2013 Competitive Balance Lottery

[TooLiveBrew]

The Rays are smart enough that I'd be shocked to see them move Guerrieri for Aoki as the main return.

 

Glad to see this competitive balance lottery seems to be working. Next year's draft should be fun.

[torts]

you dont trade picks for prospects, you use picks in trades to bring in MLB vets/star players. trading a draft pick for a AA player is not going to happen, let alone a top 40 pick. a pick will not be added in a trade of a brewer MLB player for prospects is what I am saying, teams looking to get a big name will package their comp pick in to get that player.

[brewcrewdue80]

The Rays are smart enough that I'd be shocked to see them move Guerrieri for Aoki as the main return.

 

Glad to see this competitive balance lottery seems to be working. Next year's draft should be fun.

 

For Tampa, Aoki plus 36ish pick next year for Guerrieri? Tampa loses Kelly Johnson after this season, leaves them a hole in the OF.

I dunno, I guess with Myers having Johnson/Joyce is enough for their OF. I just see them being better off with Aoki batting leadoff, Jennings 2nd, Longoria 3rd, Myers, Loney. For a typically punchless offense, I think Aoki improves it a bunch.

[TheCrew07]

For Tampa, Aoki plus 36ish pick next year for Guerrieri? Tampa loses Kelly Johnson after this season, leaves them a hole in the OF.

I dunno, I guess with Myers having Johnson/Joyce is enough for their OF. I just see them being better off with Aoki batting leadoff, Jennings 2nd, Longoria 3rd, Myers, Loney. For a typically punchless offense, I think Aoki improves it a bunch.

 

Guerrieri who missed a start with a shoulder problem and now is down with an elbow issue?

 

Even if he was healthy TB wouldn't do the deal, they aren't trading a potential #1 for a year and 2 months of Aoki and a draft pick.

 

you dont trade picks for prospects

Why not? Because you only want immediate MLB solutions? I'd rather trade for the best possible talent than worry about how ready that talent is. A prospect has greater value than a draft pick.

[torts]

For Tampa, Aoki plus 36ish pick next year for Guerrieri? Tampa loses Kelly Johnson after this season, leaves them a hole in the OF.

I dunno, I guess with Myers having Johnson/Joyce is enough for their OF. I just see them being better off with Aoki batting leadoff, Jennings 2nd, Longoria 3rd, Myers, Loney. For a typically punchless offense, I think Aoki improves it a bunch.

 

Guerrieri who missed a start with a shoulder problem and now is down with an elbow issue?

 

Even if he was healthy TB wouldn't do the deal, they aren't trading a potential #1 for a year and 2 months of Aoki and a draft pick.

 

you dont trade picks for prospects

Why not? Because you only want immediate MLB solutions? I'd rather trade for the best possible talent than worry about how ready that talent is. A prospect has greater value than a draft pick.

 

I have been trying to think of another sport where franchises trade draft picks for non-major league roster players, and the only thing I can come up with is trading draft picks in the NHL for prospects PACKAGED with an NHL-level player, or teams packaging draft picks and minor league players for an NHL star player. its rare to see teams trade off a pick AND a pro-level player for just prospects.

 

especially if your team is going to be a top 5-10 draft pick, why would you trade off a comp rd pick that is going to increase your draft signing pool? If you're going to be competitive, like the Pirates last year when they traded off their comp pick for Sanchez, that makes sense... but if you're at the bottom with no hope, why would you trade off additional money?

[torts]

if anything, if the 2014 draft class has some promising talent, it makes more sense to me to try and GET a teams Comp Pick for a player (Orioles and Indians might part ways to get a player to stay competitive for august/sept), imagine if the brewers had 4 picks in the top 40 next year?

[brewcrewdue80]

And I could see that too. The Indians trading for Gallardo offering up their pick.

 

Sorry TheCrew, I wasn't aware Guerrieri was hurt recently. And yes, while the guy is a super Talent, the basic idea stands that by Milw getting the 1A vs 2B compensation, they've got something with a lot more value to work with in trade.

 

You also have to consider Tampas run this year coinciding with Prices soon departure. Guerrieri won't be up in time before that occurrence.

[fondybrewfan]

St Louis is really one the 10 smallest markets in baseball? I am sure it is true but that doesn't seem right. Milwaukee as a small market needing extra picks like this is one thing, St Louis is hardly a small market that relies on revenue sharing and draft picks to survive. They have the payroll capabilities to sign any player they want.

[TheCrew07]

I have been trying to think of another sport where franchises trade draft picks for non-major league roster players..

 

So lets flip that around, in what other sport do teams freely give away young cost controlled talent for anything? For example, in the NFL teams trade draft picks because they don't want to trade the young talent they have already acquired.

 

Baseball is its own animal, any comparison to another league is going to be apples and oranges for the most part.

 

I would take a legit prospect 99 times out of 100 vs a draft pick, a draft pick has fictitious value, we could get Odorizzi or we could get Frederickson. The Brewers haven't exactly been hitting home runs in the draft, I'd definitely take an established/productive prospect over a draft pick nearly every single time.

 

The question should be how to acquire the best talent possible, not how to acquire the talent that best fits some arbitrary framework. If teams are dumb enough to trade away young cost controlled talent for any reason I say take advantage of the opportunity. Build a deep organization robust with impact talent, not only will we have depth of talent to cover injuries and ineffectiveness, we'll have true roster flexibility where decisions can be made based on talent and production rather than age and cost.

 

I'm still amazed at the number of people who are willing to go after aging veterans because they are "proven", when the contracts don't ever seem to work out for the Brewers due to injury, declining performance, or both. Yet if a prospect fails they jump all over themselves to proclaim how unreliable prospects are. What makes more financial sense: missing with a player who costs the league minimum or missing with a player who costs 7 to 8 figures per season? Which scenario sets the organization back?

 

Cost aside the Veteran players the Brewers can afford have proven to be no more reliable from a production standpoint than the prospects and yet still there is a constant clamor to sign or trade for the next veteran savior. I've never viewed the MLB roster from that perspective and I never will, if we want to be competitive year in and year out we have to be draft/develop team focused on acquiring pre-arby talent as much as possible. Since it's very difficult to pull young players who are proven at the MLB level via trade that means we'll have to target prospects more often than not.

 

Injuries are an overblown excuse around here, they are known part of sports, we know players are more likely to get injured as they age, and of course when we have very few options on the farm to replace injured players every injury is going to have a significant impact. That's the whole reason behind building an organization instead of patching an MLB roster... legitimate options. Payroll flexibility really doesn't mean anything, flexibility of talent is what counts. We're spending more than any of us thought possible in 2003 to be 18 games under .500, spending money isn't the answer and never has been.

 

If we're trading a competitive balance pick that's fine, but why trade for another short term solution for anything? It hasn't worked. We've had 2 playoff years in 8 and for 6 of those seasons we had 2 potential HOF players on the roster together, this strategy isn't working, it's not viable in Milwaukee.

 

I say always trade for the best talent available and avoid quantity deals as they are a waste of time. I'd much rather target 1 Matt Cain than 3 Dave Bush types. We can build a rotation 1 impact pitcher at a time, but throwing out 3 pitchers who are 4s best case just to fill holes in the rotation leaves us with crappy rotation full of 4/5 types, which not so coincidentally is exactly what we've had for the duration of Melvin's tenure. We have to start building a decent rotation somewhere, why not now? No more aging vets, no more trades for the next short term savior, look to acquire long-term pieces to go with Peralta and Nelson. It might take a couple of trades over 3 years to get there, but I'd rather be building towards something than continually patching nothing.

[torts]

I have been trying to think of another sport where franchises trade draft picks for non-major league roster players..

 

So lets flip that around, in what other sport do teams freely give away young cost controlled talent for anything?

 

the NHL does this, (Boston just traded their 1st rd pick from three years ago to Dallas who is still on his entry-level contract!!), numerous times during/after the season now that I thought about it a little. teams will trade a prospect or two for future draft picks in one or multiple future off-seasons. they also can trade any/every round of draft pick slots in their draft, heck they'll even trade NHL player negotiation rights for a draft pick if they know they cant sign the player before they become an unrestricted free agent.

[homer]

I think it's hard to compare MLB to the NBA or NFL or even NHL just because the economic landscapes are very different.

[brewmann04]

It be nice to have 4 picks if possible but it means nothing if they can't draft a impact player.

[And That]

It uses 2000 data, but here's a ranking of baseball (and other major sport) cities by market size.

[Point Beer Is Best]

if anything, if the 2014 draft class has some promising talent, it makes more sense to me to try and GET a teams Comp Pick for a player (Orioles and Indians might part ways to get a player to stay competitive for august/sept), imagine if the brewers had 4 picks in the top 40 next year?

 

This is exactly what I think we should do. It's the only viable way to accumulate picks in our situation.

[igor67]

TheCrew07 is right taking picks in trade vs. another prospect has to be weighed on a case by case basis. It's all about total talent. It is a tough comparison to make, but there should already be a general sense of how talented the class is overall, and their are plenty of historical studies on the relative value of picks deeper into the draft as well. The one significant advantage from a trade standpoint is that a pick is more fungible value to the receiving team. For example I would rather have a comp pick in the second round instead of say another player whose ceiling would be a regular OF. We have a pretty healthy number of middle of the road OF guys, that addign another one is not substantially improving the talent base, the pick means I could get a comparable talent at another position.

[TooLiveBrew]

If someone would burn a comp. balance pick on Aoki, Ramirez, or Lohse, I'd jump all over it. Heck, same goes for Weeks, Axford, Henderson, K-Rod, Gonzalez... not saying we'd necessarily get one of these picks for any of the RPs, but you never know. I'd send Ax & K-Rod together for one sandwich-round pick.

[brewcrewdue80]

Maybe my scenario was reaching.

 

The idea to me is that if we're looking to trade and a team won't part with say a top 100 prospect we like but a guy who's about 140 offering up the draft pick that changes their mind to give up the top 100 prospect.

Splitter just posted RP to Detroit for Alex Castellanos. top 25 prospect. Doubtful. Throw the pick in there? It could happen.

 

If I'm Detroit's GM and I make that trade, you had best be sure that when it comes time to use that pick? I'm going super high upside/Truly Best Player Available. With the idea that by doing so, and this high upside kid becomes a serious ML Talented Ballplayer, down the road the lashing that may incur the next 3 seasons for trading away Castellanos becomes mute and actually called genius to get the RPs they needed while adding a Draft Pick that turned in to so and so.

Meanwhile, the Brewers just added a Player that is a certain ML contributor and useful for their organization under their current state. Needing a 3b. or If Guerrieri a SP. Those are just example ideas and I hope it comes to fruition some way some how.

[igor67]

I think it is worth making a big distinction between whether we are talking a 1st or 2nd round pick. Looking at the historical studies (http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2009/06/draft_picks_and.php)and rounding up a bit to be generous a 2nd round pick at the end of the round could be expected to produce 3 WAR. That is not much for career value. An end of the first rounder isn't much better (more like 5 WAR if generous). I'd be willing for reliever types perhaps, maybe even a guy like Weeks who has value that is close to his salary. Aoki, Lohse... those guys though I'd want more.

[torts]

If someone would burn a comp. balance pick on Aoki, Ramirez, or Lohse, I'd jump all over it. Heck, same goes for Weeks, Axford, Henderson, K-Rod, Gonzalez... not saying we'd necessarily get one of these picks for any of the RPs, but you never know. I'd send Ax & K-Rod together for one sandwich-round pick.

 

If the Pirates got Gabby Sanchez for their comp A pick last summer, I dont see how any BP arm couldnt net back a comp A round pick as well.

[logan82]

I would take a legit prospect 99 times out of 100 vs a draft pick, a draft pick has fictitious value, we could get Odorizzi or we could get Frederickson. The Brewers haven't exactly been hitting home runs in the draft, I'd definitely take an established/productive prospect over a draft pick nearly every single time.

A prospect takes most of the scouting out of the equation. After they play a couple years in MiLB they have played against a similar level of competition for a while. Amateurs could be playing against either really good or bad players.