So, what are the Brewers doing....besides nothing...

[brewtank34]

 

This really doesn't make sense. You're basically saying that if we have one guy have an MVP caliber season, and then 5 of the remaining offensive starters have all star caliber seasons, AND the rotation is all at least above league average, with Gallardo performing at an all star level, you'd consider that an 85 win team? I realize the bullpen was bad last year, but they'd almost have to fall into an incredible vortex of bad luck to be that bad again this year. Either you're assuming the bullpen will be historically bad (again), or you're undervaluing exactly what an 'all star' level performance really is.

 

Not an 85 win team a 90 win team. I still believe in 90 wins gets you into the playoffs even with the added 2nd wildcard. Yes the bullpen is going to be bad again as I don't see much of an improvement over last years bullpen. It is possible that they won't be as bad as last year but that bullpen is going to hurt the Brewers again.

 

Not sure how anyone can predict this. Last year this time, we were thinking our BP was one of the best in the NL and the least of our worries. This year could be entirely different or it could be the same. BP's are crazy like that. I like what ATL is doing to their BP, but again, it could go south very quickly for them as well. BP's are a crap-shoot.

[Ennder]

Last year this time, we were thinking our BP was one of the best in the NL and the least of our worries

 

Speak for yourself. There was no reason to think we had a great bullpen last year. I didn't expect it to be epically bad or anything but it really lacked depth going into the season and there wasn't a ton of upside there either. As for the Pirates they aren't an 81 win team much less an 85 win team on paper. I think this current Brewer team is probably around an 80-82 win team which puts them on the edge of a playoff race. We still have a really good offense and a lot of potential for pitching. If the young starters produce better than I expect we can be an 85+ win team. It is unlikely we will ever have a team that projects at 90 wins, that just isn't realistic expectations. You need a team with the absolute best young talent (Rays a couple years back) or with loads and loads of established vets (like the Dodgers) to project to 90.

 

The super early Cairo projections have the Brewers at 78 wins but making the playoffs 24% of the time. That feels about right to me. If you can get to a true talent level of 80ish wins you will find a way into the playoffs a significant portion of the time because the actual results are so high variance.

[RockCoCougars]

I still think that we are going to see a makeover in the bullpen. Melvin is just not biting on multi-year eight figure deals for the likes of Mike Adams. There are plenty of guys out there who will end up available on one year.

[brewcrewdue80]

Okay, the whole 85win prediction? Team won 83games last season. Worst bullpen. Worst Weeks/Morgan combo first half of season. No Grienke in final half which is how it stands now. To say this team is only at 80wins and then say basically everyone has to play at 100% their capability to win 85-90? I think if everyone plays to 100%capability Brewers win 115games. No team gets 100% capability from all 25 on their roster throughout a season though. I just don't see why this team is listed at 80wins when the Entire #1 in NL Offense is back? And in what should be a set lineup from day 1. Your ACE is there. And all the other young pitchers who helped spark a season ending run are there that took a team from 12under .500 to 4 above? in final 66games.

Any projection right now with a pitching staff the Brewers have should be in a +/- of 18games! so if the Cairo projects to 78 that means 62-96wins. There is no way to determine Peralta's pitching forthcoming. Fiers? Is he that under 2era stretch pitching or that 5+era stretch? How many Wins +/- is that on a under 3era vs a 5+era? Then you put the 5th which is who at this point? The fact its a question mark has folks wanting a FA pitcher like Dempster/Jackson. Adding a pitcher like that probably changes that +/- from 18-13.

Just remember 11wins blown after the 8th inning this season. Convert them all and you have 94wins.

[Oxy]

Okay, the whole 85win prediction? Team won 83games last season. Worst bullpen. Worst Weeks/Morgan combo first half of season. No Grienke in final half which is how it stands now. To say this team is only at 80wins and then say basically everyone has to play at 100% their capability to win 85-90? I think if everyone plays to 100%capability Brewers win 115games. No team gets 100% capability from all 25 on their roster throughout a season though. I just don't see why this team is listed at 80wins when the Entire #1 in NL Offense is back? And in what should be a set lineup from day 1. Your ACE is there. And all the other young pitchers who helped spark a season ending run are there that took a team from 12under .500 to 4 above? in final 66games.

Any projection right now with a pitching staff the Brewers have should be in a +/- of 18games! so if the Cairo projects to 78 that means 62-96wins. There is no way to determine Peralta's pitching forthcoming. Fiers? Is he that under 2era stretch pitching or that 5+era stretch? How many Wins +/- is that on a under 3era vs a 5+era? Then you put the 5th which is who at this point? The fact its a question mark has folks wanting a FA pitcher like Dempster/Jackson. Adding a pitcher like that probably changes that +/- from 18-13.

Just remember 11wins blown after the 8th inning this season. Convert them all and you have 94wins.

 

The logic and points made in this post are spot on. People put so much faith in projections around here it's ridiculous. The most "projectible" part of the Brewers next year is a veteran laden offensive unit that should be near the top of the league. The pitching staff could do just about anything. There is enough talent that they could be very good all around, and there is enough youth that they could be horrible. I kind of think it's kind of exciting and is the very reason I enjoy sports so much.

[Kelbysdaddy]

Just be glad We didn't trade for dickey.

[endaround]

Just be glad We didn't trade for dickey.

 

Yeah because having an awesome pitching staff would suck

[mothershipconnection]

Yeah because having an awesome pitching staff would suck

 

Mostly, giving up a top-20 prospect + your #3 and getting a 38 year-old would suck.

[sveumrules]

Seeing as the Brewers don't have a top 100, much less a top 20 prospect, I guess we don't have to worry about Doug trading for guys like Dickey. I don't care how old the guy is he has the 13th best WHIP and 11th best ERA in all of baseball over the last three years combined.

[pogokat]

WE HAVE A TOP 20 PROSPECT?

 

obviously kidding...but we are on a different path than the teams going crazy right now...

 

truthfully, the vast amount of cash has ben thrown at over 30 free agents who wouldn't have helped the team...i wouldn't mind a reliever or two still, but that may still happen..

 

the only trade i'm jealous of was what the Rays got for James Shields, other than that, I think Stoic Melvin has done well to sit on his hands.

[MNBrew]

As happens every year, some of the crazy-FA-money teams will do well & look good. And then others will be lousy & look bad. . . I, too, am only jealous about the Shields trade b/c I think he's a difference maker (and I think Hart-for-Shields would've been the basis of a pretty fair trade while still retaining good payroll flexibility).

 

While I'd like to see all our problem spots fixed (bullpen, mainly), Melvin's played it much smarter than some by staying on an even keel and not doing anything too rash just to feel better NOW about the roster (and have a greater chance of buyer's remorse and/or less payroll flexibility over the rest of the offseason & heading into ST). There will be plenty of decent guys available for better prices and you only need to get a 1-2 of them to feel much better about the offseason than some may feel right now. . . .

 

Patience is the necessary virtue & Doug Melvin knows how to play this game. That the right (or any) additional players come to MIL isn't a given, but the team's still improved (mainly by subtraction -- hallelujah! -- but also by adding 'Hopper to the 'pen) without having compromised their prospect pool or payroll.

[monty57]

This is the natural outcome of utilizing the "window" strategy (build the roster to open a "window" and then go all in to win it all during that window). Eventually, the "window" strategy will lead you to a cliff, as spending money and prospects to go all in leaves you in need of re-building your money and prospects. Melvin built the team to win over the past few seasons, and now we're naturally going into the cycle of rebuilding/retooling.

 

We have a lot of big, expensive (for the Brewers) contracts on the books, leaving us with limited financial flexibility to fill holes. It would be revisionist history to try to determine what would've happened and where we'd be if we had taken another path. What's done is done, and we've got a couple of playoff appearances under our belt. Now we need to look at where we are going forward.

 

We could either do what apparently is the wont for the author of this thread... continue to try to go all in to see if we can force a crack in the window to sneak in for another year. That would either cost money or prospects (hurting our future, pushing the cliff back a little, but making it deeper) for a little better chance at winning this season.

 

We could stand pat. The offense takes up a huge portion of our payroll, so there is talent there. Some games could look ugly, but the ride could be fun, and if everything goes well we could pull off a playoff appearance if some of our untouted but over-acheiving starters continue to prove the pundits wrong. Through natural attrition over the next couple of seasons, some of the big contracts which are limiting our payroll flexibility now will fall off the books, and if we can draft well we will naturally re-build our farm as long as we don't trade the best pieces away.

 

Or, we could potentially forego a little this season to help keep the drop off the cliff from being so painful. Trading guys like Hart and Gomez would probably make us take a step back this season. However, the benefits would be numerous: (A) Most importantly, we would get really good prospects in return, hopefully making this a quick turnaround (B) We would save around $15MM by playing pre-arby guys Gamel and Schafer instead of Hart and Gomez. This could be used to help in other areas or saved for the future © We would give MLB experience to MLB ready guys like Schafer, Gamel, Rogers, Peralta, etc. determining which will be parts of the future and which falter (D) There is a definite chance that we could be as good this year after trading Hart & Gomez because of the talent we get back and the available money to fill in other holes (bullpen) with actual talent. I'm not looking at trading irreplaceable pieces. Hart is an average-to-slightly-above-average 1B and Gomez is someone many wanted to DFA prior to 2012.

 

It would be great to have unlimited resources and simply buy our way out of any problems. That's not reality. At this point, if I were given the choices above, the last choice for me would be option #1. If the market's there (and it looks like proven vets are bringing back good return in trade so far this offseason), I'd trade Hart and Gomez for good young players. If it's not there, given the prices FA's are getting, then I'd "do nothing" (as this thread calls it) by simply picking up a couple of so-so bullpen arms and trying to find a veteran SP cheap at the end of the offseason. The last thing I'd do is pay current market prices for a FA starter and bullpen arms, which wouldn't really do much this year and would simply block players and take up payroll in the future.

[JohnBriggs12]

It's very easy to fall into thinking that offseasons have winners and losers. Other than the top guys which are out of the Brewer's reach, most of the guys moving around are not difference makers. If not for an historically poor bullpen performance last year, the Brewers would be coming off of 2 straight playoff appearances. They return the bulk of the the roster that produced the most runs in the NL. They led the league in HR and SB. They should be near the top again next year in both categories. They've made several "addition by subtraction" moves and they likely will make some additional moves between now and opening day. Are there guys that are no longer available that would be good fits? Absolutely. But that doesn't mean they can't find other guys that fit. Plus their payroll is such that they can consider a big in season move.

[Ennder]

Any projection right now with a pitching staff the Brewers have should be in a +/- of 18games! so if the Cairo projects to 78 that means 62-96wins

 

Yeah that sounds about right since they gave 18 wins but a 24% chance to make the playoffs, it probably is more like +/- 20 games. Last year's team wasn't really much different than the one that won 96 the year before and we saw a 13 game swing in wins. The 2012 team actually scored more runs, it was the pitching and most significantly the bullpen that was the difference.

[DHonks]

why pay top dollar for guys that 1) don't want to play here unless overpaid and 2) aren't very good?

 

If we want to wait till early February, we can probably land a pitcher that can contribute at the right price. The teams that sign free agents early in the offseason either are targeted by a player/agent or are willing to overpay

[Kelbysdaddy]

Just be glad We didn't trade for dickey.

 

Yeah because having an awesome pitching staff would suck

 

No, giving maldonado and probably our top 4 prospects for a 39 year old pitcher, who We had before, would suck.

[RobDeer 45]

I would say predicting bullpen quality is about the hardest thing to do when it comes to a team.

 

Ender, can you explain how we didn't have depth or upside with our bullpen last year? I could be wrong but I would think most people would say we did have depth and our closer the year prior was lights out. Just curious what you meant.

 

No way would I want us to have grabbed any of the players that have been grabbed so far.... would not have been the right move for the cost.

[wisniewski]

No way would I want us to have grabbed any of the players that have been grabbed so far.... would not have been the right move for the cost.

 

You think 2/8 for Burnett was a bad cost move? I think that's been one of the best value signings of the FA period. (JMO)

[monty57]

No way would I want us to have grabbed any of the players that have been grabbed so far.... would not have been the right move for the cost.

 

You think 2/8 for Burnett was a bad cost move? I think that's been one of the best value signings of the FA period. (JMO)

 

I agree, and while it sucks to nickel-and-dime everything (no one likes sticking to a reduced budget), $4MM is around 5% of our probable opening day payroll, and money will probably be even tighter next year as it's Ramirez's balloon payment year. Is it a wise use of funds to spend even $4MM/year for two years on a free-agent reliever?

 

Melvin's in a tough position this year, as his payroll is being slashed by around 20% while many teams are seeing huge payroll increases. But, he built the boat he's sailing.

[RobDeer 45]

No way would I want us to have grabbed any of the players that have been grabbed so far.... would not have been the right move for the cost.

 

You think 2/8 for Burnett was a bad cost move? I think that's been one of the best value signings of the FA period. (JMO)

 

 

That's a valid example for sure! Maybe my previous statement was a bit aggressive. I just don't know if it's a wise move for us, that's all. I'd rather save the little extra money we have and grab a starter (as I've stated before, I'm all for going after a couple high risk, low cost guys to see if we can strike gold to go along with our young guys). Just my opinion as well

[Ennder]

Ender, can you explain how we didn't have depth or upside with our bullpen last year? I could be wrong but I would think most people would say we did have depth and our closer the year prior was lights out. Just curious what you meant.

 

We had Axford and KRod and a bunch of question marks going into last season and those two had their own warts, there was no quality depth at all. I searched for posts about it going into last year but this is all I could find.

 

viewtopic.php?f=63&t=27699&p=772458&hilit=bullpen#p772458

 

We lost guys from the 2011 bullpen and just hoped that someone would emerge to replace them but we didn't exactly have a lot of raw talent. Loe, Dillard, Parra, Braddock were all guys I had no faith in and the guys behind them seemed pretty low upside for young bullpen arms. Veras seemed like just a filler arm as well. I figured we would struggle a lot in games that didn't go KRod - Axford and if one of those guys got hurt we would have real problems. The fact they both stunk for much of the year really brought that lack of depth into play. I never understood how people looked at the bullpen as a strength going into last year, I just didn't expect it to be a weakness. It was just a really mediocre bullpen on paper, one that shouldn't blow many saves but should have some problems getting to the 8th inning. Of course we ended up with exactly the opposite problem so what do I know~.

[RobDeer 45]

Ya I see where you are coming from Ender. I never have a good feeling on our bullpen until I see them in action for a couple months, but even then the swings can be wild. Last year was a great example.

[ewitkows]

Has any team put an offer out to Krod? I haven't seen his name anywhere.

[reillymcshane]

Ender, can you explain how we didn't have depth or upside with our bullpen last year? I could be wrong but I would think most people would say we did have depth and our closer the year prior was lights out. Just curious what you meant.

 

We had Axford and KRod and a bunch of question marks going into last season and those two had their own warts, there was no quality depth at all. I searched for posts about it going into last year but this is all I could find.

 

viewtopic.php?f=63&t=27699&p=772458&hilit=bullpen#p772458

 

We lost guys from the 2011 bullpen and just hoped that someone would emerge to replace them but we didn't exactly have a lot of raw talent. Loe, Dillard, Parra, Braddock were all guys I had no faith in and the guys behind them seemed pretty low upside for young bullpen arms. Veras seemed like just a filler arm as well. I figured we would struggle a lot in games that didn't go KRod - Axford and if one of those guys got hurt we would have real problems. The fact they both stunk for much of the year really brought that lack of depth into play. I never understood how people looked at the bullpen as a strength going into last year, I just didn't expect it to be a weakness. It was just a really mediocre bullpen on paper, one that shouldn't blow many saves but should have some problems getting to the 8th inning. Of course we ended up with exactly the opposite problem so what do I know~.

I also remember Melvin talking about the lack of financial flexibility with the bullpen last year. K-Rod, Parra, Loe and Veras all had guaranteed contracts last year. These are our 2-5 bullpen guys. There was a lot of money tied up in them, and he had to give them a long leash. Our payroll was maxed out, and he couldn't just cut a guy and add more salary. He had to work with what we had and hope they'd rebound.

 

I think this year's pen will be a lot of 1st and 2nd year players. We'll roll the dice with them. If they fail, back to Nashville and give another a try. We still might add a veteran or two, but only if it works financially for us.

[umphrey]

We really need to fill out our bullpen. If we don't, it might even eat into our starting pitching depth if we decide we need Thornburg or Narveson or Peralta in the bullpen.