

2. the idea of acquiring Roy Halladay, for example, is the exact sort of move Melvin has to pursue. But on a prospects-loving fan website like BF.net, it doesn't surprise me to hear folks rip that like it's the ultimate in stupidity. Heck, it was a Sabathia-like move, but for an entire season. So why exactly is that stupid? The whole point Melvin was making on that note in McCalvy's article is that a trade seems to be one of the only ways the Brewers are going to land a stud pitcher like Halladay other than if they can develop those guys in their own system. So Melvin made a strong play. But the Brewers lost out on Halladay anyway.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I could not possibly disagree with this more. Selling our entire farm for a guy like Halladay is the exact sort of move Melvin has to pursue? Seems to me like it's the exact sort of move that can bury our franchise for the next 5 years. So if that trade had gone through, we are around what, maybe around a .500 team this year? Then we're down a few top 10 prospects including probably some pitching prospects, and things are looking mighty bleak at the moment. The reason BF.net values prospects very highly is because of how important it is for a team like the Brewers to have their players succeed in their first 6 cost-controlled years.

 

Also, the Sabathia situation was very different. We were a top NL team at the time looking for the extra pennant push. I'm not saying there isn't situations for these kinds of things to happen, but for a franchise like the Brewers, it has to be the exception, not the rule. We are not a team structured that can afford to cough up our top prospects every couple of years for the top rent-a-pitcher on the market. The Yankees can afford to do that. Not us.

 

Do you see teams like the Rays, Twins, and Marlins unloading their farms for the top pitcher on the trade block? No, because they develop their own top pitchers. We have to as well, there isn't any other option, and I think they are beginning to realize that.

The thing you're missing -- perhaps because I didn't say it -- is that I'd bet 99% of the time the Brewers would make a play for an elite pitcher, they wouldn't get him anyway.

 

Melvin never stated what he offered Toronto, and I'm guessing it wouldn't have been ONLY prospects but, like what Texas gave up for Cliff Lee, 3 players, and at least one would've been a major leaguer. By definition, while the acquisition of Halladay would've come at a significant price, it's hard to assert as fact, which you implied, that it would've equated to selling off all our top prospects.

 

I do wonder, now with all the wasted money coming off the payroll after this year, if the Brewers don't have at least a financial chance at Cliff Lee. If you can get a stud pitcher w/o giving up anything to get him, and you have the wherewithal to do it, you at least have to make that run. . . . That said, I'm not delusional enough to think this has a very realistic chance of happening.

 

As DM often says, you have to consider all possible avenues to improve your team. Clearly, though, and above all, it must start by developing from within. You just do what you can after that.

[Thurston Fluff]

On the trade side of the coin, unless you're advocating a total rebuild and take anything any other GM offers you for your proven ML talent, you have to insist on comparable value in return in any deal.

 

To back this point up that is what Pittsburgh has done. Look where that got them.

[TooLiveBrew]

Lately, Pittsburgh has actually made some nice trades, including this trade deadline. Nothing major, but got rid of dead weight & brought in youth. I think Huntington has them headed in the right direction.

[adambr2]

On the subject of players have no-trade clauses to Milwaukee or in general just not coming to Milwaukee, IMO there are 2 major factors in whether an elite MLB player is willing to come here for comparable money to what a big market team might offer.

 

- Winning. Like someone said, players want to play for a winner. You show you're a contender, and you're going to see more players agree to come. It's kind of the chicken and egg situation, because you need these players to HELP turn your team back around, but that's where our prospects panning out is so important to us.

 

- Familiarity. Would Gallardo, Braun, and Hart be the kind of players who would sign here for the same money that a West Coast team offered, having never played here? Probably not. But they all took extensions. Why? Players spend some time here, get comfortable with the environment, and then want to stay. Come to think of it, even with Milwaukee not being the most attractive city to come to, I can't think of too many players who, after spending a year or even less (CC) with the Brewers, didn't warm up to the idea of spending a few years here. That's why we're more likely to be able to hold onto our OWN home grown elite players than acquire someone elses.

 

 

There are other factors involved....such as a player's lifestyle..does he like to party, or just want a quiet place to relax with his wife? Or where did the guy grow up? For guys like Counsell and Washburn, that makes Milwaukee more attractive. But in general, I think winning and familiarity are the biggest factors.

 

-

[biedergb]

With some of the Doug Melvin bashing, I just wanted to put a little perspective into some of the discussion. First off, I am not attempting to be a Doug-Melvin-apologist and I will concede is not the best GM in the business, but is in the upper half (when payroll constraints are taking into account). Those of you who remember Sal Bando and then the Dean Taylor years, there were some horrendous decision making. While it was regrettable that Melvin could not turn one of our players into prospects at the trading deadline, this is a far cry from the latter Bando years when he held on to Dave Nilsson and Hideo Nomo, because he didn't want to wave the white flag and risk losing attendance. Also, we are nitpicking whether or not there was a player or two in a particular draft that would have been better than we selected, while in the 90's we had between a handful and dozen of players who would have been better than our selection. In 1993 we had four 1st round selections (only D'Amico had a serviceable career for the Brewers). While Seitzer for Burnitz was a great move by Bando, he then handed bad contracts to players on the decline (Eldred, Valentin, Grissom, Burnitz), while Melvin has overpaid for the most sought after commodity -- starting pitching -- which is hard to get good contracts when about 25 teams could use a FA pitcher's services.

 

Anyway, Melvin has not been great, but our organization is not a laughing stock (as it was about 2003) and while we are bemoaning the fact that we've been about one really good starting pitcher and/or closer short of being a playoff team during the past few seasons, and we are wasting away seasons of the best duo (Fielder/Braun) that we've had since Yount/Molitor in the late 80's-early 90's. It wasn't that long ago that a non-losing season was a big deal.