How do we turn this sad franchise around?

[paul253]

To me the biggest obstacle in turning this thing around is the same obstacle people would have in trying to control an alcohol or gambling addiction: You have to first admit there is a problem. I don't mean to make light of alcoholism or gambling addictions but it's the same idea. Nobody in this organization up until this terrible start would acknowledge how bleak the future is. They were all looking at things through their rose-colored "we're a free agent and good health away from winning" glasses. I don't think any of us here are shocked at how bad the season has gone so far but I'd bet Mark and Doug are.

 

I said earlier and I'll say again: The hot start by us and poor start by St. Louis and Pittsburgh last season was the worst thing that could have happened to this franchise. Everyone was all obsessed with how long we were in first place last season. But they didn't notice apparently that after April the team had one winning month and played 10 games under .500. Playing 83% of your season 10 games under .500 does not equal a good team. But because of the fact that they were still in first place there was this illusion that they were much better than they really were.

 

As far as the future what do you do? Well the moves Id make are as follows:

 

1) Trade Gomez: He's still producing and still relatively young. Should get a decent prospect or two for him.

2) Trade Lohse: He's gone anyway. Get what you can for him.

3) Trade Lucroy: Probably your best trade chip. Take advantage of the high value while it is still there.

4) Trade any bullpen piece you can, outside of younger guys like Jeffress, Smith and Thornburg, that can bring something in return.

 

Focus on huge positions of need with trade returns. Third base, first base, starting pitching, and catcher. Notice how when we traded Gallardo we didn't get any players who play those positions other than an extremely young starting pitcher.

 

5) Continue to draft high ceiling vs high floor players. I'd also suggest they move away from drafting players who throw really hard but can't control it and look at guys who throw a little softer but can throw strikes.

6) Try to sign at least one mid-high international prospect each season.

[Patrick425]

We made the playoffs in 2008 prior to trading away the farm for Greinke and Marcum, so no we would not still be looking for our first playoffs in 30+ years.

 

Don't forget about this:

 

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/3084786/

 

A lot of people thought we were "trading the farm" at that point. Without Fielder the Brewers don't make the playoffs in 2008. People tend to cherry pick regarding these trades and just remember the prospects that ended up actually having good careers and forgetting the ones that ended up being not much at all. When you have a chance to make a run for the playoffs I will trade away unproven "prospects" for proven major leaguers every single time.

 

All we know is we won one playoff series at the cost of their future, and for some reason that is acceptable to many Brewer fans, who would not accept that from their beloved Packers, who always look to the future and have created somewhat of a dynasty in large part by showing a willingness to give up "name" veterans for young, unproven players (including but not limited to Hall of Famer Favre for injury-prone, unproven Rodgers for those who say the only way they win is because they have a QB).

 

You are not seriously going to compare a small market MLB team to a small market NFL team. Not sure where to start, but it's apples and oranges. Salary cap, National TV deal with a lot more revenue sharing. Green Bay does not have to compete economically with the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, and Angels of the world who all have separate TV deals that dwarf that of teams like the Brewers (yes, they share some of that, but not like in football). Also, their drafts picks often contribute the very next season. Baseball teams don't usually see the fruits of their drafts until 3 or 4 years later and many times the "can't miss" prospects they draft end up missing badly.

 

I believe the future always has to be considered, as does the present. When, for a prolonged period of time, a team makes every move for "today," and no moves for "tomorrow," tomorrow will still come, and it will not be any fun. When a team, especially a smaller-market team, plays for a "window," there will be a lot more down years than up years, as it takes a complete rebuild to get you to the stage where you mortgage the future for your "window," and since you mortgaged your future, you need another complete rebuild. Complete rebuilds take about a decade, whereas your "window" is usually only a few seasons.

 

I don't think the Brewers made moves for a "prolonged" period of time. They did it when it was appropriate to do it. Here is a list of big names they drafted in the early/mid 2000's and the year of their debut:

 

Fielder: Drafted: 2002 Debuted: 2005

Weeks: 2003/2003 (first yr of real significant playing time was 2005)

Hart: 2000/2004

Hardy: 2001/2005

Braun: 2005/2007

Gallardo: 2004/2007

 

Ok, so as you can see, lots of offense, little pitching. They needed pitching to make it to the playoffs. They could have done nothing, made no trades, and waited for pitchers like Peralta( drafted 2005/ debuted 2012), Odorizzi (2008/2012), and Nelson (2010/2013) to come up and hope that they would all be effective in the majors (which there is never a guarantee that they will be). By the time they came up and were all ready to contribute, the possibility of still having that offensive core together and be able to pay them was not likely at all. So, they either had to trade for pitching or sign free agent pitcher. We all know that the Brewers are never going to compete for pitchers like Sabathia and Grienke in the FA market.

 

It's pretty much impossible to have an entire team of home grown talent on the MLB ballclub at the same time. There are always holes to fill. You either have to do that through FA pickups (not a reasonable plan for the Brewers) or be willing to trade some of the future for guys to fill those holes.

[tmwiese55]

You need more than just one Hall of Famer on your team to make it competitive.

 

Really? None of us knew that.

 

But when you have one it's perfectly logical to go for it and all these things were ripping the for doing was made thinking you would have a 320/380 35 hr 110rbi guy as a center piece. Things are way different if he was still that player. Heck you could be arguing that we didn't go for it hard enough in those years instead. Going with Yuni at ss, ignoring1b the last few years etc.

 

Yes these next years could be rough and the 06ish type era of optimism was better than this. But would you just want to be in that state at all times without ever going for it. Think kc fans are still complaining about Myers/shields right now? This attitude would have led to trading Prince before 2011 for the future, possibly by the time those guys are ready you would have traded Braun. By the time those guys are ready you'd have to trade some others. At some point you have to go for it and in the smallest market with the smallest tv deal your window will be small, if you don't like it you might as well quit following MLB because it's not changing. That or be dodgers, cubs, Yankees, or cardinals fan.

 

Draft/develop better the last 9 years and they're not in this bad of a spot.

 

Good post Patrick.

[TheCrew07]

I was going to stay out this because quite frankly I tired of the discussion a long time ago. However this notion that posters are "cherry picking trades" to criticize isn't true at all, and never has been.

 

The discussion always has been about ULTIMATE VALUE, but apparently that concept keeps getting past people. Why is it so hard to understand that by trading for Sabathia and the playoffs in 2008, the Brewers likely compromised what was possible in 2009 and 2010. Or that trading for Marcum and Greinke directly led to 2012-2015?

 

Why is it so hard to acknowledge the good and the bad that came with those moves?

 

It's the same with FA signings, what major impact have any of those signings over the years had? Did any actually move the Brewers up into the next tier and make them significantly better than they otherwise would have been?

 

This is fascination with being 1 or 2 players away has been fallacy from the start, it's never been true and will never be true until we have legitimate depth through out the organization.

 

People aren't cherry picking anything, it's been the same tired strategy year after year since 2006 and it hasn't produced meaningful results. We have 1 playoff series win to show for all the talent we had come through Milwaukee because the roster construction was flawed from the start.

 

Personally I've hated every move besides the Greinke trade with the exception of Gallardo, which I'm indifferent on, posters have called me out on that on fact, and I've readily agreed. The strategy was never sustainable and many of us were figuring that out long before the Greinke trade.

 

The Brewers simply cannot just continually buy MLB players with prospects, they cannot continually target short term solutions, they cannot arbitrarily box themselves in with the "only making moves if we're out of it in July" theory, and they need to quit wasting money on FA acquisitions that won't make a significant impact. They need to both buy and sell to keep the organization deep in talent as well as young, and FA should be a place to sign temporary stop gaps to fill out the roster, not a place to try and sign key members of the team. Signing players in their mid 30s or older has just lead to wasted money at the end of every single contract.

 

Take a wider view and see the entire picture, see how all of the moves link together, see how the patterns continually repeat. If your focus is only 2008 and 2011 then you're missing the greater truth.

[TooLiveBrew]

Another thing that is routinely glossed over in this discussion is that the options were not simply 'Make the Sabathia/Greinke/Marcum trades' or 'Don't make any trades' -- there are a lot of other ways the most valuable prospects at the time (namely LaPorta, Lawrie, Odorizzi, & Escobar) could've been dealt.

[Ennder]

This thread has quickly turned into a lot of hindsight is 20/20 comments. Since we didn't happen to make the playoffs in year X any move we made in year X must be a bad one. It just isn't productive in any way. Then we go into but we could have done this or that when not one of us knows if we actually could do something else. People love to make up trades we could have done but there is no way to know if said trade was really possible.

 

This is not going to be productive unless people keep this looking at the future only.

[trwi7]

Can you stop with the hindsight is 20/20 crap? TheCrew and many others have been posting about this for years. This isn't some new thing that just came up with a week ago.

[homer]

Can you stop with the hindsight is 20/20 crap? TheCrew and many others have been posting about this for years. This isn't some new thing that just came up with a week ago.

 

The Crew didn't even enjoy the good years because he didn't like the way the team was built.

[PeaveyFury]

Can you stop with the hindsight is 20/20 crap? TheCrew and many others have been posting about this for years. This isn't some new thing that just came up with a week ago.

 

Then how about it at least stays out of a thread where it isn't the point? I think that was more to Ennder's comment. Complaining about the Marcum trade or how we didn't trade Ramirez 2 years ago isn't productive to the discussion about how to fix where we are now.

[3and2Fastball]

Well if we are looking into the future, my hopes are:

 

1) The Brewers never again sign a free agent over the age of 30-31 (and for the most part completely stay away from MLB free agents)

2) The Brewers never again trade away young controllable pitching

3) The Brewers completely revamp their farm system, bring in new instructors who emphasize a more advanced offensive approach and bring in pitching instructors who have had success with other teams

4) The Brewers completely embrace Advanced Analytics and moneyball

5) When Brewers players are a year away from free agency, they get traded for younger prospects, instead of constantly overpaying for extensions with Brewers

6) By saving money on not signing older free agents and not re-signing current players, the Brewers go in big on spending money on Cuban & Dominican Republic players

[Patrick425]

Ok, so let's play the hypothetical future Brewers game. Let's say the Brewers draft well and trade off old pieces for prospects. Let's say over the next 2 to 6 years these promising prospects start making their way onto the MLB club. Now let's say it's 2021 or 2022 and the Brewers have 3 solid homegrown starting pitchers and a couple of all-star caliber home grown position players. Maybe a couple of these players are arby eligilble and another couple of these players will be FA's in a year or two demanding $15 to 20 mil a year or more. Even with these 5 or 6 players they have some holes to fill. They are in contention but definitely need to make a move or two near the trade deadline in order to secure a playoff spot. For those who say..no, never trade any future pieces for now, what do you do? Take a chance at not making the playoffs in order to keep building knowing that you can't afford to keep the current pieces together for more than another year or two?

 

Seems like this is a game of laying down track on one end while someone is tearing it apart on the other end. The Brewers should definitely tear down and rebuild now, but I don't understand the point of building for the future if you are not willing to do what it takes to make a run for it once the future arrives.

[3and2Fastball]

Patrick425 - your point is well made, and there are possible exceptions when it makes sense to trade for a rental player, but I would advise against it in general.

 

In a "go for it year", that is when you don't trade away at the deadline your stars who are leaving at the end of the season, and keep your buying to a minimum. The Giants are a good model

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2148035-grading-the-san-francisco-giants-trade-deadline-performance

[BuckyBrewer61]

5) When Brewers players are a year away from free agency, they get traded for younger prospects, instead of constantly overpaying for extensions with Brewers

 

^This.

 

It's ok to trade prospects when your team is close to being a REAL contender (a la 2011, not 2102-2015). Even a free agent signing isn't the end of the world, though I'd rather the Brewers avoid it. But for a small market team, you have to recognize the value you have in your players and sell high unless you have an immediately legit division champion quality team. For years the Brewers have held on to valuable pieces until they depreciate, then sell them for less than peak value. Unless you routinely dominate the draft, which the Brewers clearly don't, that is a perfect strategy for mediocrity with steadily diminishing future returns.

[xisxisxis]

The Crew didn't even enjoy the good years because he didn't like the way the team was built.

 

So 2 out of the last 30 years.... He must be crushed he missed all those good years....

[umphrey]

The Marlins took a lot of flack when they traded away all of their good players a couple years ago but they had it right. We have to compete in waves, no reason to be upset about it just slash payroll and if we're lucky we can compete 2016 or 2017. Oakland is doing the same thing, Tampa pretty much does the same thing. I'm glad we traded for Greinke, Marcum, Sabathia and others but it's time to give up Gomez and Braun if possible.

[3and2Fastball]

Once Lucroy & Gomez are healthy again, the Brewers could likely get some very good prospects for them

 

This might be tough on the casual fans, but it would very exciting for the real Brewers fans who understand Baseball. I would think it could be conceivable for the Brewers to get 2 Top 100 players for Gomez and 2 or 3 Top 100 players for Lucroy. Follow that up by getting something for Lohse, Ramirez, K-Rod & Garza and you have really retooled your farm system.

 

I think it may be possible to trade Braun too, even just for cap relief

 

With the saving of $60 million or so.... go in huge on the next Cuban or Dominican Republic star or two, in 2017 or so when the prospects plus Clint Coulter & Arcia & Kodi etc come of age....

[umphrey]

I didn't realize that Braun has been a replacement level player for 2 full years and counting. That would be a tough sell. Wouldn't it have been nice if not for the extension and he was a UFA next year after making $12M this year?

[lcbj68c]

I said earlier and I'll say again: The hot start by us and poor start by St. Louis and Pittsburgh last season was the worst thing that could have happened to this franchise. Everyone was all obsessed with how long we were in first place last season. But they didn't notice apparently that after April the team had one winning month and played 10 games under .500. Playing 83% of your season 10 games under .500 does not equal a good team. But because of the fact that they were still in first place there was this illusion that they were much better than they really were. ~~ Paul253

 

^This. Spot on. This. Last season wasn't a historic collapse. It was just a slow regress to the mean of who they really are. And given more time (say, adding April 2015) is a true indicator of how talented, or lack thereof, that they really are.

 

There is a ton of conjecture in this thread that simply can't be confirmed and reads as quite silliness. "Mark A. is obsessed with not wanting to rebuild and thusly is to blame"

 

Patrick has it right. There needs to be a happy medium with regards to acquiring talent when a clear window is available to contend. "Signing A. Ramirez" doesn't mean they went for it. "Signing K. Lohse" didn't mean they were all in. They just aren't that good of a team in terms of talent. It's not that they have bad approaches. It's not a mental problem. It's not a hustle problem. It's not a coaching problem. It's not a game management scheme problem. They just don't hit. Wishing for them to walk more or slap more singles isn't the difference between winning and losing. This team needs to acquire talent. Whether that happens via draft and development over 6 years, or by trade, or by the owner paying out of his own deep pockets (none of which impacts us as fans) is irrelevant to me. The hurdle to that, as many have mentioned, is the indentification of that talent. For that, DM can't retire or otherwise soon enough. This organization doesn't have a philosophy problem. They have a talent problem.

[lcbj68c]

The Marlins took a lot of flack when they traded away all of their good players a couple years ago but they had it right. We have to compete in waves, no reason to be upset about it just slash payroll and if we're lucky we can compete 2016 or 2017. Oakland is doing the same thing, Tampa pretty much does the same thing. I'm glad we traded for Greinke, Marcum, Sabathia and others but it's time to give up Gomez and Braun if possible.

 

What flippin' difference does it make if the owner spends $110M on player payroll or $60M on player payroll? They have to field a team. They have to pay 25+ guys. It's not like spending on player payroll has caused Mark A. to ignore infrastructure, stadium improvements, etc. Payroll isn't the problem. What evidence is there that the Marlins have done anything right? Stanton and the like are drafted in the same manner regardless of what number the payroll is at.

[TooLiveBrew]

Can you stop with the hindsight is 20/20 crap? TheCrew and many others have been posting about this for years. This isn't some new thing that just came up with a week ago.

 

Then how about it at least stays out of a thread where it isn't the point? I think that was more to Ennder's comment. Complaining about the Marcum trade or how we didn't trade Ramirez 2 years ago isn't productive to the discussion about how to fix where we are now.

It is the point, because the same decision makers are still in place.

[lcbj68c]

Well if we are looking into the future, my hopes are:

 

1) The Brewers never again sign a free agent over the age of 30-31 (and for the most part completely stay away from MLB free agents)

2) The Brewers never again trade away young controllable pitching

3) The Brewers completely revamp their farm system, bring in new instructors who emphasize a more advanced offensive approach and bring in pitching instructors who have had success with other teams

4) The Brewers completely embrace Advanced Analytics and moneyball

5) When Brewers players are a year away from free agency, they get traded for younger prospects, instead of constantly overpaying for extensions with Brewers

6) By saving money on not signing older free agents and not re-signing current players, the Brewers go in big on spending money on Cuban & Dominican Republic players

 

Great, we should just change our team name to the Huntsville Stars. Have a player like Giancarlo Stanton...trade him to get younger just before his arby years run out? I don't understand the logic of #5. A major league ballclub needs a variety of ages, experiences, talent types, etc. If not, you're just a minor league ballclub. Continually rotating to get younger and cheaper is something farm teams do. We need to acquire talent. It doesn't HAVE to be young talent. It doesn't have to be cheap talent.

[Pugger]

Pretty sure we all know how to turn this sad franchise around. It's build through the draft. Like the Packers. It's not overspending on Free Agents that cost a draft pick like Lohse. It's being willing to make a trade for the future strength of the franchise when the opportunity presents itself, vs laughing it off in the ARam story above. 2014, it appears was a banner year for building through the draft and International signings. That's a start, only it's what 5years in the making? Not since 2008? And there's still part of last year's draft that could be attributed to luck. Nobody draft Harrison or Gatewood before the Brewers took them. The Medeiros pick wasn't taken as a winning pick in opinion at the time vs what was left on the board. So while 2014 looks great now, one can't actually say that is what the team drew up to happen. It started with a small fail, ended up with a big Win.

 

Maybe the success of that draft though overall will lead them to drafting more that way and less the previous way.

 

You can go back and read every page of this thread, it's all saying the same thing. We know how to turn this around. There's not much more to be said if any on turning it around. It's just repeating what's been said, with different wording. What more needs to be added to this thread?

 

We might know what to do to turn this ship around but none of us are running the club.

[logan82]

You need more than just one Hall of Famer on your team to make it competitive.

 

Really? None of us knew that.

 

But when you have one it's perfectly logical to go for it and all these things were ripping the for doing was made thinking you would have a 320/380 35 hr 110rbi guy as a center piece. Things are way different if he was still that player. Heck you could be arguing that we didn't go for it hard enough in those years instead. Going with Yuni at ss, ignoring1b the last few years etc.

 

Yes these next years could be rough and the 06ish type era of optimism was better than this. But would you just want to be in that state at all times without ever going for it. Think kc fans are still complaining about Myers/shields right now? This attitude would have led to trading Prince before 2011 for the future, possibly by the time those guys are ready you would have traded Braun. By the time those guys are ready you'd have to trade some others. At some point you have to go for it and in the smallest market with the smallest tv deal your window will be small, if you don't like it you might as well quit following MLB because it's not changing. That or be dodgers, cubs, Yankees, or cardinals fan.

 

Draft/develop better the last 9 years and they're not in this bad of a spot.

 

Good post Patrick.

Just because you have one good player doesn't mean you should kill the near future of a franchise. They didn't draft and develop good players so they shouldn't have gone for it at any point after 2012. The moves they made would have been the right ones if they had drafted and developed talent. As it is the moves they made spread our talent over all the levels of the majors and minors instead of creating a bubble of talent.

[The stache]

The first step is admitting that there truly is a problem. And, I don't see that admission coming from the guys, or "the guy", at the top of the food chain. To paraphrase Mark Attanasio, "we have veteran guys on this team, and all but about 20 of them are underachieving per their career norms." And, this time in his own words, "the manager and GM are not being looked at right now".

 

Nobody is on the hot seat because the players are underachieving. That's the answer we are provided. Well, is there no question as to why they are underachieving? Perhaps they are not motivated? Perhaps the guy chosen to lead the team is not up to the task?

 

The 1958 Green Bay Packers were 1-10-1 even though they had seven future Pro Bowlers, including four Hall of Famers (Bart Starr, Paul Hornung, Jim Ringo and Ray Nitschke). With essentially that exact same team (plus the players that Lombardi drafted, though not all of them started right away), Vince Lombardi led the Packers to a 7-5 record in 1959. The difference was a clear statement of what was acceptable in Green Bay under Lombardi. He said that the team would relentlessly pursue perfection, and though perfection was impossible, they would pursue it, achieving greatness in the process. He said he was not remotely interested in just being good. He set the tone for the whole franchise, and they won five NFL Championships, and the first two Super Bowls, in the next eight seasons.

 

Well, hell, if those screw ups at the top of the food chain here have no accountability, what is there to motivate the guys on the team now? Pride? LOL.

 

As I write this post, I am watching When it Was a Game, the wonderful HBO Films three part documentary comprised of home movies shot on 8 and 16 MM cameras from the late 20s through the early 60s. Hall of Famer Enos Slaughter, who is included in the voice-overs, said back then, you had to play for your spot on the team every year, no matter how good you were. You had to prove yourself every year, show the manager that you hadn't lost a step.

 

When Yogi Berra was a rookie, and didn't run out a pop fly, Joe DiMaggio gave him an ice cold stare, and Berra didn't do it again.

 

I accept that the game is much different now. But regardless of the era, or the sport, or level of talent on a team, a good coach/manager can make a big difference. A great coach can motivate decent players, and make them good, or good players, and make them great. There is none of this accountability on the Brewers. There is no leadership in the dugout. No Prince Fielder to beat up a water cooler. There's no fire on this team. Jerry Kramer, who is one of the best pulling guards in NFL history, was not getting it after being drafted by the Packers. Lombardi chewed him out in front of the team at a film session. Kramer, after practice, left the field, sat alone in the locker room, and thought he'd never play for the Packers. Lombardi came into the locker room, put his hand behind Kramer's head, and said "son, one of these days, you're going to be the best guard in the NFL." And, that lit a fire in Kramer.

 

We don't have anybody in this entire franchise, not in our minor league system, and certainly not in the Brewer front office, that possesses the ability to empower our players. They have done well in the past, and they're paid a lot of money. So, they should just perform, right, Mark?

 

Sometimes, when things start going bad, you need a leader with a reassuring voice to take command. We have none.

 

So, how do we turn it around? That can't even begin because the guys at the top don't acknowledge that there's anything either "sad" about this franchise, nor anything that "needs to be turned around." And, unfortunately, I don't foresee that changing anytime soon.

 

Mark Attanasio is much like a drug addict refusing to admit he has a problem. We've won 11 of our last 45 games, dating back to last year. The Brewers are the first team in MLB history to lead their division for 150 days, and fail to make the playoffs. Mark? There is a problem, and if you can't see that a .244 winning percentage over the last 1/4 of a year isn't a MAJOR problem, then you aren't the man to own this franchise, and I would appreciate you getting rid of it immediately. This isn't the business world, or the stock market.

 

Do you think that somebody like Mark Cuban, or Bob Kraft, or George Steinbrenner, if he were still alive, would tell the media "there's no problem" if their team were playing .250 ball? Of course not. Yet the Brewers are profitable, so Mark apparently doesn't care.

 

I don't need Chicken Little running around yelling "The sky is falling!", but, I do need an owner that says something similar to this:

 

"As the owner of the Milwaukee Brewers, I want to make it absolutely clear to our fans that no stone will be left unturned as we examine why a team that led our division for almost the entire year last year has suddenly become the worst team in baseball. Every single person employed by this franchise, from the lowest minor league level coach, all the way up to the General Manager of the Brewers, is held accountable by me. I will sit down with anybody in my organization that wishes to speak with me, privately if need be, to find answers. I am greatly concerned by the lack of performance I am seeing on the field, and if this continues, changes will be made.

 

I want reassurance that the man at the top is in command, and not just walking around shrugging his shoulders saying "I don't know what's wrong." If your company's stock dropped 30 points, you'd launch an inquiry, right? Well, your franchise is failing, Mark, and consider the paying customers your stockholders. Find answers. Solve the problem. Or, you will see a drop in attendance, and soon.

[homer]

The Crew didn't even enjoy the good years because he didn't like the way the team was built.

 

So 2 out of the last 30 years.... He must be crushed he missed all those good years....

 

 

I was looking at the standings the other day and said "Probably about time for xis to show up at Brewerfan".