flipping players...

[TURBO]

Since so many on this site think it is a common occurrence, and that it is actually easy to pick up players on the cheap, then flip them to teams who had a chance at picking up those same players at one time, I'm just curious, how many times have the Brewers actually picked up players with the intent of flipping them at the trade deadline, and then actually flipped them for a return that actually benefited the team in the long run.

 

It seems that term is used a lot on these boards, but I'd like to know how often it actually happens, and what the return was for those players who were flipped.

[Roderick]

I don't think it is really something that we would have examples for the Brewers as more recently they were expecting to compete, so the players they picked up weren't really looked as flip candidates. And before that time, but still when MA owned the team, I don't think they wanted to stretch payroll as they just had bought the team and took on a bunch of debt and wanted to be conservative. And before MA we know they didn't want to spend anything.

 

I think the key thing as to why it is being mentioned more is because the Brewers have dropped payroll so much that they probably can still balance the books and take a flyer on a come-back type of player. Worst case scenario, you eat the salary and cut them half way through the season. Otherwise you get a player that may produce enough to help the team and best case he really produces and we are able to flip for prospects. Since there is a cap on how much you can spend on the draft and central/south american players, it would appear the next best way for the team to leverage the ability to spend some cash to try to improve the farm system. Either that or trade with the Diamondbacks.

[FVBrewerFan]

This is the first year the Brewers have ever tried to have a "true" rebuilding season, so the answer would be none. But it has happened "by accident." Parra and Broxton last year for example.

 

I'll also add the Brewers haven't even done much of that even this year. I don't know of any new player to the system was brought in primarily to flip later. It's just that flipping players as an option later is just a given this season.

[TheCrew07]

They did once with a draft pick, they said from day 1 LaPorta was likely going to be a trade piece, and of course he was traded for Sabathia.

[TURBO]

I don't think Parra was acquired as a flip guy though, I think he was acquired to help us on our playoff run...

[1992casey]

We don't really know if someone is a flip guy until he's actually flipped.

[dlk9s]

Braun kind of flipped from heel to face to heel again.

[AKCheesehead]

Another scoreless hitless inning for Chapman today. His numbers so far this season are plain incredible. I could see him being a guy they could flip this summer, if they were to bring him on up to the majors soon.

[danzig6767]

Given the Brewers are in an obvious rebuilding mode, the better question should be how often have other teams in a similar rebuilding mode ended up trading a player at the deadline that they signed on the cheap during the offseason?

 

In most cases, i don't think the GM's of rebuilding teams go about signing a few veterans with the main intention of trying to trade that player later on for prospects. Instead, i think those rebuilding GM's see holes on their roster in a given year which lack a suitable young player to plug in, so they look for veterans on the cheap who they think will be good value. Gotta field a 25 man roster.

 

Then though, if one of those cheap veterans produces better than expected, it does open the door for a potential trade as an added bonus.

 

Take Carter. I don't think Stearns signed Carter with the main intent of hoping to trade him in July. Instead, i think Stearns signed Carter mainly because there was no firstbaseman in the minors ready to play in the majors, he knew Carter from Houston, and he signed for cheap. That said, Stearns clearly knows that the Brewers still need time before realistically being able to at least compete for a playoff berth. So if Carter were to be still hitting well come July, Stearns without question will listen to offers..

[MrTPlush]

I think this idea is a bit overrated because the Cubs were so successful with it during their rebuild. Jason Hammel really made the whole "flipping" thing become a talked about thing among fans. People think we can start flipping stuff of the trash heap to help get Addison Russell type players.

 

It can be done, but it likely won't be that successful nor are we likely to get anything super meaningful.

[SRB]

I feel like they brought back K-Rod in 2013 and 2015 with the knowledge that he might get flipped. Though of course they were still trying to win at that point as well.

[trwi7]

I don't think flipping players really works. A lot of these vet guys are signed to fill the roster for a year or two until a prospect can come up and replace them. If they're good enough that you can flip them, you do that but I don't think that's the main intent.

 

I'm sure we would love to flip Aaron Hill if he didn't suck, of course Arizona probably wouldn't have been desperate to get rid of his salary if he didn't suck either.

[MrTPlush]

If they're good enough that you can flip them, you do that but I don't think that's the main intent.

 

I would lean to agree with this. Flipping them is more of a secondary reason to sign these guys. It probably crosses your mind as a possibility down the road, but not necessarily something you are trying to do.

[JohnBriggs12]

Two "flip" guys out there this winter were Latos and Chacin. Latos is big reason Sox have best record in baseball. Chacin looks like he'll garner a nice return for Braves. Brewers opted to keep Garza in hopes they could get something for him. That was never going to happen at his salary level.

 

Cubs showed the value of picking up veteran arms cheap. They turned Scott Feldman into Jake Arrieta.

[QuevedosTongue]

Cubs showed the value of picking up veteran arms cheap. They turned Scott Feldman into Jake Arrieta.

 

[sarcasm]The Brewers should have expected this type of return on Lind and, in fact, should expect it every time they deal a vet. Every. Single. Time.[/sarcasm]

[paul253]

It seems to me that Doug Melvin preferred to extend guys as opposed to flipping them. He seemed to think "Why would I trade them if they are good now?" That was my biggest beef with Melvin. Couldn't seem to think more than a year or two down the line.

 

When I think "flip" I think bringing in guys with zero value and then immediately trading them after a year or two when they actually gain value. I think Podsednik was a good flip but I think we missed chances on guys like Mcgehee, Axford and Turnbow. This year Chris Carter seems like an ideal flip candidate. We will just have to see how Stearns approaches it.

[DuWayne Steurer]

I think it's fine to bring in guys like Carter or (for example, Mat Latos) for what he's costing and say "if he plays well, we'll see what we can get"

 

It gets dicey when you see proposals for guys who have multiple years and 75 mil+ left on contracts, coming off terrible seasons. Those are not good flip candidates.

[FVBrewerFan]

It seems to me that Doug Melvin preferred to extend guys as opposed to flipping them. He seemed to think "Why would I trade them if they are good now?" That was my biggest beef with Melvin. Couldn't seem to think more than a year or two down the line.

 

That's what Melvin did, no doubt, but it was by design- not poor roster management. Mark A. wanted to try to win every year, result is what we have now.

 

Also, now that I think about it Greinke was probably a flip guy. But another example of how that wasn't the primary goal. They knew they couldn't sign him long-term. Ideally, he would have been part of a playoff run both years. However, since that didn't happen his 2nd year, they flipped him.

[logan82]

I wouldn't think of Greinke as a flip guy. We gave up way to much to consider him a flip guy. Besides, when they flipped Greinke their back was against the wall. Like many of the trades Melvin made.

[MrTPlush]

Of course this thread turns into something about Doug Melvin. When will you guys realize everything Doug Melvin did was largely in part because of Attanasio. Melvin couldn't do things Attanasio wouldn't let him. Attanasio wanted to sign old veterans so he could try to compete every year. Attanasio wanted to trade away prospects to win now. Attanasio wanted to extend every homegrown guy to keep a winning team for just a few more years. Doug Melvin was just doing whatever possible to put the best team on the field every year even though towards the end that was far fetched. He didn't look a few years down the road because Attanasio didn't care about that.

 

Attanasio was the biggest problem of the last decade NOT Doug Melvin. Your GM can only be as good as your owner. If your owner is an idiot so will the GM.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Of course this thread turns into something about Doug Melvin. When will you guys realize everything Doug Melvin did was largely in part because of Attanasio. Melvin couldn't do things Attanasio wouldn't let him. Attanasio wanted to sign old veterans so he could try to compete every year. Attanasio wanted to trade away prospects to win now. Attanasio wanted to extend every homegrown guy to keep a winning team for just a few more years. Doug Melvin was just doing whatever possible to put the best team on the field every year even though towards the end that was far fetched. He didn't look a few years down the road because Attanasio didn't care about that.

 

Attanasio was the biggest problem of the last decade NOT Doug Melvin. Your GM can only be as good as your owner. If your owner is an idiot so will the GM.

 

 

Melvin the GM (the baseball guy) could have (presumably) done more to convince the owner "look, this isn't going to work". I understand that Melvin the person most assuredly wanted to keep his job, but Mark A doesn't seem like an unreasonable idiot. He just seems like a really exuberant fan who owns a baseball team.

 

Melvin seems like the guy who just went along with it and said *sigh........"fine, I'll see what I can do".

 

Who knows though? Maybe he DID try to tell Mark A that the Titanic was sinking, and a rebuild was necessary sooner rather than later, but it doesn't really seem like that's the case.

[MrTPlush]

Melvin the GM (the baseball guy) could have (presumably) done more to convince the owner "look, this isn't going to work".

 

Right I am not saying Doug Melvin doesn't hold some of the blame, but at the end of the day Attanasio was calling the shots. Throughout Melvin's tenure with this team it was very obvious Attanasio was running the show.

 

Thanks Attanasio has stepped down from the command center and given power to Stearns to do whatever he wants.

[TURBO]

Of course this thread turns into something about Doug Melvin. When will you guys realize everything Doug Melvin did was largely in part because of Attanasio. Melvin couldn't do things Attanasio wouldn't let him. Attanasio wanted to sign old veterans so he could try to compete every year. Attanasio wanted to trade away prospects to win now. Attanasio wanted to extend every homegrown guy to keep a winning team for just a few more years. Doug Melvin was just doing whatever possible to put the best team on the field every year even though towards the end that was far fetched. He didn't look a few years down the road because Attanasio didn't care about that.

 

Attanasio was the biggest problem of the last decade NOT Doug Melvin. Your GM can only be as good as your owner. If your owner is an idiot so will the GM.

 

Seems like a lot of speculation there if you ask me.

 

I highly doubt Melvin was as powerless as you claim, and I highly doubt Attanasio was calling as many shots as you claim either.

[FVBrewerFan]

Mark A strikes me as a rather smart guy. I'm sure Melvin explained to him each year what options they had, and the consequences. Plus, those years were closer calls in what to do compared to now. Mark A. knew he was taking a chance trying to win every year. That meant giving up prospects, not trading guys at their peak, etc.

 

During those years I think Melvin could have jumped up and down on the conference table, and it wouldn't have mattered. Mark A was anxious to win, and Melvin executed that game plan. (And no, that doesn't take Melvin off the hook entirely. Zero WS appearances means he didn't execute the "win now" strategy quite good enough.)

[MrTPlush]

I highly doubt Attanasio was calling as many shots as you claim either.

 

All he had to do was say he wanted to win. That then causes signing aging vets, holding onto players, and trading prospects to put the best team(on paper) on the field. That is the only shot Attanasio had to take and cause all of those things indirectly.