Aoki Trade Value

[TheCrew07]

Maybe in the end it's as simple as angles.

 

How many different points of view and possible paths are you willing to take in your view? How wide is your view? Just the MLB club? Just the MLB budget? Just the minor leagues? The division? The NL? MLB in general?

 

What Monty, TLB, I, and many others have been talking about is about moving 1-3 somewhat expendable pieces to build a foundation around which we can sustain success. When have you that view you are someone who's trying to take in and account for as many different variables (angles) as possible. You want to build something which sustainable and competitive for the longterm, this year doesn't matter anymore than next year, or any other year. There will be up and downs with injuries and performance setbacks, but a strong foundation will keep the team competitive.

 

Many posters here just simply obsess about the MLB team, or the position players, or just want to watch the best possible baseball for their season ticket package. That's fine but the problem is when we start talking about organization building if you aren't willing to step out and make an effort to take a wider of view of what's happening to the organization, around the division, around the league, and eventually around MLB then it's impossible to have intelligent discussion. Why? Because you aren't seeing the entirety of the picture, and without that context it’s extremely difficult to understand what’s truly being proposed. That’s why even after hundreds of posts the retort when suggesting trading whatever popular player for a position of greater need is typically along of the lines of, “you just want to trade everyone”.

 

For example, the argument simply cannot always be the same clichés like “prospects fail” when the free agent veteran players the Brewers can afford to bring in tank at a similar rate, but at a much higher cost. Since 2008 I’ve been saying the exact same thing about our pitching, then I said it again when Marcum and Greinke were acquired, but yet somehow myself and other who share that view get labeled with the “revisionist history” card. How does that work when we’ve been saying the same things for all these years? Even now that the bottom fell out and we have relievers starting, how about acknowledging that there was probably something to what we being discussed.

 

Maybe posters don’t take the time to read those long well thought posts, but if that’s the case, reading a post like that is too much effort, then why even comment on the ideas? How can you possibly understand what someone is saying if you just skim that kind of post?

 

For the most part I'm done discussing this stuff, because by now it should be obvious that the way the team operated had a serious cost. We made the play-offs twice, we won 1 play-off series. I don't believe in shifting blame around, in the past I've taken everyone responsible to task for their part in what's been happening... Jack Z, Reid Nichols, Bruce Seid, Doug Melvin, Mark A... they're all responsible for the good and the bad, why does it matter who's to blame for how much? I was a huge Melvin fanboy for years until I sat down and took an honest look at the organization. I didn't set out to "hate" anyone in the the Brewers front office, they are my team, they are our team, but when I set out on a different path it was no longer possible to view those people in the same manner I had previously.

 

After all these years of the same cliched repsonses being thrown back it's obviously not worth the effort to sit down and type out posts about organization building. There are so few people in the middle that the discussion has degenerated to the point of extremism coming from both sides. I happen to believe that history has proven the Brewer's strategy wasn't sustainable, and ultimately wasn't even that all that successful. Being better than we were for 20 years and having 2 nice runs shouldn't have been the end-game in my opinion, which is why I've argued so vehemently against the organization's policies for so long. Either you're willing to see it or you aren't, but either way this discussion has been stale for years and it's time to move on.

[Outlander]

Being better than we were for 20 years and having 2 nice runs shouldn't have been the end-game in my opinion, which is why I've argued so vehemently against the organization's policies for so long. Either you're willing to see it or you aren't, but either way this discussion has been stale for years and it's time to move on.

Melvin and company were not anticipating an end game of 2 nice runs they were looking for a World Series and almost had it if not for a hot Cardinals team. There are still things that you can't plan for and they were very close to winning it all. I don't consider you revisionist history with Greinke or Marcum I just consider you wrong because even with hindsight I would say they turned out to be good moves that almost won them a World Series, which would have been worth it. In the process they got a franchise type player and a couple of pitching prospects so in my opinion that was a great job because Melvin gave them a chance to win it all and then got young talent in return.

[And That]

Maybe in the end it's as simple as angles.

 

How many different points of view and possible paths are you willing to take in your view? How wide is your view? Just the MLB club? Just the MLB budget? Just the minor leagues? The division? The NL? MLB in general?

 

What Monty, TLB, I, and many others have been talking about is about moving 1-3 somewhat expendable pieces to build a foundation around which we can sustain success. When have you that view you are someone who's trying to take in and account for as many different variables (angles) as possible. You want to build something which sustainable and competitive for the longterm, this year doesn't matter anymore than next year, or any other year. There will be up and downs with injuries and performance setbacks, but a strong foundation will keep the team competitive.

 

Many posters here just simply obsess about the MLB team, or the position players, or just want to watch the best possible baseball for their season ticket package. That's fine but the problem is when we start talking about organization building if you aren't willing to step out and make an effort to take a wider of view of what's happening to the organization, around the division, around the league, and eventually around MLB then it's impossible to have intelligent discussion. Why? Because you aren't seeing the entirety of the picture, and without that context it’s extremely difficult to understand what’s truly being proposed. That’s why even after hundreds of posts the retort when suggesting trading whatever popular player for a position of greater need is typically along of the lines of, “you just want to trade everyone”.

 

For example, the argument simply cannot always be the same clichés like “prospects fail” when the free agent veteran players the Brewers can afford to bring in tank at a similar rate, but at a much higher cost. Since 2008 I’ve been saying the exact same thing about our pitching, then I said it again when Marcum and Greinke were acquired, but yet somehow myself and other who share that view get labeled with the “revisionist history” card. How does that work when we’ve been saying the same things for all these years? Even now that the bottom fell out and we have relievers starting, how about acknowledging that there was probably something to what we being discussed.

 

Maybe posters don’t take the time to read those long well thought posts, but if that’s the case, reading a post like that is too much effort, then why even comment on the ideas? How can you possibly understand what someone is saying if you just skim that kind of post?

 

For the most part I'm done discussing this stuff, because by now it should be obvious that the way the team operated had a serious cost. We made the play-offs twice, we won 1 play-off series. I don't believe in shifting blame around, in the past I've taken everyone responsible to task for their part in what's been happening... Jack Z, Reid Nichols, Bruce Seid, Doug Melvin, Mark A... they're all responsible for the good and the bad, why does it matter who's to blame for how much? I was a huge Melvin fanboy for years until I sat down and took an honest look at the organization. I didn't set out to "hate" anyone in the the Brewers front office, they are my team, they are our team, but when I set out on a different path it was no longer possible to view those people in the same manner I had previously.

 

After all these years of the same cliched repsonses being thrown back it's obviously not worth the effort to sit down and type out posts about organization building. There are so few people in the middle that the discussion has degenerated to the point of extremism coming from both sides. I happen to believe that history has proven the Brewer's strategy wasn't sustainable, and ultimately wasn't even that all that successful. Being better than we were for 20 years and having 2 nice runs shouldn't have been the end-game in my opinion, which is why I've argued so vehemently against the organization's policies for so long. Either you're willing to see it or you aren't, but either way this discussion has been stale for years and it's time to move on.

 

I think that's a yes for trading Aoki.

[MNBrew]

TheCrew07, you make many points with which I agree. I'm sure you've already given the answer at length, but I'd rather not go read through more pages of more threads than I have to ask this 4-part hypothetical question: Given the current state of the Brewers -- the MLB team and the entire organization -- if you were in Doug Melvin's shoes,...

 

- which "1-3 somewhat expendable pieces" would you be looking to move (or would you have been looking to move prior to August 1st)?

- what would constitute sufficient value to acquire in exchange for those 1-3 somewhat expendable pieces (in other words, who would you expect to get in return)?

- which current MLB players AND current Brewers prospects would you view as the core around which you're building?

- how would you propose to improve the deficiencies of their player development program as it currently exists?

 

I've read many of your posts about organization building. It's a solid and well thought-out philosophy. I like a lot of what you're saying. In asking those questions, I'm not trying to challenge or patronize you, not at all. To help me visualize it how that philosophy might look if it were implemented, I'm simply curious about specific examples of how you'd carry out that plan -- what it might actually look like.

[monty57]

TheCrew07, you make many points with which I agree. I'm sure you've already given the answer at length, but I'd rather not go read through more pages of more threads than I have to ask this 4-part hypothetical question: Given the current state of the Brewers -- the MLB team and the entire organization -- if you were in Doug Melvin's shoes,...

 

- which "1-3 somewhat expendable pieces" would you be looking to move (or would you have been looking to move prior to August 1st)?

- what would constitute sufficient value to acquire in exchange for those 1-3 somewhat expendable pieces (in other words, who would you expect to get in return)?

- which current MLB players AND current Brewers prospects would you view as the core around which you're building?

- how would you propose to improve the deficiencies of their player development program as it currently exists?

 

I've read many of your posts about organization building. It's a solid and well thought-out philosophy. I like a lot of what you're saying. In asking those questions, I'm not trying to challenge or patronize you, not at all. To help me visualize it how that philosophy might look if it were implemented, I'm simply curious about specific examples of how you'd carry out that plan -- what it might actually look like.

 

I'll try, and if the mods want to move this to a new "How would you build the organization" thread, please do so, as this is getting really off topic.

 

I have to start with the premise that we are too far gone for this to be a quick fix. It's kind of like a family in bankruptcy saying "maybe we should stop going out to eat every night." That's great, and it will help, but they should've done that before they got into bankruptcy. Now some "pain" may be necessary in order to get back on track. In my opinion (and Melvin made this comment, so I have some hope), every decision now should be in an attempt to build a good franchise from the bottom up, hopefully leading to sustainable success at the MLB level several years down the road.

 

So, if I took over today looked at the franchise top-to-bottom and wanted to build from there:

 

Starting with #4 (deficiencies in player development), it seems that there is a lot going wrong with the Brewers in this area, so major changes would need to be made. Therefore, a lot of heads would have to roll. I would look to the teams that seem to be "doing it right" like Tampa, Texas, St Louis, etc and see if I could find a good person who was blocked from becoming Director of Player Development in their organization. I would make a very good offer to that person to bring them over, and give them a decent amount of discretion to pick their staff and implement their rules for player development, scouting, draft prep, etc. We should get some good picks over the next few years, so it is imperative they aren't screwed up. As an outsider, it seems to me that the Brewers have put every spare dollar into the MLB payroll, not leaving extra funds for things like player development. I'd reverse this somewhat, as the MLB payroll would be lower over the next few seasons, I'd put a lot of money (dumping the $20MM we owe Ramirez and the $29MM or so we owe Lohse would be a good start) into getting heavily into both the domestic and international markets (scouting, signing and developing). A couple of "finds" in the international market would be as meaningful to the franchise as making good draft picks and developing them properly. Getting both these areas up to par could help us attain sustainable success.

 

For #1 & 2, which kind of go together, we're in a bad situation. Whether through injuries, bad contracts, age, bad play or whatever, there weren't many deals to be made that could have really changed the franchise. (My angst is that they should've moved guys like Hart and Ramirez last year, and they'd be in much better shape now if they had, but lamenting bad moves of the past is not the point of this post). I hoped Gallardo might be that "franchise altering" move, but his loss of velocity seems to have lowered his trade value to the point that the Brewers are better off holding onto him in hopes that he regains his trade value by this offseason or next year's trade deadline. Aoki should have been traded, because I think Melvin could have brought back a high-upside guy at the lower levels that we all would have fallen in love with. But really, since there's no way Segura or Braun was getting traded, Gomez was probably the only guy who could have been traded to bring back meaningful talent. Other than that, we'd have a couple of salary dump trades (Lohse and maybe an August trade of Ramirez) that wouldn't bring back any talent, but would free up a lot of money, and some minor trades of relievers. I am surprised that Axford and Gonzalez weren't dealt, even if the return was small. In any move, I would look for high upside talent, even if it meant going for players in the low minors to get it. The K-Rod deal did this, and I believe that if Melvin were given the thumbs up, he could make some more good deals, but that would mean trading guys who actually have trade value, and not requiring "MLB ready" guys back, as requiring "MLB ready" means we'd get less upside in return for immediate gratification (I think that was the fatal flaw when we looked to move Hart & Fielder a few years back).

 

So, short answer would be trade Aoki for as high-upside a player as we could get, even if he was in the the low minors (someone who could be better than Aoki if he reaches his potential, but has the risk of not reaching the potential), trade Gomez for a some top prospects who have a good chance of being core players for many years, dump Lohse and Ramirez for a minor amount of talent, and a lot of salary relief, much of which would be used on forward-looking upgrades like improving scouting & player development, and trade Gonzalez and Axford for some minor leaguers who project to have a few years' success at the MLB level in the future.

 

Question #3 is a really important one, and is probably more difficult than it should be, because two obvious names should be Braun and Segura. However, the Braun PED situation and Segura's seeming reluctance to sign an extension fog the issue. Personally, I'd hold onto Braun and just let him play. The fans will either accept him or not, but I think time will heal the wound, and trading him when his value is at it's lowest doesn't seem prudent. There will be a vocal group that will scream for his head, so there is a chance he could be traded, which would probably set the franchise back even further. I really hope Segura extends. However, as I felt with Fielder, if he is not going to extend (which is his right, and I support his decision if he wants to go year-to-year for maximum dollar), then we have to look at him as someone who will be a Brewer for a few more years, and then should be traded when he's in his arby years. That makes him an integral piece for the short term, but not a "core player." Lucroy is a good player signed to a good contract, but he shouldn't be extended beyond his current contract (which goes to 2017, when he's 31), so we should probably look to move him in 2-3 years. As I mentioned before, I think Gomez should be shopped because I don't think we'll be good during his contract, and with the season he's having, we should be able to bring back a couple of Top 100 prospects for him (guys who could be long-term core players in the near future). Peralta could be a core player, but he has to prove he's got his control down before I'd extend him. Therefore I really don't know what our core is going forward. We've got some big question marks, some stopgaps, and very little in the minors who look to be core guys in the future. Since I believe in building a "malleable" core, this is troublesome, and needs to be addressed ASAP. We need a good group of 20-somethings playing for little money, willing to (and worthy of) extend their Brewer career to eight seasons while they're still in their pre-arby years, and we don't have any (unless Segura signs).

 

Note that had we done less drastic moves in the past, we would not need to make as drastic of moves going forward. Now I feel that we're in a position where unless we make some drastic moves, both in the "management" and "personnel" areas, we will flounder around hoping to get lucky and reach .500, much like we did through the late 80's and 90's. It's a shame really, because we recently went through this, and just five or so years ago, we looked to be on the "sustainable success" path. Unfortunately, it takes a lot longer to build a franchise up than it does to tear it apart.

[LouisEly]

There is a "General Thoughts on the Franchise" thread.

 

And you can't dump a ton of money into signing domestic and international players - there are limits on the bonus pools for the draft and for signing international free agents, and if you go over those limits you forfeit draft picks. You are aware of this, right?

 

Now, back to Aoki. How about we wait until after the winter meetings are over, when all 29 teams are possible trade targets for Aoki and not just the 12 that are in the playoff hunt (or the 7 that don't have their division or a wild card spot sewn up already)?

[JohnBriggs12]

While I can appreciate the passion you guys have that drives you to write short novels on the travails of the Brewer franchise, my gut response is that you are suffering from serious overreaction syndrome or SOS. How many games have the projected 3-4-5 hitters missed? Look the team backslid last year after having lost a franchise cornerstone in Fielder. Yeah they aren't in the same position they were in 2011. But this isn't the 62 Mets. It's talent base is in the vast middle range. Teams in that range compete and secure playoff berths one year and the next they struggle. Someone compared this year to the efforts in the late 80's and 90's. A short history lesson would reveal that under today's playoff scenario, some of those teams would have qualified for the postseason. In 92 they couldn't counter the then wealthy Blue Jays, who ramped up their playoff push by getting David Cone. Those Brewer teams fell victim either to a. a cheap owner or b. the economics of the game back then. After the 92 season, Molitor and Bosio left for greener pastures and the Brewers nosedived.

 

The Cubs backed up their truck because their management had saddled them with horrific contracts that were going to take years to extricate themselves from anyway. Other than possibly now Braun, the Brewers aren't hindered by such deals. They can and should rebuild on the fly and not let one rather fluky season determine their future. The Cubs also have the ability that once they get what they consider their cornerstone players to the big leagues, they can delve into the premier FA market to insure success. The Brewers for the most part are permanently locked out of that market meaning the only way they can turn a group of solid young talent into champions is to do what they did to get Greinke and focus on a couple years.

[MNBrew]

I think there's excellent validity to TheCrew07's (and others') viewpoints (thanks, Monty, for elaborating, though trading 6 MLB starters is more of a tear-down than moving 1-3 tradeable commodities), but I'm also at least as inclined toward the lines of thinking that LouisEly & JohnBriggs12 are presenting. To wit:

 

- Organization-building from the bottom up is undebatably essential. The Brewers definitely must improve on their drafting & developing. Their future is is rough shape if they don't have that to build on.

- I also think that improvement there & keeping the MLB team competitive are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

- The Marcum & Greinke acquisition trades didn't gut the farm system, let alone in a way from which they haven't recovered -- after all, Odorizzi is the only one of those 5 prospects who, this year, has been in the minors this year still on his ascent to the majors. So almost certainly none of those 5 guys would be in the minors for the Brewers by now, either. Rather, in those two deals, they skimmed the cream off the top, and that ended up revealing a rather flat mug (pun intended) in terms of the Brewers' farm system. That's not Melvin's fault, but Seid/Nichols & all those under them, as well as perhaps some elevated or at least painfully obvious degree of the "some prospects just don't develop" phenomenon.

- To lead the charge in terms of player development, I wouldn't be opposed to getting the right national crosschecker or someone like that from the Cardinals or Tampa Bay, with other teams like Texas & Oakland & maybe Arizona next on my list.

- If it were making a couple select moves that could net a good prospect influx (quality over quantity), brought about by moving just the right pieces off the MLB roster in trades, I think that's logical, especially if it's Aoki or Gomez, though my gut would say to try for Aoki first because his production is more easily replaceable. I sure like Aoki a lot, but he'd be a valuable piece for a contending piece.

- I'd favor trading bats and avoid trading pitching unless it's the right piece at the right time for the right return. In the end, good pitching usually trumps good hitting. Reasonable FA bats are easier to acquire than valuable FA pitchers.

[monty57]

And you can't dump a ton of money into signing domestic and international players - there are limits on the bonus pools for the draft and for signing international free agents, and if you go over those limits you forfeit draft picks. You are aware of this, right?

 

You are aware that when the Brewers won the Aoki bid, they had never seen him play because they don't scout Asia, right? You realize that this is because of money, right? You realize that there are a lot of good players in Asia, right? You realize that when you spend money in one place, you can't spend it elsewhere, right? What you're looking at is throwing big money at the guys everyone knows about. What I'm looking at is developing a system to find and develop the guys that everyone else doesn't know about.

 

The Brewers have decided to spend that money on their MLB roster, limiting their chances of acquiring good international talent. Opening academies and sending scouts all over the world is pretty expensive, but it can be well worth the money... if you choose to spend the money on forward-looking projects, that is. Unfortunately, the team doesn't see immediate gratification for this (fans don't buy tickets now because some guy is watching kids play in Japan), and the Brewers under Attanasio are all about immediate gratification.

 

trading 6 MLB starters

 

Axford will be too expensive to offer arby, so he'll likely be a free agent anyway. Gonzalez is going to be a free agent. Trading these guys won't affect the team going forward, and this year is not worth worrying about.

 

So the players I looked at that count are:

 

(1) Aoki, who I think could bring back a pretty good prospect, and I'd shoot for as high of a ceiling as possible, probably meaning getting someone in the lower minors. I think Aoki's production could be adequately replaced from the mix of Schafer, Gindl and Davis. Sideways step at the MLB level, with a big help to the farm.

 

(2) Lohse, who I have said all along is very likely to regress over his contract. I feel that trading him will free us from having to pay him to be a bad starter/long reliever/dfa candidate in two years. Not everyone believes this, but I think it unlikely that he'll defy age the way some people seem to expect.

 

(3) Ramirez has a knee injury that has hampered him all season. Knee injuries don't generally just go away without surgery, which could cause him to miss a significant portion of the year he has left on his contract. If we don't trade him, we'll owe him $20MM to probably be a part-time, hampered player next year, and we will potentially pay him to get knee surgery and sit out the season. Of course, other teams know this, so we'd have to dupe the free-spending Dodgers, or potentially an AL team who thinks he can handle DH'ing. If not for the perennial chirping of "but we're a playoff team, so we can't trade anyone without ruining our team," we could've traded him last year for Eovaldi, and we'd be much better off right now and going forward. That move might have made even me a bit optimistic. Now we just need to find a way to rid us of this horrid contract, which was structured in a future-breaking deal because we had to "go for it" in 2012 and we didn't have any money (there's that money problem again).

 

(4) Gomez. I think the other moves are no brainers, and this is really the only head-scratcher. Gomez is young and signed through his prime. He looks like something may really have clicked, and he could be a very good player through his contract. Players like that are good to have, which also makes them extremely expensive in trade. The question becomes whether he is more valuable to the Brewers by playing for them for a few more years, or by trading him (this should really be the question for every player at all times). Looking at the talent the Brewers have in their system, and the contract obligations they owe, I don't think the Brewers are going to be very good any time soon. So to me, (assuming we could get a king's ransom in trade), having Gomez adding a couple of wins to a bad team is less valuable than trading him. I don't like using a specific name, because that player may not be available, but if we could get an Archie Bradley-type and another Top 100 prospect, I think that could be a franchise-changing move. Schafer is MLB ready to step into CF. We'd take a step back there, but Schafer is capable, and we'd get a front-line starter of the (near) future and another key piece to fill in elsewhere. Maybe a step back next year, but the potential to take some big steps forward in the not-too-distant future.

 

The rosy projections that would be "torn apart" consider that Lohse can continue to pitch without regression at an age when most pitchers seriously regress (to the point of retirement) and Ramirez will overcome a knee injury that has sidelined him for this season and has not been repaired, to put up the numbers he posted when he was younger. They assume we will re-sign Hart (when once again, we don't have any money) and Hart will bounce back after a full year off and be the player he was, or that we will bring up Morris, and he'll be a savior, when apparently the Brewers themselves don't trust him over Betancourt. We assume our bullpen will remain good, when (as we've seen the past few seasons) that is a huge crapshoot, and that our SP will be even league average, when other teams' scouts apparently think Gallardo is a #4-5 starter, and Peralta, while talented still has to prove he has his control issues mastered. We don't have much young talent coming up, and we're almost assured (without making some moves) to have a $100MM payroll at a time when (after this poor season) ticket sales will almost assuredly drop, meaning a significant drop in payroll. All this at a time when every other team in the division has more talent at the MLB level and significantly better farm systems that are bearing fruit right now.

 

So yeah, everything could "gel" and the Brewers could surprise people and win, but the deck is so heavily stacked against them that "going for it" seems akin to the Titanic captain screaming "full speed ahead."

[LouisEly]

You are aware that when the Brewers won the Aoki bid, they had never seen him play because they don't scout Asia, right? You realize that this is because of money, right? You realize that there are a lot of good players in Asia, right? You realize that when you spend money in one place, you can't spend it elsewhere, right? What you're looking at is throwing big money at the guys everyone knows about. What I'm looking at is developing a system to find and develop the guys that everyone else doesn't know about.

Do the Brewers not scout Asia because they don't have the money to, or because so few players from Asia sign to come here each year, thus not making it economically worthwhile? Is it because players in Asia are under contract with teams there and are not free agents like Latin America, and thus have to get permission from those teams (be "posted") to come to the US, then those teams auction the right to negotiate a contract with that player and thus every MLB team knows which players want to come here and which ones don't? How many players from Asia has each team signed over the last few years? Is it because it doesn't pay to scout players of whom so few want to come to the US each year? Is it because they really abuse pitchers arms there, causing them to burn out quickly? I'm pretty sure they have TV coverage of games there, thus making it easy to watch film of a player, something they can't do in Latin America. There's also a lot more players in Latin America that want to come to the US (like almost all of them), versus only a couple each year that come from Asia.

 

If the Brewers won the right to negotiate with Aoki - a very good player - without scouting him, it tells me two things about the rest of the teams in the league - 1) few if any have any scouts in Asia (which means there's a reason for that), and 2) if they do have scouts there they aren't very good to not make a recommendation to bid on Aoki.

 

Yes, there have been some good finds there - so far Darvish and Ryu have done very well, but they come with risk - Ryu was signed for $36M and Darvish for $56M (not sure if that includes the fees they paid their teams just for the right to negotiate with them, which was $51.7M for Darvish and $25.7M for Ryu), but Matsuzaka burned out quickly, was washed up by the age of 30, and the Red Sox paid him $20.3M over the last two years of his deal for him to pitch a total of 83 innings to the tune of a 6.94 ERA and 1.60 WHIP.

[monty57]

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/07/how-smart-investing-made-the-pittsburgh-pirates-baseballs-best-team/277609/

 

Here's a quick article on how the Pirates went from laughing stock to one of the best teams in baseball by putting their money into scouting rather than putting it into the MLB roster. I know the Brewers were shooting for the playoffs during this time frame, but there has to be some middle ground. Instead of spending every available penny on the MLB roster, if they had saved some of that extra money to use on scouting, drafting, signing and developing players, they would probably be better off today.

 

Again, I'm not saying the Brewers shouldn't have tried to win at the MLB level since 2008, but I don't think they needed to to go absolutely all in (going over budget on the MLB payroll and showing extreme reluctance to trading any vet away), giving them little chance to have a good franchise going forward. Going "over slot" in the draft was a great way for smaller market teams like the Pirates to build up a strong farm system quickly. Melvin complained about this every year, when he should have been taking advantage of it. His complaints are probably at least part of the reason it is now gone, replaced with the goofy "pool" that made this year's draft pretty ugly. This "pool" seems to be exactly what Melvin was whining for, and now it keeps the Brewers from paying "over slot" to quickly rebuild our farm, and leading to us drafting guys with a ceiling of middle reliever with several of our top picks.

 

Same holds true with signing guys like Chapman and Cespedes, who are "unproven," but have a very high upside. Great way for smaller market teams to get a potential superstar for below market, but Melvin would rather spend the money patching the roster year-to-year on "proven" vets. Even when he got lucky winning Aoki with his lowball bid, (something which seemed to shock Melvin, judging by his quotes at the time), the Brewers won't turn it around with a forward-looking trade. They'll get a couple of decent years from Aoki on losing Brewer teams, and then he'll walk, all because they have to try to convince the fans that they have a playoff-caliber team in 2014, so they'll continue to buy tickets.

 

Was pay Gagne really a better option than spending that $10MM to get a couple of 1st rounders in the later rounds? Instead of offering K-Rod arby in an attempt to get a pick, couldn't we have just apportioned that money to signing our 2nd rounder to over slot money? There are a lot of examples of wasted money on the MLB roster for the Brewers over the past decade, which could have been put to much better use.

 

Melvin is good at some things, but I think he's pretty bad at managing finances. When that is combined with Attanasio's strategy of making sure every move is done to get fans in the seats now, you end up bypassing some things that could really help the franchise. Going "all in, all the time" has hurt us, and we don't seem to ever want to stop. It's not one big move that has broken us, it's the aggregate of all the moves being made with a focus on today at the expense of tomorrow. Holding onto Aoki falls into this category. Trading him won't save the franchise by itself, but it is one step in the direction of building for a better future. Who knows, maybe we'll trade him this offseason, but looking at recent history, I doubt it, because that may, in some small way signal to someone that we're not "going for it," and Attanasio could never live with that perception.

[Bnowell4evr]

Saying we should have put all of our money from the past into scouting and the draft is kind of pointless now because there's caps on how much you can spend. We're obviously gonna spend all of our allotted slot money so these long diatribes are severely outdated. Everything down to draft pick compensation has been changed so saying you want to follow the Rays model is fine and dandy but how do you do that playing on an even playing field as everyone else in the league? Basically if you want to rebuild these days you gotta finish near dead last like were doing because it gives you the most money to use in both the draft and international market.

 

Do I wish the Brewers would have invested more money into past draft classes and international FA? Of course I do but I also see the team making major strides in international FA (signing 2 top 30 prospects) with the rule changes. Next year were gonna have a lot more money to work with which should translate into a nice haul.

[LouisEly]

Yep. If this was 2006 I would absolutely, 100% agree that not signing Suppan and instead spending that money on signing a handful of high bonus draftees and international free agents would be the right thing to do. But it isn't 2006. I'm looking forward playing within the rules that are currently in place, and not looking in the rear-view mirror.

 

What I gather about reading that article is that the Pirates spent the bulk of that $50M on signing players and not on their scouting system. Obviously something you can't do anymore. At least until next year when the Brewers have more draft and international pool money.

 

Remember, everything that people are saying about the Pirates and Cubs right now the rest of the division was saying about the Brewers five years ago.

[James Zumstein]

I was watching an Orioles game the other day, and got to thinking that Aoki would be a good fit for them next year. McClouth is a FA at the end of this season, and they don't have a true leadoff hitter at all. In fact, Chris Davis is their only player with a decent OBP at all this year. Their team slash line is currently .259/.312/.431. I know we already got Delmonico from them, but does anybody know of any more good prospects that would be a fair trade to make with them?

[TigerUppercut]

I was watching an Orioles game the other day, and got to thinking that Aoki would be a good fit for them next year. McClouth is a FA at the end of this season, and they don't have a true leadoff hitter at all. In fact, Chris Davis is their only player with a decent OBP at all this year. Their team slash line is currently .259/.312/.431. I know we already got Delmonico from them, but does anybody know of any more good prospects that would be a fair trade to make with them?

 

I believe Bundy is coming off of TJ surgery, but I'd be willing to package Aoki and Yo to roll the dice on him. That's the type of upside trade that scares the hell out of Melvin, though. Boom or bust.

[sveumrules]

Even coming off of TJ there is no package we could put together that gets Dylan Bundy.

 

While Aoki lacks the power typically associated with "corner outfielders" he has the perfect mix of OBP and high contact rate that teams look for in a "top of the order hitter", so he fits that role well at least. Combine that with one year at a cheap salary and I think he should bring something back.

 

I'd target KC and ask for one of their many arby eligible relievers as they need a 3rd outfielder to go with Cain/Gordon and got poor OBP out of their top two lineup spots this year.

[trwi7]

I want Aoki traded and even I wouldn't trade him for a reliever. How does that help the organization?

[James Zumstein]

I agree. Trading Aoki for a reliever is not the type of move that moves this team forward. I was thinking the Orioles because they have good power 2 through 7 in their lineup, and need a leftfielder for next season, where Aoki would fit better than he does in right. I also agree that we have zero chance of packaging anything to get Bundy, but could Aoki plus Thornburg net us Gausman? I think trying something along those lines would be at least inquiring about.

[sheetskout]

I don't think it is. I just don't see the Orioles moving Bundy or Gausman.

 

I wonder if the Tigers would pull a move for Aoki and give us Porcello. They have a ton of salary spent and would appreciate the contract.

[Mr Southpaw]

Trade Gomez, keep Aoki, unless you like a strike out king who can run and catch in center. Gomez will regress, he already has. Trade him over the winter, someone will bite.

[logan82]

Even if Gomez regresses he is still a more valuable player than Aoki. Of course that is also an argument to trade Gomez. He would bring back a better player.

[sveumrules]

I'm suggesting trading Aoki for a reliever because that's what I think his market will be. I'd love to get a prospect with some upside, even if it's only an A ball guy, but I just don't see that offer materializing. Who are some specific teams/players you would target?

[LouisEly]

Giants need a leadoff hitter and an upgrade over Blanco. They just extended Pence, so they are not rebuilding. Not sure what they think of turning LF over to Kieschnick though. They could market Aoki to the large Asian community in the Bay area.

 

Rays need a leadoff hitter. Not sure if they want to go to Arby's with Matt Joyce; if not they need another OF. Aoki's low cost would appeal to them.

 

Baltimore desperately needs OBP and a leadoff hitter. McLouth only made $2M last year, so if Baltimore can get him back for a similar number they may view that as better than giving up talent for Aoki.

[brewcrewdue80]

Another 3+WAR season by Aoki. Well I guess by BRef, by Fangraphs list him at 1.9. Overall Aoki is a top 100 baseball player in MLB and his OB of .356 ranks 8th as a RF.

I probably said it already but the close comparison to go by is ShinSoo Choo. A man who Arizona parted with Trevor Bauer and Cincy Didi Gregorious. Two top 100 prospects. Aoki is very cheap for similar production minus about 10HRs.

You look at Ely's mention above: Giants have RHP Clayton Blackburn #93 via MLB, Orioles LHP Eduardo Rodriquez #84, Tampa RHP Alex Colome #81

 

A few things though. Tampa will look to trade Price, not sure if Aoki fits in to a team who trades away their staff Ace in this offseason. Baltimore looks a mess for SP, Bundy's injury I think really curtailed their momentum and plans with he and Gausman. You're staring at a Wei-Chen,Bud Norris, and Miquel Gonzalez stalworths and then Gausman/Bundy to fill it out when ready. I just don't think 1year acquiring Aoki with their makeup is worth a prospect this offseason. 2years would have done better but 1year no. That leaves the Giants....they have Pence in RF and Pagan was extended this last offseason. So LF replacing Gregor Blanco? Just don't see that happening.

 

I couldn't really tell you who's going to go after Aoki. Texas is one I can see using Aoki. Sorta the replacing David Murphy type. Like Choo, I am at the thought now that Aoki will only leave in trade when other player(s) are packaged. for Cleveland it was a Utility IF, Dud 1b, and a BP guy. Gee, wonder how the Brewers stand with that kind of package? I'm sure we have that to send with Aoki no?

[logan82]

Choo is way better than Aoki. 30 points of OBP and 60 points of SLG is a drastic difference. bWAR never passes the smell test. fWAR is probably more accurate. He is probably about an average player.