Garza to DL, right shoulder tendinitis; Knebel recalled

[trwi7]

Lohse did give us two very good seasons before this debacle.

 

Yeah but what did it get us? We didn't make the playoffs either year. We didn't capitalize on his value by trading him and it cost us a 1st round pick.

[TheCrew07]

I still hope this is a phantom injury just to shut him down for a while since he was in the dugout last night. A legit shoulder injury is very worrisome.

[tmwiese55]

Yeah but what did it get us? We didn't make the playoffs either year. We didn't capitalize on his value by trading him and it cost us a 1st round pick.

 

You have to try to win though don't you? Might as well fold up the team and leave with that attitude. Stems from the ESPN rings obsession. What did Robin Yount ever win us? Should have traded him after say 1983 and tried a different route.

[trwi7]

No, you don't have to try to win. Teams in every sport all the time don't try to win intentionally to get better players for the future. The Astros and Cubs are two recent examples in MLB and it worked pretty well for them.

[Thurston Fluff]

No, you don't have to try to win. Teams in every sport all the time don't try to win intentionally to get better players for the future. The Astros and Cubs are two recent examples in MLB and it worked pretty well for them.

 

I think I'd wait for more than half a season with a winning record before I claim how well it worked for them. Especially the Cubs who didn't exactly get there solely through sucking for years on end. Buying Lester in the free agent market has something to do with it too.

[monty57]

I believe that money matters a lot, but I do not believe that spending money just to spend money, or to get a "name" that will sell tickets, is the same as "trying to win."

 

The Brewers did win when they had good prospects make it to the major league and contribute. They have not won by signing "name" players to contracts each of which eats up 10-15% of the team payroll for three or four years. They stopped gaining momentum and started going in reverse when they started getting "top heavy," with a handful of players eating up most of the payroll and a poor farm system trying to fill in the rest of the roster.

 

The Brewers live in perpetuity, so making short term moves to try to prove to the fans that they are "trying to win" can have detrimental long term effects. With that mindset, I think of "trying to win" in a different context than someone who cares mainly about "right now." The best chance the Brewers have to win on any kind of continual basis is to do as much as possible to maintain a strong farm so they can continually have good, young, inexpensive players advancing to the major league ranks.

 

As long as we are run under the premise of convincing the fans we're "trying to win," we will never win anything. Eventually, the fans will realize that we aren't really "trying to win," but rather are tying to sell tickets, and they will stop showing up. Then we will be exactly where we were at the end of the Selig tenure.

[trwi7]

No, you don't have to try to win. Teams in every sport all the time don't try to win intentionally to get better players for the future. The Astros and Cubs are two recent examples in MLB and it worked pretty well for them.

 

I think I'd wait for more than half a season with a winning record before I claim how well it worked for them. Especially the Cubs who didn't exactly get there solely through sucking for years on end. Buying Lester in the free agent market has something to do with it too.

 

Bryant, Soler, trading Cashner for Rizzo, trading Scott Feldman for Jake Arrieta, trading Samardzija for Russell. It's like some of you don't want to admit that taking a step back to take two steps forward can actually work.

[Thurston Fluff]

No, you don't have to try to win. Teams in every sport all the time don't try to win intentionally to get better players for the future. The Astros and Cubs are two recent examples in MLB and it worked pretty well for them.

 

I think I'd wait for more than half a season with a winning record before I claim how well it worked for them. Especially the Cubs who didn't exactly get there solely through sucking for years on end. Buying Lester in the free agent market has something to do with it too.

 

Bryant, Soler, trading Cashner for Rizzo, trading Scott Feldman for Jake Arrieta, trading Samardzija for Russell. It's like some of you don't want to admit that taking a step back to take two steps forward can actually work.

 

No I am saying it is a bit premature to say it worked so well for them. A few injuries, stagnated careers, free agent busts or free agent losses and they are in the same position the Brewers are. What happens if Lester stumbles? If Bryant's thumb acts up? If Castro leaves via FA? If Rizzo's career path is similar to Weeks? We do accept there are times when a rebuild is necessary. That is not the same as saying you start to rebuild at the first sign of trouble. I simply am not interested in sucking for 5 or 6 years for a two year window of winning. That seems to be what some here would do. I would personally go through trying to win as long as there was a viable shot to win. Sometimes that means signing a guy like Lohse instead of hoping that first round draft pick someday becomes better than Lohse. So be it.

[TheCrew07]

Yeah but what did it get us? We didn't make the playoffs either year. We didn't capitalize on his value by trading him and it cost us a 1st round pick.

 

You have to try to win though don't you? Might as well fold up the team and leave with that attitude. Stems from the ESPN rings obsession. What did Robin Yount ever win us? Should have traded him after say 1983 and tried a different route.

 

No it stems from building a winning franchise, the Brewers haven't come close to being consistent, just 2 blips on the radar, and 2008 was gifted by the Mets.

[trwi7]

I simply am not interested in sucking for 5 or 6 years for a two year window of winning.

 

There is no reason a rebuild has to be for 5 or 6 years with only a two year window of winning. The Brewers made it a window by trading prospects for players that were only under control for two more years. Or half a year in Sabathia's case.

[tmwiese55]

Sorry, didn't mean to start that whole argument again. It wasn't even what I meant.

 

I was just referring to the attitude that if you don't win a title that it was all a waste. Basically that argument would lead to saying the Brewers should have never even existed, what's the point we never won. Or that every move was wrong because we didn't win it all. There's more to it. Yea of course Lohse has been brutal this year and it's shocking to see such a quick drop. but without him they wouldn't have almost won the division last year.

[monty57]

I was just referring to the attitude that if you don't win a title that it was all a waste. Basically that argument would lead to saying the Brewers should have never even existed, what's the point we never won. Or that every move was wrong because we didn't win it all. There's more to it. Yea of course Lohse has been brutal this year and it's shocking to see such a quick drop. but without him they wouldn't have almost won the division last year.

 

That's not where I'm at. Where they lost me was when they decided that they were decided that trying to win it all in a one-year window (Prince's final year) was worth sacrificing the future, essentially guaranteeing that they would get worse and worse until they would eventually need a major rebuild when they could have stayed on track, limiting their chances in that one year, but increasing their ability to compete going forward.

 

Since then, they have signed "name" players like Garza (to keep this remotely on topic) to keep fans interested enough to buy tickets, when the talent level on the team isn't really that high.

[Thurston Fluff]

I simply am not interested in sucking for 5 or 6 years for a two year window of winning.

 

There is no reason a rebuild has to be for 5 or 6 years with only a two year window of winning. The Brewers made it a window by trading prospects for players that were only under control for two more years. Or half a year in Sabathia's case.

 

That assumes players who would have been that good but cost controlled for longer were available. Teams don't usually give up top end pitchers with four or more years of control. If they do the cost would be higher than what Greinke or Sabathia cost us. Which in and of itself would reduce the amount of years we would be competitive. Had a reasonably priced young ace pitchers been available for what we paid for Greinke was available I have little doubt they the Brewers would have traded for them. It goes back to the idea that you can rebuild through the draft alone. I just don't know if that is possible. The Cubs had a total rebuild that everyone says was very well done. Yet they failed to get enough pitching. If htat sound familiar it should. They are in exactly the same position the Brewers were in with the Braun, Fielder, Hart, Hardy and Weeks wave of players. The only difference is they have the resources to buy the pitching we had to trade for. They also have the money to pay for them when they hit free agency. Which is why I am skeptical that a total rebuild will get the Brewers any closer to long term success than the last one did. We have to find another way. I think that is what they are trying to do by keeping Melvin on in another capacity. Take what he has learned in his past efforts and add a new GM to compliment a new way moving forward. Make sense to me instead of just starting over and reinventing the wheel.

[TheCrew07]

That assumes players who would have been that good but cost controlled for longer were available. Teams don't usually give up top end pitchers with four or more years of control. If they do the cost would be higher than what Greinke or Sabathia cost us. Which in and of itself would reduce the amount of years we would be competitive. Had a reasonably priced young ace pitchers been available for what we paid for Greinke was available I have little doubt they the Brewers would have traded for them. It goes back to the idea that you can rebuild through the draft alone. I just don't know if that is possible. The Cubs had a total rebuild that everyone says was very well done. Yet they failed to get enough pitching. If htat sound familiar it should. They are in exactly the same position the Brewers were in with the Braun, Fielder, Hart, Hardy and Weeks wave of players. The only difference is they have the resources to buy the pitching we had to trade for. They also have the money to pay for them when they hit free agency. Which is why I am skeptical that a total rebuild will get the Brewers any closer to long term success than the last one did. We have to find another way. I think that is what they are trying to do by keeping Melvin on in another capacity. Take what he has learned in his past efforts and add a new GM to compliment a new way moving forward. Make sense to me instead of just starting over and reinventing the wheel.

 

I don't agree with you on the point you made, as I believe that is true, once a young impact pitcher is established his is in truth the most valuable commodity in baseball. There are however other ways to make to trades, such as prospect for prospect swaps or selling a young established MLB hitter for the pitching we needed.

 

If the options are limited to only buying established MLB pitching with prospects, then yes the Brewers did the right thing.

 

However, there were other avenues to get the pitching talent we so desperately needed and the organization chose to go a different way. It can be done, TB has continually done it, ATL has done it over the last 14 months, there are deals out there. The problem those deals are few and far between so if you don't take advantage of the opportunity when it presents itself then you're left out in the cold.

 

It's not that the Brewers didn't have other opportunities to mold the team, it's that the Front Office used strict and arbitrary criteria to determine what moves should be made, thus limiting the opportunities that were available. This organization has been very good at limiting it's own options and boxing itself into corners.

 

The organization knew even when Weeks, Fielder, and Braun were prospects that they didn't have enough pitching, it was a regular topic in Gord Ash interviews with the minor league broadcasters. He repeatedly said they thought they could trade for the pitching they needed so I had great hope for the future. I was thinking they'd give up a hitter or 2 to get pitchers to go with Gallardo. When the strategy turned out to be trading an entire wave of prospects for 3 short duration solutions I was crushed, lost faith in management, and have remained as such to this day. Holes were not permanently addressed so the same issues kept back around and eventually the prospect well ran dry so the Brewers ended up with a paper thin MLB roster with literally nothing behind it, and here we are.

 

It's wasn't preordained, it's not fate, and contrary to what has been posted making those moves for Sabathia, Greinke, and Marcum were not "necessary", they only feel that way from a selfish point of view. Lucroy wanted to win, he knew the Brewers needed pitching, so he approved of the trades, just like the majority of fans. However just because the solution chosen was obvious doesn't make it the best possible course of action in the long or short term.

 

There are always other options.

[tmwiese55]

What has Tampa won? See what I mean? We'll see how thing there being good lasts too as all their top guys are now gone and Longoria is declining quickly. Keep in mind they were terrible last year.

 

This debate has been hammered endlessly on here already. My take is we overhype how we traded the system. Those trades we made cost us Cain/Brantley and Ordazzi as useful MLB players, that's really it. Segura/Escobar is a near wash. Maybe Lawrie will become good still but maybe the pitchers we got back from Greinke will as well. The only other route would have been to trade Fielder before his last year, which you might as well have traded Weeks and Hart then. How ballsy would that have been, to blow up a contender at that point, fans would have rampaged.

 

Problem has simply been poor draft/development. STL never has high picks and rarely do they trade away really good players, fringe gus like Freeze sure but not the Pujols and Wainwrights, and they win every year. Looks like they just made a huge mistake in trading Miller too and they're still winning.

 

Atlanta though, those guys are wheelers and dealers and very creative. Wouldn't be a bad idea to pluck some people from their management. But what have they won in the last 20 years?

 

Again, I was just commenting that there is more to it than whether you won a title. There's value in increasing your odds as best as possible and enjoying the progress, season and competition of the playoffs.

[logan82]

In the last 10 years the Rays they have twice as many wild card berths. Twice as many division titles, in a much much tougher division. They also have a World Series appearance.

[pacopete4]

In the last 10 years the Rays they have twice as many wild card berths. Twice as many division titles, in a much much tougher division. They also have a World Series appearance.

 

 

The point the other side is making is so what? They still haven't won a World Series so what they've done hasn't benefitted them as much either. Granted it's nice to have winning years but if you haven't won the prize it all didn't matter much.

[tmwiese55]

Exactly. Do you think TB fans are saying it was all a mistake because they lost at the end? would they rather go back to the first 15 years where they get crushed every year. It was a heck of a run they had an enjoyable for them.

 

I was just saying before we crown them as some genius team let's see how this all works as the essentially rode a pile of good prospects all at once just like we did. Except ours were hitters and theirs pitchers. now they've lost them all, lets see how they do. Sure looks better than ours right now as they've still brought up good young pitchers like Archer, Moore, etc. But it's still to be seen.

[LouisEly]

Tampa wouldn't have made it to the WS in 2008 or the playoffs recently without Longoria and Price, two top three overall picks, or Garza, who was acquired for a former #1 overall pick. They also probably wouldn't have made it to the WS in 2008 without 35-year-old Cliff Floyd, who signed as a free agent the offseason prior. Yes, they spun Garza for Chris Archer, but they needed Delmon Young - the #1 overall pick in 2003 - to acquire Garza.

 

Unless you have a payroll in the upper 1/3rd of the league, you need a string of top 10 picks (Giants, Royals, Rays, now Astros, Cubs, Pirates; actually, the Giants have both - a string of top 10 picks and a payroll in teh top 1/3rd). The Cardinals are the exception this year, but last year they were 9th in payroll, 10th in 2013, 9th in 2012, etc. The Cardinals have done a great job with talent identification and development, but it helps that they can have a big payroll to keep those players.

[tmwiese55]

And maybe they should have traded a couple of the prospects they had back then (Jennings types) to "go for it" and they would have won it all?

[trwi7]

you need a string of top 10 picks (Giants, Royals, Rays, now Astros, Cubs, Pirates; actually, the Giants have both - a string of top 10 picks and a payroll in teh top 1/3rd).

 

So you agree we need to rebuild?

[igor67]

I believe the relevant part of that is that the talent acquired by dumping assets is almost irrelevant to the fact that the blueprint for rebuilding a farm system is not all these magic moneyball themed tricks, but multiple high draft picks. That's not building a long term winner that's a return to the success cycle idea.

[MrTPlush]

Yeah but what did it get us? We didn't make the playoffs either year. We didn't capitalize on his value by trading him and it cost us a 1st round pick.

 

You have to try to win though don't you? Might as well fold up the team and leave with that attitude. Stems from the ESPN rings obsession. What did Robin Yount ever win us? Should have traded him after say 1983 and tried a different route.

 

No it stems from building a winning franchise, the Brewers haven't come close to being consistent, just 2 blips on the radar, and 2008 was gifted by the Mets.

 

Gifted by the Mets? I am sorry but that is when you know you are just trying to be as negative as you possibly can. They earned it in 2008...no one gifted them anything.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Yeah but what did it get us? We didn't make the playoffs either year. We didn't capitalize on his value by trading him and it cost us a 1st round pick.

 

You have to try to win though don't you? Might as well fold up the team and leave with that attitude. Stems from the ESPN rings obsession. What did Robin Yount ever win us? Should have traded him after say 1983 and tried a different route.

 

No it stems from building a winning franchise, the Brewers haven't come close to being consistent, just 2 blips on the radar, and 2008 was gifted by the Mets.

 

Gifted by the Mets? I am sorry but that is when you know you are just trying to be as negative as you possibly can. They earned it in 2008...no one gifted them anything.

 

 

The Brewers definitely earned it, but it was also absolutely aided by an epic collapse by the Mets. There's no denying that.

[LouisEly]

you need a string of top 10 picks (Giants, Royals, Rays, now Astros, Cubs, Pirates; actually, the Giants have both - a string of top 10 picks and a payroll in teh top 1/3rd).

 

So you agree we need to rebuild?

Absolutely. I've said it before that I'm looking forward to a few years of top 10 picks to build the next wave. I believe in the "sine wave" approach if you aren't a top payroll team. I have no problem with what they've done the last few years because I agree with the go-for-it then bottom out and get high draft picks approach. The last few years were the crest of the sine wave/go-for-it time. Now it's time to get those high draft picks.