Blow it Up?

[TURBO]

At what cost do we add a starting pitcher though?

 

Do we sell out on the farm for someone, overpay in FA, how do you propose we just go out and get the magic starting pitcher which will send us straight to the promised land?

 

I like optimism, but not blind homerism optimism, which it seems this thread is loaded with.

[PrinceFielderx1]

At what cost do we add a starting pitcher though?

 

Do we sell out on the farm for someone, overpay in FA, how do you propose we just go out and get the magic starting pitcher which will send us straight to the promised land?

 

I like optimism, but not blind homerism optimism, which it seems this thread is loaded with.

 

Looking at the prospect we have I'd be fine with trading any of them in any combanation. Likely have to include Jimmy Nelson, then just keep adding. If our system is as bad as they are suggesting why not just go for it and start at the lower end of the minors (rookie ball/a-ball) and rebuild it in the next 2 years through the draft and through some trades of some mlb players. I'm not worried about losing player in the minors. Most of those positional prospect we have in the system are blocked anyways. Hanigar, Taylor are both blocked for 3+ years. Hellweg looks to be a year or two away. Nelson and Thornburg are the only one who are mlb ready.

 

The pitcher we will get we will likely trade for.

 

Also instead of just saying that there is homerism going on in this thread you need to point it out or not say that at all.

[fondybrewfan]

Its not blind homerism to think this lineup isn't very strong. There really isn't a black hole in the group assuming a competent 1st baseman is found. Injuries are a question mark but I still think this offense will be significantly above average. Braun, Lucroy, Gomez, Segura, Ramirez, Davis, Gennet, Hart? is a damn good offense.

 

I am not saying the pitching is top 5 in the NL or anything crazy like that but our starters are good enough to keep us in the game and have some upside potential. The 2nd half last year was so much better that it was reason enough to be lightly more optimistic on the pitching front.

 

I really don't think it is a stretch at all to think that an incredibly potent offense could mitigate the issues in the pitching staff and produce a playoff contending team. Injuries are a big question mark but that could be said for most teams. Lose arguably your top 3 offensive talents and of course the team will suffer.

[TooLiveBrew]

Its not blind homerism to think this lineup isn't very strong. There really isn't a black hole in the group assuming a competent 1st baseman is found. Injuries are a question mark but I still think this offense will be significantly above average. Braun, Lucroy, Gomez, Segura, Ramirez, Davis, Gennet, Hart? is a damn good offense.

 

I am not saying the pitching is top 5 in the NL or anything crazy like that but our starters are good enough to keep us in the game and have some upside potential. The 2nd half last year was so much better that it was reason enough to be lightly more optimistic on the pitching front.

 

I really don't think it is a stretch at all to think that an incredibly potent offense could mitigate the issues in the pitching staff and produce a playoff contending team. Injuries are a big question mark but that could be said for most teams. Lose arguably your top 3 offensive talents and of course the team will suffer.

I agree the offense will be above average & a genuine strength.

 

For the bolded part, I certainly agree about the second half of 2013, & if Jimmy Nelson pitches to his potential once he's up, then I think you could have the upside of like four #3 or #2 types in Gallardo/Lohse/Peralta/Nelson. I think Thornburg will be a decidedly back-end guy, a player who's nice to have for his pre-arby seasons but not someone in the long-term plans. As of right now, the bullpen is big red flag for me... in that there's just no clear picture as to who the arms will be beyond Henderson. Kintzler & Figaro seem like decent bets. Overall there are just too many question marks with the pitching staff for me to feel good about it.

 

"Our starters are good enough to keep us in the game and have some upside potential" -- could be uttered about probably 2/3 of the league or so. It's a problem that the bar is set at "keep us in the game", which I by no means am attributing to you directly, fondy. It seems that's been Melvin's m.o. on pitching for years... probably even before he got to Milwaukee. If the Brewers are going to contend, it'll be because the pitching is a heck of a lot stronger than just "keep us in the game."

[logan82]

Losing the players we lost mainly in the middle of the line-up cost us 10-15 wins.

Where do you get 10-15 wins? Please break it down. I think you are overvaluing the contributions of any one player.

[jerichoholicninja]

Losing the players we lost mainly in the middle of the line-up cost us 10-15 wins.

Where do you get 10-15 wins? Please break it down. I think you are overvaluing the contributions of any one player.

 

I don't know about 10-15 wins but he's not talking about losing 1 player. He's talking about losing 3 and probably your 3 best hitters.

[paul253]

I don't know about 10-15 wins but he's not talking about losing 1 player. He's talking about losing 3 and probably your 3 best hitters.

Didn't we actually play better without Braun than with him?

[PrinceFielderx1]

Losing the players we lost mainly in the middle of the line-up cost us 10-15 wins.

Where do you get 10-15 wins? Please break it down. I think you are overvaluing the contributions of any one player.

 

I don't know about 10-15 wins but he's not talking about losing 1 player. He's talking about losing 3 and probably your 3 best hitters.

 

Exactly. How many wins do you think Ryan Braun is worth in a full-season alone? How does having him in the line-up affect the rest of the line-up? Had he'd been playing we would likely have had scored 78 more runs (38 of those via the HR ball), and he would have driven in 74 more runs. 78 more runs would put the Brewers in second place in Runs scored in the NL. Add in Ramirez and that's 50 more runs, then add Hart and then we are in 1st place with 859 runs scored compared to the Cardinals 783. It's not even close.

 

The Brewers are only 7th in runs allowed last season, and Peralta/Gallardo had a poor 1st half. I wouldn't expect that from Peralta next year. he's just going to get better. Gallardo second half was more like his career norms. That right there alone is HUGE. Add in another pitcher like Lohse and we are somewhere between 3-5th in runs allowed in the NL with the best offense in the NL/Baseball.

 

We are just fine.

[brewcrewdue80]

Losing the players we lost mainly in the middle of the line-up costed us 10-15 wins. A ton of wins. That is us missing some serious production. With a healthy line-up which is what we should have had heading into this season Gomez's numbers should actually increase. That what a great line-up will do to everybody in it.

 

Let's go with a BRef stat:

Scored 640 runs, Allowed 687 runs. Pythagorean W-L: 76-86 Milwaukee's this season.

Cleveland's this season:

Scored 745 runs, Allowed 662 runs. Pythagorean W-L: 90-72

 

Just keep in mind that Milwaukee having lost 18more games than Cleveland is 18IP that our team doesn't have to close out so the projection would be closer to 695Runs likely.

 

So with maybe 100runs more production I don't see 90wins out of having 3,4,5 in lineup all season.

 

2012's:

Scored 776 runs, Allowed 733 runs. Pythagorean W-L: 85-77

 

I think it's safe to say that we are looking at an 85win team if everyone was healthy and didn't miss games. That's on a max.

 

The argument though is we had no knowledge of how well Segura would play. If Gomez' bat was going to be for real. Our pitching situation was a complete mess. Axford,Henderson and then the rest of the bullpen pretty much all new additions.

SP was Gallardo and then running out Peralta,Estrada with Fiers,Rogers being their 4/5 Gorzellany and Thornburg being 6/7.

 

That is an awful looking bunch to depend on to expect on to take you to win 85 or more wins. There were just way too many question marks on pitching to be counted on as leaving the 2013 Brewers contenders. So we sign Lohse and actually even signed Rodriquez. And for what could have turned out terrible, they both exceeded expectations to get us to respectability.

On paper the 2012 Bullpen vs what we had on paper for 2013, I'd had laughed at you if you said the 2013 bullpen would outperform the 2012 bullpen. And that's just it. On paper looking at 2013's roster, nothing stood out as saying that a Kyle Lohse signing is what will take this team from pretender to contender.

Sure Offensively you'd have thought we'd score 700runs again easily. But giving up under 650? That's what the team would have needed to do to honestly be serious about winning the division.

 

Lohse didn't change the outlook of the team from saying we went from 81wins to 88wins. What he changed was taking the team from an 85-92 loss team potentially and make it look like a 78-85loss team. Either way you look at it, you're not a Playoff team. And that outlook was with all going right. That Hart would only miss the first 3 weeks of 2013. Segura would be for real, Gomez was for real, ARam wouldn't have a down year or get injured. That Weeks wouldn't have the first half again of 2012. If everything went right then I could believe we were an 85-86win team after signing Lohse. And even that was tough with who we were staring at for 8th/9th innings.

I see it as Failed Drafts leaving a poor farm that needs to be addressed and a Major League club who's a .500ish team but not Playoff quality nor set up well for the playoffs(Our Pitchers vs. Others) And instead of willing to improve the most where needed we do the opposite, ignore the farm, and try to improve the Major League team with a old, aging and very questionable on helping the team achieve anything other than .500 ball.

[brewcrewdue80]

Your posts hit before I sent my last one PFX1 but:

Add in Ramirez and that's 50 more runs, then add Hart and then we are in 1st place with 859 runs scored compared to the Cardinals 783. It's not even close.

 

I just posted that leading the NL in runs scored in 2012 was with 776. Mind you that was with a better than previous MVP season by Braun, a better than expected output by ARam, and a very productive season by Hart. We're talking your 3,4,5 hitters having basically their Best Case Scenario season of production in 2012. Don't forget the out of nowhere .320BA Lucroy had. Something this season's .280 is more realistic of expectations. Aoki had top notch production in 2012. That's 5 batters whose production was 120% of a realistic expectation. All that to finish the season with 776 runs scored. So 859? Honestly? You figure the production difference would amount to 200runs over the season vs. the production we did get by the replacements? ARam did appear in 92games to you lost 70games of output. 100 games by Braun and the full 162 by Hart. That's a 2full seasons worth of replacements on the roster between the 3. And you figured it amounted to 100runs for each roster spot? I mean Betancourt did have 13HRs and Francisco had 13 that's 26HRs in replacement production. Or about what Corey Hart should be expected to produce. So no way does Corey's missing roster spot amount to 100runs?

And Khris Davis's season amounted to half of Braun's missed games. A .280 11HR/27RBI for 1/4 of a season's PAs is a pace of 44HRs 108RBI Exactly in line with Braun's best expectations. So where's the second 100Runs?

[PrinceFielderx1]

Your posts hit before I sent my last one PFX1 but:

Add in Ramirez and that's 50 more runs, then add Hart and then we are in 1st place with 859 runs scored compared to the Cardinals 783. It's not even close.

 

I just posted that leading the NL in runs scored in 2012 was with 776. Mind you that was with a better than previous MVP season by Braun, a better than expected output by ARam, and a very productive season by Hart. We're talking your 3,4,5 hitters having basically their Best Case Scenario season of production in 2012. Don't forget the out of nowhere .320BA Lucroy had. Something this season's .280 is more realistic of expectations. Aoki had top notch production in 2012. That's 5 batters whose production was 120% of a realistic expectation. All that to finish the season with 776 runs scored. So 859? Honestly? You figure the production difference would amount to 200runs over the season vs. the production we did get by the replacements? ARam did appear in 92games to you lost 70games of output. 100 games by Braun and the full 162 by Hart. That's a 2full seasons worth of replacements on the roster between the 3. And you figured it amounted to 100runs for each roster spot? I mean Betancourt did have 13HRs and Francisco had 13 that's 26HRs in replacement production. Or about what Corey Hart should be expected to produce. So no way does Corey's missing roster spot amount to 100runs?

And Khris Davis's season amounted to half of Braun's missed games. A .280 11HR/27RBI for 1/4 of a season's PAs is a pace of 44HRs 108RBI Exactly in line with Braun's best expectations. So where's the second 100Runs?

 

I didn't factor Aoki's 2012 at all actually. I was only using Braun, Ramrez, and Harts career norms in the runs scored column only and comparing it to this season. This is what they have done in their previous multiple years. Even if you subtract let's say 20 runs like in 2011 you get the top offense in the NL. It's what we should expect.

[MNBrew]

...a better than expected output by ARam...

Several people keep saying this, but it's dead wrong. Ramirez's 2012 was pretty much in line w/ his career norms over his previous 10 years (less the one season where he missed a lot of time). . . . The other thing about him is this: His production rates once he was mostly healthy last year (late August & Sept) were creeping right back toward those norms. There's nothing other than a sprained knee he tried to play through but which significantly hindered his play most of the year that would indicate regression's happening with him yet, and an injury (eventually fully recovered from) doesn't automatically = skill erosion. Time will tell, of course, going forward, but I think writing him off as being of limited effectiveness/production going forward is more hunch than evidence-based.

 

One other point boosting PFx1's claim that losing their 3-4-5 hitters hurt . . . It wasn't just those 3. Arguably the Brewers' 4th best consistent & proven power bat was Rickie Weeks, whose 2nd half of 2012 started to show recovery from his badly injured ankle at the end of 2011. But Weeks' ability to hit the ball at all absolutely fell off the planet SO BADLY in 2013 (BB & HBP numbers still respectable, but that only gets you so far if you can't hit the ball for crap). So while Weeks didn't miss time 'til well into the 2nd half, basically his hitting was MIA all year save for a nice month of June. Heck, Weeks was SO BAD that he may not even be here if it weren't for his unfortunate 2014 contract figure.

[TooLiveBrew]

Several people keep saying this, but it's dead wrong. Ramirez's 2012 was pretty much in line w/ his career norms over his previous 10 years (less the one season where he missed a lot of time). . . . The other thing about him is this: His production rates once he was mostly healthy last year (late August & Sept) were creeping right back toward those norms. There's nothing other than a sprained knee he tried to play through but which significantly hindered his play most of the year that would indicate regression's happening with him yet, and the injury itself isn't regression. Time will tell, of course, going forward, but I think writing him off as being of limited effectiveness/production going forward is more hunch than evidence-based.

I think you make great points on Ramirez. I hope the Brewers move him to 1B to help keep his bat in the lineup. I'd rather look to go with a solid to strong defender at 3B (hopefully who can hit enough to make sense) & slide Aramis across the diamond. He makes a ton of sense to play there at this point imo. Granted, the Brewers are in a unique position if Hart is loyal enough to sign the kind of one-year make-good deal he discussed earlier this offseason. Then it's hard to just say "bye" to Corey.

[MNBrew]

Several people keep saying this, but it's dead wrong. Ramirez's 2012 was pretty much in line w/ his career norms over his previous 10 years (less the one season where he missed a lot of time). . . . The other thing about him is this: His production rates once he was mostly healthy last year (late August & Sept) were creeping right back toward those norms. There's nothing other than a sprained knee he tried to play through but which significantly hindered his play most of the year that would indicate regression's happening with him yet, and the injury itself isn't regression. Time will tell, of course, going forward, but I think writing him off as being of limited effectiveness/production going forward is more hunch than evidence-based.

I think you make great points on Ramirez. I hope the Brewers move him to 1B to help keep his bat in the lineup. I'd rather look to go with a solid to strong defender at 3B (hopefully who can hit enough to make sense) & slide Aramis across the diamond. He makes a ton of sense to play there at this point imo. Granted, the Brewers are in a unique position if Hart is loyal enough to sign the kind of one-year make-good deal he discussed earlier this offseason. Then it's hard to just say "bye" to Corey.

I'm with you. If Hart's health and the deal are both right, his Brewers career seemingly inevitably will continue.

 

If that's not the case, in my dream world, I still hope now-darkhorse Taylor Green comes in & stakes serious claim to a starting spot as a Cirillo-like hitter and enables Ramirez to comfortably & logically slide across the diamond to 1B . . . or at worst Green earns a roster spot as the top corner IF reserve who also can back up at 2B (his original position) and corner OF.

[TheCrew07]

You forgot another option. The Brewers take the money they would have spent on the first rounder and instead use it on the international draft. Didn't they give two kids $800K each? They hadn't done that in previous years.

 

That's a convenient assumption to make but basically untrue as the Brewers didn't over spend the cap on international FAs. All of that information was all covered in great detail in the international signings/draft forum.

 

As to the contention that this team has plenty of talent I would qualify that as an extremely biased opinion. We're old, the team's average age has been creeping upwards for years now. Look how quickly the Cubs went from competitive to a joke as their old players fell off production wise, got injured, or both. We are clearly the 4th best team in our own division... the Brewers would need extreme good fortune and to have the other teams in the division suffer extreme misfortune for the Brewers to contend for anything.

 

There's no magic formula for long-term success, but foolishly hanging onto veterans who are past their prime physically is the surest recipe for disaster, especially in a small market with limited payroll flexibility to start with. I've posted on organization building literally hundreds of times, but I'm done, it's proven to be a waste time with the same mantras being repeated on both sides over an over. I understand the need to hang onto the past, or players that you may have formed some emotional bond to, but none of that really has anything to do with what is best for tomorrow. No organization in any sport can afford to have their eyes firmly fixed on today, though many do (and it never seems to work out well with the exception of the Marlins in the 90s) there should always be a balance between today and tomorrow, but in Milwaukee there hasn't been.

 

I've never been in favor of blowing it all up, I've argued vehemently against the organization's moves which I believe are bringing us closer to that scenario, but at some point if we don't get some young impact talent coming back into the upper part of the organization that is exactly what is going to happen. I'm not a believer in Gomez now nor was I ever high on him, I was never a believer in Ramirez' ability to stay healthy, and we should move on from Hart and Aoki. The Brewers need to cycle talent appropriately which does not include continually buying MLB veterans with prospects, especially considering the lack of impact talent coming through the draft.

 

The Brewers need to get younger and more dynamic athletically... bigger arms, better range from the position players, more speed, etc. We aren't just behind those other teams in the standings, we're miles behind from a physical talent standpoint. Impact pitching... hell the Cards are using guys that would start for us in their bullpen. We have 1 pitcher in our rotation with an above FB.... 1, Peralta, every other pitcher has an average or below average arm. The rotation is a joke from a playoff perspective.

 

Young impact position talent? We have none, we have guys who have a chance to be relatively productive, but I'm not sure there is even someone of Hart's caliber anywhere near Milwaukee, certainly no one like Braun or Fielder. 3B is may or may not be a hole in 2014 depending on Ramirez' health, he's not a good defender regardless, and what about 2015? Gennett will not be a long-term answer at 2B, he's a guy who's okay when you don't have anything better but is replaceable. I think Segura will continue to grow at SS. 1B... what a joke last year, will it be better in '14 or beyond? Braun will be Braun in LF or hopefully RF. I think Gomez regresses at the plate, and I think Kris Davis could be league average in LF.

 

I couldn't care less about the bullpen at this point, with a rotation that profiles to be average at best and line-up which is pretty much the same playing in an extremely tough division... I'm sorry but i just don't see "competitive" in that unless we're framing the argument around being .500, which is pretty meaningless to me.

[MNBrew]

TC07, you've repeated endlessly how this team's getting older. Every team's getting older. The Brewers are NOT that old. They're just not super young, which is what they were at the start of this run when Fielder, Weeks, Hardy, Braun, Hart, & Yo first arrived in the bigs. To wit....

 

The only SEVEN players 30 or older right now -- between starting position players, SPs, & main BP cogs -- are Estrada (30), Henderson (31), Lohse (35), Ramirez (35), Weeks (31), Aoki (31), & Braun (30). That's 7 out of about 16 (8 position starters, 5 SP, & 3 main BP cogs). Ramirez & Lohse are the only TWO who are older than 31, and they're hardly ancient, never minding that they're still very productive (see post #87 above re: Ramirez's production).

 

Given that most all players get pretty well banged up over the course of every year, I find your cynicism about Ramirez's ability to stay healthy peculiar if not ill-founded, too, given that only 2x in the past 13 years has he played fewer than 100 games -- years with a more substantial or hindering injury, obviously -- and in the remaining 11 of those 13 years he never played in fewer than 120 games, 8x playing in >140 games (the highest 3 years averaging 158 games), and 149 games played in both 2011 & 2012.

 

Your points about the lack of dynamic young talent and staying on the proper side of the age/talent combo/balance in terms of organization building & sustaining are well taken. But I find your interpretation that optimism about this team's talent being a highly biased opinion . . . well, just as biased as your oft-repeated assessment that it's a glaring negative issue that the team's average age has been increasing for years (the main alternative to which is doing what Kansas City has done for the past decade, and which certainly hasn't paid off until finally their "core" young guys aren't really so young anymore: 2013 KC: position players: 26.9 yrs, pitchers: 29.8 yrs; 2013 MIL: position players 27.8 yrs; 28.5 years . . . so why is this a problem for MIL but not the "generally seen as up-and-coming" Royals?)

[KCBrewerfan34]

Hard to believe anyone is even putting Taylor Green into a discussion around possibly starting, what is the guy going to blossom after sitting out a year?

 

He"ll be lucky to make the team IMO.

[logan82]

How many wins do you think Ryan Braun is worth in a full-season alone?

About 6 and that is probably being a little generous. He was only at 7-7.5 in his MVP years and I wouldn't expect that every year. So he maybe comes up with 4 extra wins if he plays the full season healthy and given his injury history that isn't a given. I know he hasn't missed games but he seems to have at least one nagging injury every year.

 

Ramirez is probably a 4ish win a year player. That is assuming no drop off in production or missed time for injuries. That is about 2 extra wins.

 

Our 1B position was about -2 WAR this year. Hart I am going to go with 3 WAR and that is probably being generous considering position and defense. He could be down as far as 1 WAR.

 

Rounding everything up and adding that only comes to 11 wins on the high side. Probably closer to 8. That is assuming good health and all three players maintaining production which is by no means given considering injury history and age for all 3.

[JohnBriggs12]

Old? Seriously? Gennett and Segura both turn 24 next year. Davis will be 26. Thornburg is 25. Peralta turns 25 in May. This roster got significantly younger last year. Bench isn't a bunch of mid 30's guys either. They aren't kids but guy like Bianchi, Gindl, Maldanado, Schafer, and Halton are all in their 20's. Alex Gonzalez is gone. Yuni is gone. Aoki could or could not be on the block. Hart seems older than he is. but he hasn't turned 32 yet. Gomez and Lucroy will be 28 next year. They along with Braun who just turned 30 are in their prime.

[Eye Black]

Several people keep saying this, but it's dead wrong. Ramirez's 2012 was pretty much in line w/ his career norms over his previous 10 years (less the one season where he missed a lot of time). . . . The other thing about him is this: His production rates once he was mostly healthy last year (late August & Sept) were creeping right back toward those norms. There's nothing other than a sprained knee he tried to play through but which significantly hindered his play most of the year that would indicate regression's happening with him yet, and the injury itself isn't regression. Time will tell, of course, going forward, but I think writing him off as being of limited effectiveness/production going forward is more hunch than evidence-based.

I think you make great points on Ramirez. I hope the Brewers move him to 1B to help keep his bat in the lineup. I'd rather look to go with a solid to strong defender at 3B (hopefully who can hit enough to make sense) & slide Aramis across the diamond. He makes a ton of sense to play there at this point imo. Granted, the Brewers are in a unique position if Hart is loyal enough to sign the kind of one-year make-good deal he discussed earlier this offseason. Then it's hard to just say "bye" to Corey.

Sign Juan Uribe to play 3B and move Ramirez to 1B? Juan Uribe is probably going to be the cheapest Free Agent ever for a player coming off a 5 WAR season. Granted he is going to regress on offense, but his defense was stellar last year. I would not advocate for the Brewers signing another aging 3B if they had anyone in the system that resembled a future major league regular at the position, but that isn't the case. I think Uribe actually makes some sense for the Brewers if they could sign him to a one year deal. Unfortunately if the Dodgers are bidding he probably ends up with to a 2 year deal in the 7-8 million per year range.

[TheCrew07]

TC07, you've repeated endlessly how this team's getting older. Every team's getting older. The Brewers are NOT that old. They're just not super young, which is what they were at the start of this run when Fielder, Weeks, Hardy, Braun, Hart, & Yo first arrived in the bigs. To wit....

 

The only SEVEN players 30 or older right now -- between starting position players, SPs, & main BP cogs -- are Estrada (30), Henderson (31), Lohse (35), Ramirez (35), Weeks (31), Aoki (31), & Braun (30). That's 7 out of about 16 (8 position starters, 5 SP, & 3 main BP cogs). Ramirez & Lohse are the only TWO who are older than 31, and they're hardly ancient, never minding that they're still very productive (see post #87 above re: Ramirez's production).

 

I don't think you quite understand the point I'm making, I'm not talking old relative to the average person, I'm talking old relative to peak performance/production, which encompasses all of the issues from talent to injury risk. When a player hits 30 they already on the downside of their career, it's been statistically proven time and time again. They aren't old by human standards, I was still figuring myself out well into my early 30s, but by professional sports standards they are old... players in their mid to late 30s are ancient. Those are not players a team like Milwaukee can afford to build around, there isn't enough money nor enough options to cover extended injury absences.

 

I'm not going hedge my bets based on any outlier... as in a gut feeling that a particular player is going to buck a historically proven injury/production decline trend. That argument has been made for every 30 something pitcher we've signed by one poster or another, but how many of those guys have remained productive through the end of their contract? How many position players? I can think of one off the top of my head, Cameron, but many people disliked him for all the things that he wasn't at the plate, I actually liked him for all the things he was including great value as a FA signing.

 

Just because many teams operate in "win now" fashion around MLB doesn't make it a sound strategy. It pays off here and there for certain teams, but most teams buying are just spinning their wheels. Look at a team like Arizona who's traded more young impact pitching than any other team... had they just kept their own guys they'd have a monster rotation with more talent coming. For example trading Scherzer for Jackson, then flipping Jackson for Hudson? They would have been much better off just sticking with Scherzer the entire time.

 

Your points about the lack of dynamic young talent and staying on the proper side of the age/talent combo/balance in terms of organization building & sustaining are well taken. But I find your interpretation that optimism about this team's talent being a highly biased opinion . . . well, just as biased as your oft-repeated assessment that it's a glaring negative issue that the team's average age has been increasing for years (the main alternative to which is doing what Kansas City has done for the past decade, and which certainly hasn't paid off until finally their "core" young guys aren't really so young anymore: 2013 KC: position players: 26.9 yrs, pitchers: 29.8 yrs; 2013 MIL: position players 27.8 yrs; 28.5 years . . . so why is this a problem for MIL but not the "generally seen as up-and-coming" Royals?)

 

First, I don't think you've really understood my point. The team's average age should be right between 26-27 if constructed properly. Ideally we'd have a couple of players in their early 30s about to exit and we'd be adding a couple of very young rookies to the roster every year, with everyone else in between. When the bulk of your team is through the arbitration process and on FA contracts, that's an "old" team... again not in terms of age, but in terms of professional sports and cost relative to production. I'm fine cutting bait with every single player at 30 or 31, sooner if the right trade comes along.

 

As to KC... I liked what the Royals were doing until they bought proven veterans to shore up the rotation and finish in 3rd place. I understand the perception value from casual fans in actually getting over the top and posting a winning season for the first time in 10 years, but if this was a KC forum I'd be posting the same stuff about them as I have about the Brewers. Why on earth would you give up 6+ years of Myers and Odorizzi for Shields and Davis just to finish in 3rd place? That's not taking a shot, that's blowing your wad for nothing, kind of like the Brewers signing Lohse to lose a 1st round pick and finish in 4th place.

 

The Royals do have a couple of young pitchers worth keeping an eye on in Kyle Zimmer and Yordano Ventura.

 

That being said, I don't really spend a whole lot of time posting about teams that I don't want to emulate, I'm not big on "what not to do", I'd rather focus on how to keep the talent train rolling... then winning will take care of itself. I'm not into chasing 2-3 extra wins for a fundamentally flawed roster from the start. For me it's World Series or bust, that's my idea of being competitive, and I'm not looking to rise up to that level for 1 season in every 30, or even 1 season in every 10, I want to sustain a high level of success for a long period of time, I'd like to be in the NLCS 4 out of 10 years.

 

However there is simply no way to do that without the pitching, and the Brewers haven't proven they can draft and develop pitching, which brings me back around full circle to where I started all those years ago when the talk was about trying to acquire Sabathia or Peavy on this forum; our focus should be trading for young impact starting pitching when those deals become available. The opportunity isn't going to be there on a yearly basis but the Brewers must be willing to jump when it comes knocking, that's the only way to permanently get on top of the pitching situation. Hitting on 1 pitcher every 6 or 7 drafts isn't going to get it done... Sheets to Gallardo to Odorizzi (if he performs for TB) to whom? Jake was drafted in 2008, Jack Z's last draft, who's a legit #2 or better anywhere in our farm system above A ball? There's just too much space between impact pitchers for the Brewers. I'm not talking about developing an Ace, those guys don't come around very often, I'd be happy with a rotation full of 2s with a 3 or two on the back end.

 

So yes, the Brewers are old and expensive relative to production with flawed roster construction, it's not a biased opinion, it's the reality of the situation. We have too little pre arby talent, we're top heavy, we've been top heavy for years, and from an impact talent standpoint we're a wasteland. I'm still hoping Peralta ascends, I still like Thornburg, but neither one of those guys have proven to be exceedingly efficient as pitchers (the same problem I had with Gallardo coming up), we need guys who can somewhat routinely get through the 7th inning, but we don't have them in the organization, and haven't had a guy like that since Sabathia's half a season. The rotation leaves too many innings for the bullpen, who for the most part are all pitchers who weren't good enough to be starters in the first place, so they aren't as talented and give up more runs pitching to a greater workload.

 

Balance the payroll distribution and fix the pitching with long-term solutions and my outlook on the big league Brewers will change positively. Until then I'll spend the majority of my time on the minor league/draft side where there is a new story every day, there's just not much of anything compelling to discuss regarding the MLB side of the Brewers. It's been the same cycle of conversations for years...

[brewcrewdue80]

Old? Seriously? Gennett and Segura both turn 24 next year. Davis will be 26. Thornburg is 25. Peralta turns 25 in May. This roster got significantly younger last year. Bench isn't a bunch of mid 30's guys either. They aren't kids but guy like Bianchi, Gindl, Maldanado, Schafer, and Halton are all in their 20's. Alex Gonzalez is gone. Yuni is gone. Aoki could or could not be on the block. Hart seems older than he is. but he hasn't turned 32 yet. Gomez and Lucroy will be 28 next year. They along with Braun who just turned 30 are in their prime.

 

Ah yes 24,25,26 being considered young. Yes the problem is none of those players were considered top 50 or even top 100 prospects...Well, Segura yes but he's not a product of our system.

Meanwhile within our division:

StL: Oscar Tavaras age 21 Kolten Wong age 23 Shelby Miller age 23 Carlos Martinez age 22 Trevor Rosenthal age 23 Michael Wacha age 22 Mat Adams age 24 Seth Maness age 24

Pitts: Jamieson Taillon age 22 Gregory Polanco age 22 Alen Hanson age 21 Nick Kingham age 22 Gerrit Cole age 23 Starling Marte age 24 Jose Tabata age 24

Cubs: Javier Baez age 20 Jorge Soler age 21 Starlin Castro age 23, Anthony Rizzo age 23 Junior Lake age 23 with Albert Almora age 19 and Kris Bryant age 19 top tier prospects in the immediate pipeline

 

Yes we're old and out matched in terms of young talent, whether on the team today or in the immediate future. How's it going to work for Milwaukee in the Arb years for all our guys? Let's say we keep them for the full 6years team control. These guys will be 30/31 come time for Free Agency. What's the odds any one of them gets a QO?

 

Now look at the future big three in our division. Especially Stl/Pitts. Their players will graduate to Free Agency age 27-29. How attractive is that whether in trade? Or even for QO purposes. How about not only having young super talent but Locking them in beyond 6 years of team control?

 

Stl will have Ace type Pitching 1 through 3 in their rotation for 5 more years minimum. Martinez pans out that's 4. Take Miller,Wacha,Martinez and extend them til they are aged 32? How do we look vs StL. for the next decade? That's what we're staring at a decade of Stl/Pitts with Ace...True Ace Pitching for the next 10 years vs Milwaukee. And then here they are with top 20 Position Prospects to back them up to boot.

 

Meanwhile we're here discussing Gennett and Davis pretty much all those listed above aside from the one guy who didn't come up in our system Segura as being capable moving forward to keep us competitive.

Look, there's a reason these guys didn't crack top 50 prospects. It's either Offense or really, it's Defense. Gennett/Davis aren't gold glove or Plus defenders. So while they may, just may be worth 5-20Runs above Replacement offensively. They will be in the costing the team 15runs to maybe gaining 2-3 runs defensively year to year. And we sit here with no Ace pitching how's that outlook? When not only do Pitts/StL have Aces today/in the making but prospects who will be a net gain in runs defensively to support them/ while being adequate with the bat.

 

Tell me something more if our team of non top 100prospects are 24-26 in age how much growth potential do you really think will occur as these less talented players mature?

 

Now think about how the age 21-24 top 50 Prospects StL/Pitts/ChC have and the growth potential beyond what they've shown already will be as they mature?

 

Yeah that is why I advocate blowing it up when possible. Or avoiding signings of Kyle Lohse for a draft pick. We're outmatched/Outgunned now,today, and in the immediate future. Waiting on aging assets to get the job done or regain value they have been losing hasn't been working. Continually failing to maximize a player's trade value to get younger leaves us here. I don't even care if those Prospects don't pan out. Milwaukee needs to build through youth as Crew has stated. Recycle the talent for more youth/cost controlled players as the approach Free Agency. Rather than as they approach Free Agency to sign them to 2yr/3yr extensions. Taking chunks of payroll with it. Saving the payroll for the Brauns we find are what is necessary.

[MNBrew]

A few points:

 

TC07, I totally did get your point. It's very obvious we lack lots of high-end young talent (blue-chip prospects, to borrow a football term) both in the pipeline and MLB pre-arby. The team's not blatantly old -- you talk about the ideal team avg. age being 26-27 and the Brewers are in the 27-28 range -- about 1 year too old on average by your standard, which isn't bad, but indeed top-heavy in that the greatest talents are mostly at/above that age level.

 

My point about KC as a comparison is that they've been a team with a decent number of promising/high-end prospects in their pipeline and making their MLB debuts for many, many years. But that's all they had (in other words, for too long they were TOO young -- NO significant or at least meaningfully successful veterans to add some maturity/leadership/perspective -- and part of the result is that they've been nothing but a cellar dweller for the past decade until they finally brought a few needed "good" vets into their equation. . . . which now leads many to say that any moves to add that talent (proven SPs, mostly) were ultimately foolish since it didn't put 'em over the top and cost some strong prospects. . . . My point was that at some point KC needed to do something to break their cycle of lousy teams -- not unlike what the Brewers did, meaning make a stronger-than-usual move to try to boost the franchise into contending status for the first time in 2 decades. It's a calculated risk. But it's also one that can pay dividends if teams like KC still have a strong talent stream and a view of the big picture that wide, wise, and shrewdly forward-thinking.

 

BCD80, you can't just automatically blow off the Gennetts and Khris Davises of the world just because they're not seen as blue-chip prospects. They just come with less of a sense of "guaranteed" success. While the Cubs, Pirates, & Cardinals all have lots of young stud prospects, you can't compare all 3 equally because STL gets to that level routinely without much of a down stretch at the MLB level at all over the past decade. CHC & PIT got to this point because they were SO bad for SO long that they both have more top-10 draft picks than not over the past decade . . . the exact same sort of stretch that put the Brewers in position 10-12 years ago to draft Weeks & Fielder & Hardy & Yo, where the eventual results were good but the MLB team was torturously bad for several years and there was still no certainty that all the top prospects would pan out.

 

While I don't agree with every specific point you both make, I do agree with most and I strongly agree with both of your overall premise that the scouting and player development departments HAVE TO improve their results greatly because they hold the keys to the long-term success of the Brewers' franchise -- they're the lifeline for long-term survival.

 

I'll advance one more point: I think the notion that every >30-yr-old player needs to be moved for prospects is simply too extreme. But in terms of a template, I think the 1990s Braves are a good example of identifying your "true" core players, then mixing/matching & adding/subtracting around that core with from the pipeline of young talent and the right "external" moves -- willingly & readily making moves as they're needed and often having the "right" timing that's sooner than other competing teams or the fan base might realize in terms of moving on from & replacing certain players. The key for a mid- or small-market team like the Brewers is as simple as getting it right nearly every time because their margin for error is so much smaller.

[danzig6767]

You forgot another option. The Brewers take the money they would have spent on the first rounder and instead use it on the international draft. Didn't they give two kids $800K each? They hadn't done that in previous years.

 

The Brewers need to get younger and more dynamic athletically... bigger arms, better range from the position players, more speed, etc. We aren't just behind those other teams in the standings, we're miles behind from a physical talent standpoint. Impact pitching... hell the Cards are using guys that would start for us in their bullpen. We have 1 pitcher in our rotation with an above FB.... 1, Peralta, every other pitcher has an average or below average arm. The rotation is a joke from a playoff perspective.

 

The by far difference between the Cardinals and Brewers comes down mainly just to the draft. Their amateur scouting department has badly outperformed the Brewers, especially when it comes to pitching. Look at the guys on their staff who pitched well for them last year or prior winning years be it in the rotation, pen, or lineup.

 

Trevor Rosenthal 21st round. Joe Kelly 3rd round. Shelby Miller 1st round. Michael Wacha 1st round. Jaime García 22nd round. Kevin Siegrist 41st round. Seth Maness 11th round. Jason Motte 19th round. Albert Pujols 13th round. Matt Carpenter 13th round. Yadier Molina 4th round. Allen Craig 8th round. Jon Jay 2nd round. Matt Adams 23rd round.

 

They also have well regarded Kolten Wong coming next year after he was drafted in the 1st round. Carlos Martinez was signed internationally and is an top pitching prospect. Oscar Taveras was signed for only 140K and is one of the best prospects in the game. Stephen Piscotty supplemental 1st round. Marco Gonzales taken 19th overall last year was impressive as a rookie. I probably missed others.

 

The Brewers amateur scouting/drafting under Zduriencik had a nice run landing position players like Prince, Braun, Hart, Weeks, Hardy, etc and he drafted Gallardo, but that's mostly it for pitching over many years and the drafting of high end talent anywhere has largely dried up since Seid was hired to replace Zduriencik. When we sign Latin free agents, they don't turn out like Carlos Martinez or Oscar Taveras.

 

Given general managers don't have the time to go scouting countless high school and college prospects for drafts each year, to me, these amateur scouting directors are the most under-appreciated people in baseball. Their success or failure in drafting and helping evaluate international talent has incredible importance to every team in the league, but especially teams lacking huge revenue streams, and few fans even know their names.

 

If your franchise is in that small to mid-market area and the amateur scouting director is pretty consistently to consistently providing quality cheap young talent, it allows for so many opportunities to compete for layoff berths each year via simply adding quality talent and allowing financial resources to spent elsewhere on the roster. If though your franchise is in that small to mid-market area and the amateur scouting director is struggling to provide quality cheap young talent, the impact causes a spider web like level of negative ramifications, especially if they fail to draft quality young pitching which is the most valuable commodity in baseball. IMO, the amateur scouting directors who do really well, particularly the ones not picking really high in drafts often, they deserve considerably more money than they get paid given the huge sums of money they both save and provide their team's.

[RobertR]

Who cares if Segura is not a product of the system? The topic is about the Brewers competing, not whether the farm system has been particularly good the last few years. If anything, it points that the Brewers have a good eye in spotting trade talent and making good trades.

 

Personally, I think we need to take Top 100 lists with a good grain of salt. They're an appeal to authority, but the track record of them will show that about half or more will wash out without making much of an impact. I'll hazard that Jonathan Lucroy, a prospect that was never ranked in a Top 100 list, will have a more valuable career than about 75% of the top prospects listed above. Maybe more as he's an All Star level talent.

 

Heck, just to cite two, would you be eager to take on the contracts of Starlin Castro and Anthony Rizzo based on what you've seen from the two of them to date? There's a fair chance that Scooter Gennett and Khris Davis could ultimately be more valuable.

 

Which isn't to defend the Brewers drafting and development at all, although it does seem reasonable to note that Peralta and Thornburg have shown up in Top 100 lists as prospects, but a smattering of top prospects doesn't make a farm system. That said, they seem to have at least developed some pitching depth at the top levels and I have a lot more faith in Peralta in his second year and Thornburg being assets to the rotation than I ever had in Rogers and Fiers.

 

Really, at this stage, the only bad contract that the Brewers are really holding onto is Weeks. Yeah, Lohse and Ramirez are getting up there, but they're still two very good players. Other than those two and Weeks, I'm not sure what the complaint about the Brewers is. Frankly, I'd argue that age isn't the issue with the Brewers anyway, it's being able to remain healthy. And not settling for Yuniesky Betancourt at first base.

 

Otherwise, if the Brewers don't compete this year, Ramirez and Weeks are gone. They probably shop Lohse too. But, in the meantime, they have to field a team. And I don't see any harm in putting together a competitive team. The Cardinals have never tanked. Frankly, they've won a World Series with a fairly weak team that just got hot. I see nothing wrong with taking your best shot at the beginning of the season and if it's not working out at midseason, trading off guys like Ramirez, Weeks, and Lohse. And, if you're only on a pace to win 86 or so, maybe look to see what you can acquire to get you to 90 wins.

 

Also, the way teams seem to value prospects these days, I'd say that the market is overcompensating to an extent. A prospect that pans out is very valuable, but lots of them don't. With the exception of possibly Odorizzi, who have the Brewers given up for their run that you really want back now? Heck, given the choice between Odorizzi and Segura, I think Segura looks like much more of a star at this point.