What former Brewers are doing in 2015, and why it's time for Melvin to go

[Thurston Fluff]

When it comes to player development I am starting to wonder of there isn't some issues with our minor league philosophy going on. There is a reason the last two AAA affiliates didn't want to renew with us. We are now sitting in a place nobody wants to be in AAA. It was like musical chairs and we were left with out when the music stopped. I don't know if they skimp on things or if it's about how well the major league franchise helps draw customers to the AAA games but something unfavorable seems to be going on.

 

Nashville is definitely the canary in the coal mine. They didn't see any reason to continue with us. That says a lot about what teams think of how we fill and incubate out talent pipeline. Something MAJOR has to change.

 

I'm not as sure it has to do with the talent pipeline as much as maybe lack of spending on the farm system as a whole. Obviously that is related to player development but not wholly the same. Helping with promotions, spending on equipment or having recognized names attached to the team all might contribute to better relationships with our minor league affiliates. The one example of how things other than sheer talent can help foster a good working relationship with an affiliate is Timber Rattlers. That is one of the better facilities in the Midwest league and has a good long standing relationship with the Brewers. That has more to do with the Major league club's proximity to them than talent of players. We just have to find out what some of these minor league facilities want out of a major league team and start to cater to that better. If we can create some stability with a good affiliate with good facilities it is bound to help develop players. As it is we were stuck with Nashville when their facilities sucked and lost them once they were good enough that a more desirable team wanted to go there. Pushing us once again to a crappier place than our competitors.

I also think we need to expand our international scouting. We can hire as many GM's managers and minor league instructors as we want but if we are being seriously outspent in amateur scouting it will be very difficult to keep up with those who spend more on it.

[Boomer5]

When it comes to player development I am starting to wonder of there isn't some issues with our minor league philosophy going on. There is a reason the last two AAA affiliates didn't want to renew with us. We are now sitting in a place nobody wants to be in AAA. It was like musical chairs and we were left with out when the music stopped. I don't know if they skimp on things or if it's about how well the major league franchise helps draw customers to the AAA games but something unfavorable seems to be going on.

 

Nashville is definitely the canary in the coal mine. They didn't see any reason to continue with us. That says a lot about what teams think of how we fill and incubate out talent pipeline. Something MAJOR has to change.

 

I'm not as sure it has to do with the talent pipeline as much as maybe lack of spending on the farm system as a whole. Obviously that is related to player development but not wholly the same. Helping with promotions, spending on equipment or having recognized names attached to the team all might contribute to better relationships with our minor league affiliates. The one example of how things other than sheer talent can help foster a good working relationship with an affiliate is Timber Rattlers. That is one of the better facilities in the Midwest league and has a good long standing relationship with the Brewers. That has more to do with the Major league club's proximity to them than talent of players. We just have to find out what some of these minor league facilities want out of a major league team and start to cater to that better. If we can create some stability with a good affiliate with good facilities it is bound to help develop players. As it is we were stuck with Nashville when their facilities sucked and lost them once they were good enough that a more desirable team wanted to go there. Pushing us once again to a crappier place than our competitors.

I also think we need to expand our international scouting. We can hire as many GM's managers and minor league instructors as we want but if we are being seriously outspent in amateur scouting it will be very difficult to keep up with those who spend more on it.

 

All of the above is really cheap compared to over spending on major league talent. I pick on Broxton a lot, but I would bet all of what you suggest would be funded just by never trading for him in the first place.

[monty57]

I think the only real thing the MLB club does for the minor league teams is provide the talent. The facilities, staff, promotions, etc are the responsibility of the local owner. Minor leagues need talent to draw fans and make money, so if a minor league team's board/ownership feels they are not getting enough talent and will not get enough talent in the future, they would be prudent to try to get a different team into their facilities.

 

All of the above is really cheap compared to over spending on major league talent. I pick on Broxton a lot, but I would bet all of what you suggest would be funded just by never trading for him in the first place.

 

Every year, there seems to be a lot of money thrown away on at least one really bad contract, most of which was kind of expected when the contract was signed. That happens when you constantly sign 30-somethings to multi-year deals, none of which has worked out well in the final year or two of the contract.

[RobertR]

I think the only real thing the MLB club does for the minor league teams is provide the talent. The facilities, staff, promotions, etc are the responsibility of the local owner. Minor leagues need talent to draw fans and make money, so if a minor league team's board/ownership feels they are not getting enough talent and will not get enough talent in the future, they would be prudent to try to get a different team into their facilities.

 

Which is why it's a mistake not to have an ownership stake in a minor league affiliate. How does having an affiliate in Colorado Springs help you develop and evaluate talent?

 

Maybe it made sense, when there weren't 30 teams, to not worry about stability of your affiliates. Given the premium on developing young talent these days, especially for a team like the Brewers that is reliant on a steady supply of cheap, young talent to compete, I'd say it's time to change the model.

[FVBrewerFan]

The Brewers as currently put together do not aquire, draft or develop the pitching needed to contend for a World Series title. That is why the entire front office, scouting staff and farm system needs to be significantly upgraded.

 

This. I have said before, without any reaction here, that the Brewers should establish a Senior VP-Pitching (or whatever they want to call it.) Reports directly to GM, with dotted line to Owner. This would be the single most important thing the Brewers could do to turn things around.

 

One thing I've learned in business is that intense focus is needed to change anything. I firmly believe baseball isn't much different. Find a proven star from a pitching rich organization, and give him the authority to do whatever he needs. Let him bring in new scouts, new ways to develop pitchers, new coaches. Anything. Everything. Let the GM handle the big picture for baseball operations as a whole, and this VP-Pitching would be wholly responsible and accountable for identifying and developing pitchers. Goal should be to take the Brewers from where they are now to a top 5-7 organization for pitching talent. Do that, and you've WHOA SOLVVD a lot of the problems this organization has today.

[Thurston Fluff]

I think the only real thing the MLB club does for the minor league teams is provide the talent. The facilities, staff, promotions, etc are the responsibility of the local owner. Minor leagues need talent to draw fans and make money, so if a minor league team's board/ownership feels they are not getting enough talent and will not get enough talent in the future, they would be prudent to try to get a different team into their facilities.

 

They can also send a few former players, coaches and such to sign autographs and do general meet and greet stuff. Doing things like that helps give those fans a connection to the parent club. It also might help boost attendance which is always a good way to suck up to affiliates.

As far as the talent thing goes I just don't think there is that strong a correlation. We lost the Indianapolis affiliate the year they were going to get Fielder, Hart, Weeks, Nelson Cruz, Jose Cappellan, and Brad Nelson. That was along with a good dose of veterans who helped the team actually win games as well. It was also a time when the Brewers had one of the best overall farm systems in baseball. So the future looked good prospect wise. Arguably better than any other club in baseball as a matter of fact. Yet the Indy club wouldn't even talk to the Brewers about extending their relationship. That leads me to believe talent was not at the top of the list in what they were looking for.

[jerichoholicninja]

The Brewers as currently put together do not aquire, draft or develop the pitching needed to contend for a World Series title. That is why the entire front office, scouting staff and farm system needs to be significantly upgraded.

 

This. I have said before, without any reaction here, that the Brewers should establish a Senior VP-Pitching (or whatever they want to call it.) Reports directly to GM, with dotted line to Owner. This would be the single most important thing the Brewers could do to turn things around.

 

One thing I've learned in business is that intense focus is needed to change anything. I firmly believe baseball isn't much different. Find a proven star from a pitching rich organization, and give him the authority to do whatever he needs. Let him bring in new scouts, new ways to develop pitchers, new coaches. Anything. Everything. Let the GM handle the big picture for baseball operations as a whole, and this VP-Pitching would be wholly responsible and accountable for identifying and developing pitchers. Goal should be to take the Brewers from where they are now to a top 5-7 organization for pitching talent. Do that, and you've WHOA SOLVVD a lot of the problems this organization has today.

 

Wasn't this the plan with Rick Peterson, and then he was just kind of shoved aside.

[FVBrewerFan]

Yes and no. Most teams have a position in charge oh pitcher development. Part of the problem is the position is too far down the chain of command. The other part is petersons role wasn't all-encompassing.

 

My vision would have this person hire pitching specific scouts, huge role in the draft, naming pitching coaches and instructors, and much more. He would a half step down from the GM.

[Thurston Fluff]

The Brewers as currently put together do not aquire, draft or develop the pitching needed to contend for a World Series title. That is why the entire front office, scouting staff and farm system needs to be significantly upgraded.

 

This. I have said before, without any reaction here, that the Brewers should establish a Senior VP-Pitching (or whatever they want to call it.) Reports directly to GM, with dotted line to Owner. This would be the single most important thing the Brewers could do to turn things around.

 

One thing I've learned in business is that intense focus is needed to change anything. I firmly believe baseball isn't much different. Find a proven star from a pitching rich organization, and give him the authority to do whatever he needs. Let him bring in new scouts, new ways to develop pitchers, new coaches. Anything. Everything. Let the GM handle the big picture for baseball operations as a whole, and this VP-Pitching would be wholly responsible and accountable for identifying and developing pitchers. Goal should be to take the Brewers from where they are now to a top 5-7 organization for pitching talent. Do that, and you've WHOA SOLVVD a lot of the problems this organization has today.

 

Wasn't this the plan with Rick Peterson, and then he was just kind of shoved aside.

 

 

That happened because they fired the manager so they could start for the third time in four years.

[The stache]

You cannot compare NFL and MLB franchises when it comes to player development, or really other type of success. It is an apples to oranges comparison. I apologize that I didn't read the rest of your post except for the end when you - again - tell us how we should or shouldn't look at this situation.

 

Yes, you absolutely can. Because the comparison is all about what the two organizations feel is acceptable.

 

The Packers before the twenty year drought had had massive success. And even when they were terrible, they gave people a few years to fix things, and when there weren't tangible results, they were sent packing.

 

The Brewers have never had success. Never. They were good for about a 5 year span in the late 70s and early 80s, and made a single World Series appearance. Since the Brewers have never had any success at all, we have come to accept that level of mediocrity. By doing so, when you have a general manager like Doug Melvin, who (again, don't know how many times I have to say this...has never won a thing in the three decades he has been a Major League executive), you don't feel any urgency to expel him from the organization. "We're losers, we've always been losers, and under Doug Melvin, we've been less of a loser organization than ever before."

 

When Melvin's track record is being glowingly compared to every other Brewer General Manager in franchise history (which is a flashing light substantiating my claim), there is a problem. Our measuring stick is our own failure! That's where this black hole of an organization has come to after four decades. Any rational baseball fan's measuring stick should be the record of a successful organization.

 

Instead of saying "this is how far we need to go to reach the top", Brewers fans instead prefer to say "this is how far we've climbed up from the very bottom". And, here we are again, Brewers fans. At the bottom. The net effect of Doug Melvin's thirteen year tenure in Milwaukee is we're the worst franchise in the Major Leagues. Again.

[brewcrewdue80]

Just to go a little further on my Melvin disgust on missing the opportunities to trade players. He extended or kept players that were a negative defensively overall and earned their value with the Bat. He should have learned to trade these players their final year of team control or with 2years team control vs extending them. Hart, Fielder, Weeks, Aramis Ramirez being prime examples. And I'll say this now. Khris Davis fits the mold to a tee. He should be available in trade now and through the rest of team control, and traded the moment something promising is offered. You could say the same for Scooter if he ever played meaningful time at 2b when he's healthy.

 

But then again, the team's scouting appears so terrible at top notch talent in a long while, I'm sure the returns would be AAAA guys all of them and we'd be .400 baseball playing since 2010.

[The stache]

brewcrewdue80, ask me who I'd rather have at shortstop, a power bat like Xander Bogaerts, or a slick fielder like Andrelton Simmons.

 

It's Simmons, no contest. He's slowly improving with the bat, and should provide some more consistent power as he matures more (he hit 17 out two years ago. I expect 12-15 annually at his peak). But his defense is absolutely world class. And yet, I can't help but get the sense that this Brewers regime (like others before it) treat defense like an afterthought.

 

No one defensive play can have the effect that a three run homer can have, true (though the gap is not as big as some might think). But the greatest hitters come to the plate only 4 or 5 times a game, and they can be pitched around in a given key situation. Simmons is always out there. His range is incredible, and his feel is Ozzie Smith-like. Any ball hit within 100 feet of him (well, not really) is going to be an out. (it does feel like that at times). On a busy night, he might have 12 balls hit towards him. His ability to limit scoring between third and deep towards second has such a huge impact. And nothing kills a rally like a great shortstop turning two.

 

Yet year in, year out, it seems like the Brewers are trying desperately to find positions for their big bats to play...because their defense is so suspect, they have no natural position. Braun eventually became a pretty decent left fielder. Yet, does anybody get how much worse our defense became when Braun was moved to right field (net effect for Braun, putting him in a place where he wasn't nearly as good), and putting Khris Davis in Braun's place (net effect, downgrading the defense in left field, too, by a considerable amount)?

 

Davis has a pop gun for an arm. I don't know why that is. The guy is "strong like bull." It mystifies me how somebody that can hit the ball 450 feet throws a ball like a ten year old. But when Gomez isn't in center, the defense out there is pretty bad, especially if Parra is on the bench. And we wonder why our Garza and Lohse have been so awful. A big part of that is their fault. But a guys who have been in the league for a good long while, they expect a level of defense behind them, and I wonder on a given night how many more balls are falling in that shouldn't be. Those add up.

 

This lack of emphasis on defense needs to be addressed, and the only way I see that happening is by basically rebooting the whole franchise.

[The stache]

- The A's haven't been to the World Series under Billy Beane. Sure, he makes headlines and won the winter press clippings battles this year, but his team's worse than last year. Outside OAK he's darn near achieved sabermetric sainthood, but he's not always the best GM in the world, either.

 

Really? Billy Beane has been the A's GM since 1997. In the last 18 years, the A's have made the playoffs eight times with one of the smallest payrolls in baseball. That suggests a pretty damned good GM to me. The As are competitive year in, year out. He puts a winning team on the field.

 

As to this year's team "being worse than last year's", do you have any idea how many players they've lost to injury in the last year? Sure, a team like the Yankees can open up the checkbook and plug in replacement players. The A's can't do that. So, even as good as their system is, at some point, that well runs dry.

 

The A's lost Brandon Moss, who had 55 home runs in '13 and '14 at first base, to Cleveland for a minor league player. They had to dump his $6.5 million salary.

The A's lost Josh Donaldson, who had 53 home runs in '13 and '14 at third base, because his salary jumped from $400k to $4.5 million. They got some minor league players, and Brett Lawrie, making less than half of Donaldson's salary.

The A's lost Yoenis Cespedes, who hit 48 home runs in '13 and '14. He made $8.5 million in 2013. The A's got Jonny Gomes and Jon Lester, who they promptly traded for prospects.

They granted Bartolo Colon, who won 18 games with a 2.65 ERA in 2013, free agency when his salary was to raise from $3 million to $9 million.

 

Them, the injuries. Coco Crisp has missed all but 13 games. Ike Davis, their new first baseman, is on the 15 day DL. Then, there are their pitchers. A.J. Griffin and Jarrod Parker, who won 26 games between them in 2013, have had three Tommy John surgeries between them, and there is no knowing when they will return.

 

Three of their best starters are gone. Their big bats are gone. And there are more injuries I haven't touched on. And you're surprised they're flailing?

 

And yet, I bet they turn it around before the Brewers do.

[sveumrules]

...And yet, I can't help but get the sense that this Brewers regime (like others before it) treat defense like an afterthought...

 

...Yet, does anybody get how much worse our defense became when Braun was moved to right field (net effect for Braun, putting him in a place where he wasn't nearly as good), and putting Khris Davis in Braun's place (net effect, downgrading the defense in left field, too, by a considerable amount)?...

 

JJ Hardy, Lorenzo Cain, Alcides Escobar, Brett Lawrie and Jonathan Lucroy all came up through the Brewers organization and they play pretty good defense. Reports seem pretty positive on Orlando Arcia. I'm pretty sure when it comes to prospects that the Brewers are not unique in favoring the hit tool over the field tool amongst MLB front offices.

 

The 2013 Brewers outfield ranked 5th in UZR (25.2) and 2nd in DRS (64). Fielders (& innings) included Aoki (1297), Gomez (1242), Schafer (663), Braun (503), Gindl (292) and Davis (265).

 

The 2014 Brewers outfield ranked 10th in UZR (8.5) and 17th in DRS (-1). Fielders (& innings) included Gomez (1269), Braun (1168), Davis (1156), Schafer (285) and Parra (271).

 

At first glance, wow, the Brewers outfield defense performed significantly worse in 2014 than in 2013. Looking closer though, nearly the whole of that difference comes from Gomez 24.4/38 UZR/DRS in 2013 vs. 5.8/2 UZR/DRS in 2014.

 

In 7071 career innings in LF Braun has a UZR/150 of -3.7 compared to -2.6 for Davis over 1765 innings. So, by the numbers, Davis has been a better LF defender than Braun. In his 1555 innings so far in RF Braun has a UZR/150 of -5.7, slighty worse than his numbers in LF. The amount the outfield defense worsened moving Braun to RF to accomodate Davis in LF has been fractional at worst.

[danzig6767]

You cannot compare NFL and MLB franchises when it comes to player development, or really other type of success. It is an apples to oranges comparison. I apologize that I didn't read the rest of your post except for the end when you - again - tell us how we should or shouldn't look at this situation.

Yes, you absolutely can. Because the comparison is all about what the two organizations feel is acceptable.

No you can't.

 

The Packers can compete financially with every other team in the NFL. They don't ever have to trade good players away because they can't afford them. Packers management decides completely on who they want to keep based just on the cap. The exact same cap number that every other team in the NFL is up against, including the biggest markets while Green Bay is the smallest market in all of pro sports. No other pro sport is like the NFL with ideal levels of revenue sharing and a hard cap which combined pretty much allows all teams to keep whatever good players they want within the framework of the league cap number.

 

Plus, the NFL is a lot like the NBA in how one single great player can completely turn around a franchise and keep a team good for a decade or longer. It's no surprise that the Packers have been good to great for over two decades now at the same time they've had first ballot HOF quarterbacks in Favre and Rodgers, while at the same time multiple other teams who have lacked a top tier QB, they've mostly languished in mediocrity. Elite quarterbacks cover for tons of warts on teams they play for. Hell, the Packers went 15-1 a few years ago even though their defense set a NFL record for most yards given up, but Rodgers greatness overcame that bad defense. The Colts went from a 10-6 playoff team to a 2-14 worst team in the league with Manning out for the year. They get lucky and land Luck though in the draft, and immediately go back to a 11-5 team. No single great player or even say two great players in baseball can make a team good each year by themselves as a top QB does in football or a superstar can in the NBA.

 

I'm totally on the clean house train for the Brewers. We need fresh voices in the front office and if/when Attanasio hires a new GM, Mark needs to stop being a quasi GM owner who treats the Brewers as his own fantasy team. That said, the Brewers situation is nothing like the Packers for a variety of reasons. We do have a sizable financial disadvantage compared to a number of other markets, the Packers don't. We also won't turn this team around for the next decade simply by landing one great player as NFL teams can do by landing a top quarterback as the Packers have done twice in a row which is nearly unprecedented in NFL history except for the 49ers with Montana and Young. Aaron Rodgers alone in the QB driven NFL is more valuable than say a baseball team having Trout, Stanton, Kershaw, and Kluber. Rodgers alone is a go to the playoffs free card every season he is healthy.

[Nottso]

Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm working from memory here, and it is admittedly sometimes off. Here we go....

 

When Dean Taylor was hired, the Brewers' farm was one of the worst in all of baseball. At the time of his hire, Taylor said "If you expect the big club to win in 3 years, you've hired the wrong man. The farm is a disaster and this organization needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up" (or words to that effect). I was thrilled to hear this, as were many of my friends. Finally, a guy with the stones to tell it like it is and to do something about it!

 

Shortly thereafter, the farm was pretty highly rated, as Taylor promised; but the big club wasn't winning, so Taylor was ousted and Melvin was hired. Dean Taylor ended up in KC, who stunk and whose farm was a disaster at the time of his hire. The Brewers improved in the following years, mostly due to the farm that Taylor built, but Melvin was given the credit.

 

Fast forward to today: Here in Milwaukee, the big club stinks and the farm is below average. In KC, they're winning. A lot. And they're winning with players that Melvin let go and homegrown talent, mostly pitching. Even after trading away some of their good prospects to make their current run, Baseball America has them ranked 13th in organizational talent.

 

I'm sure some of you can point out moves Taylor made that didn't pan out. Nobody hits every time. But looking at the big picture, the Brewers should have kept Dean Taylor. Unless my memory is crossed up... which is always a possibility.

[JohnBriggs12]

The most damning decisions made by Melvin in recent years were the signings of 4 FA pitchers: Suppan, Wolf, Lohse and Garza. The first three were all virtually the same guy, veterans with long histories coming off of peak career years. Garza has been sometimes brilliant but frustratingly inconsistent his entire career. Oh the first 3 started off useful enough, but were all done before their contracts expired. Not coincidently, Attanasio was to some extent involved in all four signings, but that still hangs on Melvin.

 

It takes an ace to get over the hump and twice Melvin pulled the trigger on trades to get one and both led to postseason appearances. But none were drafted/developed in his tenure though there's still some hope for Nelson and Peralta.

 

Until they stop settling for at best mid rotation guys in their 30's as "big" signings and either start developing top of the rotation starters themselves, or play with the big boys in FA and pay the going rate for a true top of the rotation guy with something left in his tank, the best they can hope for is to once every 5 years or so accumulate enough in their system to swing a deal for a short term fix.

 

The notion that they can get their by dealing off their assets for prospects is dubious at best.

[Boomer5]

Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm working from memory here, and it is admittedly sometimes off. Here we go....

 

When Dean Taylor was hired, the Brewers' farm was one of the worst in all of baseball. At the time of his hire, Taylor said "If you expect the big club to win in 3 years, you've hired the wrong man. The farm is a disaster and this organization needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up" (or words to that effect). I was thrilled to hear this, as were many of my friends. Finally, a guy with the stones to tell it like it is and to do something about it!

 

Shortly thereafter, the farm was pretty highly rated, as Taylor promised; but the big club wasn't winning, so Taylor was ousted and Melvin was hired. Dean Taylor ended up in KC, who stunk and whose farm was a disaster at the time of his hire. The Brewers improved in the following years, mostly due to the farm that Taylor built, but Melvin was given the credit.

 

Fast forward to today: Here in Milwaukee, the big club stinks and the farm is below average. In KC, they're winning. A lot. And they're winning with players that Melvin let go and homegrown talent, mostly pitching. Even after trading away some of their good prospects to make their current run, Baseball America has them ranked 13th in organizational talent.

 

I'm sure some of you can point out moves Taylor made that didn't pan out. Nobody hits every time. But looking at the big picture, the Brewers should have kept Dean Taylor. Unless my memory is crossed up... which is always a possibility.

 

I believe it was Dean that brought in Jack Z but that was about it. Dean Taylor was our worst major league GM. Everyone of his moves were insane other than the wickman for sexson trade. I'm very glad he is gone as the GM. Maybe as a farm guy but he was not a major league caliber GM.

[reillymcshane]

Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm working from memory here, and it is admittedly sometimes off. Here we go....

 

When Dean Taylor was hired, the Brewers' farm was one of the worst in all of baseball. At the time of his hire, Taylor said "If you expect the big club to win in 3 years, you've hired the wrong man. The farm is a disaster and this organization needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up" (or words to that effect). I was thrilled to hear this, as were many of my friends. Finally, a guy with the stones to tell it like it is and to do something about it!

 

Shortly thereafter, the farm was pretty highly rated, as Taylor promised; but the big club wasn't winning, so Taylor was ousted and Melvin was hired. Dean Taylor ended up in KC, who stunk and whose farm was a disaster at the time of his hire. The Brewers improved in the following years, mostly due to the farm that Taylor built, but Melvin was given the credit.

 

Fast forward to today: Here in Milwaukee, the big club stinks and the farm is below average. In KC, they're winning. A lot. And they're winning with players that Melvin let go and homegrown talent, mostly pitching. Even after trading away some of their good prospects to make their current run, Baseball America has them ranked 13th in organizational talent.

 

I'm sure some of you can point out moves Taylor made that didn't pan out. Nobody hits every time. But looking at the big picture, the Brewers should have kept Dean Taylor. Unless my memory is crossed up... which is always a possibility.

 

I think you're right that Taylor recognized the need to rebuild the team's minor league infrastructure - and he began the process, which would bear fruit in the coming years.

 

However, he made some odd decisions on the major league level. Davey Lopes, Jerry Royster, Jeffrey Hammonds. I believe he dealt Cirillo and Burnitz - which wasn't a bad idea to restock the team - but the assets he got back were mediocre (at best).

[Nottso]

Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm working from memory here, and it is admittedly sometimes off. Here we go....

 

When Dean Taylor was hired, the Brewers' farm was one of the worst in all of baseball. At the time of his hire, Taylor said "If you expect the big club to win in 3 years, you've hired the wrong man. The farm is a disaster and this organization needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up" (or words to that effect). I was thrilled to hear this, as were many of my friends. Finally, a guy with the stones to tell it like it is and to do something about it!

 

Shortly thereafter, the farm was pretty highly rated, as Taylor promised; but the big club wasn't winning, so Taylor was ousted and Melvin was hired. Dean Taylor ended up in KC, who stunk and whose farm was a disaster at the time of his hire. The Brewers improved in the following years, mostly due to the farm that Taylor built, but Melvin was given the credit.

 

Fast forward to today: Here in Milwaukee, the big club stinks and the farm is below average. In KC, they're winning. A lot. And they're winning with players that Melvin let go and homegrown talent, mostly pitching. Even after trading away some of their good prospects to make their current run, Baseball America has them ranked 13th in organizational talent.

 

I'm sure some of you can point out moves Taylor made that didn't pan out. Nobody hits every time. But looking at the big picture, the Brewers should have kept Dean Taylor. Unless my memory is crossed up... which is always a possibility.

 

I believe it was Dean that brought in Jack Z but that was about it. Dean Taylor was our worst major league GM. Everyone of his moves were insane other than the wickman for sexson trade. I'm very glad he is gone as the GM. Maybe as a farm guy but he was not a major league caliber GM.

 

I can't agree with that, but I can't disagree either. The thing is, Taylor wasn't given enough time here to bring his entire plan to fruition. I felt like he was building for the future and he flat out told us he was willing to sacrifice wins at the big league level to rebuild the entire farm system.

 

Taylor inherited an utter mess. Melvin inherited a strong farm. I don't think there's really any denying that. Everybody wants to credit Jack Z for it, but Seattle certainly hasn't done much under his watch and their farm system is ranked barely above the Brewers' farm. Meanwhile, in KC...

 

Of course I can't say with any certainty that KC's successes are to be credited to Taylor, as he was listed as "Vice President of Baseball Operations/Assistant General Manager." As of this year he's retired but still serving as a consultant to KC. The bottom line, though, is that KC is currently light years ahead of the Brewers and the Mariners, organizationally speaking.

[Thurston Fluff]

Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm working from memory here, and it is admittedly sometimes off. Here we go....

 

When Dean Taylor was hired, the Brewers' farm was one of the worst in all of baseball. At the time of his hire, Taylor said "If you expect the big club to win in 3 years, you've hired the wrong man. The farm is a disaster and this organization needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up" (or words to that effect). I was thrilled to hear this, as were many of my friends. Finally, a guy with the stones to tell it like it is and to do something about it!

 

Shortly thereafter, the farm was pretty highly rated, as Taylor promised; but the big club wasn't winning, so Taylor was ousted and Melvin was hired. Dean Taylor ended up in KC, who stunk and whose farm was a disaster at the time of his hire. The Brewers improved in the following years, mostly due to the farm that Taylor built, but Melvin was given the credit.

 

Fast forward to today: Here in Milwaukee, the big club stinks and the farm is below average. In KC, they're winning. A lot. And they're winning with players that Melvin let go and homegrown talent, mostly pitching. Even after trading away some of their good prospects to make their current run, Baseball America has them ranked 13th in organizational talent.

 

I'm sure some of you can point out moves Taylor made that didn't pan out. Nobody hits every time. But looking at the big picture, the Brewers should have kept Dean Taylor. Unless my memory is crossed up... which is always a possibility.

 

He may have said that but that sure wasn't how he acted. The first thing he did was to trade our few good assets for Jimmy Haynes and Jaimie Wright type of players. If you don't plan on winning in the next three years why trade for major league ready players? Then he spent money Jose Hernandez and Jeffery Hammonds and rushed our best pitching prospect up the ladder so fast it cost him his career. All of that shows more of a desire to win sooner than later. I don't necessarily blame him for it. He had to be under some amount of pressure to put a competitive team into the new stadium.

[xisxisxis]

and rushed our best pitching prospect up the ladder so fast it cost him his career.

 

The only person to blame for that is Nick Neugebauer. He knew he had an injury, but kept it from the team because he didn't want to delay getting to the majors. One injury lead to many that lead to a shoulder that was completely messed up. I don't see how anyone can lay that at Taylor's feet....

 

Outside OAK he's darn near achieved sabermetric sainthood, but he's not always the best GM in the world, either.

 

Would you trade Melvin for Beane straight up? I would without even thinking about it. There's about 10 GMs I would do the same. There's another 5-10 where I would think about it, but probably say yes. There's another 5 where it would be churn and finally 5 who are worse and I would say no. So that puts Melvin in the bottom 20%, just like the Brewers farm system and just like the Brewers. So after 12 years of Melvin we are worse off than when he came... That's one pretty crappy record.

[yfinn6]

You cannot compare NFL and MLB franchises when it comes to player development, or really other type of success. It is an apples to oranges comparison. I apologize that I didn't read the rest of your post except for the end when you - again - tell us how we should or shouldn't look at this situation.

 

Yes, you absolutely can. Because the comparison is all about what the two organizations feel is acceptable.

 

The Packers before the twenty year drought had had massive success. And even when they were terrible, they gave people a few years to fix things, and when there weren't tangible results, they were sent packing.

 

The Brewers have never had success. Never. They were good for about a 5 year span in the late 70s and early 80s, and made a single World Series appearance. Since the Brewers have never had any success at all, we have come to accept that level of mediocrity. By doing so, when you have a general manager like Doug Melvin, who (again, don't know how many times I have to say this...has never won a thing in the three decades he has been a Major League executive), you don't feel any urgency to expel him from the organization. "We're losers, we've always been losers, and under Doug Melvin, we've been less of a loser organization than ever before."

 

When Melvin's track record is being glowingly compared to every other Brewer General Manager in franchise history (which is a flashing light substantiating my claim), there is a problem. Our measuring stick is our own failure! That's where this black hole of an organization has come to after four decades. Any rational baseball fan's measuring stick should be the record of a successful organization.

 

Instead of saying "this is how far we need to go to reach the top", Brewers fans instead prefer to say "this is how far we've climbed up from the very bottom". And, here we are again, Brewers fans. At the bottom. The net effect of Doug Melvin's thirteen year tenure in Milwaukee is we're the worst franchise in the Major Leagues. Again.

 

So basically you're saying you can compare an NFL franchise: the Packers - and an MLB franchise: the Brewers because one franchise has had a lot of success and the other franchise has had very little success? But you're going to completely disregard the fact that drafting in the NFL and drafting in MLB are two completely different sets of circumstances; you're going to disregard that the NFL has a salary cap and each team has the same amount of money to spend whereas in MLB that is not the case whatsoever, among a dozen other differences that danzig already pointed out.

 

As I said, NFL and MLB is an apples-to-oranges comparison. In fact, I don't even know what you're arguing other than you think Melvin should be let go. Fine - I won't argue with you; but you also don't need to write things like "again.. I don't know how many times I need to say this" - plenty of others have said the same thing about Melvin since the 2012 season.

 

Also, the Brewers haven't "accepted" mediocrity either since MA bought the team. How many managers has he gone through now? It's just happened through poor drafting and player development, and trading away any good prospect we had to take a shot when the window was open. Again, if you want to make a claim that Melvin should have been fired, then fine, but please.. don't compare the Brewers' situation to the Packers'.

[monty57]

Taylor inherited an utter mess. Melvin inherited a strong farm. I don't think there's really any denying that.

 

Agree. Melvin and Attanasio inherited/bought into the Brewers at a point when an upswing in success at the MLB level was pretty much inevitable. They had a strong farm, a surge in ticket sales from the new stadium, and a rock bottom MLB payroll allowing them to add a lot of salary. Give about anybody the reigns and tell them "you have two guys who will put up Hall of Fame numbers, and several other multiple-time All Stars for the next six years, and you can add around $60,000,000 in annual payroll," and see if you can squeeze some wins out of it. It is extremely disappointing that we've pissed that away and now sit in an unenviable position, likely unwilling to take the steps necessary to break us out of the rut.

 

Until they stop settling for at best mid rotation guys in their 30's as "big" signings and either start developing top of the rotation starters themselves, or play with the big boys in FA and pay the going rate for a true top of the rotation guy with something left in his tank, the best they can hope for is to once every 5 years or so accumulate enough in their system to swing a deal for a short term fix.

 

The notion that they can get their by dealing off their assets for prospects is dubious at best.

 

Well, they could get some of that desired pitching back in those "dubious" trades. They don't have anyone in the franchise that is likely to have the term "Ace" affixed next to their name, so they need to get some. They can tank the next five or six seasons and hope to get some aces in the draft, or they can trade for some. One way you mentioned is to trade multiple good prospects for 1-2 years of a "proven ace," or you can trade 1-2 years of our "proven stars" to get multiple good prospects. It would take trading talent to get this talent, so the only real way they can get "Ace-caliber" talent in their system for more then a short time is to trade guys like Gomez and Lucroy.

 

As I said, NFL and MLB is an apples-to-oranges comparison.

 

There are a lot of differences, but I think most long-term successful franchises (whether in sport, business or elsewhere) have similarities. The most important is that the person at the top has to set in place an organizational philosophy and a long-term plan for success. The Packers floundered until they brought in Harlen. The Badgers floundered until they brought in Alvarez. Apple floundered when Jobs was let go until he was brought back. So yes, there are a lot of "micro" things to bicker over, but on the "macro" level, the person at the top really matters, so until Attanasio either becomes much more knowledgeable about the ins-and-outs of baseball, or until he gets the heck out of the way, this team will be a rudderless ship.

 

Also, the Brewers haven't "accepted" mediocrity either since MA bought the team.

 

Agree. Attanasio doesn't like mediocrity, he just doesn't understand that he's the root cause for the mediocrity.

[Thurston Fluff]

The only person to blame for that is Nick Neugebauer. He knew he had an injury, but kept it from the team because he didn't want to delay getting to the majors. One injury lead to many that lead to a shoulder that was completely messed up. I don't see how anyone can lay that at Taylor's feet....

 

He also was coming off an injury and was back playing in a far shorter period of time than most people thought prudent at the time. I don't think that happens without some input from management. If it did that is in itself a failing on his part.