Wilkins called up, Davies to CS [Latest: Boras displeased about Davies' demotion, post 20]

[monty57]

When did it become good business to take money out of the pocket of a performing employee for no organizational benefit?

 

With that logic, shouldn't Hader and Arcia be on the 25 man roster, as they are better than some of the guys blocking them? They would make a lot more money over their careers if they were on the 25 man roster now, but they could be kept in the minors until next year in order to retain a year's service time, costing them millions of dollars over the long run.

 

The CBA is set up the way it's set up, and teams are going to play within those rules to do what they think is best for the team. Wilkens isn't anything special, but he is a bat off the bench, which we needed far more than a 5th starter. Wilkens offered little value, while Davies offered no value over this time frame. How many people would have been up in arms if we trotted out a pitcher to pinch hit because we had a short bench? Wilkens was probably also chosen because the team won't really care if they lose him after this stint.

 

Attanasio has been very kind to Boras over the years, so while Boras feels it helps his client to speak up about this minor move, it is very unlikely to have any affect on future negotiations with Boras clients. Finally, nothing I have ever heard from Davies or his parents would make me think he would let this effect him. He seems to be a guy who has always had people writing him off because of his size, and having to do much more than the next guy in order to advance. If anything, I think he'll just take this as "fuel" to keep him motivated.

[Thurston Fluff]

I just don't like the hypocrisy inherent in these debates.

 

If it's a business for a player, then it should be a business for the team as well.

 

This isn't on the same level as Melvin screwing JJ Hardy by sending him down to the minors simply to steal another year of service time. The team was playing by the rules, it doesn't effect Davie's service time, and if 24K is that big of a deal it's been pointed out the team can make that up.

 

Was it a necessary move? No I don't think the Brewers are in a position for "every potential win matters", but I do find it interesting that such a sort term event gets 5 pages worth of discussion.

 

As for Boras, he can suck it. I find it irritating that someone with such limited perspective is so good at what they do.

 

While they are not in that position at least it should end the debate about the Brewers intentionally tanking. Teams who are looking to lose as many games as possible don't make moves like this. If it does settle that debate then these 5+ pages will be a small price to pay.

[RobertR]

When did it become good business to take money out of the pocket of a performing employee for no organizational benefit?

 

With that logic, shouldn't Hader and Arcia be on the 25 man roster, as they are better than some of the guys blocking them? They would make a lot more money over their careers if they were on the 25 man roster now, but they could be kept in the minors until next year in order to retain a year's service time, costing them millions of dollars over the long run.

 

.

 

You note a tangible benefit in your last sentence and it was perfectly reasonable to decide Hader and Arcia weren't ready to perform at the major league level before the season so apples and oranges. There was no benefit short term or long term to that move.

 

Where we disagree is the notion that the Brewers "needed" a bat. (We also may disagree on whether Wilkins constituted a "bat".) Predictably the Brewers saw no benefit from the move only cost. A predictable negative cost benefit ratio is a bad move. They'll teach that in business school.

 

I'm persuadable if people could point to a real tangible benefit. But I see zero benefit here. When your benefit is predictably zero that's not good business. Saying baseball is a business doesn't mean that every move management makes is good or doesn't deserve scrutiny.

[tmwiese55]

The real tangible benefit was to have another bench player available in case he's needed, most likely in an extra inning game or injury. Turns out nothing happened in the game so far but it's just like buying insurance. Now add in the other real tangible benefit to the team of potentially getting an extra year of control on Davies and you have a move that makes sense from the team's perspective.

[And That]

I'm persuadable if people could point to a real tangible benefit.

Tangible benefit from a team improvement standpoint? None. Though on the flip side of that, the negative impact is also negligible. They might have to smooth things over by giving Davies an extra $25k next year, but that's a drop in the bucket from a payroll standpoint. It's not nothing, but it's just barely not nothing to the Brewers.

 

Tangible benefit to Andy Wilkins? MLB pension. There's something to be said for apparently going out of their way to give off the field benefits to a guy that may or may not have been given another chance to play in the big leagues and accrue service time.

[Outlander]

There is no potential of getting an extra year of control with this move unless they feel like keeping him there nearly the whole month.

[ZBTMP]

 

I'm persuadable if people could point to a real tangible benefit. But I see zero benefit here. When your benefit is predictably zero that's not good business.

 

The Brewers gave Wilkins 4 ABs. Lets assume those at bats would have went to Rivera and Maldonado at 2 a piece.

 

Using the players ZIPs projections of Wilkins (96 wRC+), Rivera (48 wRC+), and Maldonado (60 wRC+), the Brewers could have expected to get ~0.3 more runs using Wilkins. Assuming 10 runs per win, that is worth about .03 of a win. Assuming about $7,000,000 per win on the open market, that is $210,000.

 

Obviously a win isn't worth 7 million at this point to the Brewers, but thats all I got.

[JohnBriggs12]

I just don't like the hypocrisy inherent in these debates.

 

If it's a business for a player, then it should be a business for the team as well.

 

This isn't on the same level as Melvin screwing JJ Hardy by sending him down to the minors simply to steal another year of service time. The team was playing by the rules, it doesn't effect Davie's service time, and if 24K is that big of a deal it's been pointed out the team can make that up.

 

Was it a necessary move? No I don't think the Brewers are in a position for "every potential win matters", but I do find it interesting that such a sort term event gets 5 pages worth of discussion.

 

As for Boras, he can suck it. I find it irritating that someone with such limited perspective is so good at what they do.

 

While they are not in that position at least it should end the debate about the Brewers intentionally tanking. Teams who are looking to lose as many games as possible don't make moves like this. If it does settle that debate then these 5+ pages will be a small price to pay.

 

Maybe not, but Davies would have been on his regular rest to pitch on Sunday (likewise Guerra on Saturday) and they could have held on to Hill a few more weeks. How is sending Anderson out there instead not tanking? Brewers are tanking while still allowing their relatively inexperienced manager to make moves even though the pieces he's moving are inferior to the opposition and in some cases not major league caliber.

[tmwiese55]

If only you could predict beforehand how every game would have gone and that he would not be needed. It was just insurance in case something happened. Yes this time along won't matter but at some point who knows, maybe he gets sent down again due to not pitching well, then this time could be enough to put them over the top.

[And That]

It also could have been a question of the big league coaching staff wanting to get a closer look at him to see if he'd be a feasible fit at first if/when Carter is traded.

[RobertR]

It also could have been a question of the big league coaching staff wanting to get a closer look at him to see if he'd be a feasible fit at first if/when Carter is traded.

 

He's hitting 0.238 in Colorado Springs. The answer should be obvious. I understand not wanting to burn an option or start a true prospect's service time. Or even to reward an organization soldier but the baseball reason to bring him up was always questionable.

[monty57]

What he's done in a couple of month in Colorado is pretty meaningless. He is a better hitter than any of our pitchers. If we got into an extra inning game, we should have a much better chance of winning with him coming in to hit rather than bring forced to use a pitcher due to a short bench.

 

There is no potential of getting an extra year of control with this move unless they feel like keeping him there nearly the whole month.

 

It could matter if he's going through a rough stretch in the next couple of years and gets sent down for a while. Every accrued day has meaning, as you never know what will happen down the road. Davies is an easy guy to cheer for, but his ceiling isn't that high, so it's well within reason to believe he could see more time in the minors in his career.

 

At the end of the day, this is a pretty minor move, and guys with limited service time who are not signed to a guaranteed contract get jerked around all the time. If there is even a slight improvement to the MLB team (i.e. having a full bench instead of being a player short) then I don't see the big deal.

[Thurston Fluff]

Maybe not, but Davies would have been on his regular rest to pitch on Sunday (likewise Guerra on Saturday) and they could have held on to Hill a few more weeks. How is sending Anderson out there instead not tanking? Brewers are tanking while still allowing their relatively inexperienced manager to make moves even though the pieces he's moving are inferior to the opposition and in some cases not major league caliber.

 

A couple things. The first is what is the advantage to holding onto Hill for a couple more weeks? It is as likely we get less for him than more. Hill could get hurt, have a two week long slump or Boston may have found someone else which takes one potential trade partner away. When someone is willing to give you the asking price you don't wait to see if someone is willing to give up more without significant risk of not getting that much ever again.

Second, while chase Anderson isn't pitching well I don't see how starting him in his regular slot is somehow a sign of tanking. He has enough of a track record to think he is a viable major league starter and a few bad starts does not change that. Not to mention the other options are either worse, untested or bringing them up is a complete waste of service time.

[xisxisxis]

I don't want to dig the horse up so we can beat him again....

 

Baseball is a business, but not all businesses are the same and the way you manage your "talent" should be a lot different than the way you manage the "drones".

 

I really think the issue with this move is just another example of poor communication within the organization. Zach is obviously pissed off because Boras is blowing off his big mouth. I just think whoever broke the news to Zach really didn't do a good job of laying out the reasoning. And if they werent thinking someone in the players posse wasn't calculating the "$" then there needs to be some educatering donst in dat dere offices....

[reillymcshane]

We must really want some trades or something to happen. I thought this would be one of those threads that would die in a page or two.

 

We need cool stuff (trades and so forth) to start happening!

[logan82]

I really think the issue with this move is just another example of poor communication within the organization. Zach is obviously pissed off because Boras is blowing off his big mouth. I just think whoever broke the news to Zach really didn't do a good job of laying out the reasoning. And if they werent thinking someone in the players posse wasn't calculating the "$" then there needs to be some educatering donst in dat dere offices....

I am not so sure how upset Davies really is. Boras likes to shoot off his mouth now and then just to position himself later in negotiations. He doesn't always act in the best interest of the players he represents.

[1992casey]

Based on what we see on the mound and in interviews, Zach's really even-keeled. You really have to read between the lines to make half a guess at what he's feeling. In other words, we usually don't know. I recall one time when it was apparent that he was pissed. That was when he hit a batter and mouthed a naughty word. On the pissed off scale, that's nothing compared to what we see from a lot of players.

[And That]

Zach is obviously pissed off because Boras is blowing off his big mouth.

Is that obvious? I don't think Boras' big mouth needs any provocation.

[QuevedosTongue]

I am lazy enough not to want to read through all the posts I've missed over the last 5 days or so, so I'm wondering if I'm missing something about Davies being upset. I know Boras voiced his displeasure, as I would expect him to do. As an agent, part of his job is to just that. I would assume most agents would. Boras is just way more likely to do it publicly than other agents. But I don't think him making a public statement is any evidence to the degree that Davies is angry (or upset, or whatever his emotions are) regarding this move. I expect Davies doesn't like it, but is it "This sucks, but this is what happens to players with low service time" dislike or is it "This is B.S. and I want out of Milwaukee ASAP" dislike? Do we have any idea or is it all just speculation?

[logan82]

I expect Davies doesn't like it, but is it "This sucks, but this is what happens to players with low service time" dislike or is it "This is B.S. and I want out of Milwaukee ASAP" dislike? Do we have any idea or is it all just speculation?

No idea. The only one talking is Boras and we know he has an agenda. We don't even know if Davies said anything to Boras. I believe he probably did since I would guess at the very least Boras called him to ask.

[1992casey]

Davies referred to the situation as being "business," which is similar to what he said about being sent down to start the season. I think that's as strong a statement as you're going to get out of him. The difference is that in April, Boras didn't say anything.

[rickh150]

So........ If Davies pitches this weekend and stays in the majors the rest of the season, what is his MLB service time. Anyone have the calculations? Do we actually get another year of his services before FA?

[1992casey]

Zach acquired 34 days of service last year. By Sunday's start, he will have spent approximately 24 days in the minors this year. Add in that the season is about 180 days long, and players have to accumulate 172 days to reach a full year of service. Given all that, I think we're still quite a bit away — about 18 days maybe? — from the Brewers gaining another year of service from him.

[LouisEly]

If my math is correct, prior to the callup Andy Wilkins had 29 days of major league service time (Aug 31, 2014 through September 28, 2014). He was called up on July 6th, so today marks his 14th day in the majors this year, which would make today his 43rd day of service time, thus vesting him for MLBPA's pension.

 

[sarcasm]Awful, horrible, disrespectful Brewers treating players that way. Shame!![/sarcasm]

[dacbrewers]

Boras didn't even bring up this point but I will...Maybe they should of left Davies up instead of sending him down...I'm pretty sure he wouldn't do any worse than Wilkins with a bat in his hands.