How long will the rebuild take?

[fondybrewfan]

I am in the; if it ain't broke don't fix it camp with Thornburg. He is a very valuable reliever who is a trade or two from becoming a cost controlled closer. I would just assume leave him in the bullpen. In a perfect world he would have stayed a starter but I think that ship has sailed. He can be a 3-5 type starter or a lock down reliever.

[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.

 

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.

 

The Royals fans stuck around for many years of losing and were finally rewarded in the end thanks to some help from the Brewers.

[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.

 

 

 

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.

 

No amount of money will get a 1 or 2 to Milwaukee because another team will pay just as much and in a better market and pitchers ballpark. Would be nice to draft a Strasburg type pitcher...Think he was a no. 1 overall, so was David Price and Gerritt Cole. In a 5 year span you should be able to get a quality starting arm.

[Bombers]

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.

 

While most stars are not top 5 picks is accurate, I would adjust the comment to say most stars are either international or first round picks. And the top pitchers are normally top 15 picks.

 

Price - 1st overall

Strasburg - 1st overall

Pomeranz - 5th overall

Kershaw 7th overall

Harvey - 7th overall

Bumgarner - 10th overall

Scherzer - 11th overall

Sale - 13th overall

 

And while there are some Syndergaard (38th overall) DeGrom (9th round), Arrieta (5th round) and international guys (Cueto, Teheran) the fact remains if you want the best shot at a top arm, you need to take a shot in the top of the 1st round. The issue for the Brewers is they have been mostly horrendous at drafting top pitching and haven't hit on a top 15 pitcher since Ben Sheets in 2001.

 

But as you say, the Royals are quite impressive as their starting pitching is mostly mediocre. They have had some guys that are good Cueto, Shields, etc but they don't have the consistent starter who dominates MLB. Their success lies in the bullpen and timely hitting.

[FVBrewerFan]

Nice post. Yea, my comments were in response to "having the #1/#2 pick for several years." They have already been bad for two years now, next year will be the third. I don't mind a couple more bad years either.

 

But there's a difference between being bad, and being the worst team in MLB for several years in a row. To me, that's not worth doing for the purpose of trying to find an ace. If they are able to sell everyone before next season, and they end up being the worst team as a result, fine. I just don't see any reason to stay THAT bad for several more years.

[bill hAll Star]

Yeah, we'll have a high pick in the 2017 draft and 2018 draft. After that (beginning in the 2018 season), as I had stated earlier, I don't think Mark is going to go all in...but he's going to start to spend. If some of the high $, short term, high reward short signings/acquisitions fail, they could be drafting high again in 2019 or maybe even 2020. They'll have 2016, 2017, and 2018 drafts for sure and it's not like they'll be drafting #30 in 2019/2020 either. I just don't know if the fans or the owner are going to want to sit through not supplementing the roster (without trading away the future) starting in about 2 years.

[Austin Tatious]

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.

 

While most stars are not top 5 picks is accurate, I would adjust the comment to say most stars are either international or first round picks. And the top pitchers are normally top 15 picks.

 

Price - 1st overall

Strasburg - 1st overall

Pomeranz - 5th overall

Kershaw 7th overall

Harvey - 7th overall

Bumgarner - 10th overall

Scherzer - 11th overall

Sale - 13th overall

 

And while there are some Syndergaard (38th overall) DeGrom (9th round), Arrieta (5th round) and international guys (Cueto, Teheran) the fact remains if you want the best shot at a top arm, you need to take a shot in the top of the 1st round. The issue for the Brewers is they have been mostly horrendous at drafting top pitching and haven't hit on a top 15 pitcher since Ben Sheets in 2001.

 

But as you say, the Royals are quite impressive as their starting pitching is mostly mediocre. They have had some guys that are good Cueto, Shields, etc but they don't have the consistent starter who dominates MLB. Their success lies in the bullpen and timely hitting.

 

Great post. You could add Verlander, Greinke, Sabathia, and Alex Fernandez who were high picks too. People like to denigrate the baseball draft compared with football or basketball, but at the end of the day, the elite talent gets drafted high at a high rate. There are always lower drafted kids that emerge in any sport, like Draymond Green in basketball or Arian Foster in football. That will always be part of sports. But to make drafting decisions with the notion that you can get elite talent late is fallacious because of the incredibly low odds. It's more like found money.

 

Regarding outliers like Arrieta and DeGrom, you have to consider what longshots they are compared to the universe of pitchers taken after the first 75 picks. That's probably 2 out of hundreds of pitchers. Picking two outliers to say something is possible is folly.

 

International pitchers are a different category anyway since they aren't even part of the draft.

 

The list of Brewers number one picks since Braun is flat out abysmal. You guys know the list. LaPorta, Lawrie, Arnett, Bradley, Jungmann, Roache, Coulter, Medeiros, Clark, Ray.

[reillymcshane]

Trying to predict a rebuild is tough because there are so many variables in a player's development. But I've said that 2016-17 will be tough years, but by 2018 will have an interesting team. Doesn't mean we'll be that good, but we'll be interesting.

 

Could we win in 2018? Yes, but you just don't know for sure. Injuries and lack of player development can cause so many things to go awry. But then you find out if guys like Villar and Guerra are more than one-year wonders. Other guys emerge - think of Jake Lamb for the Dbacks. He's tweaked his swing and is now on pace for 30+ HR. We have to hope a couple of guys can step up like that in the next couple of years. Plus hope we don't have big regressions.

 

Like I said, I think we'll have an interesting team in 2018. Hader, Arcia, Phillips, etc. all will likely be in the majors. We should get some decent prospects back for Luc and whomever else gets dealt this month (or after the season). The kids will have their growing pains, but hopefully we'll see something that resembles hope emerging toward the end of 2017 and go forward some good vibes.

[LouisEly]

The one thing that is missing and the one question that needs to be asked is, do we have the best positional coaches in the system who can coach players up? Looking at the Cardinals and now Cubs, I believe that a lot of their success is due to having the best pitching coaches in the game. Looking at the transformation of Arrieta and Hammel and the success of Hendricks (a soft-tossing 8th round pick from Dartmouth, kind of their Davies) and Rondon (Rule 5), I have a hard time believing that Bosio isn't a big part of that.

 

Also, no one on their entire pitching staff is a home-grown draft pick. They had success with some scrap heap guys (Arrieta, Hammel), but only one starter is a big free agent signing. And they aren't afraid to sign pitchers over the age of 30 (Lackey, Hammel, Lester).

 

Yes, talent is important but the Cubs haven't gotten to where they are by spending top 10 draft picks on pitching. And I don't think you need to if you have the best pitching coaches in the game.

[dacbrewers]

The one thing that is missing and the one question that needs to be asked is, do we have the best positional coaches in the system who can coach players up? Looking at the Cardinals and now Cubs, I believe that a lot of their success is due to having the best pitching coaches in the game. Looking at the transformation of Arrieta and Hammel and the success of Hendricks (a soft-tossing 8th round pick from Dartmouth, kind of their Davies) and Rondon (Rule 5), I have a hard time believing that Bosio isn't a big part of that.

 

Also, no one on their entire pitching staff is a home-grown draft pick. They had success with some scrap heap guys (Arrieta, Hammel), but only one starter is a big free agent signing. And they aren't afraid to sign pitchers over the age of 30 (Lackey, Hammel, Lester).

 

Yes, talent is important but the Cubs haven't gotten to where they are by spending top 10 draft picks on pitching. And I don't think you need to if you have the best pitching coaches in the game.

 

Good Points. Based on what Stearns has been doing with waiver pickups. He is looking for that needle in a haystack that can stick or someone that can be flipped. I'm just wondering how many pitchers in the Brewers system move to another team and seem to do better. That would lead me to think that the coaching is a little suspect.

[Austin Tatious]

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)

 

 

I hope that Stearns and Matt Arnold are looking at every single instructor, coach, and manager in the farm system and looking at their track records. Look at their history. Who have they instructed and coached? How did they work out?

 

I feel bad for anyone losing a job, but we all are accountable in our jobs. If there are instructors where players are not developing, then that needs a very close look. We have had some poor drafting to be sure, but the other side of it is player development. I suspect we can identify some coaches and instructors who have had too many pedigreed players who have not worked out. We need much better results on player development. Sure, you can factor in circumstances such as aggressive placement and what have you. But let's look at each coach/instructor and see what the results are.

 

In addition to drafting better than us, the Cards also are better at the corollary of player development.

 

I am confident that Stearns and Arnold are looking at this. We know they are trying to unify teaching. But they inherited a cluster mess on the player procurement and development side.

[1992casey]

I think that building coaching to fit an organizational philosophy is similar to acquiring players. It isn't going to happen all at once.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Player development personnel, most notably in the lower levels of the minor leagues, is an area that's commonly undervalued or even a complete afterthought for many of us always looking to find the best trade pieces or draft eligible talent for the Brewers - if you draft a guy based on upside that needs development, you better be certain that you have quality resources to maximize their potential. If you don't, you're basically trying to build an organization with one hand tied behind your back.

 

IMO, one of the reasons entire draft classes appear to stink for several years is the people in the organization tasked with developing them collectively stink at their jobs or that particular organization's budget/process for developing players isn't competitive with the more highly respected MLB counterparts. When I see the smallest market in baseball stretch their payroll at the MLB level to retain homegrown stars through free agency or bring in veteran talent, I question what % of those dollars were poached from other parts of the organization where it could be much more effective in the long term.

 

I'm not saying for certain that the Brewers' organization lacks quality and resources in the player development department because I frankly have no idea who they have (or had) in place - results on the field speak for themselves, though. I remember one thing Epstein/Cubs brass insisted on throwing $ and resources at early on in their Chicago tenure was the player development side of things - that organization was a laughing stock in that department during the tail end of the Hendry years, partly because they threw all available dollars at the MLB payroll during their sale to inflate the value of the team.

[MoreTrife]

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)

 

 

I hope that Stearns and Matt Arnold are looking at every single instructor, coach, and manager in the farm system and looking at their track records. Look at their history. Who have they instructed and coached? How did they work out?

 

I feel bad for anyone losing a job, but we all are accountable in our jobs. If there are instructors where players are not developing, then that needs a very close look. We have had some poor drafting to be sure, but the other side of it is player development. I suspect we can identify some coaches and instructors who have had too many pedigreed players who have not worked out. We need much better results on player development. Sure, you can factor in circumstances such as aggressive placement and what have you. But let's look at each coach/instructor and see what the results are. .

 

.

 

Completely agree. It has seemed like an organizational failure in the minors this year. It is just too wide spread. VERY few bright spots - I can't even come up with one right now. Hader I guess. The failures and/or slumping players are widespread.

[BillScottCanRake]

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.

 

To expand on the point you are making, teams only have a very limited amount of control over the present- the schedule, injuries to your team and others, luck for your team and others, others teams playing out of their minds, slumps at the wrong time, etc. are all things largely outside of a teams control.

 

The Brewers can do a lot of things to put the odds in their favor, but they can't exert enough control over the present to ensure anything. Which is why I hope that Stearns and company are able to produce long-term success instead of rolling the dice on a one- or two-year window. As a Brewer fan, I know how fickle luck can be an in general how back their luck has been, so give me six years with 85-88 win talent over one or two years of 95 win talent any day. And if that means the run starts in 2021, so be it.