2013 Brewers Pitching Staff

[Oxy]

After reading on a Tim Stauffer suggestion.

My wonder is on Jeff Karstens?

 

I think Braun would veto a Karsten's signing. /half blue

[Tim_Unroe_Helped]

After reading on a Tim Stauffer suggestion.

My wonder is on Jeff Karstens?

 

I wouldn't be opposed to signing him. He has been somewhat inconsistent, but he has improved from 2010 to 2011 and then again from 2011 to 2012 (although with many fewer innings in 2012). I still wouldn't depend on him being much more than a number 4 or 5 pitcher, but a 1 year/$4 million or even a 2 year/$8 million (I may be off with these projections) deal would seem to be reasonable.

 

Just looking at his past two years, he seems to give up home runs at an above average rate (HR% of 3.3% in 2011, 2.2% in 2012) and he doesn't strike out many at all (14.4% in 2011, 17.7% in 2012), but his walk percentage is exceptional (BB% in 4.9% in 2011, 4.0% in 2012). I know that using the "Three True Outcome" approach in judging pitchers isn't the end-all be-all way to judge a pitcher, but it does say a lot. His 2011 stats would indicate he's a mid-4 ERA pitcher who could still provide value as an inning-eating number 5 pitcher. His 2012 stats would indicate he's a low-3 or even high-2 ERA pitcher who would compare favorably with Brandon McCarthy. Even if he could maintain an ERA around 4 in future years, he could be a solid innings-eater at the bottom of the rotation for this team. I think it could also strengthen our bullpen by letting us start the season with Chris Narveson or Mark Rogers taking on the role Marco Estrada had in the bullpen to begin 2012.

 

Agreed, though, that Ryan Braun may have an issue with his signing.

[nate82]

The 2013 pitching staff looks a lot like the 2009 pitching staff minus Suppan.

[RobDeer 45]

Like someone said earlier, put the check book away, hang up the phone for a month and let's see what's left. If we can grab a couple high risk guys (coming off injury, bad seasons) that have potential, we now have something I'd be happy to go in to the season with. Let's roll the dice and see if we can come up with a young pitching staff, maybe get a guy to come out of no where, and see what we can do.

[torts]

I would think if the brewers were going to sign Karstens, Ryan Braun would suck it up and be the team leader and welcome a new player. I would hope he wouldnt tittybaby about the signing. that said, after watching Karstens the last couple years quiet a bit, i'd take a flyer on him for a Spring Training invite with a chance to make the team

[phnxcrew]

As much as I love the young pitching talent we have, add me to the group that thinks this season has a huge potential downside and a very slim potential for competition. I usually over value young pitchers and think they will all be great but at least 1/2 of Rogers/fiers/peralta/thornberg will completely tank if given a long look this year. That's not just a feeling, that's looking at any young, talented arms in the past (and those have mainly been thought of far superior to our guys)

[monty57]

As much as I love the young pitching talent we have, add me to the group that thinks this season has a huge potential downside and a very slim potential for competition. I usually over value young pitchers and think they will all be great but at least 1/2 of Rogers/fiers/peralta/thornberg will completely tank if given a long look this year. That's not just a feeling, that's looking at any young, talented arms in the past (and those have mainly been thought of far superior to our guys)

 

Right, which is why Melvin has a big decision:

 

-Do we spend more money and prospects, hampering our future, to slightly upgrade our chances this year? It seems to me the market is too expensive for the cost-cutting Brewers to buy enough new talent to really make a difference, so the only way they make a splash this offseason would be to trade away some of our few good prospects. As more and more teams get huge TV deals, I think the Brewers need as many guys playing for league minimum as possible to remain competitive into the future.

 

-Do we stand pat with a good offense and unproven pitching staff, allowing the big contracts to gradually fall off the books (starting with Hart & Gomez after 2013) before signing/extending more players to big contracts? It's early, but this appears the direction we're headed. We have talent, so we should be around a .500 team. With some luck, we could even squeak into the playoffs. This is a boring but safe way to play the offseason. My concern is that if we end up a middle-of-the-pack team, we haven't maximized the value of Hart's last year, as his value in trade would be greater than his value playing for a so-so team and then walking away.

 

-Do we trade some of the big contracts before they walk, perhaps lowering our chances to win this year, but strengthening our future while adding financial flexibility to fill holes in the roster? I still believe that with the system we have, we could make a quick turnaround with a few good trades. The Greinke trade was the start of it (too bad Marcum was hurt, as trading him would've helped). Trading players when they are entering the final year of their contract when your chances to win it all are slim allows you to stay younger and less expensive while maintaining good talent on the roster. In this scenario, phnxcrew's statement I referenced is a good thing. Some of the Brewer's young starters will fail, but some will succeed. By this time next year, we will have a lot of our questions closer to answered, as we will know how guys like Peralta, Rogers, etc performed in a full-season in the bigs, and the guys who pitched on the farm will have another year under their belt.

[RobDeer 45]

Well said Monty! I do agree that it's time to trade Hart, I just worry nobody will offer anything worth taking and Melvin will not just give him away (which he shouldn't). It's very much the way the Twins have done if for years! I've always said that they are what we should be emulating. Problem is they went against the "Twins way" when they got stuck with the Mauer problem. If he was not from the city, there is no way they give him the big contract. They would have traded him away for a huge load of prospects. Of course the whole state would have been calling for heads if they did that. Now they are several years away from getting back to where they were. Developing young prospects and then trading them before they get expensive, to make sure the farm system is healthy, is what we need to aim for.

[Ennder]

I would think that if we get off to a bad start we would trade Hart/Gomez mid season. Braun is a once in a lifetime type of player so I think Melvin is almost obligated to do whatever he can to put winning teams on the field while we have him. He creates a special window of competitiveness for us that we can't really waste with rebuilding.

[monty57]

The only way I can comprehend the smallest market in baseball going 10+ years without "wasting" some seasons rebuilding is to continually trade expensive vets with limited control for top young talent so that there is always a number of good players making league minimum on the roster, allowing us to afford a few expensive players (including Braun) on the roster and allowing us the capital (in both money and a fully-stocked farm) to fill holes on the roster through free agency or trade.

 

I don't see any way that we can just continue to extend all of our talented but expensive players indefinitely and fill in holes in the roster without ever going through a rebuilding phase when we have a limited payroll. Continually spending big money for players is the reason teams need rebuild periods.

 

Edit: Also, while you are probably correct in what is going to happen (Hart/Gomez only traded if we're out of it mid-season), both of their values drop dramatically after opening day, as the receiving team loses the ability to make the qualifying offer and receive draft compensation.

[reillymcshane]

The only way I can comprehend the smallest market in baseball going 10+ years without "wasting" some seasons rebuilding is to continually trade expensive vets with limited control for top young talent so that there is always a number of good players making league minimum on the roster, allowing us to afford a few expensive players (including Braun) on the roster and allowing us the capital (in both money and a fully-stocked farm) to fill holes on the roster through free agency or trade.

 

I don't see any way that we can just continue to extend all of our talented but expensive players indefinitely and fill in holes in the roster without ever going through a rebuilding phase when we have a limited payroll. Continually spending big money for players is the reason teams need rebuild periods.

Monty, this is exactly right. We simply can't always extend every guy - even if we want to. I think Tampa is the prime example of this. They've traded key guys like Delmon Young, Shields and Garza. They've let guys BJ Upton and Carl Crawford leave via free agency.

 

But they also just have drafted well (and not just with their top picks). I guess that's the key. For every guy they trade or let leave via free agency, they have replacements ready. Not all of them work out, but at least it's a plan.

 

Free agency for Tampa is rarely a big signing. But instead a one year deal on guys looking for a chance.

 

I think St. Louis does a good job as well. They use free agency more than Tampa does. But they draft well, and are constantly cycling in new guys.

 

The scary thing for the Brewers is comparing our system to someone like St. Louis. Our lack of impact bats, especially at the upper levels, is painful.

[RobDeer 45]

"The scary thing for the Brewers is comparing our system to someone like St. Louis. Our lack of impact bats, especially at the upper levels, is painful."

 

I think they concentrated on pitching for a few years because of the great offense we had in the majors. This could cause some offensive issues in years to come, but I'm hoping the pitching can carry us. We'll see I guess.

[TooLiveBrew]

"The scary thing for the Brewers is comparing our system to someone like St. Louis. Our lack of impact bats, especially at the upper levels, is painful."

 

I think they concentrated on pitching for a few years because of the great offense we had in the majors. This could cause some offensive issues in years to come, but I'm hoping the pitching can carry us. We'll see I guess.

They also traded the only impact bat in the system for 324.2 IP of Marcum. Meanwhile, the Jays still have Lawrie for at least 5 more seasons. Man, I hate that trade. The Brewers could've used Lawrie to bring in a solution for 6 seasons, and if that trade had been executed properly, we might not have any posts worrying about signing an overpriced vet FA SP this offseason.

[RobDeer 45]

Ya the Marcum trade is hard to chew on for its short sidedness. I still say it gave us a great season and legit chance to make a run at a ring. I also think if Marcum stays healthy, we would have gotten some young talent in return for him last year. All that said, boy, it would be great to have Lawrie or a young stud on our staff because of a smarter trade.

[jerichoholicninja]

The jury is still way out on the Marcum trade. Yes, Lawrie has an amazing 2011. But last year he had a .729 OPS. The only Brewers regulars that had a lower OPS was everyone they put at short stop and Rickie Weeks. Weeks was .728.

[TooLiveBrew]

But the point isn't whether or not he'll wind up being more or less valuable than the 325 IP the Brewers got from Marcum. It's that Lawrie could've been traded for a player under team control for far more than two seasons.

[RobDeer 45]

But the point isn't whether or not he'll wind up being more or less valuable than the 325 IP the Brewers got from Marcum. It's that Lawrie could've been traded for a player under team control for far more than two seasons.

 

And I have to say, the player had to be major league ready to handle that playoff season. And maybe not just ready, but ready to be a #3 type guy at least. Remember, with no Marcum that year, we probably don't make the playoffs.

[Tim_Unroe_Helped]

TooLiveBrew said:

But the point isn't whether or not he'll wind up being more or less valuable than the 325 IP the Brewers got from Marcum. It's that Lawrie could've been traded for a player under team control for far more than two seasons.

 

 

And I have to say, the player had to be major league ready to handle that playoff season. And maybe not just ready, but ready to be a #3 type guy at least. Remember, with no Marcum that year, we probably don't make the playoffs.

 

Isn't it true that Zack Greinke would not have waived his no trade clause if the Brewers didn't have Marcum? If that's the case, there is absolutely no way the Brewers make the playoffs in 2011.

[TooLiveBrew]

But the point isn't whether or not he'll wind up being more or less valuable than the 325 IP the Brewers got from Marcum. It's that Lawrie could've been traded for a player under team control for far more than two seasons.

 

And I have to say, the player had to be major league ready to handle that playoff season. And maybe not just ready, but ready to be a #3 type guy at least. Remember, with no Marcum that year, we probably don't make the playoffs.

I do remember that, believe it or not.

 

But the Marcum trade & subsequent value returned for the Brewers is a perfect example of why 'going for it' in any given one or two-year window is a really bad strategy. Another thing I remember after the Marcum trade went down is at least one MLB GM being (anonymously) quoted as being really surprised to see Lawrie dealt, and that he didn't even know Lawrie was available. Tells you a lot about how highly regarded Lawrie at least was at the time -- he was a prospect at least one other GM just assumed was off-limits.

[monty57]

I dislike the trade, but any speculation is just that. Sure we may have missed the playoffs in 2010, but maybe the stud young pitcher we got instead of Marcum would have taken us to the playoffs last year, and would have us sitting as the favorites to win the division this year. Or, maybe we still do make the playoffs in 2010 and the stud young pitcher doesn't have the Marcum meltdown and we make the World Series, so instead of raising our "Division Champions" banner in front of the World Series champs, we're raising the World Series banner in front of the downtrodden Cardinals.

 

Maybe if we didn't get Greinke we'd have Odorizzi ready to step into the rotation and we wouldn't have needed to focus on SS because we had Escobar. Maybe we would've traded Prince for multiple stud prospects, who would all be hitting their stride right now, so along with the stud pitcher we got for Lawrie, Odorizzi and the guys we have on the team right now, we'd also have a young ace or two from trading Prince, so we'd be locked in with one of the best teams in baseball for the next four or five years, essentially trading our division title in 2010 for multiple playoff appearances going forward. Or everything could've went wrong. It's a bird in the hand vs two in the bush.

 

There are a lot of ways it could've been played. Melvin's choosing to "open a window" got us a division title banner hanging in the rafters. It is also the reason we have the team/system we have and the payroll obligations that go along with it. It's the reason Attanasio/Schlesinger have cut payroll. We now have to look at where we are going forward. I dislike the Marcum trade, but we can't change it... all I can hope for is that Melvin continues to learn from his actions. I hate being in the position that we are with no bullpen, a need (or at least a perceived need) for a starting pitcher and no financial ability to fill those holes because our payroll is shrinking while prices are rising and most of our payroll for the next two seasons are taken up on a few players. I also hate that we've become spoiled as fans into thinking that we're going to raise payroll forever and that we should never think of trading "proven" for "prospect" unless it's a last resort (mid-season trade when we're out of it). The "window" stretegy may feel fun while you're in the "window," but it usually assures that when the window closes, you're left with either a fire sale or a period of mediocrity while you wait for contracts to expire and the gutted farm to rebuild.

 

I'm generally optimistic, so I still hang on that ray of hope that we can still avoid a prolonged downswing, but we can't make any financially foolish moves. Thankfully, the team seems to realize this as well, as Melvin is passing on big money, multi-year deals. Standing pat with the pitching we have is very risky, which is why I think the odds of winning the division this year are small enough that I'm willing to take a small step back this season by trading guys like Hart and Gomez in order to take many steps forward for the future with young inexpensive talent playing significant roles, thereby granting us financial flexibility to build a winning team around our core players.

[Ennder]

It goes both ways though. Maybe the young pitcher we get doesn't pan out like most of them don't. When you have a window to win you generally have to make moves for the short term. There is nothing wrong with somewhat mortgaging the future to try to go for it during the window that having Braun and Fielder together had created. We can nitpick the deals all we want and if you look hard enough you will find flaws with any deal but overall our GM has put us in a position to contend over a pretty wide window which is something the team hasn't had for a pretty long time now. I can't make any large scale complaints about things given that.

 

Most GMs seem to agree that the worst position you can be in is to have a mediocre team and that is what we have if we don't make the trades. A team that takes a perfect storm to make the playoffs but which will be good enough that it won't get great picks in the draft. That team would just be eating up Braun and Fielder's time for no good use. When you are in that situation you either go into rebuild mode or you go into 'go for it' mode. Unless this crop of pitchers really steps up this year we will be in that same situation next year and that time I think we'll probably end up back in rebuild mode since we don't have the prospects or money to enter 'go for it' mode.

[monty57]

It goes both ways though. Maybe the young pitcher we get doesn't pan out like most of them don't. When you have a window to win you generally have to make moves for the short term. There is nothing wrong with somewhat mortgaging the future to try to go for it during the window that having Braun and Fielder together had created. We can nitpick the deals all we want and if you look hard enough you will find flaws with any deal but overall our GM has put us in a position to contend over a pretty wide window which is something the team hasn't had for a pretty long time now. I can't make any large scale complaints about things given that.

 

Oh, I know, which is why I ended the speculation part with: "Or everything could've went wrong. It's a bird in the hand vs two in the bush. There are a lot of ways it could've been played. Melvin's choosing to "open a window" got us a division title banner hanging in the rafters."

 

I've seen the Marcum trade debated ad nauseum and one side either wishes the trade wasn't done or that we'd have received a younger pitcher with more team control instead of Marcum, while the other side counters by saying we made the NLCS and that makes the trade worth it.

 

The main reason to study history is to learn from it, so basically I was trying to say that what's done is done, and we now need to assess the current situation and focus on the future. To me, the current situation is that the Brewers have a some big money contracts which eat up most of our declining payroll, and we are in a period where most other teams' payrolls are increasing, leading to an overall rise in player salaries. We have a few glaring holes, notably the bullpen, possibly the need of a veteran starter, and while our farm is improving, and I like to pitching that's developing, we have a lack of position prospects in the system, as well as a lack of "can't miss" prospects.

 

The past was fun, but if the last paragraph illustrates our current reality, what is the best option moving forward. Reality is real, so working in that reality what will make us the best team going forward? Does it make sense to push for a better team in 2013 and how would that effect 2014 and beyond? Most discussion is on signing a free agent, but is that in our best interest or not? Does is make more sense to trade away some players? Should we look at extending anyone, whether it be an expensive contract to Hart or Gomez or an inexpensive contract to someone like Segura or Peralta... and if the latter, at what point should that extension be offered?

 

All in all, what is the basic plan on how to develop the team. To date, Melvin started by building from within, and then jumped to the "window" strategy. Is that going to be our methodolgy going forward, and if so at what point are we currently sitting in that cycle? Or, as TV deals are once again pushing Milwaukee into "small market" status, are we shifting gears to go to more of a Tampa/Minnesota (pre-Mauer deal)/Oakland model of continually cycling talent?

 

Now is really a good time to decide which road we're taking, as the landscape of baseball is changing with the TV deals, and the window Melvin opened has closed significantly. To topic of this thread, what we should do with the 2013 pitching staff should be determined by our long-term plan. If we intend to grow our pitchers from the farm, they eventually need to play at the MLB level. That would seem to point to 2013 being a good year to let the young pitchers pitch. Some will succeed and some will fail. Those who succeed will greatly help future Brewer teams. Those who fail will be replaced by the growing group of pitching prospects we're developing. In the not-too-distant future, we should have a fully homegrown staff (starters and relievers), and probably even be in a position where we're trading away some pitchers as we won't have room for all of them.

 

If we're looking at keeping the window open as long as possible, then we should bring in some veterans and stick Rogers in the pen. We may (or may not) be better in 2013, but next season we will have the same questions as to whether we can count on the "young" pitchers. So, in using the Marcum trade as a learning tool, should we be the 2010 Brewers, trading prospects for a short-term fix, or the 2010 Jays trading a vet for good prospects?

[brewmann04]

Go with the young arms and fill the Bullpen with veterans.

[Ennder]

I don't think he started with a building from within strategy though. I think he started with a rebuild the fanbase strategy. He didn't trade Sexson for a bunch of upside guys, he traded him for a bunch of guys that could put some wins on the team. He traded Carlos Lee for established big league players to put wins on the field. He didn't hold out on the young players trying to maximize their years on the major league roster, he rushed almost every single one of them to the majors. Everything Melvin did in his first seasons was aimed at rebuilding the fanbase. Nothing he did seemed aimed at building from within.

[DR28]

If we were to sign 2 of Farnsworth, Frasor, Rauch and Gonzalez... I want Rauch and Gonzalez then go with this Staff...

 

Rotation

Gallardo

Estrada

Peralta

Rogers

Fiers

 

Bullpen

Axford

Henderson

Gonzalez

Rauch

Badenhop

Kintzler

Narveson

 

I still would like Marcum in the #2 slot behind Yo but doubt that happens... Then I would put Fiers in AAA and go with the Rotation of:

 

Gallardo

Marcum

Estrada

Peralta

Rogers