Expectations, time to revise again?

[reillymcshane]

I see a team pretty much exactly where I expected them to be. We have some nice developments this year (plus our share of disappointments), but we are a long, long way from being good.

 

Stearns set up a plan to succeed - stick with it, don't get distracted. Doesn't mean you don't tweak things - flexibility is critical - but don't con yourself into thinking we are better than we are. That will lead to short sighted decisions - I've seen too many of those in my day.

[FVBrewerFan]

We just don't have the starting pitching right now. Put me in the camp that firmly believes we'll be back in the thick of contention by 2018, though.

 

 

I've always respected your opinions, so I'm honestly curious how you see a rotation that can contend in 2018? Will they be better in 2018? I sure hope so. But a contender?

[clancyphile]

I see a team pretty much exactly where I expected them to be. We have some nice developments this year (plus our share of disappointments), but we are a long, long way from being good.

 

Stearns set up a plan to succeed - stick with it, don't get distracted. Doesn't mean you don't tweak things - flexibility is critical - but don't con yourself into thinking we are better than we are. That will lead to short sighted decisions - I've seen too many of those in my day.

 

The Brewers needed to do some significant re-tooling after the 2014 season. I don't think they need a full tear-down, but it was time to sort out who the core of the team was, and who needed to be let go. They weren't as good as 2014 lead many of us to think they were, but they weren't as bad they seemed in 2015.

 

I think it is important to be flexible. By this I mean they should have multiple plans in place. One for re-tooling, one for a tear-down and rebuild, and one for making a playoff run in the near future. Which approach they need to take really won't be clear until the All-Star Break. The plan right now has to be "Wait and see."

 

If Peralta, Jungmann, Zach Davies, Jorge Lopez, and Brent Suter can show signs of righting their ships while Jorge Ortega, Josh Hader, and Wei-Chung Wang keep up what they are doing by the All-Star Break, the Brewers have a chance at a real good rotation by 2018. The Brewers should then pursue an extension for Lucroy through 2020. They can then use him at first base in a couple of years should Josh Nottingham shapes things up.

[Boomer5]

The team even after their recent 3 game winning streak is at 11-16 (66 win pace) with a pythagorean of 10-17 (60 win pace).

 

The team ERA is 5.58. There are two pitchers that look like legitimate building blocks in Nelson and Jeffries, though I assume Will Smith will join that group at some point. The pitching staff's development has been by all measures a disappointment and that extends to the minors for the most part.

 

Catcher: Luc is playing great but wont be signed to an extension and likely will be traded

1B: Carter is playing great but he has a one year deal. I cant see them extending him, paying him market value in arby, and there are no 1B ready to fill in

2B: Scooter is adequate but thats about it.

SS: I really like Villar on offense. I like that they are letting him steal some bases now too.

3B: Complete black hole though I would think they could move Villar here and move up Arcia

LF: Braun is mashing but I think is likely to be traded. We have discussed his injury age problems projecting his future to death.

CF: Total black hole. Phillips ready in 2017???

RF: Big fan of Santana but lets face it, he is not producing.

 

I have no idea how that equates to contender anytime before 2018 at the absolute earliest.

[Patrick425]

I'm in the camp of continuing the rebuilding process. Trade Lucroy. Trade Braun if you can, if the deal is right and we don't have to eat too much of his remaining contract. Definitely don't trade away any prospects in some attempt to compete this year.

 

Also, perhaps someone already pointed this out and I missed it, but the original post says Carter is controllable. They signed him to a one year deal..correct? That's not "controllable". If he continues at anywhere near the pace he is at right now, he's going to be looking for a bigger pay day after this season. So, trade him too, hopefully while his value is still high.

[1992casey]

Controllable simply means that a team has the right to keep a player for X amount of time. Cost certainty is a step beyond that.

 

Carter's salary isn't controllable, but his presence in Milwaukee is controllable for this season and two more. Nobody's salary is controllable for more than two or three seasons, however, players remain a team's property for their first six or six-plus seasons in the Major Leagues.

 

Braun's first multi-year contract, signed in 2008, gave the team both cost certainty and extra years of control.

[TheCrew07]

I see a team pretty much exactly where I expected them to be. We have some nice developments this year (plus our share of disappointments), but we are a long, long way from being good.

 

Stearns set up a plan to succeed - stick with it, don't get distracted. Doesn't mean you don't tweak things - flexibility is critical - but don't con yourself into thinking we are better than we are. That will lead to short sighted decisions - I've seen too many of those in my day.

 

That was well said.

[reillymcshane]

Also, perhaps someone already pointed this out and I missed it, but the original post says Carter is controllable. They signed him to a one year deal..correct? That's not "controllable".

He is still arbitration eligible for 2017 and 2018 - so yes, he is controllable for a couple of years beyond 2016.

[IndyCrew]

I'm not a fan of the idea that you need to be ridiculously bad for 2-3 before you can start getting better during a rebuild. This year should be the low point, and every year after, the goal should be improvement. Does that mean going and signing a bunch of overpriced free agents? No. It means, we keep what worked (Carter, Villar), retool what didn't work (Hill, Jungmann), and pepper in guys from the minors while restocking the farm by trading away expiring contracts.

[FVBrewerFan]

I'm not a fan of the idea that you need to be ridiculously bad for 2-3 before you can start getting better during a rebuild. This year should be the low point, and every year after, the goal should be improvement. Does that mean going and signing a bunch of overpriced free agents? No. It means, we keep what worked (Carter, Villar), retool what didn't work (Hill, Jungmann), and pepper in guys from the minors while restocking the farm by trading away expiring contracts.

 

I agree you don't NEED to be horrible for 2-3 years, but you shouldn't be afraid of that either.

 

Yes, we all would like to see their record improve every year. But I don't think that should prevent them from trading guys like Villar, Carter, Smith, Jeffress, etc., if they get something really good in return. (Same is true for Lucroy and Braun also, but that has already been discussed to death.)

 

That could mean an even worse record in 2017, but better positioned to be even better a few years down the road. I know I keep saying it, but I think everyone would feel better if they just put W/L records out of their mind for next 3 years. This had a chance of being a rather quick fix, but that's out the window now.

[monty57]

This had a chance of being a rather quick fix, but that's out the window now.

 

I don't think one month of a season changes anything that much.

 

Next year, we will have Braun and Santana in the corners, with Phillips likely to come up after the cutoff. Villar will likely move to 3B once Arcia is up after the cutoff, with Gennett and Carter manning 2B and 1B. Assuming Lucroy is traded, catcher is the only position that won't be spoken for, and hopefully Pina's AAA performance isn't a complete fluke and he and Maldonado can hold down the catcher position until Nottingham is ready (which may be 2018).

 

We should also have a decent bullpen, so the concern is putting together a competent starting rotation. First off, I think our current rotation is better than they have shown, but by this coming offseason, we will know a lot more about what we have in our young pitching, and should be able to build a decent rotation out of it. This season should be about weeding through the chaff to see if any of the "fringy" guys show that they are capable of getting MLB hitters out, while our better prospects continue to grow on the farm. We have a lot of pitching at the AA/AAA levels, and hopefully some of them will step forward, so it's not nearly as dire as some are making it that we have to pull an entire rotation out of thin air. Plus, we should target a starting pitcher in the high minors as the prize of the Lucroy trade, so hopefully we will fill a big hole there.

 

Then, when the time is right (I'd guess the offseason leading into 2018, but possibly as soon as this coming offseason), we will use some of the $60-80MM in free cash flow to go after a free agent pitcher or two. I don't think we should start expecting playoffs next year, but I hope we're back to pushing for .500, this time with young, cheap talent and a strong farm instead of old expensive guys and no farm.

[FVBrewerFan]

This had a chance of being a rather quick fix, but that's out the window now.

 

Next year, we will have Braun and Santana in the corners, with Phillips likely to come up after the cutoff. Villar will likely move to 3B once Arcia is up after the cutoff, with Gennett and Carter manning 2B and 1B. Assuming Lucroy is traded, catcher is the only position that won't be spoken for, and hopefully Pina's AAA performance isn't a complete fluke and he and Maldonado can hold down the catcher position until Nottingham is ready (which may be 2018).

 

While the rotation is nowhere near ready to compete, I figure it's about time to pour water on the line-up too.

 

Santana, Phillips, and Nottingham are far from guaranteed to be average players, let alone really good players. Sometimes it seems like we're playing fantasy baseball. Just plug this guy in here, another guy there. These are all talented players, but we all know how many really talented players never make it to MLB, let alone stick.

 

So to compete in 2017/18 we basically need FOUR starting pitchers, 2-3 reliable bullpen arms, keep Braun (and he needs to stay healthy and continue to hit at this level), Carter hitting close to his current pace for 2 years and 5 months longer, Santana and Gennett panning out, and then Arcia, Phillips, and Nottingham all getting close to their ceilings, and doing it almost immediately in their MLB careers.

 

I can be as glass half full as I want, but that's hard to swallow.

[mertonmonk]

To be a contending team, it will all come down to pitching. Jeffress and Smith are excellent, and building a bullpen around them isn't the biggest challenge. To win a 5 game series, having a legitimate ace is hard to overemphasize. If the Brewers don't have one at the time that they think they can compete, their current payroll should allow them to save up to buy one when the time comes. Let's assume the Brewers will have the financial resources to swing a big deal for an ace, there are always a few of them for sale every offseason. Nelson has shown that he can be a legitimate #2 or #3 (can he raise his stock further?). Peralta seemed like that guy a couple of years ago, and hopefully he's re-emerging. Anderson has been too erratic to know for sure. In a playoff scenario you really only need 3 or 4 highly reliable starters - the last starter or 2 can be skipped because the games are usually spread out enough. If Nelson and Peralta can both be reliable, then the Brewers really just need 1 other pitcher to join them and then it would be worth entering the annual starters sweepstakes. If the team doesn't have 3 reliable pitchers by the end of this year, there seems little point in making that purchase this winter, and instead try again before the '18 season. The offense is easier to address and there are a lot of players in the pipeline, so that's the lesser worry.

[FVBrewerFan]

Let's assume the Brewers will have the financial resources to swing a big deal for an ace, there are always a few of them for sale every offseason. Nelson has shown that he can be a legitimate #2 or #3 (can he raise his stock further?). Peralta seemed like that guy a couple of years ago, and hopefully he's re-emerging. In a playoff scenario you really only need 3 or 4 highly reliable starters - the last starter or 2 can be skipped because the games are usually spread out enough. If Nelson and Peralta can both be reliable, then the Brewers really just need 1 other pitcher to join them and then it would be worth entering the annual starters sweepstakes.

 

There are not a few aces available every off-season. It's rare for an ace to be available on the open market. Even if there were a few, no, the Brewers can't compete financially for a true ace in the open market. If they could, they would have signed Sabathia at the time.

 

Secondly, you may only need 3-4 reliable starters in the playoffs. A little problem there though, you have to MAKE the playoffs first. And you need more than 3 to make the playoffs- especially if you're counting on Peralta to be one of them.

[clancyphile]

I'm not a fan of the idea that you need to be ridiculously bad for 2-3 before you can start getting better during a rebuild. This year should be the low point, and every year after, the goal should be improvement. Does that mean going and signing a bunch of overpriced free agents? No. It means, we keep what worked (Carter, Villar), retool what didn't work (Hill, Jungmann), and pepper in guys from the minors while restocking the farm by trading away expiring contracts.

 

I agree to an extent.

 

But keep an open mind as to what to do.

[DHonks]

Extending Lucroy is a horrible idea no matter how good/bad this team is. I trust Stearns is smart enough to not sign an old catcher to a big contract. Not to mention with health issues.

 

 

I just don't get some of these claims you make. It would be true if he were plagued by nagging injuries or if he were old, but he's neither. He turns 30 this year...he should have a minimum of 3-4 good years left in him. Since when is 29 old? He's expected to still have several more years of his prime. As for injuries, he hasn't had chronically bad knees, a balky back, tender hamstrings, etc. He's had injuries, but so has every MLB player besides Ripken (who had injuries, just not bad ones).

 

If we believe we can contend in 2-3 years, Lucroy may be our only path to having an above average contributor at catcher. Even factoring in aging, he should maintain having decent doubles-power and OBP. His whole field approach should age fairly well. He's signed VERY cheaply for next year as well. If a team overwhelms us, then a trade can be warranted. But there's no reason to actively be trying to move such a solid, affordable player who has previously attempted to negotiate a "career contract." Catcher, more than any other position, is one where I'm reluctant to dump someone. Maybe I have bad memories of the constant string of poor talent we had--Nilsson (nice bat, terrible D), Matheny, Blanco, Lampkin, Oliver, Harper, Hughes, Moeller, Estrada, Zaun, Kendall, etc. There aren't many catchers that are good defensively, good offensively, and affordable--Lucroy is one of them. Hence why I'd rather consider extending him than trading him, unless that notion of a career contract is gone. He may want to finish out his Brewers career as part of our next successful wave. If he won't re-sign, then I understand trading him in '16 if overwhelmed with an amazing offer (like Gomez)

[brewcrewdue80]

Santana hasn't been bad. He's met expectations. Maybe a SB or 2 off.But BA. HRs. Met. I'll be pissed if Arcia isn't playing this season. He's over .300 and .230+ is all he needs to warrant a ML call up. As said multiple times, team control means squat when you have a guy who's looking at a 10-13year contract extension. Which may happen this season! You want to trade Lucroy+Braun? Who's your franchise player? Arcia and a 10-13yr deal will make that known.

 

Starting Pitching. That's what the team requires to become Playoff potential, not just competitive. 1 or Lucroy or Braun had better bring a TOR Starter. It's not a bad rotation with that TOR, Nelson, Hader+ Davies/Lopez/??? You don't need TOR through the rotation. But 2top and 3 adequate. Heck 2top and 2 adequate. Is more than enough. So far it's Nelson and 0adequate. Cubs gave up #1pick to sign Lackey/37yrs old. Doing well now. But come September/Playoffs? I expect them to be regretting the signing. The beyond Luck on Arrieta got them +8wins ahead of schedule/maybe 11 this year. What if Hader becomes 85% of Arrietta? That's enough with Nelson to start a healthy 1-2. 345 can be okay if you get that 1. For Cubs 5 is Hendriks(Davies equivalent). Hammel(Garza/Davies equivalent). 3=Lackey(FA signing? Or Prospect?).

[FVBrewerFan]

That sounds strikingly similar to the strategy for the last 15 years.

[Ennder]

Extending Lucroy is a horrible idea no matter how good/bad this team is. I trust Stearns is smart enough to not sign an old catcher to a big contract. Not to mention with health issues.

 

 

I just don't get some of these claims you make. It would be true if he were plagued by nagging injuries or if he were old, but he's neither. He turns 30 this year...he should have a minimum of 3-4 good years left in him. Since when is 29 old? He's expected to still have several more years of his prime. As for injuries, he hasn't had chronically bad knees, a balky back, tender hamstrings, etc. He's had injuries, but so has every MLB player besides Ripken (who had injuries, just not bad ones).

 

If we believe we can contend in 2-3 years, Lucroy may be our only path to having an above average contributor at catcher. Even factoring in aging, he should maintain having decent doubles-power and OBP. His whole field approach should age fairly well. He's signed VERY cheaply for next year as well. If a team overwhelms us, then a trade can be warranted. But there's no reason to actively be trying to move such a solid, affordable player who has previously attempted to negotiate a "career contract." Catcher, more than any other position, is one where I'm reluctant to dump someone. Maybe I have bad memories of the constant string of poor talent we had--Nilsson (nice bat, terrible D), Matheny, Blanco, Lampkin, Oliver, Harper, Hughes, Moeller, Estrada, Zaun, Kendall, etc. There aren't many catchers that are good defensively, good offensively, and affordable--Lucroy is one of them. Hence why I'd rather consider extending him than trading him, unless that notion of a career contract is gone. He may want to finish out his Brewers career as part of our next successful wave. If he won't re-sign, then I understand trading him in '16 if overwhelmed with an amazing offer (like Gomez)

 

Sorry but given the rebuild I can't think of anything more ridiculous than extending Lucroy. That would be a fire-able offense if they decided to do it, like day of the contract I would lose 100% confidence.

[Patrick425]

Also, perhaps someone already pointed this out and I missed it, but the original post says Carter is controllable. They signed him to a one year deal..correct? That's not "controllable".

He is still arbitration eligible for 2017 and 2018 - so yes, he is controllable for a couple of years beyond 2016.

 

 

He is still arbitration eligible for two more years? His MLB debut was 2010. How can he still have 2 more years of eligibility (and not be eligible for Free agency yet)? I'll never understand the timing process of arbitration and free agency eligibility.

[Baldkin]

Also, perhaps someone already pointed this out and I missed it, but the original post says Carter is controllable. They signed him to a one year deal..correct? That's not "controllable".

He is still arbitration eligible for 2017 and 2018 - so yes, he is controllable for a couple of years beyond 2016.

 

 

He is still arbitration eligible for two more years? His MLB debut was 2010. How can he still have 2 more years of eligibility (and not be eligible for Free agency yet)? I'll never understand the timing process of arbitration and free agency eligibility.

 

Arbitration/team control is determined by service time. So time in the minors does not count. As an example, JJ Hardy's 21 day demotion got the team a full extra year of team control.

[Boomer5]

As someone mentioned, Carter is technically controllable but his salary may not be.

 

The pitching other than Nelson and Jeffries is not contention ready anywhere in the system so the whole point of abandoning the tank...err I mean rebuilding plan is moot.

[dlk9s]

Expectations of the "Expectations, time to revise again?" thread, time to revise again?

[1992casey]

Arbitration/team control is determined by service time. So time in the minors does not count. As an example, JJ Hardy's 21 day demotion got the team a full extra year of team control.

 

To add to this…

 

A player can earn up to 172 days of major league service time in a year. Once he's earned 1,032 days of service time (172x6), he can declare free agency. If a player spends less than 20 days in the minors in a given season, an option isn't used up, and he earns major league service for those days. Spending more than 20 days in the minors can cause the player to be under an extra year of team control if he's had no other scattered callups.

 

Baseball Reference and Cot's both show the player's service time at the beginning of the season. Carter began the year with 3 years and 159 days of time (noted as 3.159). That gives his team this year plus two more years of control, provided that he doesn't spend any more time in the minors.

[Patrick425]

Arbitration/team control is determined by service time. So time in the minors does not count. As an example, JJ Hardy's 21 day demotion got the team a full extra year of team control.

 

I get that minor league time does not count, but I always have a hard time understanding the number of days in any given year at the MLB level counts towards a full year. Does not seem to be straight forward (seems like timing during the year, what date you call a player up, factors into that as well). Carter played 24 games in 2010, 15 on 2011, and 67 in 2012. If he still is arb eligible in 2017 and 2018, then it seems like that would mean none of that playing time in the majors (2010-2012) counted (which is incredible to me). When the clock finally starts its 3 years of not being arb eligible, followed by 3 years of arb eligibility, followed by FA eligible (assuming you do not sign an extension prior to free agency)...correct?

 

 

edit: Casey, thanks. You posted at about the same time I made this post. I'm still having a bit of a hard time understanding.

 

- If a player spends less than 20 days in the minors in a given season, an option isn't used up What do you mean by "an option"? I think you mean that players can only be called up and sent down so many times before a team loses control of that player..correct?

 

- Also...how many days does a player need to become arb eligible (516?)?