I find the love for the rebuilding process curious around here

[RobertR]

Other than the Segura trade, it wouldn't surprise me if much of what Stearns did this off season is ultimately viewed as activity instead of progress. He's clearly relying on volume to find some diamonds in the rough but there's plenty of reason to doubt most individual moves. Is that any better than a more targeted aproach? We'll see.

What is a targeted approach?

 

To me, instead of bringing in a half dozen guys for CF to see if you can correctly identify the right one in Spring Training, always a risky approach, you get one player with a better known floor and concentrate your resources elsewhere. Instead of getting a half dozen arms and middle infielders in a series of trades, you combine the resources you traded away and target a AA third basemen with a reasonable floor. Realistically, the Brewers only have so many roster spots, with Arcia, Phillips, and others clearly part of future plans, that a lot of these fringey middle infielders have no real future with the team. I don't think there's anyone here that wouldn't rather have a solid third base prospect out of all the wheeling and dealing done than all these 4th outfielders and utility middle infielders.

 

We're too far away from seeing the results to judge whether the offseason actually found any future contributors or not. But, I think it's safe to say that Stearns concentrated on quantity with bigger risks and higher upside than he did on minimizing risk. It's very possible we'll be wondering about the future at third base and first base again next off season. Is that progress?

 

Saying that I don't expect most of the players acquired will make any major contributions to the major league club shouldn't be particularly controversial. I bet Stearns would agree with me in private. Realistically, if they come out with 3 or 4 players in all their moves, that will exceed expectations. I'm just saying that whether the process works or not is up to scouting, analytics, and luck. There's no right way to rebuild and low risk, moderate upside quality might have proven to be more effective than high risk, high reward quantity. Especially if you believe that the risk of some of these acquisitions has been understated. Since we don't know what else was on the table, we'll never know the answer to that question, but let's not present a false dichotomy that Stearns' way is the only true way of rebuilding and every other way wasn't rebuilding at all.

[RobertR]

None of those prospects are close to sure things, with the possible exception of Diaz. Especially those kids from Seattle. It's actually probable that the vast majority of this off season activity is going to amount to nothing. Yeah the rebuild is necessary and Stearns is committed to it, but Melvin's last flurry of trades and the upcoming draft may end up being more important than anything done this off season.

 

Santana, Houser, Phillips, and Davies are just as likely to be flops as anyone else.

 

No they're not. They might not all be studs but there's no chance that they'll flame out in A ball.

[Boomer5]

None of those prospects are close to sure things, with the possible exception of Diaz. Especially those kids from Seattle. It's actually probable that the vast majority of this off season activity is going to amount to nothing. Yeah the rebuild is necessary and Stearns is committed to it, but Melvin's last flurry of trades and the upcoming draft may end up being more important than anything done this off season.

 

I agree completely.

 

The value Stearns will add will be in the form of the 2016-2109 drafts and international talent. No one he picked up other than Diaz matters other than organizational depth. His age and how much we paid for him ($6.5M) should tell you all you need to know about his timetable.

 

We are following the Astros model that he was a part of. I dont think it's that hard to connect the dots here.

[MrTPlush]

I actually agree with Robert.

 

I don't think Stearns has done much of anything this offseason. People are giving him way to much credit for what he has done. Outside of Diaz he has acquired many role players at best, nothing at worst, and maybe a sliver of hope they could be something more. He really hasn't made any shockingly impressive moves that I wouldn't expect another half decent GM to do. All his moves are predictable that any half sane person would do.

 

That is fine though. Really all we need him to do is nothing stupid. He inherited a Top 10 farm system, 5 Top 100 players, lots of valuable MLB players to trade away, and what will likely be multiple years of top of the draft picks. It really doesn't take a total genius to run a rebuilding team. The real test for him is when we aren't rebuilding and how he will put the team over the top. Then keep them over the top as long as possible

[Boomer5]

None of those prospects are close to sure things, with the possible exception of Diaz. Especially those kids from Seattle. It's actually probable that the vast majority of this off season activity is going to amount to nothing. Yeah the rebuild is necessary and Stearns is committed to it, but Melvin's last flurry of trades and the upcoming draft may end up being more important than anything done this off season.

 

Santana, Houser, Phillips, and Davies are just as likely to be flops as anyone else.

 

Not sure I get that? Those are advanced prospects with tools that are now more easily and accurately projectable.

 

On a purely statistical basis, it is far more likely that Davies has already pitched more MLB innings that any of the 3 teens in the Seattle trade.

[Boomer5]

I actually agree with Robert.

 

I don't think Stearns has done much of anything this offseason. People are giving him way to much credit for what he has done. Outside of Diaz he has acquired many role players at best, nothing at worst, and maybe a sliver of hope they could be something more. He really hasn't made any shockingly impressive moves that I wouldn't expect another half decent GM to do. All his moves are predictable that any half sane person would do.

 

That is fine though. Really all we need him to do is nothing stupid. He inherited a Top 10 farm system, 5 Top 100 players, lots of valuable MLB players to trade away, and what will likely be multiple years of top of the draft picks. It really doesn't take a total genius to run a rebuilding team. The real test for him is when we aren't rebuilding and how he will put the team over the top. Then keep them over the top as long as possible

 

Agreed. Where Stearns will show his mettle will be in the the draft and international.

 

Stearns actually inherited something far more valuable, an owner willing to let him "Operation Astros" our team. I dont think Melvin had that.

 

IF the goal was to improve the 2016 Brewers, he has done a remarkably bad job. Since it wasnt, his skills wont be known for years.

[MrTPlush]

I actually agree with Robert.

 

I don't think Stearns has done much of anything this offseason. People are giving him way to much credit for what he has done. Outside of Diaz he has acquired many role players at best, nothing at worst, and maybe a sliver of hope they could be something more. He really hasn't made any shockingly impressive moves that I wouldn't expect another half decent GM to do. All his moves are predictable that any half sane person would do.

 

That is fine though. Really all we need him to do is nothing stupid. He inherited a Top 10 farm system, 5 Top 100 players, lots of valuable MLB players to trade away, and what will likely be multiple years of top of the draft picks. It really doesn't take a total genius to run a rebuilding team. The real test for him is when we aren't rebuilding and how he will put the team over the top. Then keep them over the top as long as possible

 

Agreed. Where Stearns will show his mettle will be in the the draft and international.

 

Stearns actually inherited something far more valuable, an owner willing to let him "Operation Astros" our team. I dont think Melvin had that.

 

IF the goal was to improve the 2016 Brewers, he has done a remarkably bad job. Since it wasnt, his skills wont be known for years.

 

I don't think we will truly know what Doug Melvin would have done at the helm of another rebuild. Not sure the Brewers would have kept him if he was willing to(sounded like they might have), but Melvin made it clear he wants to retire soon and didn't want to do half a rebuild. Figured to hand over the reigns now so the new guy could do it his own way start to end. Probably a good thing as I think Attanasio would have stuck with Melvin if he wanted to come back. Secretly saved us from himself. Not that I don't think Melvin could have gotten us in a good direction, but I think there were many people better for the job including Stearns.

[RobertR]

I actually agree with Robert.

 

I don't think Stearns has done much of anything this offseason. People are giving him way to much credit for what he has done. Outside of Diaz he has acquired many role players at best, nothing at worst, and maybe a sliver of hope they could be something more. He really hasn't made any shockingly impressive moves that I wouldn't expect another half decent GM to do. All his moves are predictable that any half sane person would do.

 

That is fine though. Really all we need him to do is nothing stupid. He inherited a Top 10 farm system, 5 Top 100 players, lots of valuable MLB players to trade away, and what will likely be multiple years of top of the draft picks. It really doesn't take a total genius to run a rebuilding team. The real test for him is when we aren't rebuilding and how he will put the team over the top. Then keep them over the top as long as possible

 

Agreed. Where Stearns will show his mettle will be in the the draft and international.

 

 

I'd say that how Stearns handles getting valuable returns for Lucroy, Davis, Braun, and Smith are his first true test. He has to get guys that will contribute for them.

 

Plus he has to be able to stay the course during losing and falling attendance. Those are near term tests.

[jerichoholicninja]

None of those prospects are close to sure things, with the possible exception of Diaz. Especially those kids from Seattle. It's actually probable that the vast majority of this off season activity is going to amount to nothing. Yeah the rebuild is necessary and Stearns is committed to it, but Melvin's last flurry of trades and the upcoming draft may end up being more important than anything done this off season.

 

Santana, Houser, Phillips, and Davies are just as likely to be flops as anyone else.

 

Not sure I get that? Those are advanced prospects with tools that are now more easily and accurately projectable.

 

On a purely statistical basis, it is far more likely that Davies has already pitched more MLB innings that any of the 3 teens in the Seattle trade.

 

If a guy doesn't become an average major league player than he's flopped. None of the guys that Doug got last year and David has gotten this offseason are average major league players yet.

[RobertR]

If our GM had a crystal ball it would be easy. But the simple fact is that the guys Melvin acquired are more highly regarded by scouts than most of the guys Stearns has acquired to date. There's lower risk that they'll wash out in the minors and a higher chance that they'll be at least average. We might as well not have scouts if you believe that all minor leaguers have an equal chance of flopping.

[adambr2]

I actually agree with Robert.

 

I don't think Stearns has done much of anything this offseason. People are giving him way to much credit for what he has done. Outside of Diaz he has acquired many role players at best, nothing at worst, and maybe a sliver of hope they could be something more. He really hasn't made any shockingly impressive moves that I wouldn't expect another half decent GM to do. All his moves are predictable that any half sane person would do.

 

That is fine though. Really all we need him to do is nothing stupid. He inherited a Top 10 farm system, 5 Top 100 players, lots of valuable MLB players to trade away, and what will likely be multiple years of top of the draft picks. It really doesn't take a total genius to run a rebuilding team. The real test for him is when we aren't rebuilding and how he will put the team over the top. Then keep them over the top as long as possible

 

Agreed. Where Stearns will show his mettle will be in the the draft and international.

 

 

I'd say that how Stearns handles getting valuable returns for Lucroy, Davis, Braun, and Smith are his first true test. He has to get guys that will contribute for them.

 

Plus he has to be able to stay the course during losing and falling attendance. Those are near term tests.

 

The good news is I think going to a Brewer game has become a lot more trendy in recent years,. I don't think they'll come close to 90s level attendance even during a rebuild. I think they'll still clear 2M fairly easily and maybe approach 2.5.

[trwi7]

But the simple fact is that the guys Melvin acquired are more highly regarded by scouts than most of the guys Stearns has acquired to date. There's lower risk that they'll wash out in the minors and a higher chance that they'll be at least average. We might as well not have scouts if you believe that all minor leaguers have an equal chance of flopping.

 

Well yeah, because Melvin traded an all-star CF and a mid rotation starter that's cheap. He should have gotten guys more highly regarded considering Stearns has only traded an older closer with off the field issues, an older 1B with injury issues and one year left on his contract, a 27 year old 1B who has barely played in the majors and one of, if not the worst hitting players in the majors the last two years.

 

So of course the returns of those guys aren't going to be as highly touted as the return we got for Gomez and Fiers. Although I do recall a lot of prospect watchers/writers liking our return for Rodriguez, Rogers and Segura.

[FVBrewerFan]

Stearns has had to do two very different things simultaneously. Build a respectable baseball team for 2016 to avoid 120 losses, and stockpile talent for the rebuild. That is no small feat. One thing they all have in common, they can all be flipped if/when it is necessary.

 

It will be hard for Stearns to top that last mega-trade by Melvin. But remember, Stearns was involved with that on the other side. Like Robert said though, let's see what he can get for Lucroy, Davis, Peralta, etc. If I had to guess, he's going to have to wait on Lucroy to prove himself a bit, a trade could still happen in April.

 

But so far, he's done a good job with what he has to work with. Arguably, the Lind trade was the most head-scratching, but who knows? It may end up being the best of all of them. It's not like he made a bad deal for Lucroy or Braun just for the sake of making a trade. As he likes to say, this is a process. Early on, I'm very pleased with what he's doing.

[RobertR]

I'd agree that the Lind trade is the only real one that raised any questions. Most of the rest have been well received and carried very little risk. It's hard to fault Stearns for not conjuring up a stud out of thin air.

 

That said his moves going forward are going to carry more risk. And even Stearns has to be concerned that center field will not accomplish anything towards long term goals. Third base still has tons of questions, short term and long term. There's a lot left to be done.

[trwi7]

I think you have to understand where Stearns is coming from on these trades. No team was going to give up a good prospect that was close to the majors for what we have traded so far. So you take a bunch of flyers on teenagers and hope that one of them becomes say a 55 major leaguer and maybe another becomes a 45/50 and the rest flame out. Considering what you traded to get those players, that turns into a win for the organization.

 

I'm sure if Stearns could've gotten a couple of 50 players and a 55 player that were in AA and/or AAA for Lind, Rodriguez, Segura or Rogers, he would've done that. But none of those players warranted a return like that, so he dipped down and got a bunch of teenagers hoping one would develop into something more than the guys we were offered that were higher in the minors. So would you rather take a sure thing that's maybe a 5th starter or maybe a platoon position player or would you rather add some risk and pick up a guy that could be a #3 starter or an average regular?

 

For the position we're in right now, I understand why Stearns did what he did. The potential upside of getting a #3 starter far outweighs getting a #5 starter or a reliever or a platoon player. We didn't give up much, we might not get anything in return but the risk of getting a potential higher upside starter is worth it.

[adambr2]

Other than the Segura trade, it wouldn't surprise me if much of what Stearns did this off season is ultimately viewed as activity instead of progress. He's clearly relying on volume to find some diamonds in the rough but there's plenty of reason to doubt most individual moves. Is that any better than a more targeted aproach? We'll see.

What is a targeted approach?

 

To me, instead of bringing in a half dozen guys for CF to see if you can correctly identify the right one in Spring Training, always a risky approach, you get one player with a better known floor and concentrate your resources elsewhere. Instead of getting a half dozen arms and middle infielders in a series of trades, you combine the resources you traded away and target a AA third basemen with a reasonable floor. Realistically, the Brewers only have so many roster spots, with Arcia, Phillips, and others clearly part of future plans, that a lot of these fringey middle infielders have no real future with the team. I don't think there's anyone here that wouldn't rather have a solid third base prospect out of all the wheeling and dealing done than all these 4th outfielders and utility middle infielders.

 

We're too far away from seeing the results to judge whether the offseason actually found any future contributors or not. But, I think it's safe to say that Stearns concentrated on quantity with bigger risks and higher upside than he did on minimizing risk. It's very possible we'll be wondering about the future at third base and first base again next off season. Is that progress?

 

IMO we're far too early in the rebuild for that targeted of an approach. I think that's more appropriate in a few years when we're nearing contention. For now, concentrate on getting the most upside regardless of position, and look to add talent at every level of out system. That is what I see Stearns doing.

 

It's entirely possible that we'll be wondering about the future at 1st and 3rd next offseason. Really, we might be wondering about the future at every position besides SS. And that's okay.

[MrTPlush]

Stearns has made some interesting moves to date. I am fine with them, but I can see how some may question them. Trading Lind for three not so promising lottery tickets that could eventually have upside was a daring move. Obviously I didn't see the offers he got, but I imagine he could have gotten at least a semi-promising pitcher that might fit into a bullpen someday. Less risk but also less ceiling in that scenario. Stearns has also traded two decent pitching prospects since taking over. I am fine because it looks like we have many of those types already in the system, but if either of those guys turns out to be a solid #4 starter or better and he might look bad. He also traded Jason Rogers. Is he just a back up and solid pinch hitter or did we just traded away a guy who might be an average starter?

 

Like I said I like the moves in the present and I support what he is doing, but I can see where some might question him a bit. These trades are like any other trades. It might take years for us to really gauge how they worked out. All I think Stearns is trying to do right now is move out the aging talent that he doesn't think fits with the teams long term goal for younger players.

[monty57]

Instead of getting a half dozen arms and middle infielders in a series of trades, you combine the resources you traded away and target a AA third basemen with a reasonable floor.

 

I agree with most of what you're saying, but aren't Cecchini and Middlebrooks "third basemen with reasonable floors?" They're not AA, but they're controllable for a lot of years.

 

but let's not present a false dichotomy that Stearns' way is the only true way of rebuilding and every other way wasn't rebuilding at all.

 

It's certainly not the only way, but it's the way I've been hoping the Brewers would adopt, so I'm happy with what he's doing. A lot of the guys he's bringing in could bomb. Heck, everyone he's bringing in could feasibly bomb, but if we have enough talent in the minors, the law of averages should push a number of those guys into the majors, and a few could even be stars.

 

I think the Brewers need to take advantage of the system that allows teams to seriously underpay players for their first six years in the majors, and the only way to do that is to continuously pump talent into the farm.

[RobertR]

I can kind of see the argument for Cecchini, although there are questions about his glove, but Middlebrooks, who's already arbitration eligible, strikes me as purely a stopgap that you hope can get hot and be flipped. I'm dubious of that myself, but I can understand the thought process.

 

Centerfield kind of perplexes me though. Yeah, you can give the ABs to Santana and Liriano who have some long term value, but I don't think anyone thinks they're up to the challenge defensively and I think you worry that it could affect developing your pitchers. Nieuwenhuis and Young don't have any upside to be flipped, so why even have them? Reed probably needs more time in the minors. And, Broxton probably has 5th outfielder as his upside. It's hard to see the plan there.

[homer]

A year ago today they were still in the playoff hunt according to most of the projection systems though likely to fall short because of a strong division. Last year was just a disaster year.

 

Things happen in the game. The team has had a playoff plausible roster every season since 2005 until this year. Just some years go better than others.

 

 

True but I don't think anyone seriously considered them "contenders". Everything had to play out perfectly for last year to end up in a playoff berth. And beyond 2015 there were serious question marks given the status of the farm system.

[MrTPlush]

Centerfield kind of perplexes me though. Yeah, you can give the ABs to Santana and Liriano who have some long term value, but I don't think anyone thinks they're up to the challenge defensively and I think you worry that it could affect developing your pitchers. Nieuwenhuis and Young don't have any upside to be flipped, so why even have them? Reed probably needs more time in the minors. And, Broxton probably has 5th outfielder as his upside. It's hard to see the plan there.

 

We have so many because we can. Why not have them? It is just depth and some of them will be dropped or in the minors by the time opening day comes around. Injuries in spring training happen so maybe we need Young for a couple weeks to start out you never know.

[endaround]

I think Flores is really the only one acquired that looks to be on the team next year that might break out. Projection systems love him (KATOH has him the #24 in all of baseball). In fact the only way to make sense of the Lind trade is if you make it Lind and Sardinas for Flores + the 3 arms. Each of the deals would be fairly lopsided on their own. But then Flores really isn't a CFer either and so I don't know where he would get ABs.

 

As to the point about defense, yeah it looks to be terrible next year.

 

Catcher looks to be only position that might be above average. Gennett will likely be about average at 2B. After that, not good.

 

Hill/Cecchini/Middlebrooks look to be below average at 3B.

 

Villar looks to be a terrible defensive SS

 

Carter is a bad defensive 1B

 

Braun's and Davis's failings are well known.

 

Niuewenhuis likely would be average in Cf, maybe slightly better but then you are giving PAs to a 28 year old 5th OFer.

[3and2Fastball]

I'm hoping Keon Broxton can hit well enough to grab the CF spot. He can be an elite defensive CF

[RobertR]

Centerfield kind of perplexes me though. Yeah, you can give the ABs to Santana and Liriano who have some long term value, but I don't think anyone thinks they're up to the challenge defensively and I think you worry that it could affect developing your pitchers. Nieuwenhuis and Young don't have any upside to be flipped, so why even have them? Reed probably needs more time in the minors. And, Broxton probably has 5th outfielder as his upside. It's hard to see the plan there.

 

We have so many because we can. Why not have them? It is just depth and some of them will be dropped or in the minors by the time opening day comes around. Injuries in spring training happen so maybe we need Young for a couple weeks to start out you never know.

 

I'm of the opinion that they have that many because they don't really have any. At pretty much every other position they either have a young player with longer term upside or a place holder with potential value to be flipped. I can't really say that about center field.

 

Signing Austin Jackson with the intention of flipping him would make sense. Barring that Broxton hitting well enough to justify a look would be a good thing.

[And That]

Between Broxton, Flores, Nieuwenhuis, Liriano, Reed, Santana, and then potentially Phillips later on in the year, I'd think the Brewers are done adding guys to the CF mix for now. I thought Austin Jackson might make sense early on in the offseason, but unless they can get him dirt cheap, you're signing him in the hopes he plays well enough to be traded at the risk of losing Flores and/or Liriano, both of whom are out of options and could be longer term pieces.