Trading for Parra to improve last year juxtaposed to trading away Gomez for prospects this year

[Thundercat32]

2 questions:

 

1. Why the love for Mitch Haniger, since you want use to describe why we liked a guy that hit very well for us for a year and played solid defense and netted us a nice return?

 

2. Why the hate for Gerardo Parra? You say he sucks, but I'd say there is a good to amazing chance his career has already exceeded the best case scenario for Haniger. I feel you're whole argument is based on your love of Haniger and the hatred for Parra is that you blame him for losing him.

 

Jesus, Melvin takes enough flak on this board (a lot of it justified) but can we at least not trash him when something he does goes well? Or are all the things that work out clearly luck and all the bad things clearly a reflection of the FO's incompetence?

 

Also, with regards to Parra putting us over the top, since when did being the best team have huge correlation to the being WS winner? If he helped us get to the dance, anything could have happened.

 

 

Went into detail on the Haniger & Parra evaluations in a separate poster earlier because other people were asking about that too... Just quickly to address your last question. I believe an intelligent organization should be aware of their probability to win vs the post-season pool and make the corresponding moves intelligently vs those odds. i.e. when your team is stronger vs the pool of opponents in a playoffs bracket, you should be willing to give up a higher level of prospect(s) than you would when your team is weaker vs the pool of opponents in a playoffs bracket.

 

I'm pretty take it or leave it on Melvin. I have no way of knowing this, but if I had to venture a guess, I would say that he probably wants to make a lot of smart moves that Attanasio nixes due to financial reasons. I'm holding Melvin's feet to the fire on the Parra trade because I don't think Attanasio made him do that. I think he did that one of his own accord.

 

If anyone deserves the Brewers' fans contempt it's Mark Attanasio. It's really sad that we're hoping to stockpile young talent, when we already had a great core of young talent in Gomez, Lucroy, Segura, and parts like Khris Davis and Mike Fiers. Come opening day 2017, all of those guys will be gone (outside of maybe Davis). And for what, so that in 2021 when a guy like Gatewood, or Santana, or Medeiros are up & playing well we have to sell them away for more prospects too because Attanasio won't open his pocketbook? (I guess, unless your name is Kyle Lohse).

[Thundercat32]

The age to competition level point is obviously extremely valid. However, it's not the be all, end all. By that measurement, Justin Upton is suppose to be the right-handed hitting equivalent of Barry Bonds by now. I could probably do some research and find a dozen examples of players who either exceeded expectations at a young age, but failed to continue that arch in later years, or players who underachieved compared to expectations at a younger age, but excelled into all star level players in later years.

 

Markakis falls into the category of players who excelled at a younger age, but have fallen off since. I'm talking about Haniger growing into a 2015 version of Nick Markakis. Although, Chris Coghlan is also a fair expectation, and yes, he is a 4th outfielder.

[Thundercat32]

Haniger is 24 years old and is in AA Ball with a .730 OPS this year

 

[ ] Judging a player solely on their age to competition level and 174 plate appearances at that level is an accurate way to project future success.

[3and2Fastball]

Haniger is 24 years old and is in AA Ball with a .730 OPS this year

 

[ ] Judging a player solely on their age to competition level and 174 plate appearances at that level is an accurate way to project future success.

 

In 420 career AA At-Bats, Haniger has a .741 OPS

 

The biggest problem is that he has just a .405 SLG % at AA ball. That'd be OK if he had elite speed or a .400 OBP or could play great middle-infield or elite CF, but he can't. 24 year old corner outfielder's who put up .405 SLG% in AA are considered longshots in terms of MLB potential

[Point Beer Is Best]

Two things:

 

1. Do you understand how the MLB draft slotting system works?

2. Are you being serious about Haniger patroling RF for 10 years, or was that a joke?

 

I'm not an expert on the MLB draft slotting system, but I understand it in general terms. What do you perceive me to not understand about it?

 

Why do you think Haniger playing 10 years is a joke? Why is everyone so down on Haniger in this forum? And maybe more importantly why is everyone so high on Gerardo Parra?

 

I don't think anybody has addressed this yet. What we're taking issue with was you had mentioned in your first post that the Brewers didn't sign Donny Everett for $2.5mil, so we should have offered him substantially more money to sign and that this would be a better use of assets than signing the Kyle Lohse's of the world. What you fail to understand is that teams are restricted to set dollar amount to sign their draft picks (about $7.744mil for MKE) selected in the first 10 rounds. After the first 10 rounds, there is up to a $100,000 signing bonus through round 40, with any excess counting against their draft pool allotment.

 

Everett was a firm commit to go to college; the Brewers just drafted him late (29th round) and several other players (Hooper & Donovan) around phase of the draft just to be able to talk directly to them and maybe see if they could be swayed. If they had offered Everett $4mil and he accepted, then you're talking about spending well over half of your draft pool on a 29th rounder, and not having enough money to sign nearly anyone else you drafted.

 

The draft cannot be viewed through the same lense as free agency.

[Thundercat32]

Point Beer is Best,

 

That's a really excellent point, and I had forgotten that. I remember it being discussed last year, when everyone was so pumped that we got Medeiros, Gatewood, and Harrison all signed with enough remaining to sign the rest of our draftees.

 

That said, mlb.com had Everett rated as the 23rd best overall prospect from this year's draft (not some 29th rounder). As long as his offer didn't prohibit the Brewers from signing Trenton Clark (#12 on that list), then I don't care if the only 2 guys they were able to sign from this year's draft were Clark & Everett. I think you could offer Everett more than we did & still land Clark & Ponce, and then I'm doing fist pumps. So, yes there's limitations, but no, they could of offered Everett more.

 

And that strategy could totally blow up in your face. The most volatile type of player to take in a draft is a high school pitcher. But, signing Kyle Lohse types to $11 mil/per year deals never lands you a front of the rotation line starter and worse than that it only causes you to drop out of a top 5 selection when you do miss the playoffs. If you spend your money on a high school arm that's a bust, then fine, you're right back at the top of the draft order the next year. Eventually, you're going to land a franchise changing player, if not a couple. I know you know that. I'm just explaining my stance in greater detail.

[trwi7]

That said, mlb.com had Everett rated as the 23rd best overall prospect from this year's draft (not some 29th rounder). As long as his offer didn't prohibit the Brewers from signing Trenton Clark (#12 on that list), then I don't care if the only 2 guys they were able to sign from this year's draft were Clark & Everett. I think you could offer Everett more than we did & still land Clark & Ponce, and then I'm doing fist pumps. So, yes there's limitations, but no, they could of offered Everett more.

 

Yes they could have offered more. They could have offered him $50 million if they so desired. The problem with that is when you exceed your bonus pool by more than 5%, you pay a 75% tax and lose your 1st round pick the next year. The penalties get worse as you exceed by more.

 

So the Brewers spent $7,239,100 on their first 10 picks this year. Below their pool of $7,743,800. I don't recall if they did end up signing any players past the 10th round for more than $100,000 but that would put a dent in their pool even more. You also have to remember that they had an above slot deal with Kirby until they found something they didn't like in a physical, which tied up even more money for a time.

 

So the most the Brewers could have offered Everett or Hooper or any other player taken after the 10th round was $891,890 or they lose their 1st round pick next year. Now that could be a decent strategy if you're a really good team and it's a strong draft and the draft next year looks weak. That's not the case with the Brewers though.

[Thundercat32]

trwi7,

 

All valid points. When I brought up the Lohse signing, originally, it was to highlight the indecision the front office has shown. Though, the Lohse signing is probably a product of Attanasio's tight purse-strings than Melvin's choice of an ideal starting pitching fit for the rotation. Still, if you remember that 2013 FA period, the Brewers let one quality starter after another go off the market, until Kyle Lohse was the only SP left. They waited so long to sign him that he missed spring training all together, and he didn't even make his Brewers' debut until a week into the season. And they overpaid $11 mil a year for a guy that's a back end of the rotation starter on a contender.

 

Every point you made to why offering Everett stupid money to sign and how that messes up the rest of your draft, it's still preferable to being indecisive and panic signing Lohse, in my opinion. That was what I was trying to say. Almost like, "Hey, if you're going to screw the pooch, there's better ways to do it... ways that at least have some upside to them."

[Thundercat32]

By the way, I haven't mentioned him much, yet, but wouldn't the Yankees have some interest in Jean Segura? I know, he's not very good, but he's better than Gregorius and Ryan, plus he offers an upgrade to the RHB platoon opposite Gregorius, if they wanted to go that route. I doubt we'd get much in return. Not much more than a low A-ball prospect with upside (sad, when you think about Segura being the cornerpiece of the Greinke deal), but we have Arcia on the way up, why not clear the path now?

 

I guess, it's a move that can be made in the offseason or at next year's trade deadline, but I wouldn't of minded making it now. The Yankees are contending this year. Who knows were they'll be at next year's trade deadline.

[torts]

Point Beer is Best,

 

That's a really excellent point, and I had forgotten that. I remember it being discussed last year, when everyone was so pumped that we got Medeiros, Gatewood, and Harrison all signed with enough remaining to sign the rest of our draftees.

 

That said, mlb.com had Everett rated as the 23rd best overall prospect from this year's draft (not some 29th rounder). As long as his offer didn't prohibit the Brewers from signing Trenton Clark (#12 on that list), then I don't care if the only 2 guys they were able to sign from this year's draft were Clark & Everett. I think you could offer Everett more than we did & still land Clark & Ponce, and then I'm doing fist pumps. So, yes there's limitations, but no, they could of offered Everett more.

 

And that strategy could totally blow up in your face. The most volatile type of player to take in a draft is a high school pitcher. But, signing Kyle Lohse types to $11 mil/per year deals never lands you a front of the rotation line starter and worse than that it only causes you to drop out of a top 5 selection when you do miss the playoffs. If you spend your money on a high school arm that's a bust, then fine, you're right back at the top of the draft order the next year. Eventually, you're going to land a franchise changing player, if not a couple. I know you know that. I'm just explaining my stance in greater detail.

 

He was only drafted in the 29th round because it was known that he was 100% committed to college and would not sign. No one else wanted to waste a pick on him because they all knew that he wasnt going to sign no matter what and no GM was going to blow their signing pool on a 30th round pick.

[Thundercat32]

He (Everett) was only drafted in the 29th round because it was known that he was 100% committed to college and would not sign. No one else wanted to waste a pick on him because they all knew that he wasnt going to sign no matter what and no GM was going to blow their signing pool on a 30th round pick.

 

This article paints a different picture of what the Vanderbilt faithful thought Everett's chances of honoring his commitment were: http://www.anchorofgold.com/2015/6/12/8774835/donny-everett-turned-down-2-5-million-to-attend-vanderbilt

[tmwiese55]

I didn't compare Parra to being as good as them. Just that it's common and those guys were on recent winners.

 

It's common for NFL teams to draft QBs early in the NFL draft. When a team drafts a terrible QB early, they're not excused from making a poor decision because the practice of drafting QBs early in the draft is common. I don't understand your logic here.

 

You stated something along the lines that teams should never trade prospects for current players, then something about how recent champions don't. I quickly thought of two players on recent championship teams who did. That's it. And both teams made trades today, STL traded for Lackey last year.

 

trading an OF prospect with little chance to make the bigs = deplating the farm system in your book. OK. This whole thread is ridiculous over a blah prospect we traded away but you saw him do well in 19 ABs in spring training so he's a superstar. Hopefully the kid does well and makes some money in this game but I won't lose sleep on possibly trading away the next Logan Schager.

[dlk9s]

He (Everett) was only drafted in the 29th round because it was known that he was 100% committed to college and would not sign. No one else wanted to waste a pick on him because they all knew that he wasnt going to sign no matter what and no GM was going to blow their signing pool on a 30th round pick.

 

This article paints a different picture of what the Vanderbilt faithful thought Everett's chances of honoring his commitment were: http://www.anchorofgold.com/2015/6/12/8774835/donny-everett-turned-down-2-5-million-to-attend-vanderbilt

http://i.imgur.com/xZEBBLp.gif

[Thundercat32]

tmwiese55,

 

You're busy writing your own narrative here, so I guess, who am I to disagree?

 

I doubt until I posted that trading Haniger last year was a mistake that you would of characterized him as having "little" chance to make the bigs. You probably would of just said he'll be a serviceable 4th OF'er, but now that you disagree with me, you have to over-exaggerate your position. Your entire post is filled with over-exaggeration. It's towards the end of the day, and I don't have the energy to go back & refute all of it, anymore.

 

We'll just agree to disagree on this one.

[Thundercat32]

He (Everett) was only drafted in the 29th round because it was known that he was 100% committed to college and would not sign. No one else wanted to waste a pick on him because they all knew that he wasnt going to sign no matter what and no GM was going to blow their signing pool on a 30th round pick.

 

This article paints a different picture of what the Vanderbilt faithful thought Everett's chances of honoring his commitment were: http://www.anchorofgold.com/2015/6/12/8774835/donny-everett-turned-down-2-5-million-to-attend-vanderbilt

http://i.imgur.com/xZEBBLp.gif

 

How do you feel about the Texas Rangers trading Tomas Telis and Cody Ege to Miami for Sam Dyson?

[trwi7]

He (Everett) was only drafted in the 29th round because it was known that he was 100% committed to college and would not sign. No one else wanted to waste a pick on him because they all knew that he wasnt going to sign no matter what and no GM was going to blow their signing pool on a 30th round pick.

 

This article paints a different picture of what the Vanderbilt faithful thought Everett's chances of honoring his commitment were: http://www.anchorofgold.com/2015/6/12/8774835/donny-everett-turned-down-2-5-million-to-attend-vanderbilt

 

What? Teams were asking him before the draft if they offered him $2.5 million would he sign and he said no. So it was pretty obvious that he was going to go to college to pretty much everybody.

 

That article doesn't say whatever you think it says.

[tmwiese55]

tmwiese55,

 

You're busy writing your own narrative here, so I guess, who am I to disagree?

 

I doubt until I posted that trading Haniger last year was a mistake that you would of characterized him as having "little" chance to make the bigs. You probably would of just said he'll be a serviceable 4th OF'er, but now that you disagree with me, you have to over-exaggerate your position. Your entire post is filled with over-exaggeration. It's towards the end of the day, and I don't have the energy to go back & refute all of it, anymore.

 

We'll just agree to disagree on this one.

 

Personally, I'm against trading prospects for trade deadline additions. My memory fails me, but I don't think it's led to a team winning in the post-season since maybe the 2009 Yankees? I can't remember who they added at the deadline or if they added someone. It certainly didn't lead to the Giants winning last year, the Red Sox in '13, the Giants in '12, Cards in '11, or the Giants in '10

 

There's your quote.

 

I didn't see Hanigan play 19 ABs in person but when the trade went down last year, I saw it went, meh, no big deal on the guy we gave them and Parra is insurance if someone gets hurt, and can platoon some with Davis and come in to play D late in games.

 

If anything I'd be more worried about the pitcher because he's so young, middling OFs guys are 12 for 10 cents. Very difficult to predict which make it and which don't

[Thundercat32]

He (Everett) was only drafted in the 29th round because it was known that he was 100% committed to college and would not sign. No one else wanted to waste a pick on him because they all knew that he wasnt going to sign no matter what and no GM was going to blow their signing pool on a 30th round pick.

 

This article paints a different picture of what the Vanderbilt faithful thought Everett's chances of honoring his commitment were: http://www.anchorofgold.com/2015/6/12/8774835/donny-everett-turned-down-2-5-million-to-attend-vanderbilt

 

What? Teams were asking him before the draft if they offered him $2.5 million would he sign and he said no. So it was pretty obvious that he was going to go to college to pretty much everybody.

 

That article doesn't say whatever you think it says.

 

"When I originally speculated odds on him suiting up in the black and gold would fall somewhere between Slim and None... Donny Baseball's commitment to Vandy was a lot more firm than we all thought..."

 

Just saying it sounds like people at Vandy weren't as sure as everyone else was.

[pogokat]

So, the Brewers should HAVE kept Haniger and signed Everett and not had a first round pick next year because you personally hated the Lohse signing?

[trwi7]

"When I originally speculated odds on him suiting up in the black and gold would fall somewhere between Slim and None... Donny Baseball's commitment to Vandy was a lot more firm than we all thought..."

 

Just saying it sounds like people at Vandy weren't as sure as everyone else was.

 

Originally speculated, meaning he had no idea. Either way, it was pretty clear that by the time the draft happened, it would take an insane offer to get him to forgo his commitment to Vandy, a money offer the Brewers couldn't make without being called insane by pretty much every team, reporter, analyst and fan in baseball.

[Thundercat32]

So, the Brewers should HAVE kept Haniger and signed Everett and not had a first round pick next year because you personally hated the Lohse signing?

 

No, they should do whatever you think they should do. [Expletive deleted by moderator]

 

I'm done with this thread. The Brewers' front office is [expletive deleted by moderator] outstanding!

 

GoPackGo

[tmwiese55]

There's plenty of people ripping the FO too if you look around and ripping a lot of the other past prospects for players trades. The trade you're bringing up though isn't really one of them, most would say the Parra trade is win for us. Essentially flipped a 23 yr old OF, where we have other OF prospects already viewed higher, for a 22 yr old kid this year who will likely start for us next year. And got 1 year of quality play for Parra in the year in between.

[dlk9s]

Ladies and gentlemen, Thundercat32.

[paul253]

The one thing I'll agree on is that the Brewers can't seem to commit to the long term. It seems as if it's more about selling tickets now then sustained success starting three years from now. This year appears to be the first time in quite awhile that the Brewers actually made moves designed to help a few years down the road rather than trying to convince fans that next year could be their year. It's encouraging but I'd like to see it next year too before I get my hopes up. This organization is still woefully thin in front line starting pitching and has no answer for the corner infield spots.. I'm praying for a top five pick next year where we can begin to address that but even that is just a beginning. The refusal to trade a guy like lucroy still bothers me as he is not a long term piece. He is not someone the Brewers should be building around yet it seems as though that is exactly what they are doing. So again while this trade deadline shows some willingness to admit they aren't close to where they need to be I just hope they stick with that rather than go make another stupid FA signing this winter and proclaim themselves contenders again.

[MrTPlush]

First people complained about being worried the Brewers wouldn't trade Gomez due to ticket sales and now I have to hear it about Lucroy?

 

I need some sleep I have a headache.