Brett Lawrie starting to put it together?

[The stache]

Gallardo is probably the main reason we beat Arizona and got to the NLCS so don't know how you say he didn't show up.

 

If you ask Kirk Gibson, it's the steroids in Ryan Braun (just the roids, mind you, not Braun at all).

[WV Brew]

If you ask Kirk Gibson, it's the steroids in Ryan Braun (just the roids, mind you, not Braun at all). [laughing]

 

Which is why I loved the hiring of LaRussa. Gibby's head must be exploding.

[homer]

I don't miss Lawrie's defense.

[RockCoCougars]

Not to veer this one too far off, but if the Brewers had been able to resign Greinke, there'd be no Segura and almost certainly no Lohse and Parra as well.

[HiAndTight]

Not to veer this one too far off, but if the Brewers had been able to resign Greinke, there'd be no Segura and almost certainly no Lohse and Parra as well.

 

I'm with you on the Lohse and obviously Segura, but Parra? I really doubt that would have been an issue. There would have been a ripple affect. We wouldn't have been so desperate for pitching so we likely wouldn't have signed Lohse and had a 1st rounder. Maybe it's Ramirez we wouldn't have. I don't know, but I'm pretty confident the Brewers still would have gone after Parra hard. And just to be clear, I was saying the Brewers should have tried to sign Greinke right after they traded for him. The Nationals did offer an extension with the deal that it sounded like Greinke would have agreed to for 5 years 100 million. Not the 6 year 150 million dollar deal.

 

I don't miss Lawrie's defense.

Why? By all accounts it's been very good in the major leagues. Are you going all the way back to when he was 18/19 and moved to 2nd base and some questioned if he could stay there?

[RockCoCougars]

I'm with you on the Lohse and obviously Segura, but Parra? I really doubt that would have been an issue."

Whoops. Meant Garza, I must be aging, because I am getting horrible with names.

[HiAndTight]

I'm with you on the Lohse and obviously Segura, but Parra? I really doubt that would have been an issue."

Whoops. Meant Garza, I must be aging, because I am getting horrible with names.

Well that certainly makes sense. Yeah, I don't know what they would have done. You're probably right. But, in this alternate universe in which they have Greinke signed for 5 years 100 million because they got the extension done right at the time of the trade, they have a true ace, Gallardo, Peralta, Estrada and Nelson and that would be cheaper than Garza and Lohse(AAV). I think we can all agree that a Greinke/Nelson combo would be preferable to a Lohse/Garza combo that costs an extra 3-4 million per year.

 

Of course this discussion is an exercise in futility. As useful of putting Sonny Gray and Jose Fernandez into our rotation over Bradley and Jungman.

[Thurston Fluff]

Given the opinion of Estrada on this board, I think it's safe to assume most believe that he would have been good enough as our 5th starter to make the playoffs.

 

Who would we have had to trot out there when Greinke got hurt then? IIRC Estrada was far from the first choice at the time. In fact I don't think he was even on the 40 man roster at the time. He only got the chance because everyone else flopped. Then add in we would have had to find someone to take the slack up in the pen with him in the rotation. Finally while he has shown he is good when healthy he has had a hard time staying healthy.

If you're going to take a player like Brett Lawrie, I think you should have tried much harder to get a better return. The Pineda for Lawrie trade is one.

 

Was that a real option?

[HiAndTight]

Who would we have had to trot out there when Greinke got hurt then? IIRC Estrada was far from the first choice at the time. In fact I don't think he was even on the 40 man roster at the time. He only got the chance because everyone else flopped. Then add in we would have had to find someone to take the slack up in the pen with him in the rotation. Finally while he has shown he is good when healthy he has had a hard time staying healthy.

 

 

Only 6 guys started games for us that year. Greinke, Marcum, Wolf, Gallardo, Narveson and then Estrada. So he was the option to start the year for us, so I can only assume he would have been the guy had they not traded for Marcum. It's purely conjecture at this point. Each move has a ripple affect, but I think it's fair to say it would have been Estrada.

 

Has he gotten hurt, maybe they would have gone with Mike Fiers. He went 13-3 with a 1.86 ERA, .94 WHIP and 9.4 K's per 9 in 2011 in AA/AAA. His AAA numbers were even better with a 8-0 record, 1.11 ERA, 9.6 K's per 9. He threw about 130 innings that year at age 26, so he had earned a chance even at that point.

 

So Fiers could have started, he could have been the guy to take up the slack and be the long man in the bullpen, or they could have made another move for a swing man/5th starter that didn't cost them Lawrie. I obviously can't say with any certainty. The Brewers were 20-23 in games he pitched in that year, and 4-3 in games he started. Obviously that only tells a small part of the story, the fact is he wasn't used as one of their late inning relievers.

For the record, the Brewers were 16-17 in games Marcum pitched in that year as well, not counting the 0-3 they were in the playoffs.

 

 

Was that a real option?

 

Well shortly after the trade the Mariners tried to trade Pineda for Lawrie and the Jays turned them down. So I can't say for certain they would have made such a trade, but I do think that had the Brewers actually shopped Lawrie as opposed to just dealing with the Jays, they could have gotten a bigger return. At least Rickey Romero.

[endaround]

Shortly after was after 2011. After Lawrie's one and only huge year.

 

The only proof the Brewers didn't shop Lawrie was one anonymous quote.

[HiAndTight]

Shortly after was after 2011. After Lawrie's one and only huge year.

 

The only proof the Brewers didn't shop Lawrie was one anonymous quote.

 

 

Not really. There was an anonymous quotes from other teams scouts saying they didn't know that Lawrie was available via trade.

 

However, Zack Minasian the Brewers pro scouting director spoke on the record about talking to his brother, Perry Minasian, the Blue Jays pro scouting director over thanksgiving dinner about the trade.

 

So the trade was first discussed by siblings for the two teams while eating thanksgiving dinner(according to Minasian). Not anonymous and not one quote.

 

 

However even if it was just scouts from other teams who said they had no idea that Lawrie was available, why doubt that? Of course they're going to remain anonymous as their comments almost always are, and what reason would they have to lie about that?

[endaround]

It means one team didn't know Lawrie was available. If that team didn't have available pitching, what did it matter? The Brewers needed a pitcher and one they didn't give up any of their own pitching for (Ordozzi was set to be a starter at this point, more proof at how the Brewers tend to rush prospects).

[TooLiveBrew]

It means one team didn't know Lawrie was available. If that team didn't have available pitching, what did it matter? The Brewers needed a pitcher and one they didn't give up any of their own pitching for (Ordozzi was set to be a starter at this point, more proof at how the Brewers tend to rush prospects).

Odorizzi? As in you're saying they planned to have him in the 2011 MLB rotation? Odorizzi, who was coming off of low-A Wisconsin the year before -- your memory is off on this one.

[Thurston Fluff]

Only 6 guys started games for us that year. Greinke, Marcum, Wolf, Gallardo, Narveson and then Estrada. So he was the option to start the year for us, so I can only assume he would have been the guy had they not traded for Marcum. It's purely conjecture at this point. Each move has a ripple affect, but I think it's fair to say it would have been Estrada.

 

Estrada wasn't even on the 40 man roster and was the last guy in spring they tried after Greinke got hurt. The reason it was Estrada was because there was no other pitcher who stepped up to be even considered over a non 40 man, soft tossing, unknown right hander. That lack of pitching prospects was why Melvin traded for two to begin with. Kudos for Estrada stepping up but given how far down the totem pole they had to go to get him it seems like him as one of the original five starters would have created a serious hole in that staff. A hole that would have had to be filled with one of the other pitchers who failed in spring.

[HiAndTight]

Only 6 guys started games for us that year. Greinke, Marcum, Wolf, Gallardo, Narveson and then Estrada. So he was the option to start the year for us, so I can only assume he would have been the guy had they not traded for Marcum. It's purely conjecture at this point. Each move has a ripple affect, but I think it's fair to say it would have been Estrada.

 

Estrada wasn't even on the 40 man roster and was the last guy in spring they tried after Greinke got hurt. The reason it was Estrada was because there was no other pitcher who stepped up to be even considered over a non 40 man, soft tossing, unknown right hander. That lack of pitching prospects was why Melvin traded for two to begin with. Kudos for Estrada stepping up but given how far down the totem pole they had to go to get him it seems like him as one of the original five starters would have created a serious hole in that staff. A hole that would have had to be filled with one of the other pitchers who failed in spring.

 

 

Estrada was on the 40 man roster in 2010 and then was sent down to AAA after complaining of arm fatigue, a move that many questioned at the time as a way to stay on the big league roster so he could accumulate service time when it looked like he was going to get sent down after making a spot start for them when the staff was depleted.

 

So no, he wasn't on the 40 man roster. However he wasn't exactly this out of nowhere longshot you're making him out to be. Peralta started out that spring pitching very well and the Brewers were considering him for the spot before Estrada earned it.

 

But I don't really see what difference that would make. He made the first 7 starts of the year for Greinke. He was the 1st option. You go into ST'ing and your #5 pitcher is often times a competition. I see no reason why things would have been different had they not acquired Marcum(assuming everything else stays the same).

 

Either way, my issue here is with what the Brewers got back for Lawrie. The conversation going off to if they still make the playoffs without Marcum can be debated a thousand ways because you can argue they would have done things differently. I can argue they could have acquired a durable starting pitcher without giving up Lawrie, and the difference between Marcum and that pitcher likely wouldn't have cost them their 6 game lead over the Cards, or 7 game lead over the top WC team.

[HiAndTight]

It means one team didn't know Lawrie was available. If that team didn't have available pitching, what did it matter? The Brewers needed a pitcher and one they didn't give up any of their own pitching for (Ordozzi was set to be a starter at this point, more proof at how the Brewers tend to rush prospects).

 

 

Right, IF it was just ONE scout. But it wasn't. It's difficult to dig up the quotes now, but this is from an Adam McCallvy article;

 

The deal was met with some surprise in the lobby of the Dolphin hotel by a handful of rival executives who didn't know Lawrie was available.

 

That of course is where the owners meetings took place.

 

Regardless though, this was a trade that was made with the Blue Jays because of relationships.

 

As I said, and Zack Minasian was in the Brewers front office and became the Brewers Director of Pro Scouting and his brother Perry Minasian, the Blue Jays Director of Pro Scouting who talked about literally first talked about the trade at Thanksgiving. Then there was also a connection with Roenicke's nephew who was in the Blue Jays organization.

 

And of course the the fact that Lawrie was very popular in Canada.

 

So I don't know how you can possibly say that it was ONE anonymous scout and then discredit the idea that the Brewers didn't shop Lawrie around when key personnel from each front office state that, and there are multiple reports that several team exects were shocked by the trade because they didn't know that Lawrie was available.

 

 

And as was pointed out, Odorizzi was never expected to be one of the Brewers starters going into 2011. He was coming off a year pitching in LowA, and while it was a good year, I don't recall ever seeing anything about the Brewers even considering him as a starter. And what prospects have the Brewers rushed?

 

If anything, they seem to be extremely conservative with their prospects, pitching prospects in particular. Unless we're going back to Rickie Weeks, who are these pitchers who were rushed?

[jjfanec]

Lawrie has fallen off the past few days. 3 for 27 with 7 k's and just 1 BB. His OPS is back down to .674 with an OBP of .275. He reminds me so much of Hardy in how streaky he is. I guess you can look at his season in two ways. If he starts getting more hits to fall he could move in the respectable range. If his power falls off though his numbers will be terrible. He is actually is 28th out of 32 in OBP for 3B. That is awful. Even with solid power numbers his OPS is 23 out of 32.

[HiAndTight]

Lawrie has fallen off the past few days. 3 for 27 with 7 k's and just 1 BB. His OPS is back down to .674 with an OBP of .275. He reminds me so much of Hardy in how streaky he is. I guess you can look at his season in two ways. If he starts getting more hits to fall he could move in the respectable range. If his power falls off though his numbers will be terrible. He is actually is 28th out of 32 in OBP for 3B. That is awful. Even with solid power numbers his OPS is 23 out of 32.

 

 

He's also not walking as much as I thought he would by this point. His BABIP is just .233 vs his career ave of .292, but his numbers still look bad.

 

That doesn't change my opinion that we should have tried to get a better return for him, but I digress.

[jjfanec]

Brett Lawrie continues his crazy year. His power numbers are phenomenal. The past 6 games he has only 5 hits but 3 home runs. So 5 for 22 with just one walk but 3 home runs. He is slugging .429 for the year. The opposite side of that is his .237 BA and .284 OBP. He has his OPS up over .700. He is a hard guy to figure out.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Lawrie's having a 2TO type season...strike out or hit a bomb. Until he corrects the swing and miss in his game a bit more and develops into a hitter that can draw walks, he'll never reach the potential he obviously has as a hitter. Immense talent that hasn't been fully developed into a polished hitter...at least yet.

 

The HR he hit a few games ago against the Cardinals to center/right center was just an absolute rocket - seemed like it was still going up with it crashed off the seats out there.

[HiAndTight]

I have a feeling Brett Lawrie would be getting a Rickie Weeks type reaction from the fans had he stayed in Milwaukee given how he's performed. He had such incredible hype coming off his first big league action that he was compared favorably to guys like Trout, Harper and Profar as the elite young players in the game.

 

Now FF 3 years and he's racking up a lot of K's and has a poor OBP and I imagine he'd be getting more pressure from the fanbase than he's getting in Canada.

 

 

I still believe in Lawrie and still think he's going to be a very good 3rd basemen(where I think he ultimately ends up as I think that is where his athletic ability plays best). But for a guy who was supposed to be such a "can't miss," guy after 2011, he's disappointed. Though he has a career WAR of 11.2 from ages 21-24 in what amounts to roughly 2 full seasons worth of games(332).

[fondybrewfan]

I am having a hard time feeling bad about losing a young player who has not cracked OPS+ of 100 in 2012, 2013, or 2014. He hasn't gotten his OPS over 730 in the last 3 years including this year. He has been entirely mediocre. Yes he is still only 24 years old and has plenty of time to develop yet but I still feel good about where Marcum got us in 2011.

[sveumrules]

Kind of funny how coming up Lawrie was a guy whose bat was going to carry him and his defense was so bad he'd probably have to move to an outfield corner. Now here we are almost 1,400 plate appearances into his major league career and he's been a below average hitter who's provided most of his value on the defensive side.

[HiAndTight]

I am having a hard time feeling bad about losing a young player who has not cracked OPS+ of 100 in 2012, 2013, or 2014. He hasn't gotten his OPS over 730 in the last 3 years including this year. He has been entirely mediocre. Yes he is still only 24 years old and has plenty of time to develop yet but I still feel good about where Marcum got us in 2011.

 

 

Again, that's where I take exception to this debate. The argument that Marcum is the one who got us to 96 wins and the NLCS. I believe we would have gotten there without Marcum, and frankly, it'd have been tough to do worse throwing someone out there in the post season given how terrible he was.

 

So again, it's not so much about losing Lawrie, it's about what we got for Lawrie at the time given his value and what Marcum did(or didn't do) for the Brewers in the limited time he pitched for us.

[jjfanec]

Kind of funny how coming up Lawrie was a guy whose bat was going to carry him and his defense was so bad he'd probably have to move to an outfield corner. Now here we are almost 1,400 plate appearances into his major league career and he's been a below average hitter who's provided most of his value on the defensive side.

 

His defensive numbers are over inflated as shown here http://forum.brewerfan.net/posting.php?mode=quote&f=63&p=897288

 

This piece shows how he was being used and how it inflated his numbers. http://thecutoffman.mlblogs.com/2012/07/02/defensive-shifts-part-iii-the-blue-jays-use-of-brett-lawrie/