Open for business (part 1)

[paul253]

So you include after the first month and take the epic collapse part ignoring the last month? 9-17month? In other words they played 2games under .500 between the first month and last of the season which is what the team was believed to be a .500 team. Which it only takes 6games winning vs. losing on the season to have 87wins. 1 game a month.

 

My point is that when you say "epic collapse" you make it sound like the team was leading the division by 4 games with 5 games left and lost. Yeah September was a bad month but the collapse didn't start then. The Brewers were up 6.5 games on St. Louis at the end of June. By the end of July it was down to 2 games. By the end of August they were even. And at the end of the year they were down 8. They built a big lead yes but it was a long, slow decline. Not an all of a sudden we're not in first place anymore type of thing. And to me a long, slow collapse is indicative of a team that just isn't very good because over the course of 3 months a good team isn't going to lose 14.5 games on another team.

[brewcrewdue80]

I think that many are going to be disappointed with the 'haul' that any current Brewer will bring in. They may net a couple of good prospects, but the only way this team will successfully rebuild is if they start drafting with a clue. Their drafts from 2009-2011 were brutal.

 

Yeah, they were. But recently, they have had a clue on the draft side (see Coulter). They also made a splash internationally (Lara).

 

Also, if they get the salary relief, they can try to sign more international prospects like Lara.

 

Just dumping Lohse and Garza sometime in may nets about 2/3 of $23.5 million for international signings and draft picks this year, and Garza'a also under contract for 2016 and 2017 ($12.5 million each year). Getting two or three more prospects like Lara on the international market each year could be a huge boost to the farm system.

 

Plus, tanking this season nets a good pick in the June 2016 draft.

 

You do know the international market is capped before penalties? Lara's signing alone basically put Milwaukee at that cap last season. Whether Milw save's 20mil this season and 12mil next season won't change their cap til penalties kick in limits. Can't fathom this being a team that signs up 20mil or so of Internationals taking an added 17mil hit roughly and the 2years limitations of now only being able to sign like 250k max for internationals.

 

Now, Maybe you mean signing players like Jose Abreu or Alex Guerrero guys not under the internation draft limitations but in no means prospects essentially. Signing 27yr old Cuban players to ML contracts and hope they work out.

 

I've always said, a contract like Garza who can net a prospect or two in return when traded is a perfect use of signing. Take 12.5mil for less than 2years sell off the 2.5years remaining for a prospect hopefully around top 100 and you again have 12.5mil to spend each of the next 2 seasons. Meanwhile you also have a prospect in your system you wouldn't have. Love it if the team could do that every couple of seasons with a FA signing. I thought Lohse would be that originally and he should have been dealt in 2013.

Two Pitchers that would maybe fit that this offseason would be Mat Latos or Scott Kazmir. Kinda #3s with #2 type outings. Get one for 11-14mil a year for 3 or 4years and trade in a season or 2. I think that is the game Milw has to play in FA with SPs.

 

It's not like prospects ranked in the 50-100 range for Pitching are TOR types generally. I remember Zach Lee being around 50 in 2013 with TOR maybe potential but really a #3 expectation. Hes now the Dodgers 14th ranked prospect vs the 2 I think he was 2 seasons ago. So I don't feel it's unrealistic for the Brewers to get a top 100 ish prospect for Garza in return under his deal. He is a proven #3 not a prospect with #3 profile and hopes to become a #2 at best. Is that impact for Milw in return? Depends how you look at it. The team getting a #3 like a Peralta at this point to pitch for them at that 500+k range to fill your back half of the rotation is a plus vs paying 10-12mil for that.

[brewcrewdue80]

So you include after the first month and take the epic collapse part ignoring the last month? 9-17month? In other words they played 2games under .500 between the first month and last of the season which is what the team was believed to be a .500 team. Which it only takes 6games winning vs. losing on the season to have 87wins. 1 game a month.

 

My point is that when you say "epic collapse" you make it sound like the team was leading the division by 4 games with 5 games left and lost. Yeah September was a bad month but the collapse didn't start then. The Brewers were up 6.5 games on St. Louis at the end of June. By the end of July it was down to 2 games. By the end of August they were even. And at the end of the year they were down 8. They built a big lead yes but it was a long, slow decline. Not an all of a sudden we're not in first place anymore type of thing. And to me a long, slow collapse is indicative of a team that just isn't very good because over the course of 3 months a good team isn't going to lose 14.5 games on another team.

 

They were leading the division before the collapse began.

 

Come on man, If I polled all the GMs in Baseball if they'd take a 51-47 record through the team's first 98 games of the season, I'd be willing to bet 90% of them said mark it down, I'll take that to begin the season. Cards were 54-44 last season(36-28 then to finish). That isn't garbage for a team on 60% of the season. Add the 20-7mark and thats 77+% of the season. The Brewers were 16games over .500 77%+ through a baseball season. It's an epic collapse the final 36games 22% of the season. Not after that first month being a total collapse.

[Thurston Fluff]

I know people like to point to the last X number of games or certain trends as some sort of proof last season's team wasn't actually what their record said they were. Yet the year as a whole, which last I checked was the only one that measured all of that team's success without adding anything but that team's success, showed us to be slightly above .500.

I thought to start the year they needed a lot of things to go right to be better than last season. I also thought they would need a lot of things to go wrong to be really bad. I still think if we left the team as is we would end up fairly close to .500 again. At this point that isn't good enough. We might as well trade anyone not in the plans for next year. For bigger names like Gomez or Lucroy I think there is plenty of time in the off season to trade them if we go that route. Melvin would be foolish not to entertain offers for them but I think it would need to be an absolute steal to let them go in season. Melvin has said many times the best offers tend to come in the off season when all the teams are building their roster. I tend to agree with that. So when it comes to in season, let them get what they can for the end of contract guys and take a lopsided trade if someone is offering it for anyone else.

[FidoMcCokefiend]

To me, anyone on the MLB roster that can be moved for value should. I wouldn't deem anyone untouchable. I'd need to be blown away for Luc for sure and Nelson/Peralta probably. Anyone else that can be, should be moved. We are is desperate need of a 3 year plan like the Cubs. No point spending money, no point shoring positions up with over the age vets. Go young, be bad, grab talent in the Top 2-3 of the draft and plan for 2018.

[clancyphile]

I think that many are going to be disappointed with the 'haul' that any current Brewer will bring in. They may net a couple of good prospects, but the only way this team will successfully rebuild is if they start drafting with a clue. Their drafts from 2009-2011 were brutal.

 

Yeah, they were. But recently, they have had a clue on the draft side (see Coulter). They also made a splash internationally (Lara).

 

Also, if they get the salary relief, they can try to sign more international prospects like Lara.

 

Just dumping Lohse and Garza sometime in may nets about 2/3 of $23.5 million for international signings and draft picks this year, and Garza'a also under contract for 2016 and 2017 ($12.5 million each year). Getting two or three more prospects like Lara on the international market each year could be a huge boost to the farm system.

 

Plus, tanking this season nets a good pick in the June 2016 draft.

 

You do know the international market is capped before penalties? Lara's signing alone basically put Milwaukee at that cap last season. Whether Milw save's 20mil this season and 12mil next season won't change their cap til penalties kick in limits. Can't fathom this being a team that signs up 20mil or so of Internationals taking an added 17mil hit roughly and the 2years limitations of now only being able to sign like 250k max for internationals.

 

Now, Maybe you mean signing players like Jose Abreu or Alex Guerrero guys not under the internation draft limitations but in no means prospects essentially. Signing 27yr old Cuban players to ML contracts and hope they work out.

 

I've always said, a contract like Garza who can net a prospect or two in return when traded is a perfect use of signing. Take 12.5mil for less than 2years sell off the 2.5years remaining for a prospect hopefully around top 100 and you again have 12.5mil to spend each of the next 2 seasons. Meanwhile you also have a prospect in your system you wouldn't have. Love it if the team could do that every couple of seasons with a FA signing. I thought Lohse would be that originally and he should have been dealt in 2013.

Two Pitchers that would maybe fit that this offseason would be Mat Latos or Scott Kazmir. Kinda #3s with #2 type outings. Get one for 11-14mil a year for 3 or 4years and trade in a season or 2. I think that is the game Milw has to play in FA with SPs.

 

It's not like prospects ranked in the 50-100 range for Pitching are TOR types generally. I remember Zach Lee being around 50 in 2013 with TOR maybe potential but really a #3 expectation. Hes now the Dodgers 14th ranked prospect vs the 2 I think he was 2 seasons ago. So I don't feel it's unrealistic for the Brewers to get a top 100 ish prospect for Garza in return under his deal. He is a proven #3 not a prospect with #3 profile and hopes to become a #2 at best. Is that impact for Milw in return? Depends how you look at it. The team getting a #3 like a Peralta at this point to pitch for them at that 500+k range to fill your back half of the rotation is a plus vs paying 10-12mil for that.

 

It may be worth restrictions if there is a year where you can land two or three Lara-level prospects. The Brewers need to re-stock the system - and this could be a way to do it.

[igor67]

The epic collapse is quite the apt description. .500ish teams will have seasons where they fluke into enough wins to make the playoffs. This is a feature of the amount of variance in baseball performance. The Brewers did not go into a slow decline last year, they played out of their minds the first month of the season, and then played as expected heading into the last week of August. At which point they put up a 9-21 record to end the season (which coincidentally is the record we'd have if the Brewers went 4-3 in the next week). They only finished 6 games out of the playoffs which means conservatively they only needed to finish the season a .500 team to make it. Given that 6 of those loses in the last month were to the Giants and Pirates they could have only needed 5 more wins (with 1 against either of those two teams 87 wins gets them in). This is the essential point in the 2 wild card era 1 really hot month is easily within the realm of possibility for middle of the road teams, and that is all it takes to turn a whatever team into a playoff team. It doesn't matter much if it happens at the beginning, middle or end of the season. All of the same probabilities apply to having ridiculously bad months. Last year's hot start was no particular justification for believing that the Brewers had found a formula for building a dynasty, and this years slow start is no particular evidence that mediocre teams can't get lucky.

[logan82]

I think that many are going to be disappointed with the 'haul' that any current Brewer will bring in. They may net a couple of good prospects, but the only way this team will successfully rebuild is if they start drafting with a clue. Their drafts from 2009-2011 were brutal.

Anything we get back in trade is better than paying them to be on a sub par team and letting them walk for nothing.

[LouisEly]

Hooray for being a rampant organizational apologist across every forum on this board? Because what an aging player did last year is representative of what he'll do this year? Mark A. is that you?

 

In Ramirez you're really going to defend a player who's over 35, has a horrible negative 3 year trend offensively, has no range in the field anymore, hasn't been able to stay healthy, and is going to retire after the season?

 

Yes, I am going to defend this:

 

2012 - .901 OPS, #2 of 17 qualified 3B

2013 - .857 OPS, #6 of 32 3B w/at least 350 PAs

2014 - .757 OPS, #9 of 26 qualified 3B

 

Is it trending downward? Yes. But in case you haven't noticed, all of baseball has been on a downward offensive trend. Yes, he's had a few nagging injuries. And despite those things, every year since they've signed him he's at least been in the top 1/3rd of 3B in offensive production. If he's terrible, then what was Pablo Sandoval last year? Ramirez had a higher OBP and SLG than Sandoval did. And David Wright. Would you rather have Matt Dominguez because he's 26?

 

Yes, he was injured in 2013. But he had enough PAs in 2014 to qualify for league leadership stats. How does that equal "can't stay healthy"?

 

And what the hell does "going to retire" have to do with anything? Is it possible you're making decisions based on small samples (2015) or subjective feelings? At least I have stats to back my viewpoint.

[homer]

Hey people....play nice, please.

[paul253]

It's an epic collapse the final 36games 22% of the season. Not after that first month being a total collapse.

 

I guess you and I have different definitions of "epic". When I hear "epic" I think rare or historical....like the 2007 Mets who blew a 7 game lead with 17 to go. Not a Brewers team whose 6.5 game division lead disappeared over a two month period. Yes they played really bad the final 22% of the season. But the lead was already shrinking prior to that.

[PrinceEatMeat]

Pretty confident that Lohse, Garza, Ramirez, Lind, Gomez, Parra, K-Rod, and Broxton will all be gone come August 1st. May just need to eat some money on a few of the them, which isn't a big deal if it's just for this year. Lucroy and Segura would likely take pretty hefty offers for the Brewers to even think about though.

[brewcrewdue80]

It's an epic collapse the final 36games 22% of the season. Not after that first month being a total collapse.

 

I guess you and I have different definitions of "epic". When I hear "epic" I think rare or historical....like the 2007 Mets who blew a 7 game lead with 17 to go. Not a Brewers team whose 6.5 game division lead disappeared over a two month period. Yes they played really bad the final 22% of the season. But the lead was already shrinking prior to that.

 

 

FWIW doing some math you're right by 1 game. Both team did have a 71-55 record with 36games to go. Milw up 2.5games Mets up 5games. The Brewers from that point on in the season finished 6games worse than that Mets team.

 

Based on the winning Pct at the time of each times falling apart Mets had a .574 vs Brewers .559 and when you project along the same win pct of what that would have led to Mets would have had 92.5wins Brewers had they kept winning at .559 would have had 91wins.

 

Philly did get to face the Mets and swept them taking that 7game lead down to 3.5 with 14games to go.

 

It's not abnormal at any point of the season for a team to gain 6games on 1 single team. A soft losing streak 2-8 vs a solid winning run of 8-2. If the Mets had beaten Philly one of those 3 games, they win the division. Brewers can't say that 1 game cost them the division or even a Wild Card berth.

Went from a .559 winning rate to .305. Mets were .294 from their .574. Pretty equally epic if you ask me.

 

Guess way I look at it. The Mets went to a 30% win rate from 57% for only 17games. The Brewers went from 56% win rate to 30% for 36games...19games epically longer than the Mets.

[paul253]

Haha well at least you're not over-thinking it

 

Regardless of how each team played beginning at whatever date you want to pick, the Mets had a 7 game lead on September 12 and by September 28 they were in 2nd place. That was over the course of 15 games. The Brewers had a 6.5 game lead as late as July 1st. It took 52 games before the Brewers fell into 2nd place. It was a much, much slower decline than that of the Mets which is why I don't think it is nearly as "epic". I have no stats to back this up but I'd imagine it is much more likely that a team would lose a 6.5 game lead over the course of 52 games than to lose a 7 game lead over the course of 15.

 

For what it's worth I think you and I may be arguing different points. I refer to the "collapse" as their lead in the division. It seems like you are talking more about winning percentage. Either way, I don't think either of us believe were as good as their 51-32 suggested.

[paul253]

On another note, I saw this quote from Melvin in an article on JSonline today:

 

"We've always said there is a short window for us to try to win. I really thought in 2011 we had a chance to win (it all). In 2012, we had a talented team, too. Sometimes, that window closes on you and you've got to make some decisions. When that window closes, you could suffocate."

 

Perhaps I misinterpreted it but it almost sounds like Doug Melvin doesn't believe Milwaukee can be a consistent winner. It would certainly explain his refusal to recycle talent. If he truly believes this he should no longer be our GM. Admittedly, it's not as easy to win consistently here as it should be in NY, LA or Chicago, but I don't believe at all that there is only a short window to win here. What we need is a GM who is willing and able to do what it takes to win consistently, not someone who thinks we can only win in short windows of time. Maybe it's his method of operation that is the biggest factor in why we can only seem to have a good team once every 4 years or so.

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/miserable-start-has-brewers-wondering-if-its-time-to-start-over-b99491603z1-302319531.html

[SoupTown]

Paul, I interpret the quote quite differently. To me, it is realistic, in a mid or a small market/payroll, to run the franchise on waves. That is, you peak, then you cannot afford to keep all your wonderful players. So you trade them for prospects. If you do it correctly, 50% of the time you are in your window, and 50% of the time your team is not in the window... BUT, that not window should be fun to follow... as it should be full of young, high upside, cheap talent.

 

Doug is pretty much saying (I think) what I just wrote. What concerns me is that his actions do not match, in any way, shape or form, what he says his thinking is. We seem to think (likely from Mark's interference) that we can get the left overs of free agency and use the left overs past glories to plug into our predictive spreadsheet and we will have a winner.

 

The more I think about Mark the more worried I get. Was he not the front runner for Suppan. Yet Suppan's career was much more modest than his series MVP. Yet we paid for the MVP - not the career. Later when we buy guys that has a down year, it is because their career prior was good. I dont get it. Which is it?

 

And the more I think about Doug's quote... he has actually thrown Mark under the bus. Doug' realistic wave approach or Mark's spreadsheet we can win every year approach.

 

I do have some Enron shares left over. If Mark looks at what they did year after year - and averages it out - I think he will want to make me an offer.

[yfinn6]

On another note, I saw this quote from Melvin in an article on JSonline today:

 

"We've always said there is a short window for us to try to win. I really thought in 2011 we had a chance to win (it all). In 2012, we had a talented team, too. Sometimes, that window closes on you and you've got to make some decisions. When that window closes, you could suffocate."

 

Perhaps I misinterpreted it but it almost sounds like Doug Melvin doesn't believe Milwaukee can be a consistent winner. It would certainly explain his refusal to recycle talent. If he truly believes this he should no longer be our GM. Admittedly, it's not as easy to win consistently here as it should be in NY, LA or Chicago, but I don't believe at all that there is only a short window to win here. What we need is a GM who is willing and able to do what it takes to win consistently, not someone who thinks we can only win in short windows of time. Maybe it's his method of operation that is the biggest factor in why we can only seem to have a good team once every 4 years or so.

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/miserable-start-has-brewers-wondering-if-its-time-to-start-over-b99491603z1-302319531.html

 

I didn't read it that way. I think I read it like he's giving the fans a 'heads-up' that there is likely a rebuild coming. I like that he talks about "if there's a way to speed it up", because we do have players on our 25-man roster who could speed up the rebuild if the Brewers make them available.

[wildcat2237]

Today's MLBTradeRumors snippet.

 

The snippit yesterday made if sound like rival GM's think the Brewers have some talent and are lining up to start the bidding.

 

Today's post makes it sound like were going to see a bunch of salary dump trades.

 

I'm sure attendance this summer is going to be terrible so I would imagine that the Brewers NEED to move some pieces to stay profitable. The question is whether these trades will be pure salary dumps or if the team can get some mid level prospects for the likes of Lohse, Krod etc.

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Brewers Open To Trade Proposals

By Charlie Wilmoth [May 2, 2015 at 1:22pm CDT]

The Brewers have let other teams know they’re willing to listen to trade proposals, ESPN’s Buster Olney tweets. Olney’s note is consistent with recent reporting from CBS Sports’ Jon Heyman and Joel Sherman of the New York Post, who have both written that other teams expect the Brewers will become sellers after their awful start.

 

Of course, 5-18 teams typically don’t have many high-performing players, and many of the players the Brewers will have to offer will be of the buy-low variety. Olney doesn’t say who the Brewers might shop, but Kyle Lohse and Gerardo Parra are both free agents after the season. They are, however, both off to poor starts (although Lohse’s peripherals are still reasonably good, which means other teams might view him somewhat favorably, particularly as a rental). Aramis Ramirez, a free-agent-to-be who plans to retire in the offseason, hasn’t played well, either. Reliever Jonathan Broxton‘s contract and performance make him more of a liability than an asset. At least, however, that contract is short-term — Ryan Braun‘s lengthy and expensive deal should make him difficult to trade. Matt Garza, who is signed through 2017 with a vesting option for 2018, might be a reasonably attractive trade candidate, although his performance in five starts this season hasn’t been stellar.

 

On the other side of the ledger, Neal Cotts is a decent lefty relief option who’s a free agent after the season. Closer Francisco Rodriguez, who is signed through 2016 with a 2017 option, has pitched well so far. Adam Lind, who is off to a terrific start and is signed to a deal with a reasonably priced 2016 option, might be a nice trade piece as well. Carlos Gomez recently returned from the disabled list and would surely fetch a very nice return, although it’s unclear whether the Brewers would want to trade a superstar. Jonathan Lucroy would fit into the same category if he were healthy.

[SoupTown]

I read the full conversation and was interested in Doug's shortest term for a rebuild (4 years). He says if you dont start soon enough you end up with a six year rebuild. And it seems they cannot start until 1 July, give or take. As other teams dont want to take on salary. HINT TO DOUG: if you pay some of the salary, you can get the players traded sooner.

 

So, it seems to me, that Doug is setting himself up for a 'relax' from 1 July 2015 to 1 July 2019. Nothing expected from him in terms of results.

 

In any case, when we are thinking about who to trade and who to keep, you can see if Doug does rebuild, his time frame is that we will be good starting in 2019 for a couple of years. So, when we propose A and B and C, then dont think about 2017 or 2018. Well, I think we can be FUN from next year. 2016-2017 young and cheap and high upside prospects. So I think we can be good in 2018. Doug gives himself to 2019.

 

And Doug did indeed throw Mark under the bus: 'Mark has never been through this before, so...' Note that Doug said he thought 2011 and 2012 was our last window. Well if you add Doug's 4 years to 2012, then you are in the game in 2016/2017. But Mark got way involved in 2013 and 2014. Doug has indeed driven the bus over the inexperienced Mark. Why oh why did Mark not just trust Doug. Hmmmmm. Doug's bum well and truly covered, hey.

[JJHardy7]

This thread is just very, very depressing to read. This organization had so much promise approximately 10 years ago (seems like yesterday).

 

I do think we have to take the emotion out of it. I'm sure most of us are pretty disappointed that what seemed to be the Brewers best chance for long-term success didn't pan out. Sheets, Hart, Hardy, Weeks, Fielder, and Gallardo are all gone. The one that stayed (Braun) has a few questions about his long-term future. Instead of looking at it this way, we did have 2 trips to the playoffs and some great memories. We had a lot of fun. I think it is time to be thankful for that, but also move on.

 

Am I the only person here that thinks Mark A is a bit like Herb Kohl? I do think it is time to replace Melvin & Co. and let the new regime run all baseball operations. This isn't a knock on Melvin...I just can't see Melvin being successful here again based on how it appears Mark A has gotten too involved in Doug's job.

[danzig6767]

Until they add the names Carlos Gomez and Jonathan Lucroy I will not believe they are serious about turning the franchise around.

 

Lucroy and Gomez are names that the Brewers should not be openly shopping. Teams need to be coming to the Brewers for those two.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Attanasio and Melvin talk about the trade dynamics for the team.

 

First of all we don't even know if Melvin will be back and i wonder if he knows yet? Or is Attanasio still unsure himself?

 

1. Will it be completely up to Attanasio as to whether guys like Gomez and/or Lucroy can be traded at all?

 

2. Or say will Melvin be allowed to field offers for each guy, but then it's up to Attanasio to actually pull the trigger on an offer?

 

3. Does Attanasio instead give Melvin carte blanche to to do as he wants with those two players?

 

Option three strikes me as most unlikely, but who knows.

 

Plus, the whole dynamic of if Melvin will even be back next year makes me wonder if that ends up having any impact on what degree of say he'd have on whether to trade important guys like Gomez and Lucroy compared to lesser value guys like Lohse and Ramirez?

[nate82]

I still believe Melvin will retire after this season and the new GM has already been hired.

[monty57]

And Doug did indeed throw Mark under the bus: 'Mark has never been through this before, so...' Note that Doug said he thought 2011 and 2012 was our last window. Well if you add Doug's 4 years to 2012, then you are in the game in 2016/2017. But Mark got way involved in 2013 and 2014. Doug has indeed driven the bus over the inexperienced Mark. Why oh why did Mark not just trust Doug. Hmmmmm. Doug's bum well and truly covered, hey.

 

That's pretty much where I've been coming from since we did what we did in the 2010 offseason, and why I've felt that Melvin has actually been the "calming force" in some small way saving Attanasio from himself. Without Melvin, I think we'd be in even worse shape than we are. I wish we'd have sold a little sooner in 2012 and been able to get something for Marcum, and I wish we'd have taken the Dodgers up on their offer for Ramirez. However, since then, every offseason we'd see quotes from Melvin along the lines of "we're pretty much set, I don't see any big things happening." Then Attanasio would step in and make a "name" signing. In other words, Melvin has been trying to do what a few others and I have been asking for, but the owner hasn't let him.

 

Melvin will be gone soon, but the owner will still be here. He's a smart guy, so hopefully he's learned from this, and hopefully his next GM will not be a yes man, but rather a good baseball mind to whom Attanasio will actually listen. I also hope that some of the moves that have been implemented over the past couple of years (Gallardo trade for prospects and not "MLB ready" and setting the focus of the draft on "young with high upside" rather than "high floor/get to MLB quickly") will shave a couple of years off the rebuild.

 

Finally, I hope that if they decide to rebuild, they rebuild. I don't want to see a situation where they still put focus on selling tickets, so they hold onto some "names" in an effort to entice the fans to purchase tickets. As tough as it will be for Attanasio, a rebuild has to have one focus... stock the franchise to make the team as good as possible for a future date. I still think a full-scale rebuild was avoidable, but here we are. Let's hope at least that our presumably long-term owner will learn a lesson from this, and let's hope that we get some high-upside talent (and not just salary relief) from the upcoming trades to give us something to hope for over the next few years.

[ewitkows]

My gut feeling is we trade Loshe, Garza , and Parra and retooll for next year

[monty57]

My gut feeling is we trade Loshe, Garza , and Parra and retooll for next year

 

I think that if Garza is traded, we will do some type of rebuild. I can't see a scenario where fans will believe their "we're a playoff team" hype if Lohse and Garza are both gone from the rotation. If fans don't believe it, they won't buy tickets, which seems to be Attanasio's major motivator. In that scenario, the question is whether they do a half-assed "rebuild" and hold on to "name" guys like Gomez, or if they will go all-in and trade everyone with value who isn't going to be around as the team emerges from their rebuild.

 

If they hold on to Garza and only trade the guys who will be FAs after the season, then I think we'll continue on the recent path, probably signing someone like Uribe to play 3B and someone like Lackey to fill out the rotation. The marketing department will start getting the "we're upset about last year, and ready for the playoffs in 2016" propaganda ready, and they will hope it works to sell enough tickets to remain profitable. Judging by his recent statements, that would probably cause Melvin to retire and a new GM would be put in place who understands how to run a franchise like the "old school" Cubs organization.