General thoughts on the franchise.

[rondoman]

Except for the fact that Francisco is NOT A FIRST BASEMAN!

[rondoman]

Already this season, five different players have manned first base, four of them for the first time ever in the Major Leagues: Gonzalez, Betancourt, Lucroy and now Francisco, a third baseman by trade who made his Brewers debut against the A's on Tuesday, a little more than 24 hours after he was traded to Milwaukee from Atlanta. Francisco didn't make an error in Tuesday's 4-3, 10-inning win over Oakland, and went 0-for-2 with a walk. Betancourt pinch-hit for him in the ninth and later delivered the game-winning hit.

 

"Of course I'm a little nervous, having never played it," Francisco said through a translator. "I'm hoping I'll get the nerves out and calm down."

 

Francisco briefly played first base in the Minor Leagues and in the Dominican Winter League, where he played alongside new teammates Jean Segura, Wily Peralta and Alfredo Figaro (he is also close with Carlos Gomez). But before Tuesday, all 880 1/3 of Francisco's defensive innings in the Majors had come at third base.

[brewcrewdue80]

So, checking out the Stats and Carlos Gomez leads the team in HRs at 13. That would mean approximately 25 to finish the season.

 

Would it set a precedence to lead the team in HRs with under 25 to finish the season? I looked up through to 2002 and Jenkins led the team with 27 in 2004 as the lowest number of HRs to lead the team.

 

If Gomez manages to get hurt(which wouldn't be surprising with this season) and nobody reaches 20HRs is that potentially a ML record?

[sheetskout]

If Gomez manages to get hurt(which wouldn't be surprising with this season) and nobody reaches 20HRs is that potentially a ML record?

 

 

No, and it wouldn't even be close.

 

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/recbooks/rb_hr7.shtml

[brewcrewdue80]

If Gomez manages to get hurt(which wouldn't be surprising with this season) and nobody reaches 20HRs is that potentially a ML record?

 

 

No, and it wouldn't even be close.

 

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/recbooks/rb_hr7.shtml

 

Yeah, I kinda figured something like that would show up. an early 1900's Stat.

 

Is there a way to change it to lowest ever since 1955 let's say? Not including the Strike shortened season.

[homer]

If Gomez manages to get hurt(which wouldn't be surprising with this season) and nobody reaches 20HRs is that potentially a ML record?

 

 

No, and it wouldn't even be close.

 

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/recbooks/rb_hr7.shtml

 

Yeah, I kinda figured something like that would show up. an early 1900's Stat.

 

Is there a way to change it to lowest ever since 1955 let's say? Not including the Strike shortened season.

 

Not sure if this is what you wanted, but these are the last two teams without a 20 HR hitter (edit: I think this is correct. If someone wants to do a search on BR and double-check that would be cool. I will try tomorrow if I have time) :

 

Kansas City in 2006:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/KCR/2006.shtml

 

Mark Teahen led the team with 18

 

and Detroit in 2002:

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/2002.shtml

 

Randall "Don't Whack Our Weiner" Simon led the team with 19.

[Thurston Fluff]

Except for the fact that Francisco is NOT A FIRST BASEMAN!

 

Where has he been playing for us? All caps doesn't make your assertion a fact.

[RockCoCougars]

I think that there were some Cardinal/Astros teams in the early-mid 80's that may not have had a guy with 15 homers.

[SoupTown]

So now our third baseman Juan makes more than an error a game costing us losses because ( according to RR) he is not used to playing third anymore. He has been playing out of position at first so much.

 

So I assume now he has no position.

 

Now THAT is great organizational asset management.

[Invader3K]

I don't know why they can't just play Halton at 1B most games at this point. See what he can do for next year possibly.

[Patrick425]

If Gomez manages to get hurt(which wouldn't be surprising with this season) and nobody reaches 20HRs is that potentially a ML record?

 

 

No, and it wouldn't even be close.

 

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/recbooks/rb_hr7.shtml

 

To me this is why Babe Ruth is a complete legend and was possibly the most dominating player in any sport. One example, 1920, Ruth hits 54 HRs, the next closest is George Sisler with 19.

[JohnBriggs12]

I've seen enough of Juan Francisco to understand why two other organizations gave up on him. It's not his "all or nothing" approach that bothers me so much. He's probably capable of hitting 30 HR albeit hitting around .225. But he doesn't seem to play hard. The Met telecast pointed out where he just lazily ran down to first on a ground ball. Apparently Roenicke tolerates that slovenly play. So that's on him too.

[3and2Fastball]

I think there is a slight chance that Juan Francisco could turn around his game similar to the way Carlos Gomez did, but unfortunately it isn't likely. Lack of effort was never one of the problems in Gomez' game

[reillymcshane]

Regarding the state of the franchise, right now the club has around $87 million slated for next year's payroll. That includes resigning Axford, Estrada and Badenhop at prices similar to 2013. I guessed Aoki's salary to be $3 million. That does not include resigning any of our impending free agents (Hart, K-Rod, Gonzalez, Yuni).

 

That means if we stay the course, we probably aren't going to be making any major additions in 2014. We could clear some salary by cutting Badenhop and Axford. That would allow a modest free agent signing (or even two), but no game changers.

 

Thus, we would be expecting to win next year with much the same team as this year. 1B is a question mark, but one of Gamel, Morris or Francisco would likely have to get the job. And we'd have to count on rebound seasons from Braun, A-Ram (and hopefully Weeks). The big question would be the starting rotation. You'd simply have to count on guys getting a lot better. Gallardo and Estrada would need to rebound. Peralta would have to mature. Maybe Thornburg and/or Nelson would step up.

 

I'm just not seeing that happen. I know it's possible, but there are too many 'ifs'. And then there's a lack of depth at most spots. Especially starting pitching. An injury or two can just kill a team like ours.

[monty57]

I don't know why they can't just play Halton at 1B most games at this point. See what he can do for next year possibly.

 

Because he's "unproven." With very few exceptions (like bringing Segura up to give the fans immediate satisfaction from Greinke trade), we'd rather play "proven bad" guys out of position, or re-sign "proven good" guys to mammoth deals than let a non-elite "unproven" guy get a shot.

[Thurston Fluff]

I'm just not seeing that happen. I know it's possible, but there are too many 'ifs'. And then there's a lack of depth at most spots. Especially starting pitching. An injury or two can just kill a team like ours.

 

That is always going to be the case. In 2011 we had even less minor league depth. If injuries would have hit that team like it is now we would have been royally screwed as well. We got a little lucky with health and made a good run. I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect good all around minor league depth and a playoff caliber roster on a $100 million max budget.

 

So I assume now he has no position.

 

Now THAT is great organizational asset management.

 

How exactly is playing him at multiple positions an organizational asset management failure? WE are playing for the future so doesn't it make sense to see what players who might be part of the future can do? How does one learn if he is capable of moving around unless they move him around? What does losing a game by finding that out now hurt in the grand scheme of things? Would it be better organizational management to leave him at first or not play him at all and learn nothing about his future potential as a utility infielder?

[monty57]

The discussion of Francisco at third got me thinking about Ramirez. Of course we have to shop him, but I don't think we'll get much (even salary relief) from a guy with a knee that could put him down for an extended period (maybe even a whole season) at any time. This latest injury should be a slap in the face to any team that thought about trading for him, and I would be really surprised if we get any decent offers for him this season.

 

If we find that we aren't going to get anything in return in trade, I hope the Brewers bite the bullet and Ramirez has surgery immediately. That way, he could potentially be healthy for an offseason trade, or if nothing else, would be 100% going into next season. If we're going to pay him $20MM for his remaining year, we might as well get regular play out of him.

 

In that case, we should be playing Francisco at 3B every day, and Halton at 1B every day just to see how they hold up with every day playing time.

[Thurston Fluff]

I think part of the problem is he doesn't need surgery as much as extended rest. If he really needed surgery and was just putting it off until winter they'd probably do it. But if he needs extended rest to get back to 100% I don't think you can just sit him for the rest of the season. But the point in well made. There is no reason to keep pushing a hobbled Ramirez to play as many games as he can possibly handle at this point. Let him rest or even DL him for 15 days. Then play him 4 times a week instead of 5 or something along that line.

[TheCrew07]

I think part of the problem is he doesn't need surgery as much as extended rest.

 

He's probably got something floating around in there or maybe torn cartilage, something that causes swelling and he can play through as long as he can tolerate the pain. If it's a PCL or MCL then I'd question why they'd have him out there gimping around because the more unstable the knee gets, the more at risk the ACL is, and Ramirez is no spring chicken. If the problem is one of the lesser knee ligaments then why not sit him for a month to 6 weeks and let him get completely healthy? What's the point of trying to play through something this season? I'd much rather have him healthy through his most expensive year (2014) then try to limp him along hoping to sell him off.

 

He'd still have to pass a physical to complete any trade and if he's not able to do that I just don't see the point. He already has established trade value if he's healthy, why not just get him healthy?

[Thurston Fluff]

If the problem is one of the lesser knee ligaments then why not sit him for a month to 6 weeks and let him get completely healthy? What's the point of trying to play through something this season?

 

I'm glad they took a shot at turning this around before they sat him. Once the season started they did what they felt they could do to keep in the playoff hunt. It expect them to do that every season. That said, it was tried and not in the cards. Time to move on. Sit Am-Ram until totally healthy, even if that isn't until next season and play Fransisco and Halton more.

[TooLiveBrew]

Regarding the state of the franchise, right now the club has around $87 million slated for next year's payroll.

Given the overall lack of quality on the roster, that's practically criminal in terms of the GM world.

[TheCrew07]

Once the season started they did what they felt they could do to keep in the playoff hunt.

 

I don't want to even debate the playoff hunt stuff again but you're on pretty thin ice if that's your main justification for playing an injured player in April and May. I can see at the end of the season or through the playoffs, because there is no more time, but it's a long season. This was a spring training injury, the organization had plenty of time to do it the right way.

 

The situation was exasperated by playing 3 SS on the IF and having no offense out of big offensive positions, we've also beat this into the ground but the simple fact that 3 SS were playing on the IF with Weeks slumping badly was horrible roster construction. If you don't like the minor league options, go get someone other than retreads like Yuni B who already played his way out of town and Gonzalez who only had 1 year of above average offensive production in his career, which was was 2007 when he was 30 years old.

 

I'm not a fan of baseball players trying to play hurt, there's too much twisting in baseball to have guys playing on bad ligaments, or trying to hit with finger and wrist problems when they can barely hang onto the bat. Baseball just doesn't lend itself to playing through injuries, production is going to suffer and risk of further injury is going to go up. Players will certainly have to play through owies, bruises, sore muscles, etc. but shouldn't play through legitimate injuries such as strains and pulls, the injuries won't heal if constantly aggravated.

[Thurston Fluff]

I don't want to even debate the playoff hunt stuff again but you're on pretty thin ice if that's your main justification for playing an injured player in April and May. I can see at the end of the season or through the playoffs, because there is no more time, but it's a long season.

 

What ever you personally thought their chances were to begin with they thought it was worth trying to play for a playoff spot. I thought if everything went well it was possible as well. Considering we have to win enough games early to make late games count I don't think taking the chance he could playing on his knee was wrong. I think we had a better chance to win if they kept Ramirez in. It didn't turn out that way. But all you can do is try to figure the odds, play accordingly and see what happens. Unless you are saying we would be in the playoff hunt without him what makes it wrong to field your best team possible early in the season? Don't they count?

[Fear The Chorizo]

Given the overall lack of quality on the roster, that's practically criminal in terms of the GM world.

 

I would argue that it isn't criminal - the problem is there isn't enough cheap talent to fill the rest of the roster out.

 

I did a very crude analysis of 2014 payroll commitments of every MLB organization. The following includes club options, player options, and mutual options, but does not include any arbitration or pre-arby amounts. obviously the actual figures will be different based on some roster decisions, but it gives you the general idea of what each team has to plan to shell out in 2014 assuming none of the contracts are traded off their books.

 

this is what each team is committed to paying in 2014 salary, followed by the number of players it's owed to:

 

 

Dodgers 180 Million to 14 players

Phillies 114 Million to 8 players

Angels 112 Million to 10 players

Blue Jays 110 Million to 14 players

Tigers 108 Million to 6 players

Yankees 100 Million to 6 players

Red Sox 100 Million to 13 players

Giants 95 Million to 11 players

Rangers 94 Million to 10 players

Nationals 86 Million to 10 players

Cardinals 85 Million to 9 players

White Sox 80 Million to 8 players

Reds 78 Million to 10 players

Dbacks 76 Million to 11 players

Brewers 75 Million to 9 players

Rockies 70 Million to 8 players

Indians 62 Million to 7 players

Cubs 58 Million to 8 players

Mets 54 Million to 5 players

Orioles 52 Million to 8 players

Royals 51 Million to 7 players

Twins 48 Million to 7 players

Mariners 46 Million to 4 players

Braves 45 Million to 5 players

Pirates 41 Million to 7 players

Athletics 40 Million to 5 players

Padres 30 Million to 6 players

Rays 24 Million to 5 players

Astros 9 Million to 2 players

Marlins 6 Million to 2 players

 

These totals also include dead contracts, where teams are paying salary portions of players traded away. Overall, many teams are in a similar position to the Brewers from a salary commitment standpoint compared to how many players that commitment covers. The problem for the Brewers is there isn't much cheap, pre-arbitration talent in the organization that will make a big impact in the short term, especially compared to other organizations in similar financial shape. That's where I consider the Brewers and White Sox to be almost mirror images of one another moving forward - teams with aspirations to contend in 2013, fell flat on their face, little impact talent in the farm systems, veterans that could be tradeable for value if health and contract issues weren't factors, both having more questions than answers at this point with no clear way out of the wilderness.

 

Other things that stand out include the craziness that new TV money has brought to bigger market clubs, how ridiculously low the Astros and Marlins commitments are compared to the rest of baseball, and how much higher the average payroll in baseball will be once each organization fills out their roster with arbitration and other free agent signings.

[TooLiveBrew]

First, thank you for doing all the digging that went into your post. It's a good read, and just because I'm dusting off my soapbox doesn't mean that I didn't appreciate it.

 

Other things that stand out include the craziness that new TV money has brought to bigger market clubs

And this context is why having $75-ish million guaranteed to 9 veterans is criminal. The Brewers are MLB's smallest market, and have a complementary tiny TV payday. I have no real problem with the Braun contract, and obviously deals like Lucroy's, Gomez's, & Gallardo's aren't bad. But when you're topping off that cake with guaranteeing about $66M to two players in their mid-30s... that's awful team-building. The Brewers simply cannot sustain the way in which this current mess of a team was constructed. Over the past season & a half or so, monty57 has made excellent post after excellent post about this very impending doomsday of sorts.

 

It was never sustainable, and the Brewers are so many pre-arby impact players away from being a good team that even a mediocre to good farm system wouldn't make for a very sunny picture. They very realistically are going to need to find at least three good SP options over the next season or two if they want to contend.

 

Yeah, 2011 was a blast, but 2013 & the not-improving-anytime-soon-without-major-trades future is directly due to it. This is the future that was mortgaged. Then, you have leadership at the club feeling for whatever reason that a Aramis Ramirez from ages 34-36 was a must-sign -- if you were going to add this guy, it should've been as a rental in 2011 when the team was viably contending & 3B was a black hole. Then let some other team pay in FA for what he used to be able to do, while his body starts to fairly predictably break down as he gets into his mid-30s. My feelings on the Lohse signing put my annoyance about the Ramirez deal to shame. Just indefensible.

 

And again, it would all be easier to take if the economic fantasy land that Attanasio & Melvin were operating in had actually been reality. But context is very important... context is everything.

 

[/rant]