How aggressive should the Brewers be with Odorizzi?

[nate82]

Should the Brewers go the Gallardo route with Odorizzi and have him in Milwaukee in 2012 or should they take it easy with him and have him called up in September of 2012 and then in the rotation in 2013? Should the Brewers do what the Padres did with Latos and bring him up after about 1 year in A and AA? That would put Odorizzi with the Brewers at about the end of the 2011 season and then in the rotation in 2012 which would be about as fast as Gallardo went into the rotation with the Brewers if I remember correctly it actually may have been faster than that.

 

Should the Brewers move Odorizzi along rather quickly and get him in the rotation by 2012 or should they move him along slowly and have him up in the majors by 2013 or later?

[igor67]

He's dominating enough that you could think about jumping him to AA next year. They'll probably go for an A+ placement with an eye towards possibly moving midseason to AA. I think they were rather patient early on and I think his innings and other things are all in place for him to move as fast as he shows is reasonable.

[logan82]

A+ next year to start with a move to AA mid season. AAA to start 2012 if he pitches well in 2011 with a possible move to the majors ni June or July depending on our rotation needs and how well he pitches in AAA.

[DHonks]

I fully expect Odorizzi to open in AA, possibly alongside Hethathorn, Peralta, and Scarpetta

That would leave Rogers, Rivas, and Fiers in AAA. It'll be nice to have depth!

[uwisfan]

if he's tearing up the upper levels at some point next year and the crew is in contention.. it might be tempting to bring him in early even if there is a sore spot at the back of the rotation.

[rickh150]

He might be in Milwaukee a year from now. Performance is everything. If he tears it up, the Brewers won't be able to keep him down.

[Klements Bratwurst]

He might be in Milwaukee a year from now. Performance is everything. If he tears it up, the Brewers won't be able to keep him down.

Mat Gamel says hi!

 

Well in all seriousness, the Brewers tend to be a bit slow on the promotions that are warranted. For quick review, Lorenzo Cain sat in the minors darn near all year while Carlos Gomez got on base at a .286 clip. Zach Braddock should have made the roster out of spring. Chris Narverson should have been the #5 starter from day one instead of Jeff Suppan taking a few turns and then preventing Axford or Braddock from being called up to take Suppan's bullpen spot. Money decisions seem to weigh heavily into any equation. Heck, they signed a bullpen arm in the offseason (Hawkins) before promoting Axford/Braddock/McClendon who all could have been a cheaper alternative.

 

Jake Odorizzi being a stud pitching prospect might well be on the fast track, but for some reason in 2012 when Randy Wolf is struggling in spring training on year three of his contract, the Brewers will still trot him out there (ala Suppan) and keep Jake Odorizzi in AAA and us fans will have new target to "Boo".

 

If a guy can get out major league hitters consistently, especially those type of pitchers that miss bats like Odorizzi, he should be called to the big club when he is "built up" and can throw up to 175 innings per year so he can be part of the rotation thus getting rid of the poorest performer at that time. However, it seems that many times when decisions like this present themselves, the Brewers put "minor league performance" lower on that priority list.

 

 

 

[kramnoj]

For quick review, Lorenzo Cain sat in the minors darn near all year

 

Cain played in 84 games in the minors this year. That's not all that close to a year.

 

Zach Braddock should have made the roster out of spring.

 

Why would you want to waste one of Braddocks 6 years of service time on this year?

 

Chris Narverson should have been the #5 starter from day one instead of Jeff Suppan taking a few turns

 

Narveson this year has been worse than Suppan was last year. He also isn't really any better than Suppan was this year when we include Suppan's time with the Cardinals this year.

[igor67]

Service time is an important issue, but it's not the only issue. Given the vagaries of development it makes some sense to test guys out if your unsure about a year, under the idea that then you can count on them the following year.

 

In a different iteration todays team has played over .500 ball. The year was not "lost" at the start of the season. Based on real performances from these guys you can make an argument that being more aggressive on young bullpen guys and cutting Soup loose early nets a number of early wins, and it this point probably at least fringe contention if you are a couple of games over .500

[logan82]

It doesn't make much sense to use service time on a guy who may or may not be ready for the majors if your goal is to be just a little over .500. If you think it may make a difference between making or missing the playoffs that is another story. We were a low 80's win team talent wise this year. That isn't a team I want bringing up guys unless they are definitely MLB ready.

[nate82]

After thinking about this I believe the Brewers really should go the Mat Latos route. Put Odorizzi in high A to start out the year next year with him moving to AA sometime in the year and if he is doing good have him up in September and the skip AAA the year after and go straight to the majors. No need to waste a year of Braun and Gallardo with Odorizzi in AAA.

[endaround]

Braddock and Cain had serious injury concerns to monitor. Axford had control issues mixed with injury issues until this year. No one knew if Loe could reinvent himself in the majors. The difference betweeen Suppan and Narveson is like 0.5 a win at most over a small time frame.

[kramnoj]

Given the vagaries of development it makes some sense to test guys out if your unsure about a year, under the idea that then you can count on them the following year.

 

Sure, and you can accomplish that by calling them up at some point later in the year, either when some time has past to give more confidence that the player is ready, or to come up in case of an injury. If Braddock is up with the team at the beginning of the year and is good, he gets a whole year of service time. I would much rather have Braddock on the Brewers in 2016 with Lawrie, Cain, Lucroy, and whichever pitchers make it than have him on the 2010 Brewers for 7 more weeks. After all, he's a reliever, how much could he have really been worth in that time?

[igor67]

I'd argue a few months of service time are more than worth going from a high 70's win team to a low 80's win total. You go from basically a 1% shot of hitting the right hot streak to contention with one, and maybe a 20% chance that you get a hot streak or a hot enough to make the right deadline deal.

[kramnoj]

I'd argue a few months of service time are more than worth going from a high 70's win team to a low 80's win total.

 

That may or not be true, but the relevant issue here is that Braddock in 7 weeks isn't going to get you there. Bref has his value at .5 WAR in the 3 months he's been up. It's hard for middle relievers to have that much impact.

[Never Outhustled]

No need to rush Odorizzi, as Rogers and Rivas will 1st get their shots at the rotation.

[logan82]

I'd argue a few months of service time are more than worth going from a high 70's win team to a low 80's win total. You go from basically a 1% shot of hitting the right hot streak to contention with one, and maybe a 20% chance that you get a hot streak or a hot enough to make the right deadline deal.

It isn't a few months of service time though. It is a full year. A high 70's win team needs more than a hot streak to be in playoff contention.

[igor67]

It is a few months, which in hindsight could turn into a full year. You've mixed a combination of later knowledge and prior knowledge. Start of the year you take your best shot if it gives you a reasonable postseason chance. As an example Braddock ended up here anyway. One tiny little injury and boom a year long DL stint anyway racking up more service. So it is a real matte of a few months that could or could not end up being a full year of time. On the flipside he could have had a horrible start and back down in the minors in a month netting less service time as a result of the decision. It is one thing to be conscious of the service time value, it's quite another to treat not playing as more valuable than playing.

[logan82]

It is one thing to be conscious of the service time value, it's quite another to treat not playing as more valuable than playing.

 

Sure if you completely ignore how good the team is. Our team was a low 80's win team this year. No point pushing guys for a couple wins unless you are at least mid 80's win talent. In my opinion you go with your best team if you think you are a high 80's win team otherwise you are just wasting service time. It is easier to bring guys along slowly an maybe hold them back a bit than send a guy down if he is doing well at the MLB level. A player is almost always going to be better and more valuable in their last year of arbitration than when they first come up. If you call a guy up in September that is one more month you have to hold him back the next year to gain a year of service time.

[kramnoj]

It is one thing to be conscious of the service time value, it's quite another to treat not playing as more valuable than playing.

 

All it takes to delay FA is a week or two. You would have to demonstrate that a middle reliever is going to create enough value in a week or two to be worth losing that player for a full year 6 years down the road.

[logan82]

It is one thing to be conscious of the service time value, it's quite another to treat not playing as more valuable than playing.

 

All it takes to delay FA is a week or two. You would have to demonstrate that a middle reliever is going to create enough value in a week or two to be worth losing that player for a full year 6 years down the road.

I believe that a baseball season is about 180 days long. You need 172 days of service time to acquire a full season of service time. However if you are on optional assignment for less than 20 days you get service time for a full season so it is more like 3 weeks in the minors not 1 or 2. Usually the super 2 cutoff is around 140 days but that changes and could go lower since most teams are very conscious of service time and that extra year of arbitration from being a super 2.

 

I agree with your overall opinion that a few weeks of a reliever and their effect on wins and losses isn't worth the service time you would use to have them up. Even the difference between starters is very little over 4-5 starts. Only a few runs.

 

Per Cot's

 

Service Time

A

player earns Major League service time for each day he spends on the

active (25-man) roster or on the Major League 15-day or 60-day disabled

lists. A player also continues to earn service time while serving any

disciplinary suspension or serving in the military.

 

Under the

CBA, 1 year of service is defined as 172 days. A player may earn up to

172 days of Major League service during a championship season (regular

season), which generally lasts 183 calendar days. If a player is sent

to the minor leagues on optional assignment for a total of less than 20

days during a season, he receives service time for the entire season.

 

Service time specifics

• A player promoted from the minor leagues is credited with ML service beginning with the date he physically reports.
• Service

  time is not interrupted when a Major League player is traded and

  reports to his new club in the normal course (within 72 hours).

• A player demoted to the minor leagues is credited with ML service through the date of the assignment.
• A player who is unconditionally released is credited with ML service through the date he was notified of his release.
• A

  Major League player designated for release or assignment continues to

  be credited with service after the designation, through the date of the

  actual assignment or the date he is notified of his unconditional

  release.

• For a player who

  appears on the opening day roster, ML service time is credited as of the

  earliest scheduled opener, without regard to the actual opening date of

  his own club.

• ML service

  time is not credited during any period or periods of optional assignment

  totaling 20 days or more during a single season.

[igor67]

I consider a players 2nd and third season their most valuable from an organizational perspective. Rookie years are too unpredictable with adjustments and the like to count on too many of them. So I have a tendency to favor getting those players playing time in less than crunch situations when possible if you are anticipating building a better team in the following year. I actively advocate against pretending we know enough about the future 6 years from now with a pitcher with a history of arm issues to base decisions now on then. Service time is the new defensive statistics, people are out clevering themselves. The current team is very different in terms of situation than back in the day when Prince et al were brought up. That was the time to bite the bullet and game the service time a bit to preserve value in largely position players (less injury risk) and cluster as much talent from the farm system together as possible to make a big difference. In isolated cases here and there one can find value being shrewd with service time, and there are certainly dumb ways to waste time (i.e. never do a Sept. call-up on a player you'll probably end up having to call-up again next Sept as well). on the other hand calling up guys who will probably fill a role on the team next year gets them exposure, and helps get them used to the longer season for next year.

[logan82]

on the other hand calling up guys who will probably fill a role on the team next year gets them exposure, and helps get them used to the longer season for next year.

 

Odorizzi doesn't fit that description and we are likely to be a low 80's win team at best next year so it doesn't pay to have him up next year at all unless they are planning on bringing him up full time in the spring of 2012.

[kramnoj]

I consider a players 2nd and third season their most valuable from an organizational perspective.

 

That's probably true.

 

Rookie years are too unpredictable with adjustments and the like to count on too many of them.

 

Given this belief, why do you advocate potentially wasting a rookie year, when you can bring up the player 3 weeks into the year (thank you Logan for the correction) and getting the rookie time when the player isn't being counted on. In other words, as injury replacement, or allowed to get further development in the minors while seeing if the talent in the big leagues is good enough.

[Klements Bratwurst]

For quick review, Lorenzo Cain sat in the minors darn near all year

 

" Cain played in 84 games in the minors this year. That's not all that close to a year. "

 

Exaggeration sure, but we saw more than half the season with Gomez whiffing away. Cain could have made a slight difference on that "82-83" win projection for this team.

 

Zach Braddock should have made the roster out of spring.

 

"Why would you want to waste one of Braddocks 6 years of service time on this year?"

 

Braddock could have replaced Hawkins like he has as a 8th inning type set up guy as he has been. He obviously had a decent minor league track record plus did well in the Fall League last year. Whether he threw innings in AAA or in the big club, he would have been used one way or the other, if one is concerned with injury risk. It wouldn't have been a waste of service time to call up Braddock to be the 8th inning type set up guy he has been (basically any other role other than a LOOGY or the long man), plus he would have been certainly cheaper especially considering another $3.5 million due to Hawkins in 2011. He may not have added wins to the projected total, but added $7 million to Attanasio's pocket book to make other moves either at the break or next year.

 

Chris Narverson should have been the #5 starter from day one instead of Jeff Suppan taking a few turns

 

"Narveson this year has been worse than Suppan was last year. He also isn't really any better than Suppan was this year when we include Suppan's time with the Cardinals this year."

Narveson, had more upside than Suppan could dream of this year, plus had a stellar spring training on top of a decent September last year. Suppan threw 85 MPH fastballs. I agree Narveson and Suppan would be close to wash, but at the time Narveson was clearly deserving of the shot but Suppan was given the ball.

 

Just to clarify my position, the Brewers just don't consider minor league performance of a significant prospect the number one reason to call them up to the big club. Service time, money, etc, all weigh a bit more heavily, and in Gamel's case, this year there just isn't a position. Odorizzi, I would hope would be given the ball in April in the season in which he can throw 175+ innings so he can be used in the rotation where this organization needs him most.