General thoughts on the franchise.

[bill hAll Star]

In your suggestion a while back that we should have gone with more long-term pitching to build around and less free agent-signing (to the principle, I agree, this is how I would build a team), I still feel like unless we had incredible management and luck, we'd be sitting in the Royals' shoes right now given 20/20 hindsight. And I was definitely a guy that didn't like the path we were going down in ~2010 or so when we started putting more chips on the table.

 

I think it has to do with drafting/development:

Braun/Holliday

A-Ram/Beltran

Wainwright/Gallardo

Lohse/Westbook and/or Garcia

Hart/Furcal

Molina/Gomez

Motte/Axford

Freese/LuCroy

Weeks?

 

I am not saying those entities above are equal, but they are similar dollar/year amounts and in several of the cases, if you asked me before 2012 or 2013, they all seemed like somewhat similar entities.

 

Then you have this:

-Segura

-Aoki

 

vs.

 

-Craig

-Jay

-Adams

-Descalso/Kozma are more helpful than any utility players we have in the system

-Carpenter

-Rosenthal

-Miller

-Wacha

-Lynn

-Lyons in reserve

-A lot of other valuable entities

 

 

I'm not really trying to argue that this has been a good idea, but pre-2013 or in some cases, pre-2012 if you compare a lot of the slashes I put above, there are similarities.

 

2012: A-Ram out-produced Beltran and is signed through age 36 (2014) where Beltran is signed through 36 (2013).

2012: Braun out-produced Holliday. Holliday is signed through 36 (2017). Braun is signed through 36 (2020). Both contracts could soon be albatrosses with a bit of value from each.

2012: Gallardo pitches to his career norms and is on a fair deal through 29 (2014). Wainwright is coming off Tommy John and has a below-average year after missing the previous season. Wainwright is signed through 2018 at 19.5 per. Gallardo is now heading towards his Tommy John.

2011/2012: Gomez and Molina both are "defensive stalwarts that provide some offensive value" both signed to fair deals and have blown up into MVP candidates at some point in 2012 into 2013.

2013: Hart/Furcal are once valuable, oft-injured players.

2013: Lohse vs. Garcia + Westbrook. The money is equal and given Lohse is slightly better than Westbrook and Garcia has some longstanding injury issues, Lohse + some replacement level pitcher probably evens there.

 

 

You get the idea from here. The Cardinals ARE a bigger market. The Cardinals are way more intelligent. I'm not suggesting all luck, but:

1. The Cardinals have drafted and developed way better than the Brewers and that is the major difference.

2. The Cardinals are on the upswing (Beltran, Molina, Wainwright) where the Brewers have a downswing (Weeks, Gallardo, Aramis, Braun, Hart) whereas the Cards only have Holliday and Furcal down.

 

To me, the difference is that the Cardinals have drafted and developed way better than the Brewers. That is the major key, because they've been able to provide OK bullpens and tremendous starting pitching depth. They've paid 3 years, 35 million to a mid 30s pitcher (Jake Westbrook) just like we have.

 

Finally, the Brewers have some issues (again this goes back to minors system as well as head-scratching GM-ing) where they are playing horrendous options like Betancourt, where the Cards get replacement guys like Descalso and on an everyday basis they have Craig, Carpenter, etc.

 

My point is that I can't think of the Cardinals making many more long-term investments in pitchers via trade recently. Or if they did, it was a while ago and they unearthed Wainwright out of unexpected territory. The difference from 2011 until now is that the Cardinals have had a steady stream of replacements, where the Brewers have had incredibly negative value players outside of both teams' top 5 or 6 player core costing $60 million.

 

I think both GMs have proceeded similarly since 2011, however, the Cards have had a much better farm system. The only blame is that you could say that Melvin should have known that coming into one or both of the last 2 seasons. However, I do think that the farm system was such garbage that I'm not sure it could have been remedied, and I think the Brewers have had the absolute worst-case scenario this year. I think if healthy and productive (meaning no Yuni), they are hovering around .500. I'm not asking for a consolation prize, but the warts of this style would not be so present, and the current situation wouldn't be so depressing.

[bill hAll Star]

I'm sorry, that was an incredibly long post. I'm just trying to note that while in general, I would not build like the Brewers have the past 3-4 seasons, I think the Cardinals incredible system is keeping them afloat +5 games for that and +5 more for being on an upswing in their bigger names while the Brewers are a bit down.

 

I think that is why we see all of our warts. We have had such a horrible system over the past few years, bad replacement player decisions, and this season a lot of bad luck with Braun/A-Ram/Hart/Gallardo where I noted the Cards also have money tied up in similar players that are on an uptick.

 

I am not trying to measure some sort of success out of this for the Brewers, rather note that the Cards have done a lot of the same things recently, but they've kept a steady stream from the minors, mostly without selling off MLB pieces or flipping prospect bats for long-term arms. They've been smart about who they've signed in the majors but have a steady stream of great minor league players at all times. That's the major difference.

[Fear The Chorizo]

TLB, should have edited the start of my last post on this thread - after going through that exercise on 2014 payroll obligations, it became apparent to me that they absolutely need to find a way to gain more payroll flexibility via trades this year/offseason, and they need to bite the bullet and go through a few down seasons in order to do so. I started out my post not necessarily thinking it was criminal going into the 2013 season, but I would argue it would be criminal to keep the status quo going into 2014 now that this season is lost and contending next year would rely on even more things to break the Brewers' way than they were hoping for this season.

 

This all was directly a product of going for it in 2011 and then trying to sustain that success by signing Ramirez and Lohse in the following offseasons. Those two players owed all that money were signed AFTER the 2011 season. That's what makes those decisions look even worse now.

[LouisEly]

This all was directly a product of going for it in 2011 and then trying to sustain that success by signing Ramirez and Lohse in the following offseasons. Those two players owed all that money were signed AFTER the 2011 season. That's what makes those decisions look even worse now.

I'll dust off my soapbox too here, and you know where this is going. Hindsight is 20/20, but go back and look at that 2011 team. The only player on that team with more than 200 PA's over the age of 30 was Kotsay (255 PA's, hardly a key player); the only starter on the team over the age of 30 was Wolf, the only significant bullpen arms over 30 were Hawkins and Saito. This was a team that won 96 games with the core of the team under the age of 30; this was not an old team on the decline and the verge of breaking down. The holes on the team were clear - SS and 3B, and DM replaced a -0.5 WAR SS with a 1.7 WAR SS and replaced a -0.9 WAR 3B with a 2.7 WAR 3B (who performed to a 5.6 WAR). The move to sign Ramirez was a very rational one, it did not cost the team a draft pick, and those two moves should have yielded a 101-win team baseline allowing for plenty of regression at other positions including the loss of Fielder and still make the playoffs.

[logan82]

You assume, I believe incorrectly, that the 2011 team had 96 win talent.

[Outlander]

Don't have to assume, they were a 96 win team based on actual wins.

[chadomac]

They were a 96 win team with Casey McGehee and Yuniesky Betancourt playing 3B and SS most of the year, which makes me think they could've won even more with decent alternatives.

[logan82]

They were a 96 win team with Casey McGehee and Yuniesky Betancourt playing 3B and SS most of the year, which makes me think they could've won even more with decent alternatives.

They may have won more in 2011 with better alternatives but they were probably at a point where they would beging to see diminishing returns.

 

Don't have to assume, they were a 96 win team based on actual wins.

 

That's not how it works. Teams outplay or underplay their talent level all the time. 96 is overestimating the talent level of the 2011 team. Overestimating your talent is what leads to years like the 2012 and 2013 Brewers.

[Fear The Chorizo]

To say the signing of Ramirez the following offseason should have led to the team exceeding its 2011 win total is pretty silly, especially considering that the 2012 Brewers didn't have Prince Fielder like the 2011 team had every day. Plus, the 2011 bullpen outperformed even overly optimistic projections. Much the same bullpen drastically underperformed in 2012, which was probably the biggest reason they didn't seriously contend for the playoffs. In 2011, the Pirates, Astros, and Cubs were very bad teams that the Brewers got to feast on within their division for almost 1/3 of their regular season games - which probably inflated their record by 5 wins compared to NL East and West contenders. The Reds couldn't pitch in 2011, so they scuffled, too. They don't have that luxury anymore, as the Pirates are good, the Cubs are building towards being respectable, and the Astros play in the AL West.

 

logan's talking about how gm's evaluate a roster's talent level based on projections. throw the actual records out the window from one season to the next when trying to predict what future records will be. The 2011 Brewers team wasn't a 96-win team talent-wise, but they exceeded their win projection by having alot of breaks go their way and capitalizing on 3 weak teams in their division. The 2013 Brewers team is what happens when a team drastically underperforms projections - they were a low 80's win projection team going in, but injuries, slow starts from a few key players, and horrible starting pitching have totally buried them.

[Thurston Fluff]

That's not how it works. Teams outplay or underplay their talent level all the time. 96 is overestimating the talent level of the 2011 team. Overestimating your talent is what leads to years like the 2012 and 2013 Brewers.

 

It may not work that way but it appears to me you are using actual records to say the 2012 and 13 team's talent level was overestimated. You can't have it both ways.

[brewcrewdue80]

BRef and the Pythagorean for 2011 had the Brewers at 90Wins.

2011 Bullpen had 2 Pitchers with an ERA over 4 (both 4.08) who pitched over 25innings.

That bullpen was lights out that year and it corresponded with a record better than expected.

 

2012 Pythagorean had the team at 85wins.

The Bullpen had ONLY 2 pitchers with an ERA Under 4 who pitched over 25innings.

 

Look at Baltimore last year. Pythagorean had them as an 82win team. They won 93. The Bullpen was filled with guys under 3ERA. You add Manny Machado(5WAR now) vs. Betemit (.8WAR). Davis(4.1WAR now) vs. Reynolds(-.5WAR).

That would mean Baltimore in theory with replacing our SS/3b situation to their 3b/1b situation should win 102+games this year no?

Baltimore once again is getting under 4ERA from their RPs. and are 2games better than Pythagorean suggests.

 

I'm just not following the Brewers in 2012 being a 100win team because they were a 96win team last year as nobody will suggest Baltimore is a 102win team this year since they won 93games last season with replacement level 1b/3b that now have AllStars starting at.

 

Pitching is where a team can have luck help them overachieve. Look at Washington this year. Last year lights out best team in NL. this year? Storen,Haren, and Detwiler stuggle compared to expectations from last season.

 

The 2011 team had the best pitching performances they could ask for from Wolf,Grienke,Marcum, and Axford. Maybe Wolf,Axford,Marcum survived on luck and health and being in a peak ability for a period of their life. They exceeded their talent for 1 season. For Wolf and Axford they underachieved on their talent in 2012. Grienke met it again. Marcum wasn't healthy.

2011 was a year when everything went right which is how I view Washington's 2012. Washington has as good or better talent on the 2013 roster compared to 2012 but they certainly aren't looking like they will win as many games as 2012.

[EdgarDiazRocks]

The 2012 Brewers were bad? Somebody needs to back and study the 2002 Brewers. Now THAT is a bad team.

 

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

[reillymcshane]

The 2012 Brewers were bad? Somebody needs to back and study the 2002 Brewers. Now THAT is a bad team.

 

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

Thank you for that painful, but funny, reminder.

[Thurston Fluff]

The 2012 Brewers were bad? Somebody needs to back and study the 2002 Brewers. Now THAT is a bad team.

 

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

Thank you for that painful, but funny, reminder.

 

I guess if anyone wants to know how far we've come we went from calling a 106 loss season bad to considering a season we barely broke .500 bad.

[paul253]

From MLB trade rumors:

 

"Morosi says the D'Backs and Brewers have discussed Axford, Rodriguez, and Jim Henderson, while Knobler says the Brewers have told teams Henderson won't be dealt."

 

I realize it may just be posturing but if it is true Jim Henderson won't be dealt then it is clear Doug Melvin hasn't learned his lesson. The reason he wouldn't be dealt would no doubt be the fact that he is cheap and under team control for awhile yet. A few years ago they were in the exact same situation with John Axford and look what happened. Axford's value now is much lower than it was a year and a half ago. Henderson may be cheap but he is a 30 year old reliever with less than two years of major league success. If someone wants him and is willing to either provide a decent prospect or provide a better prospect in a package deal then you do it. You don't hang on to 8th inning pitchers when you are on pace to finish 26 games under .500.

[RightFieldCoder]

I know I made a handful of posts in the 11-12 offseason that the Brewers were a 90 win team that lucked into 6 extra wins. Everyone thought we would roll out the same team and win 96 again. I tempered expectations by saying the same team could have had bad luck and could have only won 84.

 

Although having a .500 record is way better than losing 106, but I'm still waiting for that championship. Making the playoffs 4 times in 43 years doesn't help accomplish that unless you follow a Marlins type tear down/build up and you have luck. Looking at the talent in the system, it will be at least 3 years before we have enough talent again. I'm pretty sure it will take much longer than that.

[trwi7]

In almost all cases I'd rather lose 106 games than be .500. Unless the division is really bad or the division winners are strong and the potential wildcard teams are weak you're most likely not getting into the playoffs with a .500 record. At least with 106 losses you're at worst picking in the top 5 and more than likely picking in the top 2. Yes prospects in baseball are more likely to flame out and don't help for a couple of years but I'd much rather have the chance to add one of the elite prospects in the draft along with getting one of the highest bonus pools both for the draft and internationally to help add potential star players to your MLB roster on the cheap for several years.

[SenatorShriv]

If we're going to consider the 2002 team the benchmark for a bad team then I'm going to say that the state of the franchise is solid. However, I have grown accustomed to a team that can compete and isn't the laughing stock of MLB. If we over performed in 2012 then we are at least under performing at a similar if not greater ratio this year. I don't think that the state of the big league team is in shambles. We're not going to the WS next year, but we should at least be playing good baseball and staying in the conversation without major overhauls and high profile free agent signings. That is more than most teams below .500 can say.

 

That being said, the lack of impact talent in the minors scares me. I want to go back to the playoffs and I don't see the current squad the arsenal assembling in the minors getting us there. I'm honestly torn between the fire sale and rebuild for 2016 strategy and the strategy of plodding along, hoping that some pieces fall into place and then striking while the iron is hot.

[SoupTown]

Sorry to take this way off the current theme, but re RR and Weeks. RR says that Weeks played a whole lot better when Scooter was up - not because of the 'heat', but because Weeks needs some time off - more than the average bear.

 

So, what do we now have. We have Weeks playing day in and day out - and playing like rubbish. RR says he will play great with a bit of platooning. But does RR platoon him. No! Question: why would a manager say how great a player is with some time off... then not give him time off. Answer: because our management are a change up short of the full quid.

[logan82]

That's not how it works. Teams outplay or underplay their talent level all the time. 96 is overestimating the talent level of the 2011 team. Overestimating your talent is what leads to years like the 2012 and 2013 Brewers.

 

It may not work that way but it appears to me you are using actual records to say the 2012 and 13 team's talent level was overestimated. You can't have it both ways.

I am not having it both ways. Both of those teams underperformed compared to their talent. Our talent was overestimated for the beginning of 2012 and they underperformed compared to their talent while the 2011 team overperformed. The truth was somewhere in the middle.

[torts]

The 2012 Brewers were bad? Somebody needs to back and study the 2002 Brewers. Now THAT is a bad team.

 

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

 

while 2002 had the most losses in franchise history... I feel the 2003 team was worse... just... look and TRY to remember that rotation if you can....... ugh, that was so awful.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/MIL/2003.shtml

 

and only 2004 can compare in offensive inability like 2002...

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/MIL/2004.shtml

[Fear The Chorizo]

Hoping that big Wily's complete game shutout last night is a sign of promising things to come from him the rest of this season. Even with as bad a season it's been for the Brewers, the right combination of deadline trades combined with the continued big league establishment/development for Peralta, Segura, Hellweg, etc. could really help brighten the outlook moving forward.