How long will the rebuild take?

[BuckyBrewer61]

^^^I couldn't agree more with A Swing and a Drive's post, #24.

 

Seconded. We've been talking a lot lately on the importance of trades for obvious reasons, but one thing the Brewers have been woeful at in recent years is drafting and developing players, especially starting pitchers. That's just about the only chance a team like the Brewers has to obtain a Kershaw, Strasburg, Harper, Trout, Bryant, etc. Drafting and developing is as, and perhaps more, important to the rebuild compared to any trades that Stearns will make.

[bill hAll Star]

I'm going to sound like a broken record here, but as of now, this is what the 2018 payroll will probably look like:

 

Carter - arbitration 4: est. $9,000,000 (if he's even still around)

Nelson - arbitration 1: est. $3,500,000

Villar - arbitration 1: est. $3,500,000

Thornburg - arbitration 2: est $3,000,000

 

MAYBE - Braun $20,000,000

 

Probably a few other guys like Chase Anderson as the swing/#5 guy in arby 1 or 2 for a couple million.

 

There will probably be 15 guys on the active roster making $550,000 or whatever the minimum is at that time.

 

Point is, the Brewers' active roster payroll will be somewhere in the $30-$40 million range without Braun. Given inflation, Mark A would probably be willing to pay $120 million if the Brewers were in theoretically competitive in 2018. Of course I am not advocating a spending spree like that, but there is room. You can overpay 4 guys or take salary dumps and still be sitting at $80-$90 million without much damage to your 2020 and beyond payroll.

 

I am generally a fan of building organically, and waiting it out one or two more seasons after 2018 might be prudent so that your hopeful "older" crop of Phillips, Hader, Arcia is a couple of years in and the next wave is arriving in 2020/2021...but why not go for a few short-term deals?

 

The 2018 class is LOADED and I wouldn't expect the Brewers to factor in too much. Maybe you could argue overpaying 1 stud that you think will still be effective 4-5 years in. Again, this is not my desire, but this is professional sports owner strategy here.

 

I see Mark and Stearns letting 2017 be a wasteland of a team. I know that I was scolded for estimating the years that this will take, but it's coming either way. Either the older prospects are mostly duds and Mark will get impatient or there will be a nice supplemental add to the roster of 3-4 players while the young guys get their feet wet.

 

Problem is, the Cubs, Pirates, and Cards all still might be pretty good...plus the Reds' rebuild will be turning the corner. I just can't see Mark waiting much longer than 2018. My hope is that it's just shrewd additions for 2018-2020 and after that, the Brewers have their pipeline continuously flowing like the Cardinals and Giants do.

[fondybrewfan]

Not a single prospect in the system right now should be viewed as a sure thing. Yes Arcia will be a stud defender but his offense is unknown. It seems to me we are in a far weaker position than early when we had the likes of Fielder, Braun, Weeks, Hardy, Gallardo, etc coming up. Are system may be pretty deep with a lot of under the radar talents but the lack of clear superstar upside is concerning.

 

And lets be honest; the results of this MILB season are not what really anyone was hoping for. I was hoping for a breakout from a couple guys and instead most took a step backwards (Looking at Lopez and Medeiros specifically)

[BuckyBrewer61]

You can overpay 4 guys or take salary dumps and still be sitting at $80-$90 million without much damage to your 2020 and beyond payroll.

 

Agreed to a point, but problem is that big free agents don't take 2-3 year deals. And big stars only get traded for coveted prospects. And teams don't salary dump players that are playing up to that contract. Big stars get 8 years/$184M like Jason Heyward got from the Cubs...and he's hardly even a star, certainly isn't this year. Or the 8/$186M that Sabathia got, or 9/$214M that Fielder got. The guys getting 3-4 year deals that the Brewers can afford tend to be the likes of Suppan, Lohse, Garza...

 

If you could pay guys for 2-3 years at a time, even big sums of money, it'd be much easier for the Brewers. But in order to get the best you basically have to sign them to too long a contract and throw away the money when they stink by the end of it. As someone said earlier, the Brewers could spend a lot of money to contend now, but it would be at the expense of being terrible again in a few years. Their best hope of contending and maintaining some level of success is Stearns' dogma of young, controllable talent. It's tough because there is absolutely no guarantee it will pan out, but the odds are just higher playing it that way.

[bill hAll Star]

You can overpay 4 guys or take salary dumps and still be sitting at $80-$90 million without much damage to your 2020 and beyond payroll.

 

Agreed to a point, but problem is that big free agents don't take 2-3 year deals. And big stars only get traded for coveted prospects. And teams don't salary dump players that are playing up to that contract. Big stars get 8 years/$184M like Jason Heyward got from the Cubs...and he's hardly even a star, certainly isn't this year. Or the 8/$186M that Sabathia got, or 9/$214M that Fielder got.

 

If you could pay guys for 2-3 years at a time, even big sums of money, it'd be much easier for the Brewers. But in order to get the best you basically have to sign them to too long a contract and throw away the money when they stink by the end of it. As someone said earlier, the Brewers could spend a lot of money to contend now, but it would be at the expense of being terrible again in a few years. Their best hope of contending and maintaining some level of success is Stearns' dogma of young, controllable talent. It's tough because there is absolutely no guarantee it will pan out, but the odds are just higher playing it that way.

 

You can hitch your wagon to 1 big signing maybe, but I'm suggesting you go for the deals later on in free agency. Ian Desmond, Colby Rasmus (yes, he took arbitration, I know but he was probably available for an overpaid 1-2 years), Fowler, and a slew of other guys did come in for less years. There's always a John Lackey-type late career deal for 2 years.

 

Of course, winning is a key factor in getting the shorter veteran deals.

 

I'm looking at the 2013 champion Red Sox:

Stephen Drew - 2 year contract

Dempster - 1 year contract

Napoli - 3 year contract

Victorino - 3 year contract

 

They had a handful of other players on short contracts as well. These are the types of deals I'm looking at. Are they worth the value that you're paying them? Generally no. I just see some short term help being added regardless. If you sign 1 or 2 guys to 4 year contracts, you're still probably fine payroll-wise. You may need some $ for an early extension to Arcia or something, but there will be a lot of room to work with over the next 5 years.

 

I'm looking at someone like Pineda maybe being a free agent that season. If he's still having up and down success, maybe you give him a 1-year "show me" deal with some sort of vesting option. This is what the Pirates did with Liriano and they've added help in Freese and Jaso. The Brewers can probably go a little bigger than Jaso/Freese, but there are short deals to be had.

[ZBTMP]

It seems to me we are in a far weaker position than early when we had the likes of Fielder, Braun, Weeks, Hardy, Gallardo, etc coming up. Are system may be pretty deep with a lot of under the radar talents but the lack of clear superstar upside is concerning.

In 2004, when the Brewers had the "#1 rated farm system" it did not include Gallardo or Braun. I wouldn't be too worried that our farm system isnt as strong as it was back then. I'm far more worried that we draft well and get a better international pipeline going. The Brewers seem well positioned after Lucroy moves on, that the talent entering the big league squad is better than the talent it replaces. Keeping that ball rolling will be key. While we do not have the impact hitters of Fielder, Weeks, and Hardy; I'd place a bet that we have far better pitching than back then and the players who become "everyday MLB" players will be better defenders.

 

The success of the rebuild will be determined by if the talent keeps flowing not whether we have the #1 system or the #10 system at any point in time.

[monty57]

I'm with Bill Hall Star. We will trade Lucroy and likely Braun in the near future, bringing back a lot of talent at all levels to add to what we already have in the system.

 

2017: We will have the current pitching with Hader replacing Garza. The lineup will be our shortfall, with the addition of Arcia and a hopefully healthy Santana not able to account for playing without Lucroy/Braun. It will be a down year overall, but we will have a lot more answers by the end of the season. The big variable is what we get back from Lucroy/Braun. We could get a couple of studs who are ready to step onto the MLB roster, which could even make 2017 more interesting, but I think this year will be a year similar to 2016.

 

2018: If we have most of our holes filled with MLB-quality guys and prospects we like, we will probably make a big free agent signing, likely a starting pitcher, and one or two other, smaller FA acquisitions. This is where we stop "shuffling deck chairs" and start the uphill climb. The playoff odds are probably slim at this point, but it should be when we can start seeing more positive results.

 

2019: Another FA signing or two, and more of our prospects hitting the big leagues, and we're in the pre-season playoff talks.

 

Big stars get 8 years/$184M like Jason Heyward got from the Cubs...and he's hardly even a star, certainly isn't this year. Or the 8/$186M that Sabathia got, or 9/$214M that Fielder got.

 

We should have around $90M/year in free cash flow with very little committed to future obligations. When the time comes, we should be able to land a couple of big FAs and still have financial "breathing room." We just need to make sure we continue to keep all levels of the farm stocked so we can continue to produce MLB talent that can play for league minimum, and avoid the wasted payroll on crappy $13MM role players. I'd rather have Davies/Guerra types at #4/5 with $25MM spent on a stud than waste the $25MM on 30-something FAs at #4/5 pushing us over budget.

 

To the point made about the Pirates, Taillon was coming up with Cole, and unfortunately got hurt. He's now up, and he, Cole and Glasnow will likely make the next few years' Pirates better than the last few years' Pirates. Their refusal to "go for it" over the past few seasons puts them in a position to still have a promising future even with MLB success. This is how I hope Stearns plays things in the future. For now, it's building up the system from top-to-bottom in order to get us into the position to do this.We have a pretty good start, and the upcoming trades will push us a lot farther down that road.

[adambr2]

I know this. Uecker probably isn't going to be in the booth when this team is contending again and that's sad. Nobody deserves to see this team win more than Uke.

 

Those of you celebrating the losing seasons as necessary for future success, consider this, the future is guaranteed to no one. The present is all that can be controlled. Lots of long suffering Brewer fans have waited long enough. Asking more of them is a sign that this ownership/management team has been a failure. Trusting them going forward? Be skeptical.

 

I'm sure Uecker has enjoyed the ride of a lifetime in the booth and I don't think he will go out with any regrets or sadness if they don't win a WS in his lifetime any more than I don't think Harey Caray did for the Cubs.

 

What do you propose they do to control the present? Spend more money than they have? Trade every farm asset for current MLB talent? What is the path to realistically hoping to contend now?

[FVBrewerFan]

We can wait for that answer, but I know Briggs has addressed that elsewhere at length. I will tack on an additional question for him though. How do you control the present? I'm sure there are plenty of teams this year who thought they were "controlling the present" and are on the outside looking in.

 

I bring this up because "trying to be competitive" every year blows up just as often as rebuilding for the future does. All I know is I can't name a small market team who has won the WS, and/or been a perennial contender without going through a major rebuild first.

[jerichoholicninja]

We can wait for that answer, but I know Briggs has addressed that elsewhere at length. I will tack on an additional question for him though. How do you control the present? I'm sure there are plenty of teams this year who thought they were "controlling the present" and are on the outside looking in.

 

I bring this up because "trying to be competitive" every year blows up just as often as rebuilding for the future does. All I know is I can't name a small market team who has won the WS, and/or been a perennial contender without going through a major rebuild first.

 

Marlins?

[logan82]

We can wait for that answer, but I know Briggs has addressed that elsewhere at length. I will tack on an additional question for him though. How do you control the present? I'm sure there are plenty of teams this year who thought they were "controlling the present" and are on the outside looking in.

 

I bring this up because "trying to be competitive" every year blows up just as often as rebuilding for the future does. All I know is I can't name a small market team who has won the WS, and/or been a perennial contender without going through a major rebuild first.

 

Marlins?

Are the Marlins really small market? They are run by a scumbag so he kind of intentionally tanked his team a few times.

[jerichoholicninja]

We can wait for that answer, but I know Briggs has addressed that elsewhere at length. I will tack on an additional question for him though. How do you control the present? I'm sure there are plenty of teams this year who thought they were "controlling the present" and are on the outside looking in.

 

I bring this up because "trying to be competitive" every year blows up just as often as rebuilding for the future does. All I know is I can't name a small market team who has won the WS, and/or been a perennial contender without going through a major rebuild first.

 

Marlins?

Are the Marlins really small market? They are run by a scumbag so he kind of intentionally tanked his team a few times.

 

I don't know if they are. No one comes to their games and they hardly spend money so I would consider them small market even if the market data doesn't.

[BuckyBrewer61]

We can wait for that answer, but I know Briggs has addressed that elsewhere at length. I will tack on an additional question for him though. How do you control the present? I'm sure there are plenty of teams this year who thought they were "controlling the present" and are on the outside looking in.

 

I bring this up because "trying to be competitive" every year blows up just as often as rebuilding for the future does. All I know is I can't name a small market team who has won the WS, and/or been a perennial contender without going through a major rebuild first.

 

Marlins?

 

I don't remember the details that led up to their '97 championship, but they most definitely tore it all down to nothing right afterward and rebuilt before their 2003 run.

[adambr2]

I thought the Marlins were textbook 'rebuild first.' Didn't they gut everything, keep payroll at a bare bones minimum, rebuild, and then went on a spending spree when their window hit?

[nate82]

If the Brewers make the playoffs next year does that mean the rebuild is over?

 

If the Brewers make the playoffs in 2019 instead of 2017 does that mean the rebuild is over then?

 

I don't think the Brewers are ever going to be done or should be done with rebuilding. The Brewers should always be acquiring young talent when it benefits the organization so the rebuilding should never really be done and to answer the original question it will be done when it is done.

[FVBrewerFan]

Marlins were an expansion team first time around, built with young talent. Then they tore it down, rebuilt and won again.

[adambr2]

The thing that concerns me is the lack of star power in the system.

 

 

So, quite honestly, it's not even star power that is missing. You can go a step beyond that, and say we really have no idea who can/will even be a major league player within the next 3 years, let alone a star.

 

That all sounds very depressing, but these things can change very quickly. All you can in the meantime is keep acquiring the best talent you can. I really don't know what a viable alternative is? Sign a couple Supans and Linds and tell the fans you're shooting for .500 every year?

 

Totally agree with the second paragraph. I'm kind of with you on the first, but it seems to me that stars are usually somewhat projectable. By that I am by no means saying that we can predict that most top picks will be stars. But of the stars that make it, isn't it true that most guys were very early picks with that kind of upside? Braun was a guy you could see becoming a star. Prince was a guy you could see becoming a star. Weeks too, but he didn't. All these guys were very early picks. I'm not sure we have that guy right now. Maybe Ray, eventually.

 

If you want to call Lucroy a star, I'd say he is one of those rare types that really outperformed projections. And they're out there. But most guys who become stars were expected to have that kind of upside.

[Boomer5]

We will know a lot more based on the level and age of talent brought back this trading deadline. If it's AA types they will look at 2018/2019. If it's rookie league it's 2021.

[FVBrewerFan]

Agreed, but most stars are not top 5 picks. Yes, there are guys who project to be stars on draft day already. But very often it starts at the rookie and low A level for most. For example, I Brewers had #1 overall pick this year, nobody has star written all over him.

 

And if you use the KC model, you don't even need a star. That's probably what gives me the most hope of all. Maybe the formula can be just have 25 really good baseball players. And that probably fits better with where this system is today, and where it's likely to be even after trades and a couple more 1st round picks.

[FVBrewerFan]

We will know a lot more based on the level and age of talent brought back this trading deadline. If it's AA types they will look at 2018/2019. If it's rookie league it's 2021.

 

I don't think that will have much impact on time frame. It's more about how good/ how fast Hader, Lopez, Diplan, and other starting pitchers can be. Ditto for hitters. Arcia, Phillips, Nottingham, Ray,etc.

 

Lots of positions to he filled, and a couple more AA guys won't really change by a year or two.

[Oxy]

The thing that concerns me is the lack of star power in the system.

 

So, quite honestly, it's not even star power that is missing. You can go a step beyond that, and say we really have no idea who can/will even be a major league player within the next 3 years, let alone a star.

 

Totally agree with the second paragraph. I'm kind of with you on the first, but it seems to me that stars are usually somewhat projectable. By that I am by no means saying that we can predict that most top picks will be stars. But of the stars that make it, isn't it true that most guys were very early picks with that kind of upside? Braun was a guy you could see becoming a star. Prince was a guy you could see becoming a star. Weeks too, but he didn't. All these guys were very early picks. I'm not sure we have that guy right now. Maybe Ray, eventually.

 

If you want to call Lucroy a star, I'd say he is one of those rare types that really outperformed projections. And they're out there. But most guys who become stars were expected to have that kind of upside.

 

 

The more guys you cycle through that aren't "can't miss" prospects, the more likely you are going to hit upon guys like Lucroy, Michael Brantley, Lo Cain, Nelson Cruz, and even a Marco Estrada. Ideally, you get one absolute stud in the #3/#4 spot in the order, and 1 true Ace pitcher, then you kind of fill in around those guys with a combo of young guys and veteran FAs (a la Mike Cameron and Aramis Ramirez).

 

It's all easier said than done. We'll see what happens. I have doubts that we can assemble anything better than an 85 win team that makes a run every couple years. Basically, the Melvin years.

[dacbrewers]

Let's be realistic. Brewers need a 1 and 2 pitcher. No 1 or 2 pitcher would ever come to Milwaukee, so that leaves developing a pitcher through the draft. Getting the number one or two pick in the draft for several years in a row is probably the only way they may luck into finding one. Start looking at 2020 and beyond before a playoff appearance comes.

[pacopete4]

Let's be realistic. Brewers need a 1 and 2 pitcher. No 1 or 2 pitcher would ever come to Milwaukee, so that leaves developing a pitcher through the draft. Getting the number one or two pick in the draft for several years in a row is probably the only way they may luck into finding one. Start looking at 2020 and beyond before a playoff appearance comes.

 

 

 

You first.

 

Any pitcher will come to MKE if they want to pay them. And I'm not sure there is an ACE in the league that has went 1 or 2 in the draft. Some first rounders of course but you're being over dramatic.

[FVBrewerFan]

Let's be realistic. Brewers need a 1 and 2 pitcher. No 1 or 2 pitcher would ever come to Milwaukee, so that leaves developing a pitcher through the draft. Getting the number one or two pick in the draft for several years in a row is probably the only way they may luck into finding one. Start looking at 2020 and beyond before a playoff appearance comes.

 

I don't think fans would stand for being the worst team in MLB for several years in a row. As much as I understand and agree with rebuilding, I think I would even have a problem with that.

 

Drafting #1 for years certainly would give you the best chance to find an ace, but not the only way. Plus, I dismiss the premise that you even need a #1 starter, as in a true ace. Finally, if they feel the need to get one of those guys down the road, they can always trade for one as they did with Sabathia and Greinke. Not ideal, just saying they COULD.

 

They have about 20-22 positions to fill before they compete again, so I'm not even worried about that right now.

[paul253]

So considering we're in the beginning of a rebuild and at least two years away from starting to get better, what are people's thoughts on trying Thornburg out in the rotation again? This guy was a starter his entire career, was at one point probably our top prospect overall, and put up a career ERA under 4 in the minors, almost exclusively as a starter, and an ERA under 3 through ten major league starts. He would have been in the rotation had our previous GM not made that stupid Matt Garza signing. And now he's a 7th inning guy. Granted his value as a reliever is fairly high but a starters value is almost always higher than a reliever. I realize it's a long shot but it's always bothered me how they handled him. Why not give it a shot? If he bombs he can always be moved back into the bullpen.