The Hypothetical Hot Start to 2016

[Tedaldtada]

I am very impressed with the job the Brewers have done in 2015 to position the franchise for prolonged success. The beginning of any rebuild is the easiest and the Brewers have fared well so far. The Gallardo, Gomez, Fiers, KRod, Lind, Broxton and Rogers deals have bolstered our young talent across all levels. Bruce Seid's last draft and Ray Montgomery's first draft have produced a plethora of interesting and exciting young players as well. To top it off, the team is investing in the international market to degree way beyond what we are used to. These are all positive developments.

 

David Stearns has accelerated the rebuild (some may call it "tanking") since taking over and rightfully so with how the 2015 MLB team fared. Because of this, there is a very good chance that the 2016 team will be bad all year, including early on. That said, baseball will forever surprise even the most astute. What do you do if you are David Stearns and the Brewers play .600 baseball in April and May? Do you:

 

A.) Double-down on the rebuild by trading off peak value and/or over-performing players for younger, cheaper, more controllable talent with the assumption the hot start is a bit of a anomaly?

 

B.) Stand pat until the deadline and reevaluate?

 

C.) Become aggressive and move younger, cheaper, controllable talent for established MLB talent with the idea that the Brewers can stay in contention all year AND going forward?

 

There is not an easy answer here. I am of the belief that the Brewers are in a better spot than the Cubs or Astros were when the finally started to rebuild. Maybe the timetable is not so extended as some fear.

 

My answer to the above hypothetical would be to double-down on the rebuild with an increased sense of optimism for the 2017 team. I find it hard to believe that Stearns would be allowed to go this route but the scenario is interesting to consider.

[Boomer5]

The team is tanking based on the offseason pick ups - unlike the in season trades which were more polished prospects - and even a decent start won't change that, unless:

 

1. They haven't already traded their good trade chips in Luc and Braun

2. The start is based on Nelson, Peralta, and Jungmann making the leap to all star level

3. Arcia and Phillips are key contributors.

[logan82]

If they have a hot start and decide to trade younger players for veterans, I would lose all confidence in the franchise. The GM shouldn't do it and the owner shouldn't let him.

[MrTPlush]

Ok guys if I win the $500mil lottery what should I do?

 

Oh wait that is never going to happen either. Honestly .600 is not happening with this team, no way. Even if it did I have all the confidence in the world we aren't that short sighted. I think the obvious answer is wait till the deadline and maybe make some minor moves(2014-like).

 

You aren't going to try and flip guys after two months so you would have to wait till the deadline regardless. Since teams really aren't looking to commit so early on. Taking advantage of a players hot streak is a thought, but if we were pushing end of July and were 20 games over .500 there is no way they start trading away players.

[trwi7]

The answer for me is A.

[MKE81]

My answer is D) whatever Stearns does will benefit the organization

[jerichoholicninja]

What really has been lost since last season? Adam Lind is about it. The offense still has some boppers if Davis, Lucroy, and Braun are still around come opening day. The starting pitching isn't great but it's not bad either. The bullpen is a lot of question marks but that's about it. I don't think seeing this team around 500 after the first couple months is crazy talk. I also think if that happens that Stearns is smart enough to not see this as a time to "go for it". Mark on the other hand...

[TURBO]

What really has been lost since last season? Adam Lind is about it.

 

This.

 

Unless a combination of Braun, Lucroy and Davis get traded away, I can't see our current line-up being that much worse than last season. (We'll miss Lind for sure) Our starting pitching is almost the same minus Lohse. He was horrible last season, so losing him isn't much of a loss at all. If Nelson and Peralta take a step up, our pitching might be a lot better than last year.

 

I don't see a 100 loss season unless there is some more shake-up coming with our starting line-up.

[nate82]

This.

 

Unless a combination of Braun, Lucroy and Davis get traded away, I can't see our current line-up being that much worse than last season. (We'll miss Lind for sure) Our starting pitching is almost the same minus Lohse. He was horrible last season, so losing him isn't much of a loss at all. If Nelson and Peralta take a step up, our pitching might be a lot better than last year.

 

I don't see a 100 loss season unless there is some more shake-up coming with our starting line-up.

 

Offensively the team will be the same and I think the pitching will actually be better both in the bullpen and in the rotation. I wouldn't be surprised if Garza has a sub 4 ERA along with Peralta, Nelson and Jungmann. Even if Garza has another bad year that won't be enough to get the Brewers to a 100 loss season. The only way to do that would be to trade Peralta and Nelson or if Nelson, Peralta, Garza, Jungmann and Davies all have a season above a 4 ERA. It is possible the Brewers could lose 100 games but I would go more with a 88-95 loss team with a possible at or above .500 team.

[CheezWizHed]

I wouldn't be trading away much of anything prospect wise next year no matter what. At best, I'd pull in Arcia/Maverick earlier than planned. No way I "try to win the WS" next year.

[NievesNoNO]

Combination of A & B. If they start hot it should mean the team is healthy and obviously performing well. Players are typically not moved that early (not that they couldn't be), so I'd let the next two months play out and see where they stand. Most likely it wouldn't be in very good position but hopefully Lucroy, Braun, and Garza would've gained trade value.

 

I do think, if the roster remained what it is now, they could challenge for .500.

[Outlander]

As we saw last year even if the team shows some signs of hope, but not .600 level type hope, key players will be traded at the deadline which is why I think the team still loses 100. In the hypothetical above I think Mark A learns from the past and doesn't believe the mirage while Stearns sticks with whatever plan he has.

[Bombers]

What really has been lost since last season? Adam Lind is about it. The offense still has some boppers if Davis, Lucroy, and Braun are still around come opening day. The starting pitching isn't great but it's not bad either. The bullpen is a lot of question marks but that's about it. I don't think seeing this team around 500 after the first couple months is crazy talk. I also think if that happens that Stearns is smart enough to not see this as a time to "go for it". Mark on the other hand...

Carlos Gomez, K-Rod, and Mike Fiers say hi. And you can't say replacing 1B is an easy task as we had Yuni freaking B playing it the year before. And looking at our first month of the season the Brewers play

SF, Hou, @ StL, @ Pit, @ MN, MN, PHI, @ CHC and then Miami and Angels to bring us into the first few days of May. The Brewers will be lucky. The Brewers might be looking at an 8-20 start when that run is done.

[StearnsFTW]

The answer for me is A.

[Outlander]

That is correct, the Brewers were playing like a 100 loss team after the trades last summer and have only gotten worse so it will be very difficult to not lose 100 games or to somehow have some miracle run to start the year. Nelson, Peralta, Jungmann would have to take monumental steps forward and Garza would have to return to the pitcher he was a few years ago.

[And That]

Let's try to get away from the "there's no way it will happen" thing - that's not the point of the question in the OP. Even if there's only the tiniest sliver of a chance that the Brewers are playing .600 in May - which there is - then the hypothetical is valid. I don't think anyone is saying it is likely, or maybe even remotely likely to happen.

 

As for me, given Stearns' manta of "young, controllable talent", I would be extremely surprised if the Brewers would be buyers in May or early June. With the addition of the second wild card, more teams are still very much in playoff contention at that time of year (or at least they perceive themselves to be), so getting value in the form of established major leaguers is difficult at that point on the baseball calendar.

 

If they are buying in June, it will be clear that Attanasio has not learned his lesson and will once again get caught in a mirage. It would be a disturbing omen for the long term future of the franchise.

[Fear The Chorizo]

If Stearns follows the gameplan he appears to be initiating for rebuilding this organization, how the MLB Brewers start the 2016 will have zero influence on trading away veteran talent if the return is sufficient. A few seasons ago the Cubs would be mildly competitve during the first few months when some of the scrap heap veterans were performing ok, only to see them slide to the bottom of the standings after MLB talent was traded away at each deadline - leaving gaping holes on their MLB roster.

 

I think a Lucroy trade may still happen this offseason, and a Braun trade is likely at the deadline if he shows no ill effects from offseason back surgery. Those two moves alone will make the Brewers MLB squad Astros/Cubs bad from a few seasons ago, regardless of how the young pitching performs...but they will also bolster the quality of prospects in the pipeline.

[bill hAll Star]

See: Braves, 2015

[Noche]

It would take some serious guts, and I am sure it would tick off some fans, but you have to go with choice A.

[TooLiveBrew]

What do you do if you are David Stearns and the Brewers play .600 baseball in April and May? Do you:

 

A.) Double-down on the rebuild by trading off peak value and/or over-performing players for younger, cheaper, more controllable talent with the assumption the hot start is a bit of a anomaly?

If I had to pick from the options listed, I'd take A. But my preferred approach would be to see the franchise operated about the same in strong & in lean years -- if/when the right deal comes along for a player, you take it.

 

If the Brewers somehow are 'in it' into May next year, I wouldn't want Stearns to force anything & trade a Braun or Lucroy just because. But at the same time, if a team came calling with a really good offer for a Nelson or Peralta or a Jungmann, I wouldn't turn it down because of the team's record, either.

 

The Brewers are in a great position right now as they rebuild. We're already knocking on the door of having a top-5 system in the league, & there's still plenty of valuable players on the MLB roster. That should give Stearns & Co. the ability to be picky about any potential trades, along with being able to cycle in young talent (to help maintain fanbase excitement) that's almost ready to graduate from the minors. Even with a projected 90-100 loss MLB team, I'm really excited for 2016 -- going to be an important season.

[monty57]

The Brewers do not have anyone who is a free agent after 2016, so if they happen to find themselves in the playoff mix at trade deadline, they do not have anyone in the "trade him or lose him" situation. Therefore, I would think that they would simply hold on and trade said player the following offseason.

 

Even in this situation, I do not think they would trade any prospect of significance for a rental player.

 

I still think Lucroy and one of Davis/Braun will be traded this offseason, and if they win with this roster minus Lucroy and one of Davis/Braun, then this will definitely be a short, fun rebuild :-)

 

Edit: Off topic, but if they were to trade Lucroy and Braun, they could feasibly have a payroll around $30M, with nearly half of that going to Garza.

[Jenkins5]

The Brewers do not have anyone who is a free agent after 2016, so if they happen to find themselves in the playoff mix at trade deadline, they do not have anyone in the "trade him or lose him" situation. Therefore, I would think that they would simply hold on and trade said player the following offseason.

 

Even in this situation, I do not think they would trade any prospect of significance for a rental player.

 

I still think Lucroy and one of Davis/Braun will be traded this offseason, and if they win with this roster minus Lucroy and one of Davis/Braun, then this will definitely be a short, fun rebuild :-)

 

Edit: Off topic, but if they were to trade Lucroy and Braun, they could feasibly have a payroll around $30M, with nearly half of that going to Garza.

 

Best thing possible for out future is to clear as many of those high contracts as possible. Garza for sure, even if you have to eat half of it, it is still worth it. If the goals is to develop & retain our own player, we need to begin to stash away as much money as possible. Our attendance will be down this year so that will hurt our financials. Keep Salaries down until Arcia or any other rising piece of future needs to be paid

[logan82]

I don't care that much about the money. I want talent. Keep Garza unless you can get good talent back. Eat his whole contract if that's what it takes to get good players back in trade.

[stalton]

I don't care that much about the money. I want talent. Keep Garza unless you can get good talent back. Eat his whole contract if that's what it takes to get good players back in trade.

 

The question I have is that does dumping Garza even for half the contract meaning that savings could go towards FA talent when we are competing? I know it's upto MA how much he's willing to spring for but if he is willing to pay 400 (made up number) million over the next 4 years, could we allocate Garza's 2016 allotment to 2018?

[monty57]

I don't care that much about the money. I want talent. Keep Garza unless you can get good talent back. Eat his whole contract if that's what it takes to get good players back in trade.

 

The question I have is that does dumping Garza even for half the contract meaning that savings could go towards FA talent when we are competing? I know it's upto MA how much he's willing to spring for but if he is willing to pay 400 (made up number) million over the next 4 years, could we allocate Garza's 2016 allotment to 2018?

 

Not spending revenues would turn it into profit, which would be taxable. As an LLC, the taxes probably pass through to the owners, so they would probably take dividends to at least cover their tax liability, so a good portion would not be able to be spent for the future. But, whatever remains could be held in an account owned by the LLC and spent in future years if that is what the ownership group chose to do. Just don't expect $12M not spent this year to equal $12M more spent in the future. Remember, Attanasio is a New Yorker living in California, so he could have over 50% of his income eaten up by taxes. This is why most teams don't look to make a big profit each year (they just don't want to go negative). They'd rather just build the value of the franchise, so when it is eventually sold it will be capped out at the much lower long-term capital gains rates.

 

That said, I think it's likely that a decent chunk of money will be used for things like international signings, and maybe picking up a bad contract if the team throws in a good prospect... things that will cost money now to help the future. Re-investing in the team can allow for more money to go to building the future, and less to go to Uncle Sam.