Matt Dominguez claimed and optioned; Wei-Chung Wang designated for assignment (Wang outrighted; post 100)

[DuWayne Steurer]

3TO is something that's fun and interesting. It doesn't add to or detract from value on its own.

 

Branyan's value came from his generally good OBP and excellent SLG. The real debate centered around his strikeouts; stat gurus felt that his K numbers unnecessarily scared GMs away.

 

Fair point. it was his ability to take a walk that made him different. But that is something that can be learned to some extent. Power can't. One ironic thing about stat gurus is they say K's don't matter for hitters but do for pitchers. I know they are measuring different things but if you don't care about one the other is going to be effected.

 

 

For a pitcher, they largely have little effect on BABIP. Some guys who have pinpoint control and can work the corners like magic, maybe, but largely, pitchers have little to do with the effect of a ball in play (other than flyball/groundball). If the pitcher can keep the ball from being put in play, that's always a plus.

 

For a batter, if you have a .900 OPS guy who strikes out 150 times, and a .900 OPS guy who strikes out 70 times, the difference is negligible at best. I've read that 100 strikeouts cost a team one run. (statistical research will absolutely bear this out)

 

If you go up there with the mindset to "put the ball in play", you are changing your approach, and aren't as aggressive a hitter. You have a guy who hits 30 homeruns and hits .270 and strikes out 150 times, suddenly decide to be a 'contact' hitter, it's going to completely change his game and and most likely have a negative overall effect on his offensive numbers. Weakly grounding out to 2nd base 9 times out of 10 has zero value for the offense.

[pacopete4]

NICE JOB DOUG MELVIN!!!! WOOOOHOOO!!!!!!! (we need a little enthusiasm around here!)

[1992casey]

http://fantasynews.cbssports.com/fantasybaseball/update/25218534/brewers-wei-chung-wang-clears-waivers-outrighted-to-class-a

 

Since it's short, I'll quote the whole thing.

 

The Brewers outrighted pitcher Wei-Chung Wang to Class A Brevard County on Thursday. He was designated for assignment on Tuesday.

[Outlander]

NICE JOB DOUG MELVIN!!!! WOOOOHOOO!!!!!!! (we need a little enthusiasm around here!)

I'm with you, he was called countless names by usually level headed people here. Good job Doug knowing that nobody else would put him on the 40 man roster. Congrats Wang on being able to develop at your own pace now.

[pacopete4]

NICE JOB DOUG MELVIN!!!! WOOOOHOOO!!!!!!! (we need a little enthusiasm around here!)

I'm with you, he was called countless names by usually level headed people here. Good job Doug knowing that nobody else would put him on the 40 man roster. Congrats Wang on being able to develop at your own pace now.

 

Plus adding a possible stop gap for 3B while we either trade Ramirez or his playing time starts dwindling.

[jerichoholicninja]

3TO is something that's fun and interesting. It doesn't add to or detract from value on its own.

 

Branyan's value came from his generally good OBP and excellent SLG. The real debate centered around his strikeouts; stat gurus felt that his K numbers unnecessarily scared GMs away.

 

Fair point. it was his ability to take a walk that made him different. But that is something that can be learned to some extent. Power can't. One ironic thing about stat gurus is they say K's don't matter for hitters but do for pitchers. I know they are measuring different things but if you don't care about one the other is going to be effected.

 

 

For a pitcher, they largely have little effect on BABIP. Some guys who have pinpoint control and can work the corners like magic, maybe, but largely, pitchers have little to do with the effect of a ball in play (other than flyball/groundball). If the pitcher can keep the ball from being put in play, that's always a plus.

 

For a batter, if you have a .900 OPS guy who strikes out 150 times, and a .900 OPS guy who strikes out 70 times, the difference is negligible at best. I've read that 100 strikeouts cost a team one run. (statistical research will absolutely bear this out)

 

If you go up there with the mindset to "put the ball in play", you are changing your approach, and aren't as aggressive a hitter. You have a guy who hits 30 homeruns and hits .270 and strikes out 150 times, suddenly decide to be a 'contact' hitter, it's going to completely change his game and and most likely have a negative overall effect on his offensive numbers. Weakly grounding out to 2nd base 9 times out of 10 has zero value for the offense.

 

I don't want to derail the thread but the Royals have put together a pretty decent offense of "put the ball in play" guys. I agree, when you're talking about an individual player strikeouts really don't matter. But when you put a whole team of them together, well, you get the Brewers of the last few years and an offense that struggles to score runs in situations where you are almost guaranteed to score.

[reillymcshane]

Wang coming back makes me 'get' this move. I thought for sure someone would claim him. I didn't realize he had a $300,000 salary, which I'm sure dissuaded some teams.

 

And let's be honest - Matt Dominguez is better than having Nelson at AAA. I don't think much of the guy, but he's much better.

[Austin Tatious]

Dominguez is a great instructive example of how prospects are overrated as bargaining chips and measuring asset values. This is a guy who was, what, a top 80 prospect? That averages to like a top 3 prospect per team. He can't produce a decent OPS. Enough data is in on his OPS to get the idea. He had that 21 homer season, but the metrics around it weren't promising and beyond that he hasn't sustained it.

 

Yet, if he were 20 now and in his prospect heyday and you looked at his ranking at a premium position with his good athleticism for defense, you'd think he'd be considered a sizable return for a proven MLB trade asset that Milwaukee is looking to move.

 

Proven major league talent is just that, proven. Prospects aren't. That jump from prospect to proven is massive. It's like crossing the sound barrier. But it's not taken into account in asset valuation for trades. When you make a trade and you have a proven commodity, you can't give it away for a lottery ticket that could collapse badly. Look at how many Mat Gamel's and Taylor Green's are strewn by the side of the road who did literally nothing.

 

In the new Brewers regime, I would use math to look at relative values of assets because I don't think it's understood well.

 

The Brewers can't take their talent and trade it for a bunch of guys that will be Dominguez, Delmonico, Gamel, Taylor Green, etc. We need real assets back.

 

Expenditures and value of assets has not been Melvin's strong suit. I could go on and on, on this. It's also how draft picks and international markets are used. There isn't a great master strategy to pick players commensurate with asset values for draft positions.

 

Doug is a nice guy and old school, but we need higher level strategic thinking.

[PeaveyFury]

 

In the new Brewers regime, I would use math to look at relative values of assets because I don't think it's understood well.

 

The Brewers can't take their talent and trade it for a bunch of guys that will be Dominguez, Delmonico, Gamel, Taylor Green, etc. We need real assets back.

 

Sorry, I don't follow. If what you're talking about is trading for "proven" talent that is 'MLB ready' or established, that's exactly what Melvin has done in his tenure here, rather than trading for unproven, highly-ranked prospects. Yeah, there have been some trades for the likes of Capellan or de la Rosa (who also were in the upper levels of the minors and made their MLB debuts quickly) but far more have been for younger, MLB ready assets like Segura, Capuano, Gomez, etc when he's traded a proven commodity.

[superfly]

I would rather see Rivera, Segura, Sardinas or Arcia at third right now than waste time with this guy.

 

 

Yes, bring Arcia or Rivera (or apparently Sardinas) up before they are ready and watch their confidence be absolutely shattered. Makes total sense to me. How'd that work out for the Twins with Aaron Hicks? Kid is a shell of what he could have been after he was forced up.

[brewmann04]

I glad we kept Wang and I sue you see Matt up at some point but not holding my breath that he the answer.

[Austin Tatious]

 

In the new Brewers regime, I would use math to look at relative values of assets because I don't think it's understood well.

 

The Brewers can't take their talent and trade it for a bunch of guys that will be Dominguez, Delmonico, Gamel, Taylor Green, etc. We need real assets back.

 

Sorry, I don't follow. If what you're talking about is trading for "proven" talent that is 'MLB ready' or established, that's exactly what Melvin has done in his tenure here, rather than trading for unproven, highly-ranked prospects. Yeah, there have been some trades for the likes of Capellan or de la Rosa (who also were in the upper levels of the minors and made their MLB debuts quickly) but far more have been for younger, MLB ready assets like Segura, Capuano, Gomez, etc when he's traded a proven commodity.

 

I'm referring to what we need to be doing going forward and referring to returns on our marketable veterans. Asset values of prospects need to be measured properly. When we kick around trade theories on this site, I get a kick out of some of the theoretical returns. You take a proven guy, an all star, and get a return of a top 80 prospect plus fodder. Well, Dominguez proves that top 80 prospects can be meaningless if they can't cross the sound barrier into proven MLB commodity.

 

Beyond that, the really good managements understand asset valuation. How can I have another career and still like Gallo over Haniger and see the Gallo potential as an asset value at that draft slot, but the Brewers couldn't? How good would he look now? Haniger always had that 4th outfielder feel, while Gallo had limitless power coming out of Vegas. The Brewers took Haniger.

 

Milwaukee has misused premium draft pick assets on low ceiling values like Arnett, Jungmann, and Bradley. It's like having the money for an Escalade and buying a Chevy. Its not a scouting failure. There is a decision tree on understanding the value of your resources. Last year, the Brewers had the 12th pick. That's pretty high, and took Medeiros. We are all rooting for him. But, again, it's a misuse of asset valuation. He's a guy with a weird arm slot with poor command. That's not what you want with the 12th overall pick. Is he going to be a top 30 prospect in the league eventually or a future reliever like Jeremy Jeffress, another first round pick who had questions about viability as a starter and ended up a reliever? Read the top 50 prospect lists and how they get there. They fit profiles by and large the Brewers don't focus on.

 

All teams miss on picks. The Brewers miss regularly and there is a decision making systemic problem that goes beyond scouting. It goes to allocating value to assets. You have to profile guys that fit the value of the asset of the pick. The point is not second guessing the misses. It's second guessing missing the decision making. The ideas are wrong.

 

I like Ray Montgomery. There was some good upside this year. Clark has skill. But they could have gotten a Clayton Kershaw type on an injury risk with Brady Aiken. He went two picks later so it was reasonable. At least Clark, unlike Medeiros, also figures to be a top league prospect. But, we need our Madison Bumgarner type who is home grown or we will never win big. It's just not going to happen until we get that guy. The guy who can go into a playoff series and is a lock for two wins.

[adambr2]

 

In the new Brewers regime, I would use math to look at relative values of assets because I don't think it's understood well.

 

The Brewers can't take their talent and trade it for a bunch of guys that will be Dominguez, Delmonico, Gamel, Taylor Green, etc. We need real assets back.

 

Sorry, I don't follow. If what you're talking about is trading for "proven" talent that is 'MLB ready' or established, that's exactly what Melvin has done in his tenure here, rather than trading for unproven, highly-ranked prospects. Yeah, there have been some trades for the likes of Capellan or de la Rosa (who also were in the upper levels of the minors and made their MLB debuts quickly) but far more have been for younger, MLB ready assets like Segura, Capuano, Gomez, etc when he's traded a proven commodity.

 

I'm referring to what we need to be doing going forward and referring to returns on our marketable veterans. Asset values of prospects need to be measured properly. When we kick around trade theories on this site, I get a kick out of some of the theoretical returns. You take a proven guy, an all star, and get a return of a top 80 prospect plus fodder. Well, Dominguez proves that top 80 prospects can be meaningless if they can't cross the sound barrier into proven MLB commodity.

 

Beyond that, the really good managements understand asset valuation. How can I have another career and still like Gallo over Haniger and see the Gallo potential as an asset value at that draft slot, but the Brewers couldn't? How good would he look now? Haniger always had that 4th outfielder feel, while Gallo had limitless power coming out of Vegas. The Brewers took Haniger.

 

Milwaukee has misused premium draft pick assets on low ceiling values like Arnett, Jungmann, and Bradley. It's like having the money for an Escalade and buying a Chevy. Its not a scouting failure. There is a decision tree on understanding the value of your resources. Last year, the Brewers had the 12th pick. That's pretty high, and took Medeiros. We are all rooting for him. But, again, it's a misuse of asset valuation. He's a guy with a weird arm slot with poor command. That's not what you want with the 12th overall pick. Is he going to be a top 30 prospect in the league eventually or a future reliever like Jeremy Jeffress, another first round pick who had questions about viability as a starter and ended up a reliever? Read the top 50 prospect lists and how they get there. They fit profiles by and large the Brewers don't focus on.

 

All teams miss on picks. The Brewers miss regularly and there is a decision making systemic problem that goes beyond scouting. It goes to allocating value to assets. You have to profile guys that fit the value of the asset of the pick. The point is not second guessing the misses. It's second guessing missing the decision making. The ideas are wrong.

 

I like Ray Montgomery. There was some good upside this year. Clark has skill. But they could have gotten a Clayton Kershaw type on an injury risk with Brady Aiken. He went two picks later so it was reasonable. At least Clark, unlike Medeiros, also figures to be a top league prospect. But, we need our Madison Bumgarner type who is home grown or we will never win big. It's just not going to happen until we get that guy. The guy who can go into a playoff series and is a lock for two wins.

 

There's many factors that determine the value of a "proven" asset. Ability is obviously at the top of the list, with salary, age, and remaining club control also coming into play.

 

With a prospect, their value is usually in their ceiling, and from how close they are to the majors. Further along you are on the farm, the more of a sure thing you likely are.

 

I'm partly with you on your post. If you are saying they need to be concentrating more on upside than look for high floors and low ceiling college guys, I would absolutely agree. We aren't going to turn the corner by drafting pitchers with #3 ceilings.

 

That said, just like you say a top 80 can bust, so can a top 10. You might draft a guy with a Kershaw ceiling, but you have to accept that there is a good chance that he may never make the majors. What types exactly are you looking for in return for our marketable vets? You say we can't get guys that will turn out to be Dominguez in return. If we knew what we were going to get in the future before we made a trade, it would make our job a lot easier. If the Indians knew that Matt Laporta would turn out to be a bust, I think they would have asked for something else for CC.

 

There's nothing about Dominguez that should have scared us off when he was 18 and playing well in A ball. He was a high ceiling high school prospect with All-Star potential. He just didn't pan out, or at least not so far and most likely not ever. We can always review how we're evaluating prospects, but we can't prevent that kind of thing from ever happening. Take a chance on a high upside guy in A ball, there's always the chance he won't pan out. Go for a guy in AAA ball who is near the majors, and chances are you'll sacrifice some upside.

 

Rarely do we ever see elite prospects that are seasoned in the minors and just about ready to make it to the big show get traded at that point.

[TheCrew07]

I'm referring to what we need to be doing going forward and referring to returns on our marketable veterans. Asset values of prospects need to be measured properly. When we kick around trade theories on this site, I get a kick out of some of the theoretical returns. You take a proven guy, an all star, and get a return of a top 80 prospect plus fodder. Well, Dominguez proves that top 80 prospects can be meaningless if they can't cross the sound barrier into proven MLB commodity.

 

Would you care to offer an example because I think it usually goes the other way... People want to trade our trash for top prospects.

[The stache]

First of all, Dominguez was rated as high as top 35 by MLB.com. I posted a link to it, not hard to click. Big difference from top 85. He was one of the elite third base prospects in the game.

 

Why has he failed? Do I really need to point out that he came up with the Marlins (strike one), then got jettisoned to MLB's version of Siberia (Houston) for three seasons. Now, Houston is turning it around, but they were a dumpster fire in the NL, and the entire coaching staff was awful. How the hell is a kid, who has already been moved once at age 21, going to develop?

"Hey Matt, we don't have jack in Houston. So, we're relying on you, kid, to park 30 bombs into the seats. You're going to be the one that sells tickets. No pressure."

 

Show me any top prospect who would have thrived in that element? The kid hit 7 home runs in a 12 game span. What, did he just get lucky? Was he just "Hodor" up there swinging a giant club, and a few times he got lucky? The guy's power is legit. He's had no major injuries. His "issues" at the plate are either mechanical or mental. Those can be solved. Then, bring in a coach to work with him on getting his footwork back to where it should be, so he can play third.

 

He's not the savior. Nobody is expecting that of him. He's a guy that could be a stop gap for a couple of years until the young guys we've recently drafted can (God help us) make it to the big club, and make a serious impact.

 

He is cheap. He is strong. I don't care what his ranking was, 85, 35, 46, 102....when you hear "Gold Glove caliber with power potential" at third in a prospect, I don't know about you guys, but my eyes light up. To call him a has been, or garbage is ridiculous. If that's the case, then half our 40 man roster is "garbage".

 

Go back and read the scouting reports on him. They're out there. People that know a hell of a lot more about baseball than I do (and I know a lot)--professional scouts who watch thousands of players each year--they were very, very high on this kid for a reason.

 

Sometimes, you just can't give up on a top rated prospect. If the Reds had done that, they don't have a massive year from Devin Mesoraco last year. If his hip heals, which I expect will happen, that kid is going to be hitting 30 + home runs behind the plate for the Reds for the next five years or more. But when he didn't "put it all together" right away, there were people that wanted him dumped.

 

You don't throw this one back. This is a 6'1" 220 lb young man that can hit the ball out of any park in the Majors, and if he gets his confidence back, can be really good defensively. Is his OBP low? Yeah. That's a lack of patience, which can be taught. Of course, the Brewers, with their .295 team OBP (again, last in the Majors) probably isn't the place he's going to learn that. But maybe we'll get lucky. And since we're not going to lose Wang, there is absolutely no risk. A little money. $300-400k for a chance at a solid, or better third baseman. I'll take that chance every day of the week, and twice on Saturdays.

[The stache]

Statistically speaking: Dominguez turned on the power in the second half after shaking off the aftereffects of mono. The third baseman slugged .513 after the All-Star break, hitting 16 homers and driving in 63 runs in 265 at-bats.

Scouting report: Outstanding defensively, Dominguez also has a polished and advanced approach at the plate. He has plenty of ceiling and should hit for average and power. He's extremely coachable and has worked hard on establishing a better hitting base.

 

Upside potential: All-Star-caliber third baseman who is a run-producer and Gold Glover; a Scott Rolen type.

 

They said it: "He's a complete player, other than not running. He's a baseball player who's very far along. He's been in the baseball eye for a long time. There's no question his bat was underrated. He does everything well and he's just a real smart player. He understands the game well." -- Jim Fleming, Marlins VP of Player Development and Scouting

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/minorleagues/prospects/y2009/profile.jsp?t=p_top&pid=518625

 

Now that was from 2009/10. A while ago. But I highlight "coachable", because it means the guy is willing to shut up and listen, and make changes to his game to become a better player. This is the kind of low risk, potentially high reward move that the Brewers need to be making while our young talent develops.

[JohnBriggs12]

I would rather see Rivera, Segura, Sardinas or Arcia at third right now than waste time with this guy.

 

 

Yes, bring Arcia or Rivera (or apparently Sardinas) up before they are ready and watch their confidence be absolutely shattered. Makes total sense to me. How'd that work out for the Twins with Aaron Hicks? Kid is a shell of what he could have been after he was forced up.

 

I would like to see Hernan Perez at 3b the rest of this year. He's another guy that came up way too soon. But I like what I've seen from him. That might end up being a shrewd buy low move by Melvin. He's not a little guy either and I think he can hit 12-15 HR per year.

[monty57]

Proven major league talent is just that, proven.

 

Which is why veterans like Garza, Lohse and Ramirez never have bad seasons. Of course prospects fail, but so do vets.

 

The theory is to stockpile as many good prospects as you can, because while some fail, some also succeed, and that is where major league players come from. The good thing is that when trading "proven," you are usually able to get multiple "unproven" prospects. If you are trading one year of a "proven" guy for three "unproven" minor leaguers, you only need one of those three to pan out to make the trade successful, as you are getting six years of that guy for one year of the guy you traded away. If two of the guys pan out, you've hit a home run.

 

Regarding your dislike of the Medeiros pick last year at 12, you need to understand the "draft pool" of money to figure that one out. He was expected to be a late first round pick, but by picking him earlier, the Brewers were able to sign him for under slot value. That allowed them to draft Harrison and Gatewood with the next two picks and use the money saved on the Medeiros pick to sign them. So yes, he was drafted earlier than expected, but at least there was some reason for it, and in a system in big need of high upside talent, we ended up with three guys who fit the bill.

[Thurston Fluff]

Why has he failed? Do I really need to point out that he came up with the Marlins (strike one), then got jettisoned to MLB's version of Siberia (Houston) for three seasons. Now, Houston is turning it around, but they were a dumpster fire in the NL, and the entire coaching staff was awful. How the hell is a kid, who has already been moved once at age 21, going to develop?

"Hey Matt, we don't have jack in Houston. So, we're relying on you, kid, to park 30 bombs into the seats. You're going to be the one that sells tickets. No pressure."

 

Hows is the Brewers situation now any different than either the Marlins or Astros when they had him?

 

For a pitcher, they largely have little effect on BABIP. Some guys who have pinpoint control and can work the corners like magic, maybe, but largely, pitchers have little to do with the effect of a ball in play (other than flyball/groundball). If the pitcher can keep the ball from being put in play, that's always a plus.

 

For a batter, if you have a .900 OPS guy who strikes out 150 times, and a .900 OPS guy who strikes out 70 times, the difference is negligible at best. I've read that 100 strikeouts cost a team one run. (statistical research will absolutely bear this out)

 

If you have a lot of hitters who don't care how much they strike out and you are judging pitchers on it at some point the evaluation of pitchers based on strikeouts will get skewed. I think using the standard idea that K's aren't bad for hitters but are good for pitchers needs some looking into to take into account the fact hitters are easier to strikeout that they used to be. Obviously strikeouts are good for pitchers and bad for hitters to some extent. I just wonder if the level of importance should be tweaked a little. I also question the value of using decades old metrics as the best way of finding undervalued assets in today's game. That makes me wonder if ground ball pitchers and low K, contact hitters might be the new undervalued player.

[jerichoholicninja]

First of all, Dominguez was rated as high as top 35 by MLB.com. I posted a link to it, not hard to click. Big difference from top 85. He was one of the elite third base prospects in the game.

 

Why has he failed? Do I really need to point out that he came up with the Marlins (strike one), then got jettisoned to MLB's version of Siberia (Houston) for three seasons. Now, Houston is turning it around, but they were a dumpster fire in the NL, and the entire coaching staff was awful. How the hell is a kid, who has already been moved once at age 21, going to develop?

"Hey Matt, we don't have jack in Houston. So, we're relying on you, kid, to park 30 bombs into the seats. You're going to be the one that sells tickets. No pressure."

 

Show me any top prospect who would have thrived in that element?

 

I'm not sure what being developed by the Marlins has to do with anything. They've had some pretty darn good players come up through their system: Stanton, Fernandez, Miggy to name a few. And the Astros were Siberia? They knew they had nothing in terms of major league talent so they gutted the team for prospects and knew they were going to lose. I highly doubt anyone ever told Matt he was going to "be the one to sell tickets" and he needed to hit 30 bombs.

[xisxisxis]

Why has he failed? Do I really need to point out that he came up with the Marlins (strike one), then got jettisoned to MLB's version of Siberia (Houston) for three seasons. Now, Houston is turning it around, but they were a dumpster fire in the NL, and the entire coaching staff was awful. How the hell is a kid, who has already been moved once at age 21, going to develop?

 

And now that Houston has turned things around he's landed in the dumpster fire that is the Milwaukee Brewers. I am sure he's doing cartwheels now that he is with an organization that has consistently developed elite talent... Not! Houston coaches were so bad? Welcome to Milwaukee where you get benched if you're not aggressive enough swinging at the first pitch whether it bounces to the plateau not, running from 1st to third if the ball is hit anywhere even if you are thrown out by 40 steps and being the first to the body wash in the showers... Yeah he's dropped into the Ivy League of player development and coaching and he'll blossom within no time... Strike three.

[The stache]

I highly doubt anyone ever told Matt he was going to "be the one to sell tickets" and he needed to hit 30 bombs.

 

Do you live in Texas? Do you get, and watch Houston Astros baseball games? I do, and have, and he was being hyped as one of the young stars in Houston. Young stars are the ones who are looked upon as being the draws at the gate. And when the broadcasters are comparing your power potential to that of Jeff Bagwell, a reasonable expectation is created.

[craigharmann]

I highly doubt anyone ever told Matt he was going to "be the one to sell tickets" and he needed to hit 30 bombs.

 

Do you live in Texas? Do you get, and watch Houston Astros baseball games? I do, and have, and he was being hyped as one of the young stars in Houston. Young stars are the ones who are looked upon as being the draws at the gate. And when the broadcasters are comparing your power potential to that of Jeff Bagwell, a reasonable expectation is created.

 

Exactly what The Stache said. Expectations were high and he flopped.

[Jenkins5]

I highly doubt anyone ever told Matt he was going to "be the one to sell tickets" and he needed to hit 30 bombs.

 

Do you live in Texas? Do you get, and watch Houston Astros baseball games? I do, and have, and he was being hyped as one of the young stars in Houston. Young stars are the ones who are looked upon as being the draws at the gate. And when the broadcasters are comparing your power potential to that of Jeff Bagwell, a reasonable expectation is created.

 

Exactly what The Stache said. Expectations were high and he flopped.

 

Wouldn't say he flopped had a solid first full season at 23. Wasn't terrible. Age 24 season last year was tough and struggled on an awful, struggling team. Hard to judge a guy who was young, developing, and stuck in an awful losing environment. There was no positives to build on for him. When you start to struggle on a team that loses over 200games in 2 years.... Hard to snap out of that. The losing mindset for someone that young is a real factor. HAmpers development.

[The stache]

 

Exactly what The Stache said. Expectations were high and he flopped.

 

Wouldn't say he flopped had a solid first full season at 23. Wasn't terrible. Age 24 season last year was tough and struggled on an awful, struggling team. Hard to judge a guy who was young, developing, and stuck in an awful losing environment. There was no positives to build on for him. When you start to struggle on a team that loses over 200games in 2 years.... Hard to snap out of that. The losing mindset for someone that young is a real factor. HAmpers development.

 

Exactly why I am hopeful. Though we flat out suck this year, the Brewers haven't been terrible as of late. We collapsed at the end of last year, and have been terrible since. But we had a fairly decent run for a few years before that. Nothing Earth shattering, but certainly not back to back 100 loss seasons.

 

My hope is that Dominguez comes in here with a fresh mindset, realizes that a new organization is giving him a chance to show what all those scouts saw in him, and get it going. Maybe it doesn't happen. But I've been watching baseball for three and a half decades, and faaaaaaar too many times, I've seen guys with big expectations flop for a few years, and then...it all clicks. Look at a guy like Joey Batts, José Bautista. The guy managed to hang on in the Majors for six years, playing 575 games, to age 29, and had a 91 OPS +. 58 home runs, a .238 AVG and a .400 SLG in 1,754 career ABs. Then, out of nowhere, 94 home runs (leading the league both years, including 54 in 2010), and a .951 OPS since. 201 HR in the last 6 years, even though he's been injured on and off. Now, I don't expect him to come anywhere near that production, but it does happen. That's why if you get a guy that had massive potential, and you can get him cheap, while he's still young---you go for it.

 

I'll take a chance on Matt Dominguez over most of the "safe" guys on our 40 man now. He could flame out, but that chance at catching lightning in a bottle can have a big impact on a team's fortunes, especially a small market team like Milwaukee.