Brewers Sign Eric Young Jr. to minor league contract [Latest: traded to Yankees for cash; post 68]

[Boomer5]

Whoa. No anger here. Not one bit. I'm not being sarcastic when I say that Sterns is turning the MLB roster into the 2011-2013 Astros. The goal most certainly is to make the MLB roster the worst in baseball and that is a good thing in the long run. The model is quite apparent in the Cubs and Astros.

 

I don't think that is the goal at all. Granted the primary goal isn't the major league roster next season but i seriously doubt the goal is to be the worst team in the league just to get the top pick. I think what many people here are missing is this isn't the Atros or Cubs of five or six years ago. We are way ahead of those teams. They had horrible farm systems and nobody of value at the major league level. Our farm system is far form one of the worst. In fact there are some people who are starting to look at them as one of the top farms in baseball. Jim Callis tweeted he thinks it might be top five this year. Christopher Crawford tweeted the Brewers might be his favorite system right now. Here is Jonathan Mayo's take on it. http://m.mlb.com/news/article/160576804/atlanta-braves-top-most-improved-farm-systems?topicid=151437456

I just don't see a team like that tanking just for the top draft pick. With guys like Arcia, Santana, Philips an Lopez coming along it seems wrong to tank just for a draft pick that wouldn't be ready until those guys are about to hit free agency. Seems more prudent to me to find players to compliment the next wave of stars already in the system. Basically I just don't believe the parallels to the Astros and Cubs are strong enough to be the model for how we should go about it. Just because Stearns came from the Astros doesn't mean he's going to copy what the Astros did Verbatim. My guess is the Astros wouldn't have done what they did if they inherited what Stearns has here. The two teams aren't in nearly the same situation when the respective GM's took over.

 

That doesn't even touch the fact that what worked in the past does not mean it will work as well in the future. In a copy cat league everyone wants to copy the flavor of the week. That in turn increases the odds each team that does the same thing will be less effective. Is it really wise, for instance, to race the Philly's, Braves and Reds to the bottom? After all three of the four teams are not going to succeed in being the worst. Notice four teams could copy the Astros and Cubs now instead of just those two doing it. That means instead of competing with one other team for the coveted first draft pick four are. Perhaps by next season six will be. After all conventional thinking says if it worked for the Cubs and Astos it should work for every team. At some point half the teams will be competing for the bottom. How's that gonna work out for most of them? Why not carve out our own way and be ahead of the curve for once?

 

Personally I think Stearns knows he is not in the same situation as the Cubs or Astors and is working accordingly. Why take five of six years when two or three will do? We aren't going to be good next year but we are not as far away as the Cubs or Astros were. So why follow their path of pain and torture for half a decade when we don't have to?

 

You can't possibly think that this offseason has been about improving the roster? The team lost 94 games and it wasn't a fluke as the only major injury was Luc.

 

Since July they lost their 3B, 1B, CF, RF, and Closer plus some spare parts in Rogers, Broxton, Cotts. I'd strongly suggest that none of them has truly been replaced this offseason

 

So from that 94 loss team we have added a bunch of guys who aren't terribly young and were really 40 man roster casualties by other teams. I fail to see how the MLB roster has been tooled to get to even 75 wins, let alone avoid the 6 more losses to get them to 100. I agree and I'm on board with Stearns tanking the team. It worked with Houston, it worked with Chicago, and it worked when Dean Taylor did it here, though I'm not 100% sure he knew he was tanking.

 

As for the minor league system, yes it's much better no doubt. Adding the Astros players, Davies, and the recent drafts has been a huge shot in the arm. I am going to assuming the Luc trade will be a massive upgrade to the farm system.

 

As for the tanking strategy, it is a good one for Milwaukee. I just saw Scott Kazmir signed for 3/$48. The Brewers can't compete with that. The only way for them to get to elite status isn't with good drafts and international signings, it's with league best drafts and international signings. The best way to get those is going to be with the help of guys like Middlebrooks, Young, Niewnehaus , etc who are terrible players and will lose a bunch of games.

[logan82]

When did Braun get traded? Our 3B wasn't very good so not a big loss. Gomez was pretty average this year so not a big loss either. Our 1B wasn't great either. Closers are replaceable. Overall we really haven't lost much and could possibly be better at some of the fringe positions rhat got a lot of playing time. Add in that we were probably more like a .500 or a little below talent team in 2015 and I would be surprised if we lost close to 95 games. Unless we trade Lucroy my guess is we are around 85 losses. Just a little bit worse than 2015.

[And That]

Gomez was pretty average this year so not a big loss either. Our 1B wasn't great either.

Gomez, Lind and Rogers had about 6 fWAR between them. That's not nothing. If you assume they will be replaced by replacement level players in 2016, that's a pretty big step back on a team that doesn't have a ton of room to step back.

 

I do agree though that I'd take the under on 100 losses, and maybe 95 as well. Unless they have major injury problems, this is not a truly wretched team. If Garza bounces back, they have a chance to have an above average pitching staff. The offense might well be awful, but with a few breakout years you never know. Plus the Brewers never really seem to get where they need to go, whether it's the World Series or the #1 draft pick.

[Boomer5]

When did Braun get traded? Our 3B wasn't very good so not a big loss. Gomez was pretty average this year so not a big loss either. Our 1B wasn't great either. Closers are replaceable. Overall we really haven't lost much and could possibly be better at some of the fringe positions rhat got a lot of playing time. Add in that we were probably more like a .500 or a little below talent team in 2015 and Iwould be surprised if we lost close to 95 games. Inless we trade Lucroy my guess is we are around 85 losses. Just a little bit worse than 2015.

 

Well since Parra, our best regular player when he was starting last year, is a RF though played CF, I called him RF for lazy typing purposes. I think you knew what I meant though.

 

I dont share your optimism but I suppose you never know. I look at the 94 loss team and I see a bunch of 28-31 year old guys added in the offseason that are simply not very good players. You say ARam, Parra, KRod, Gomez and Lind arent good players or average but you do see a 9 game improvement in subtracting them and adding Young Jr, Middlebrooks, Cecchini, Niewenhaus, et al? Come on now.

 

IF Stearns added these guys to go from a 94 loss team to a 85 loss team as you suggest, he is truly an idiot and I dont take that term lightly. We are looking up at 3 teams that have 100 win potential, and Stearns is signing guys to get us to 480 to 500 that have no long term future in Milwaukee? No way in the world he is that silly.

 

The Brewers will never get to elite being a 500 ish team. Honestly it would take a hard salary cap for that to happen and we know that isnt on the agenda.

 

Look at the big picture, think outside the box, or whatever cliche you choose. Stearns is correctly tanking the MLB roster to build up the future of the Milwaukee Brewers.

[NievesNoNO]

Whoa. No anger here. Not one bit. I'm not being sarcastic when I say that Sterns is turning the MLB roster into the 2011-2013 Astros. The goal most certainly is to make the MLB roster the worst in baseball and that is a good thing in the long run. The model is quite apparent in the Cubs and Astros.

 

I don't think that is the goal at all. Granted the primary goal isn't the major league roster next season but i seriously doubt the goal is to be the worst team in the league just to get the top pick. I think what many people here are missing is this isn't the Astros or Cubs of five or six years ago. We are way ahead of those teams.

 

I don't think the goal is to field the worst roster. That might be a by product of trying to rebuild. I feel like with the guys they are bringing in for the ML roster they are trying to hit on a lottery ticket. No, the odds aren't good that any of them figure it out enough to be of great value but at least there seems to be a method/plan to what's going on. Athleticism, versatility and, some OB skill seem to be priorities when filling out the roster. He could've just as easily filled out the roster with guys like Joyce, Izturis, Nava, Carter etc. for very little cost and had MLB name value. If that was the case I'd say the goal is to field the worst team in baseball.

 

Young is the first guy that IMO doesn't really match up with the rest of the acquisitions so far and other than Middlebrooks is my least favorite off-season move but it a MiLB deal so it doesn't much matter. They could do worse than a potential really fast, versatile bench player.

[Boomer5]

Gomez was pretty average this year so not a big loss either. Our 1B wasn't great either.

Gomez, Lind and Rogers had about 6 fWAR between them. That's not nothing. If you assume they will be replaced by replacement level players in 2016, that's a pretty big step back on a team that doesn't have a ton of room to step back.

 

I do agree though that I'd take the under on 100 losses, and maybe 95 as well. Unless they have major injury problems, this is not a truly wretched team. If Garza bounces back, they have a chance to have an above average pitching staff. The offense might well be awful, but with a few breakout years you never know. Plus the Brewers never really seem to get where they need to go, whether it's the World Series or the #1 draft pick.

 

Additionally, Parra was a 1.2 WAR on fangraphs. KRod was a 1.0

[MrTPlush]

Could be a move just to fill minor league roster with no real intention to put value into him. But honestly if lots of injuries happen he wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. We have fielded worse players for short stints.

[Boomer5]

Could be a move just to fill minor league roster with no real intention to put value into him. But honestly if lots of injuries happen he wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. We have fielded worse players for short stints.

 

I have kind of derailed the pick up of Young to the overall model of the team tanking thing but your are right. In the case of Young specifically, he is a cheap and somewhat useful addition in that he has a tool that cant ever be taught, speed.

 

Its either to help field a team at CS or a precursor to a Scooter/Segura trade. Either way, if Young is the answer, Id hate to think what the question would be, but he certainly doesnt hurt adding him to the organization.

[1992casey]

What's CS?

[Boomer5]

What's CS?

 

Hopefully our soon to be forgotten AAA home.

[logan82]

Gomez was pretty average this year so not a big loss either. Our 1B wasn't great either.

Gomez, Lind and Rogers had about 6 fWAR between them. That's not nothing. If you assume they will be replaced by replacement level players in 2016, that's a pretty big step back on a team that doesn't have a ton of room to step back.

Lind was 2.2 and Gomez was 1.6 while he played for us. By my math that's only 3.8 wins. Just under average. Add in the 1.2 From Parra and that is still only 5. Add in Rogers and we are up to 5.7. I don't assume those guys will be replaced by replacement level players. Logan Schafer, Hector Gomez, and Luis Sardinas are gone and so is their -1.5 WAR.

 

I don't use WAR for pitchers and the stat gets really sketchy for relievers since it is a counting stat. Lohse is gone and closers are replaceable.

 

I dont share your optimism but I suppose you never know. I look at the 94 loss team and I see a bunch of 28-31 year old guys added in the offseason that are simply not very good players. You say ARam, Parra, KRod, Gomez and Lind arent good players or average but you do see a 9 game improvement in subtracting them and adding Young Jr, Middlebrooks, Cecchini, Niewenhaus, et al? Come on now.

 

IF Stearns added these guys to go from a 94 loss team to a 85 loss team as you suggest, he is truly an idiot and I dont take that term lightly. We are looking up at 3 teams that have 100 win potential, and Stearns is signing guys to get us to 480 to 500 that have no long term future in Milwaukee? No way in the world he is that silly.

I am in no way suggesting the players added make us better let alone by 9 wins. I fully expect the Brewers to be a losing team. The problem is that there is a wide gulf between losing 94 games and being a 94 loss team. We were not a 94 loss talent team so 94 losses is not the right starting point. We were more like a 82ish loss team at the start of last year.

[Thurston Fluff]

You can't possibly think that this offseason has been about improving the roster? The team lost 94 games and it wasn't a fluke as the only major injury was Luc.

 

I didn't say it was. I was simply pointing out I didn't think you were correct is saying Stearns goal was to tank so we got a better draft pick. There is a difference between purposely tanking and the major league roster not being the main concern for next season. If you purposely tank you are not worrying about the next five or so years. I do not believe that is the way Stearns in thinking for the reasons I outlined. Our farm system is already one of the better ones in baseball. We need to find enough decent role players to supplement the next wave of core players. That wave is a year or two away not five of six. This is not the Cubs or Astos of 2010. We are well ahead of where they were. Thus we should not copy the 2010 Cubs or Astros approach.

 

 

Braun ranked 32nd in MLB in Defensive WAR among LF's in his MVP year of 2011.

 

Khris Davis ranked 39th among LF's in Defensive WAR last year (minimum 300 at-bats)

 

They are both well below average defenders. Arguably they are brutally poor defenders.

 

A single year of defensive metrics is worth about a1/3 of a year of offensive metrics. What would you have learned about Lucroy by the first third of this season? WAR is a useless stat to begin with because it fails to take that into account. If I remember correctly Braun was up for a gold glove around that same period of time. He lost out to Parra. Now I know gold gloves are not very telling either but I think it has as much, probably more, credibility as WAR does when it comes to defense.

[And That]

Add in Rogers and we are up to 5.7.

About 6... there you go.

 

I don't assume those guys will be replaced by replacement level players.

Fair enough, but where on the current roster are the Brewers getting definite above-replacement level production from any of the CF/3B/1B positions?

[Boomer5]

I am in no way suggesting the players added make us better let alone by 9 wins. I fully expect the Brewers to be a losing team. The problem is that there is a wide gulf between losing 94 games and being a 94 loss team. We were not a 94 loss talent team so 94 losses is not the right starting point. We were more like a 82ish loss team at the start of last year.

 

82 loss team means this a 500 team +/-. Yeah, I dont see how the math works there on the current roster let alone one without Luc and possibly Braun and or Davis?

 

They were a 94 loss team for a reason. Im not sure how 2015 can be looked at and justified as a flukey bad season especially since we correctly traded away a lot of talent and basically just churned Logan Schafer and Gomez, Sardinas, etc into guys who are the same just with different names, who are slightly older, but will be playing bigger roles in 2016?

 

Sure closers are replaceable but by who? Smith and Jeffries? Even IF that works out, then who replaces them? This is a pretty untested at best and messy at worst bullpen and while we all like the starting rotation, no one will confuse them for the 90's Braves. The offense looks significantly worse than last year. I have not seen any plans to promote our two big gun prospects to the MLB roster who might be difference makers. We don't have a legitimate 1B or 3B and our primary CF had 7 ABs last year and is considered a fringe prospect. Our one potentially big young bat on the MLB roster currently doesn't even have a place on the field as he is blocked by Davis and Braun. Obviously the big league roster is a work in progress but the assumption is the gaps will be filled by more AAAA types as the likely trades will be, I assume, for MiLB prospects.

 

What am i missing from the 2015 94 loss team that will get them to 500 or so in 2016?

 

And more to the point, why on earth would anyone want a team to go 500? 400 is great, 600 is great. 500 is Doug Melvin land and we know how that turns out.

[logan82]

Add in Rogers and we are up to 5.7.

About 6... there you go.

and I had to add in how many extra players to bring it up to that? That also completely ignores how bad some of the players we got rid of were.

 

Fair enough, but where on the current roster are the Brewers getting definite above-replacement level production from any of the CF/3B/1B positions?

The Brewers were only about a win above replacement level at 3B in 2015. We were not as good at those positions that we can't replace the production there or take only a small step back.

 

This all completely ignores that the Brewers likely way under-performed their talent for the first couple months of the season so 94 losses is not a good starting point.

 

What am i missing from the 2015 94 loss team that will get them to 500 or so in 2016?

Who said they would have a winning season in 2016? I just said that 2015 had a couple of really bad months at the start and their talent was not a 94 loss team in 2015. Teams pretty consistently over and underplay the level of their talent on a yearly basis. We did both in back to back years.

[Boomer5]

I didn't say it was. I was simply pointing out I didn't think you were correct is saying Stearns goal was to tank so we got a better draft pick. There is a difference between purposely tanking and the major league roster not being the main concern for next season. If you purposely tank you are not worrying about the next five or so years. I do not believe that is the way Stearns in thinking for the reasons I outlined. Our farm system is already one of the better ones in baseball. We need to find enough decent role players to supplement the next wave of core players. That wave is a year or two away not five of six. This is not the Cubs or Astos of 2010. We are well ahead of where they were. Thus we should not copy the 2010 Cubs or Astros approach.

 

In bold is the problem. Core players. Core players are Braun and Prince. Bryant, Solars, and Schwarber, etc. Correra etc. Arcia and Maverick look like core players I believe. While the farm system is MUCH improved, it contains nice players not Core Players beyond those two. That is the issue here and why we need to land the plus plus guys not nice players to have.

 

Yes we are way ahead of the Cubs and Astros in 2010 at the Minor league level, but we wont be where those two teams were in 2015 until the next wave is a wave of greatness not a wave of good.

[Boomer5]

C: Lucroy

1B: Cecchini/Middlebrooks

2B: Scooter

SS: Segura

3B: Middlebrooks/Cecchini

LF: Davis

CF: Broxton

RF: Braun

 

SP1: Peralta

SP2: Nelson

SP3: Jungmann

SP4: Garza

SP5: Davies

 

Closer: Jeffries

8th: Smith

7th: Blazek

RP: Knebel

RP: Thornburg

RP: Pena/Wagner/Cravy

 

This is a soft roster of course as I have left off some bench and some likely trades, and its only Dec 31, but show me 75-80 wins here.

[And That]

and I had to add in how many extra players to bring it up to that?

One - Parra, who I forgot to include in my list but included in the total. Like I said, about 6.

 

That also completely ignores how bad some of the players we got rid of were.

And completely ignores the bad players the Brewers may well field in 2016.

 

We were not as good at those positions that we can't replace the production there or take only a small step back.

Again, where on the current roster are the Brewers replacing 6-7 WAR worth of production at 3B/CF/1B? As it currently stands, they are a demonstrably worse offensive team heading into 2016.

[brewers4eric]

You know it is going to be a rough season when several of the posts detail statistical based arguments on how bad the team will be. I don't think the 2016 version of the Brewers will be as bad as the 2002 team, which represents the low point of my Brewer fandom. My personal goal is that we'll turn things around in time to necessitate a deadline trade for Zach Greinke at the end of his Diamondbacks contract. Zach propels the 2021 Brewers to a World Series based on unfinished business from 2011.

 

Go Brewers

[Thurston Fluff]

In bold is the problem. Core players. Core players are Braun and Prince. Bryant, Solars, and Schwarber, etc. Correra etc. Arcia and Maverick look like core players I believe. While the farm system is MUCH improved, it contains nice players not Core Players beyond those two. That is the issue here and why we need to land the plus plus guys not nice players to have

 

If Arcia and Maverick are two core players how is that different than having Fielder and Braun as the only two core players? When we had those two and surrounded them with complimentary players we won. It isn't like those teams had all above average players beyond those two either. When you can put Yuni at short and the bad version of Casey Megehee at third and still win 96 games it's pretty obvious you can win with only a couple super stars surrounded by a few above average players. What are you gonna get better than those two? You can just as easily get Rickie Weeks as you can Kris Bryant. There is far more risk in teh draft than there is projecting Arcia and Maverick. Is tanking and sucking for 3/4's of their time time in Milwaukee really a better plan than just building around them? To give up on the potential of being a contender when those guys get here in the hope to get even better players further down the road seems like a fools errand to me. There just aren't that many superior propects than they are. At some point you end up chasing unicorns and never actually get around to winning.

[pacopete4]

I get your point that you can build around two studs like Braun and Fielder but Arcia & Maverick are not Braun & Fielder. Unfortunately we probably won't have that 1-2 punch at basically the same age ever again. Miss those days.

[Boomer5]

In bold is the problem. Core players. Core players are Braun and Prince. Bryant, Solars, and Schwarber, etc. Correra etc. Arcia and Maverick look like core players I believe. While the farm system is MUCH improved, it contains nice players not Core Players beyond those two. That is the issue here and why we need to land the plus plus guys not nice players to have

 

If Arcia and Maverick are two core players how is that different than having Fielder and Braun as the only two core players? When we had those two and surrounded them with complimentary players we won. It isn't like those teams had all above average players beyond those two either. When you can put Yuni at short and the bad version of Casey Megehee at third and still win 96 games it's pretty obvious you can win with only a couple super stars surrounded by a few above average players. What are you gonna get better than those two? You can just as easily get Rickie Weeks as you can Kris Bryant. There is far more risk in teh draft than there is projecting Arcia and Maverick. Is tanking and sucking for 3/4's of their time time in Milwaukee really a better plan than just building around them? To give up on the potential of being a contender when those guys get here in the hope to get even better players further down the road seems like a fools errand to me. There just aren't that many superior propects than they are. At some point you end up chasing unicorns and never actually get around to winning.

 

Nothing the team has done this offseason has a thing to do with winning in 2016 and 2017. You haven't wrapped your arms around the beauty of tanking which is the only scenario one would acquire the 28+ years olds we have in the quantity we have. These aren't Yuni and Casey around Braun and a Fielder, this is Bako and Houtson around Jeffrey Hammonds and Jose Hernandez.

 

We aren't building around Maverick and Arcia, putting aside they aren't Braun and Fielder. We are adding sub journeyman to fill a roster so an actual game can be played. We have only 3 guys who are above average hitters in Braun, Davis, and Lucroy. The rest range from meh in scooter to downright horrible in everyone else. One injury to Braun (likely) and or a trade of Davis/Luc (also likely) and this is the worst offense in baseball.

 

We are way closer to building the 2002 Brewers than the 2008 Brewers.

[Boomer5]

I get your point that you can build around two studs like Braun and Fielder but Arcia & Maverick are not Braun & Fielder. Unfortunately we probably won't have that 1-2 punch at basically the same age ever again. Miss those days.

 

That is difficult but not impossible. We were only in position to draft those two guys because we were horrible and had high draft picks for several years. Two were home runs, pun intended and two weren't but you need several years of great drafts to get the wave of plus plus guys to Milwaukee.

[clancyphile]

I get your point that you can build around two studs like Braun and Fielder but Arcia & Maverick are not Braun & Fielder. Unfortunately we probably won't have that 1-2 punch at basically the same age ever again. Miss those days.

 

That is difficult but not impossible. We were only in position to draft those two guys because we were horrible and had high draft picks for several years. Two were home runs, pun intended and two weren't but you need several years of great drafts to get the wave of plus plus guys to Milwaukee.

 

I'd consider two of the first-round picks from 2002-2007 home runs (Braun and Fielder), one was a solid double (Rickie Weeks), two were base hits (Jeffress, traded to land Greinke and LaPorta, traded for Sabathia), and one was arguably a dud (Mark Rogers, who still made the majors).

[3and2Fastball]

Weeks was a great draft pick. Injuries curtailed what was likely a perennial All-Star career.