Grantland article (Keri) - The Rise and Fall of the Milwaukee Brewers

[bjkrautk]

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/67678/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-milwaukee-brewers

 

Didn't see a thread on this yet; seems large enough to post outside of the 'general feelings about the franchise' discussion.

[Dragonbait]

That was a very good read, thanks for posting it.

[TheCrew07]

That was a very well written and even handed piece.

[502 to Right]

Good article. And this, right here, is why those pining for a full scale tear down are not going to get it:

 

Attanasio firmly believes that the combination of winning and building a core group of players that fans could follow for more than just a handful of years has contributed greatly to the team's ability to draw 3 million fans a year (or close to it) in the smallest market in baseball. Trading away stars, or even recognizable regulars, thus gives the Brewers owner pause. In a recent meeting with Melvin and assistant GM Gord Ash, Attanasio conveyed a clear message:

 

"We don't have to do anything," he said. "We're in a good financial position. We have a lot of good players. We have no albatross contracts. What makes the job hard is that we actually have a lot of options."

[JohnBriggs12]

I don't see the Brewer situation much differently than the Rockies who didn't panic and sell off their top players after losing 98 games last year. They knew they had talent, but like the Rockies, the Brewers are always rolling the dice a bit on pitching. Combine a down year for the pitching staffs with an inordinate amount of injuries to the everyday lineup and this is what happens. Next year is a new year. Yes they will make some changes but it will all come down to how guys like Peralta and others progress and keeping their everyday lineup relatively healthy.

[Thurston Fluff]

We can do as much damage to the franchise by over selling as under. It is stupid to go into a 2002, half decade, rebuild mode if we don't have to. I'm not convinced we need to for pretty much the same reasons JB just said. Yes we do have to fix the pitching. But I think we are closer to that than some others. Hell we could keep the very same pitchers and probably be better next season simply by them pitching to their norm or improving the way most young players do. TO be clear I am not advocating that just saying it isn't as bleak as it seems now.

[logan82]

"When we traded for CC, that caught everyone off guard. We got 3 million fans in 2008. Then we trade for Greinke and Marcum, and 2011 was our best year in almost 30 years. But when you make those trades, there is a cost. You say, 'We'll worry about it later.' Well, 'later' is now."

No kidding.

 

Bottom line, we may not need to make many trades, but we need to do something. I think Gomez may be our best bet to turn things quickly. Trade him.

[gregmag]

That's really good. It's so good that it almost cheers me up, even though the substantive message is that we're at least temporarily in a mess. I think I'm more in favor of a substantial rebuild, simply because our talent base is so thin. But I also see the other side of it -- we have a legit core at the MLB level. The best thing about the article, to me, is how it shows the real difficulty of figuring out what to do next.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Fantastic article that really digs inside the mind of Mark A a little bit.

 

I don't think too many people thought this was a 90 win team, but .500 wasn't out of the question. A horrendous rash of injuries (139 games missed so far by Hart, Ramirez, and Braun, for starters), and basically the entire starting rotation under-performing leaves us where we're standing now.

 

I won't use this thread as a sounding board for what trades I think they should or shouldn't make, there's enough of those out there.

 

What I will say is that I'm starting to get this uneasy feeling that this team is headed towards a situation where they're being run like the Bucks. Chase .500, sign mediocre mid tier (and expensive) free agents, and hope the fans stay interested just enough in a team on the periphery of the playoff race to keep coming out, and not do the things that need to be done to truly make the team back into a contender, even if it means hardcore tanking a season or two.

[502 to Right]

There are a lot of teams that would kill for an up the middle core of Lucroy, Segura, Gomez. And throw a future hall of famer into the outfield (Braun).

 

But--It's the starting pitching stupid.

 

If the Brewers could just have two of their young starters pan out into solid starter quality next season they could be a playoff team (Peralta, Rogers, Thornburg, Hellweg, Fiers, Burgos, etc.).

[TheCrew07]

If the Brewers could just have two of their young starters pan out into solid starter quality next season they could be a playoff team (Peralta, Rogers, Thornburg, Hellweg, Fiers, Burgos, etc.).

 

I think that's pretty wishful thinking.

 

Peralta has a chance.

 

I don't have any faith in Rogers' ability to stay healthy, and he's never thrown enough strikes.

 

Thornburg leaves too many pitches up in the zone.

 

Hellweg doesn't miss many bats or throw enough strikes.

 

Fiers and Burgos are control guys.

 

Jungmann walks too many and doesn't miss bats.

 

And scouts universally think Nelson is a #3 best case, which is fine, I keep hoping there's #2 upside with Jimmy though.

 

We don't have a Skaggs, Walker, Hultzen, Bradley, or Barnes type. Peralta was the only top 100 player in the organization, we can "hope" all we want, but that doesn't mean these guys are going to ascend and out pitch their stuff.

 

Even if the rotation does improve, how will we match up in the post season pitching wise? I guess going 1 and done in the playoffs will put butts in the seats but competitively that doesn't interest me at all. I want to get on top of the pitching situation once and for all, then we'll be truly competitive, even in the post season.

[Thurston Fluff]

Even if the rotation does improve, how will we match up in the post season pitching wise? I guess going 1 and done in the playoffs will put butts in the seats but competitively that doesn't interest me at all. I want to get on top of the pitching situation once and for all, then we'll be truly competitive, even in the post season.

 

Pretty much every team that played against the Braves in the 90's had to matchup with the best staff in baseball and somehow managed. The Cards won a World Series trotting Suppan out there. Pitching is important but you don't need great starters as long as you have a good pen and a pitcher or two to get hot. Granted it's not ideal. Then again ideally we would like to have a 3 aces, a stud closer and four solid setup men, (two lefty two righty,) to go with five tool players at every position. Realistically we can build a solid offensive team with at least average pitchers and a deep pen and take our chances when we get there. To tear everything down just because we can't manage to fill our ideal team right now seems like a sure way to shorten the actual chances at getting to the playoffs anytime soon. Personally I think the more times you go the better shot you have. I can see the argument of building for one or two big years where you have the perfect storm of great hitting and pitching. I just don't think that approach gives you the best odds of actually winning the whole thing.

[danzig6767]

Even if the rotation does improve, how will we match up in the post season pitching wise? I guess going 1 and done in the playoffs will put butts in the seats but competitively that doesn't interest me at all. I want to get on top of the pitching situation once and for all, then we'll be truly competitive, even in the post season.

 

Pretty much every team that played against the Braves in the 90's had to matchup with the best staff in baseball and somehow managed. The Cards won a World Series trotting Suppan out there. Pitching is important but you don't need great starters as long as you have a good pen and a pitcher or two to get hot. Granted it's not ideal.

 

The Cardinals also won it all two years ago with a rotation which struggled to last just five innings in nearly every start vs the Brewers in the NLCS. They won that ring with great bullpen pitching and good hitting.

[Thurston Fluff]

Even if the rotation does improve, how will we match up in the post season pitching wise? I guess going 1 and done in the playoffs will put butts in the seats but competitively that doesn't interest me at all. I want to get on top of the pitching situation once and for all, then we'll be truly competitive, even in the post season.

 

Pretty much every team that played against the Braves in the 90's had to matchup with the best staff in baseball and somehow managed. The Cards won a World Series trotting Suppan out there. Pitching is important but you don't need great starters as long as you have a good pen and a pitcher or two to get hot. Granted it's not ideal.

 

The Cardinals also won it all two years ago with a rotation which struggled to last just five innings in nearly every start vs the Brewers in the NLCS. They won that ring with great bullpen pitching and good hitting.

 

Bingo. There is a difference between trying to build the ideal team for a deep playoff run and only trying to build the ideal team for a playoff run. If we tear everything apart every time we feel we can't build the perfect team with what we have I think we will miss out on a couple chances at the playoffs. I think the more rolls of the dice the better. Again I do understand the other approach. The Marlins did it with success a couple times. I just don't think it is the best way to maximize our chances at getting there.

[Baldkin]

Even if the rotation does improve, how will we match up in the post season pitching wise? I guess going 1 and done in the playoffs will put butts in the seats but competitively that doesn't interest me at all. I want to get on top of the pitching situation once and for all, then we'll be truly competitive, even in the post season.

 

Pretty much every team that played against the Braves in the 90's had to matchup with the best staff in baseball and somehow managed. The Cards won a World Series trotting Suppan out there. Pitching is important but you don't need great starters as long as you have a good pen and a pitcher or two to get hot. Granted it's not ideal.

 

The Cardinals also won it all two years ago with a rotation which struggled to last just five innings in nearly every start vs the Brewers in the NLCS. They won that ring with great bullpen pitching and good hitting.

 

And a manager who understood that managing in the playoffs was completely different from managing in the regular season.

[homer]

I think you build a team to get to the playoffs and let the chips fall where they may.

[Eye Black]

What I will say is that I'm starting to get this uneasy feeling that this team is headed towards a situation where they're being run like the Bucks. Chase .500, sign mediocre mid tier (and expensive) free agents, and hope the fans stay interested just enough in a team on the periphery of the playoff race to keep coming out, and not do the things that need to be done to truly make the team back into a contender, even if it means hardcore tanking a season or two.

I just had this same conversation with a friend earlier this week. I believe putting together an organization that perennially finishes in the middle-tier is the easiest (and least recommended) way of operating in both MLB and the NBA. Compiling a roster that can compete to finish around .500 seems like an easier step then breaking things down to put yourself in a better position down the road. It is a trap in some respects since you always are trying to make a move or two to "get over the hump" instead of consciously taking a step back into the lower tier for a couple of years while building up talent and organizational depth that can move you into the top tier in the future.

 

Regardless, I really enjoyed the article and it is the best synopsis I have seen of the Brewers organization from anyone in the media.

[TooLiveBrew]

Again I do understand the other approach. The Marlins did it with success a couple times. I just don't think it is the best way to maximize our chances at getting there.

 

Not many here are advocating for this. This is apples to oranges in terms of what most people want when they say they want to see Gallardo & others traded.

 

Between the 1997 offseason & early days of the '98 season, the Marlins offloaded some of the biggest stars in MLB. Kevin Brown won the CY in '96, was again dominant in '97, & finished '98 with a lower ERA than the previous season. Brown, Al Leiter, Robb Nen, Moises Alou, & Jeff Conine were all traded prior to the '98 season. May 1998 saw traded Sheffield, Bonilla, & 4 other players traded for Mike Piazza -- who they then flipped 8 days later. Both Sheff & Piazza were in their primes. Charles Johnson was offloaded during the '98 campaign. And obviously the Marlins had just won the 1997 WS (and of course won it again '03 prior to their other infamous sell-off).

 

If you trade Gallardo, Gómez, Weeks, Ramírez, and some RPs, imo that's nowhere near the scale of what the Marlins have done. The Brewers are a last-place team with no reason to expect to improve notably in the short term. There also isn't a lot of help on the way from the farm anytime soon, so unless they bring in quite a bit more young talent, they're going to be a bad MLB team for the next 3 or 4 seasons. They have weaknesses at 3B, 1B, and 3 or 4 rotation spots. You also have an argument that 2B is a weakness, or at least that the production doesn't match the salary. That's not easily patched in an offseason or two. There aren't big-name prospects with which to 'roll the dice'.

[homer]

Really good article. I understand the need for pitching but I think you need to trade Gallardo NOW given his drop in velocity and overall ineffectiveness. He's got a lot of inning on his arm now and is due for a DL trip at some point. If the rumor of Skaggs for Yo are true, I'd pull the trigger on that immediately.

[TheCrew07]

Pretending that we're anywhere near as competent an organization as St. Louis is a recipe for disaster.

 

I despise the Cards and La Russa specifically, but he got the best of every Brewer manager since we moved to the national league. We've had no manager who would have been as creative as TLR in 2011, he was tactically superior to every manager we've had.

 

As for the Braves comparison, how about a little bit more in-depth analysis of the situation than "teams found a way"? That's awfully superficial and skips right over the heart of the matter.

 

Who beat the Braves and how their did pitching match-up to the Braves? I used baseball-ref because it's easy to see complete statistics for each team and series results.

 

'91 - Twins in the WS, similar pitching

'92 - Jays in the WS, similar pitching

'93 - Phillies in the NLCS, similar pitching

'94 - No postseason

'95 - Won WS

'96 - Yankees, similar postseason pitching

'97 - Marlins in NLCS, superior pitching

'98 - Padres in NLCS, similar pitching

'99 - Yankees in the WS, similar postseason pitching

'00 - Cardinals in the NLDS, similar pitching

'01 - D-Backs in the NLCS, superior pitching

'02 - Giants in the NLDS, similar postseason pitching

'03 - Cubs in the NLDS, superior pitching

'04 - Astros in the NLDS, superior pitching

 

Once again in the postseason the depth of your pitching roster doesn't matter as there are too many off days, your depth doesn't get tested. ATL had a great 1-3, sometimes just a great 1-2, but every team that beat them was able to match them by shortening the rotation and bullpen. Regardless I'd much rather have 4 NCLS and 3 WS appearances in a span like that than our 1 NLDS and NLCS where we weren't even competitive the first time and the 2nd time we were at the end of our run. The only starting rotations that were obviously worse than them during the regular season were the '96 and '99 Yankees and '02 Giants. Towards the end of their run many of the teams actually had better pitching than the Braves.

 

Note that I'm not going to by staff ERA, rather comparing the top pitchers in the bullpen and rotation to one another for each team.

 

It would be nice if some research effort would be put into the other side of this debate rather than continually dropping superficial generalities into the discussion.

[homer]

Even if the rotation does improve, how will we match up in the post season pitching wise? I guess going 1 and done in the playoffs will put butts in the seats but competitively that doesn't interest me at all. I want to get on top of the pitching situation once and for all, then we'll be truly competitive, even in the post season.

 

Pretty much every team that played against the Braves in the 90's had to matchup with the best staff in baseball and somehow managed. The Cards won a World Series trotting Suppan out there. Pitching is important but you don't need great starters as long as you have a good pen and a pitcher or two to get hot. Granted it's not ideal.

 

The Cardinals also won it all two years ago with a rotation which struggled to last just five innings in nearly every start vs the Brewers in the NLCS. They won that ring with great bullpen pitching and good hitting.

 

 

They also won it in 2006 with only one starter possessing an era under 4.00. In fact, their starting pitching outside of Carpenter was pretty horrendous that year. Granted that was probably one of those flukey seasons.

[danzig6767]

Even if the rotation does improve, how will we match up in the post season pitching wise? I guess going 1 and done in the playoffs will put butts in the seats but competitively that doesn't interest me at all. I want to get on top of the pitching situation once and for all, then we'll be truly competitive, even in the post season.

 

Pretty much every team that played against the Braves in the 90's had to matchup with the best staff in baseball and somehow managed. The Cards won a World Series trotting Suppan out there. Pitching is important but you don't need great starters as long as you have a good pen and a pitcher or two to get hot. Granted it's not ideal.

 

The Cardinals also won it all two years ago with a rotation which struggled to last just five innings in nearly every start vs the Brewers in the NLCS. They won that ring with great bullpen pitching and good hitting.

 

And a manager who understood that managing in the playoffs was completely different from managing in the regular season.

 

LaRussa is annoying, but he was masterful in the playoffs that year in how he handled a rotation which was terrible most of the time outside of a few great starts by Carpenter. Starters kept getting rocked or were mediocre at best, so Tony would yank them in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th innings and let his bullpen keep his team in games.

 

Speaking of that Cardinals team. I still remember when they made trades at the deadline for veterans and bullpen arms, i went to a Cards forum and most of their fans were irate. They were ripping the GM left and right as clueless for not trading for prospects instead of veterans. Had TheCrew07 been a Cards fan, he likely would have blasted those trades also.

 

Come a few months later, those same Cardinals fans got to experience one of if not the most exciting playoff runs in MLB history. A ride they'll never forget and i'm envious of given how that season and playoff title run played out. Wow that had to be amazing to experience.

[JimH5]

. . .A "tech-savvy friend of (Attanasio's) son" is building a database. . .

 

That line toward the end of the article is so strange. The Brewers' advanced metrics are being driven by a guy who Danny met at summer camp?

 

What is the database going to measure? How does that information get to Melvin and his group of traditional scouts, and what do they do with it? Is this just them dipping a toe into the water of advanced stats? Why wouldn't they turn to someone with a history of baseball analysis instead of just a friend of the kid?

 

Is Attanasio planning to hand the reins to someone else?

[jjfanec]

 

I think that's pretty wishful thinking.

 

Peralta has a chance.

 

I still think there is a chance for him to be a two but even if he is a 3 it is start

 

I don't have any faith in Rogers' ability to stay healthy, and he's never thrown enough strikes.

 

Completely agree. Move him to the bullpen and see if that can help at all.

 

Thornburg leaves too many pitches up in the zone.

 

Seems more likely to be a bullpen arm at this point

 

Hellweg doesn't miss many bats or throw enough strikes.

 

He doesnt miss bats right now but it seems like the past three years his coaches have focused on him getting more ground balls.

 

Fiers and Burgos are control guys.

 

One could be your 5th starter and that isnt terrible

 

Jungmann walks too many and doesn't miss bats.

 

He still could be your 4th starter and become a decent one. He has become a great groundball pitcher.

 

And scouts universally think Nelson is a #3 best case, which is fine, I keep hoping there's #2 upside with Jimmy though.

 

Jimmy really seems to have #2 upside. Too many walks but if he fixes that he is in great shape. He strikes guys out and gets a lot of ground balls.

 

We don't have a Skaggs, Walker, Hultzen, Bradley, or Barnes type. Peralta was the only top 100 player in the organization, we can "hope" all we want, but that doesn't mean these guys are going to ascend and out pitch their stuff.

 

The hope is Gallardo can land you a top arm in a trade. IF you can get a Skaggs. You have Skaggs, Peralta, Nelson, and then a couple other guys filling in spots.

 

Even if the rotation does improve, how will we match up in the post season pitching wise? I guess going 1 and done in the playoffs will put butts in the seats but competitively that doesn't interest me at all. I want to get on top of the pitching situation once and for all, then we'll be truly competitive, even in the post season.

 

Maybe it isnt a staff that is going to make a deep run in the playoffs but it would have a very good lineup to work with featuring Braun, Segura, Lucroy, Gomez, and others. However you can get lucky once you get there and win some games and see what happens

 

[The stache]

Really good article. I understand the need for pitching but I think you need to trade Gallardo NOW given his drop in velocity and overall ineffectiveness. He's got a lot of inning on his arm now and is due for a DL trip at some point. If the rumor of Skaggs for Yo are true, I'd pull the trigger on that immediately.

 

Tyler Skaggs for Yo? I'd do that every day, and twice on Sunday. He'd immediately become the best pitching prospect we've had since Ben Sheets. And I've already got his card

 

http://imageshack.us/a/img685/6350/12chrometskaggs.png

 

A lefty with a nasty fastball/curveball/changeup combo? Yes please! Do it, Dougie!