Speculating about the unseen Battle Brewing between Stearns & Attanasio

[tmwiese55]

The championship is the goal line and they almost won it, they should have won it.

[pacopete4]

I honestly don't know how you could advocate for tearing down before 2011. Why even have a team if you're going to punt at the goal line? You're just perpetually trading for the future, you have to win at some point and they put out a team that was the favorite to win it all in the final 4. Up 1-0 in the NLCS with home field in WS

 

Because they weren't really at the goalline or anywhere near it in 2009 and 2010. They actually had a very similar team to what we have now, but the farm wasn't as good and lacked quality pitching at the top.

 

I'm not saying it was a huge mistake to do what they did but they didnt look like they were right on the cusp. It would be like trading Brinson, Arcia, Hader, Ray, Ortiz and Diaz for the best starters we can get next off-season. We could do it, and we'd probably be a playoff team next year because of it, but that doesn't mean it'd be a good idea.

 

 

I think your history is a bit off. 2011 was the year we had those types of guys at the major league level already and they traded away what were OUR top prospects, but weren't seen as much around the league for some pitching. It was the right call and I'm glad Melvin had the stones to make it. It could actually be said that they should have went out and got more pitching. This franchise is loserville every season and would've continued that way with a rebuild mentality during the primes of Braun, Fielder and co.

[adambr2]

I honestly don't know how you could advocate for tearing down before 2011. Why even have a team if you're going to punt at the goal line? You're just perpetually trading for the future, you have to win at some point and they put out a team that was the favorite to win it all in the final 4. Up 1-0 in the NLCS with home field in WS

 

Because they weren't really at the goalline or anywhere near it in 2009 and 2010. They actually had a very similar team to what we have now, but the farm wasn't as good and lacked quality pitching at the top.

 

I'm not saying it was a huge mistake to do what they did but they didnt look like they were right on the cusp. It would be like trading Brinson, Arcia, Hader, Ray, Ortiz and Diaz for the best starters we can get next off-season. We could do it, and we'd probably be a playoff team next year because of it, but that doesn't mean it'd be a good idea.

 

 

I think your history is a bit off. 2011 was the year we had those types of guys at the major league level already and they traded away what were OUR top prospects, but weren't seen as much around the league for some pitching. It was the right call and I'm glad Melvin had the stones to make it. It could actually be said that they should have went out and got more pitching. This franchise is loserville every season and would've continued that way with a rebuild mentality during the primes of Braun, Fielder and co.

 

I'm not quite sure what you mean. I was just saying that at the time we made the trades, (post-2010), we were not a great team that appeared to be close to a championship. We won 77 games in 2010, I expect this team to win more. So we were not an 85 win team that appeared to just be a piece away. I do agree that our top trade pieces now are worth more than our top trade pieces then, but I'm just pointing out a competitive move now if we wanted to go all-in. Escobar is similar in value at that time to Arcia now, so if I had to pin down what a similar offer would be now, I'd say Arcia, Corbin Burnes, Brett Phillips, and Taylor Williams would be real similar to what we gave up then, but I don't think that would be nearly enough for 2 years of an ace now.

 

Again I'm not saying it was a lousy move, but the truth is we had luck on our side, too.

We were good, but we weren't as good as our 96 wins indicated . We stayed relatively healthy in 2011 and got some surprisingly excellent CF value from Morgan and Gomez, and the pitching held up. It wouldn't have taken much more than a major injury to Prince, Braun, or Greinke to thwart the whole idea, and with Prince leaving after 2011, it was really only a 1 year shot as evidenced by the regression in 2012.

 

Because of the 2011 success it's seen as a great move even though we didn't win a WS, but it was probably an unlucky break or two away from being viewed much differently in retrospect.

[MrTPlush]

I couldn't disagree more there. 2011 was not lucky even in the slightest. That team was legit with an elite offense, elite bullpen after adding K-Rod, and a pitching rotation that was solid 1-5. That team was everything that record showed.

 

I also disagree Prince leaving was proof it was a one year shot and our decline in 2012 was proof of that. Sliding Corey Hart to 1B, adding a highly productive Ramirez at 3B, and having Gomez start to excel easily replaced Fielder greatly. The offense was greatly improved scoring 40 more runs in 2012 vs. 2011. The huge downfall in the 2012 team was he decline of a few starters and a huge drop in production from some of our (what were elite in 2011) bullpen arms. That 2012 team had just as much potential and talent.

[pacopete4]

I was just saying that at the time we made the trades, (post-2010), we were not a great team that appeared to be close to a championship. We won 77 games in 2010, I expect this team to win more. So we were not an 85 win team that appeared to just be a piece away.

 

Again I'm not saying it was a lousy move, but the truth is we had luck on our side, too. We were good, but we weren't as good as our 96 wins indicated . We stayed relatively healthy in 2011 and got some surprisingly excellent CF value from Morgan and Gomez, and the pitching held up. It wouldn't have taken much more than a major injury to Prince, Braun, or Greinke to thwart the whole idea, and with Prince leaving after 2011, it was really only a 1 year shot as evidenced by the regression in 2012. Because of the 2011 success it's seen as a great move even though we didn't win a WS, but it was probably an unlucky break or two away from being viewed much differently in retrospect.

 

I don't think we are too far off from what each other is saying but we do have a differing of opinions of how this team was seen in the 2008-2011 years and possible 2012 for a couple more years. Melvin knew he had a core group of guys that were ready to win and win now. He knew he had okay talent at the top of the prospect list but also knew they needed pitching to win. He went out and bought some pitching in 2008 when there was an opportunity at the post season (this is a success) and then again pre-2011 season with Greinke and Marcum. That carried us to our winningest season ever in franchise history.

 

This franchise, and I hate even saying it, has been a bunch of bums for decades. Sure we have a couple players we hang our hats on in the 80's and even more when people want to consider Hank Aaron a part of the franchises history but this franchise straight up sucks. One of the worst in all of sports. I love em but I'll be real about them. I never understand how anyone could be against MA/Melvin and co. going after a championship in 2011.

 

I can only hope that if in 2018, 2019 or 2020 that there is a core of players like the 2011 bunch ready to go after it like we did in 2011 when we should have won the whole stinkin thing. Sick of the losing and I hope Stearns/MA realize that as much as a lot of this fan base is.

[Thurston Fluff]

Of course anything we discuss is pure speculation. We know how things turned out with the actions taken, but will never know how things could have turned out if different actions were taken. That said, the "alternate route" would have been trading away Fielder and Hart for prospects, and never making the Greinke and Marcum trades. We see how quickly a franchise can build talent through the Gomez and Lucroy trades. Had we traded Fielder and Hart for prospects, we likely would have been worse in 2011 (maybe no NLCS run), but we would have still had lots of talent on the roster, and would have had a good farm system, likely making the 2012-present teams much better.

 

I think the trades for Marcum and Greinke are two very different things. Greinke we gave up the farm for. Marcum was traded for a single player that didn't seem to be a fit here in Milwaukee. Had we traded for Marcum and just went with Estrada instead of getting Greinke I think the team would have been almost as good that season and a better future to boot. I am all for trades like Marcum but not nearly as inclined to trade the farm again any time soon. Full disclaimer; I was all aboard with Greinke at the time. It's due to how it turned out that caused me to change my mind on that sort of trade.

[adambr2]

I couldn't disagree more there. 2011 was not lucky even in the slightest. That team was legit with an elite offense, elite bullpen after adding K-Rod, and a pitching rotation that was solid 1-5. That team was everything that record showed.

 

I also disagree Prince leaving was proof it was a one year shot and our decline in 2012 was proof of that. Sliding Corey Hart to 1B, adding a highly productive Ramirez at 3B, and having Gomez start to excel easily replaced Fielder greatly. The offense was greatly improved scoring 40 more runs in 2012 vs. 2011. The huge downfall in the 2012 team was he decline of a few starters and a huge drop in production from some of our (what were elite in 2011) bullpen arms. That 2012 team had just as much potential and talent.

 

Their Pythagorean had them at a W/L expectancy of 90-72. That should tell you right off the bat that they were lucky.

 

I'm not saying they weren't a very good team, obviously they won a playoff series. But they had an atrocious middle infield defensively, probably the worst SS in the game, their lineup was good but probably not as good as they are typically thought of. Their rotation carried them, but Marcum was a big injury risk and they are very fortunate he held up as well as he did.

 

There is no way you assemble that same team in 2011 from Day 1 against the same field and they win at least 96 games more than once or twice in 10 tries.

[pacopete4]

 

There is no way you assemble that same team in 2011 from Day 1 against the same field and they win at least 96 games more than once or twice in 10 tries.

 

 

I just don't buy these types of comments. Honestly, how do you know? How could you possibly know? I'm not even tearing into just you for it but computers have been great tools for evaluating guys but i just don't buy it that they can tell us everything about a ball club over 162 game season. Way too many variables to come up with comments like this. Maybe they don't win 96. Maybe they win 110? Who the heck knows?

[Ennder]

Very few teams are projected to win 96 games on paper, so yes you usually have some luck in sequencing or health or breakouts when it happens. It doesn't mean the team was just lucky. The 2007-2012 Brewers were all teams with legit playoff chances entering the year. You could make a case that the 2013 and 2014 were as well. Not all playoff teams look like juggernauts on opening day. That is most likely the franchises best 8 year stretch of teams.

[tmwiese55]

And on almost every team you can point out weaknesses like you did on our 2011 team. Look at the Cards that year who won it. no starting pitching, had to get an out of nowhere hot streak from Freese and a late season trade for a washed up and oft injured Furcal who managed to stay healthy and get hot at the right time. Almost impossible to build a perfect team.

 

Our team had tow legit MVP level hitters and added a legit ace in his prime and had solid backend of bullpen going 4ish guys deep. 2012 could've easily contended too if not for a month of horrid bullpen. Remember that team still almost snuck in the playoffs after trading Greinke.

 

Good discussion of the past by all. Even all that we just said trying to get back to original topic of this season, I don't think any of us would argue we're currently at a similar stage as going into 2011. Not even close.

[pacopete4]

 

Good discussion of the past by all. Even all that we just said trying to get back to original topic of this season, I don't think any of us would argue we're currently at a similar stage as going into 2011. Not even close.

 

Agreed. That next wave of players needs to come up later this year, 2018 and 2019 for us to be in that similar position. Hopefully this time with some better results on the home grown pitching options.

[Lathund]

Fangraphs article looking at some of the reasons why our record might not quite reflect where we are. The gist of it being that we're both scoring more and giving up less runs than the underlying numbers suggest we should (And for those who don't buy into wOBA, xwOBA and such, you can look at things like WHIP and FIP for the pitching side). Which is what I believe as well: There won't be a difficult decision to make, as I don't think we'll truly be in the wilcard race at the deadline, at least not close enough to warrant big trades.

[tmwiese55]

Agreed. And I wouldn't want to do any 'win now' unless we were ahead in the division so just trying to maintain at that point. Don't bother at all if you're chasing, heck that should be excuse to pull the trigger on moving Garza or whatever pieces make sense to sell.

[monty57]

I honestly don't know how you could advocate for tearing down before 2011. Why even have a team if you're going to punt at the goal line? You're just perpetually trading for the future, you have to win at some point and they put out a team that was the favorite to win it all in the final 4. Up 1-0 in the NLCS with home field in WS

 

Not a teardown at all. All I was saying was that the alternate route (what the team said they were going to do going into the offseason), was to trade Fielder and Hart as they were both going into their final season of team control. We still would have had a lot of talent on the roster, and trading Fielder and Hart would have brought a lot more talent into the system. Plus, we swould have made other moves, like adding a 1B if we indeed traded away Fielder, and as Thurston said, we still probably would have traded Lawrie, as Melvin didn't seem to want him around.

 

We likely wouldn't have been as good in 2011 without Fielder, Hart or the Greinke and Marcum trades, but we might still could have compiled a playoff roster. We also would have had a lot more young talent in the system, so we probably would have had much better teams in subsequent years. We probably could have traded one playoff appearance for several playoff appearances depending on how things came together.

 

But, we did what we did. We had a fun season where we ended up winning one playoff series and fell short of the World Series. On paper, we had a decent team in 2012, but it tripped up, and after that we had a series of streaky teams that usually ended up with worse records then we will probably end up with this season, when we have less than half the payroll, a lot more flexibility, and a much brighter future.

 

I wasn't for the moves made in the 2010 offseason, but I really cheered for that team. It was obvious that we would have a solid team, and I really hoped we'd win it all, because it was obvious that we should do a firesale afterwards or we'd be in for an extended period of "blah." The natural result of mortgaging the future is that the mortgaged future will eventually arrive. If you're going to play the "all in" game, then you almost have to follow the Marlins' strategy. As much as people scoff at what they've done, they have some rings to show for it. If you don't want to do complete teardowns, then never go "all in."

[tmwiese55]

Fair enough, that's reasonable. Problem comes that you'd logically then starting looking trading Weeks, Gallardo, etc after that and you never actually go for the title. No way I could've seen that team competing for playoffs within 3-4 years unless you got back ML ready high quality pitching in the trades for Hart/Prince. And i think we all know how likely teams are to give away ready pitching, which is almost never. You'd have had to go to lower levels and wait for them to make it, or more likely bust.

[monty57]

Fair enough, that's reasonable. Problem comes that you'd logically then starting looking trading Weeks, Gallardo, etc after that and you never actually go for the title. No way I could've seen that team competing for playoffs within 3-4 years unless you got back ML ready high quality pitching in the trades for Hart/Prince. And i think we all know how likely teams are to give away ready pitching, which is almost never. You'd have had to go to lower levels and wait for them to make it, or more likely bust.

 

That's exactly what Melvin tried. For Prince, he asked for two young MLB starters. Since the only team trading for a guy in his last year would be a team shooting for the playoffs, and since no team shooting for the playoffs would trade away two guys from their MLB rotation, it wasn't surprising that Melvin couldn't find a trade. At that point, knowing it was Prince's last season with the team, they decided to go all in with the Greinke and Marcum trades.

 

I thought at the time (and still believe) that Melvin shouldn't have been so hell-bent on getting back MLB talent in every trade. Prince signed a nearly $200M deal after the season, so I find it hard to believe the people who say he had no trade value. We could have gotten a lot for him.

[pacopete4]

 

I thought at the time (and still believe) that Melvin shouldn't have been so hell-bent on getting back MLB talent in every trade. Prince signed a nearly $200M deal after the season, so I find it hard to believe the people who say he had no trade value. We could have gotten a lot for him.

 

If we didn't get back MLB level or very close to it, the window closes with all those other guys. Then you might as well sell off all the rest too. If you do that, what exactly are we ever playing for?

[tmwiese55]

Exactly what I'm getting at, thanks Brew4u. I'd say most agree we probably held on the 'go for it' mode a year or two too long. But in spite of that look at all the assets we still had to sell once we did it so I'd say they did alright all things considering. Nobody is perfect.

[monty57]

 

I thought at the time (and still believe) that Melvin shouldn't have been so hell-bent on getting back MLB talent in every trade. Prince signed a nearly $200M deal after the season, so I find it hard to believe the people who say he had no trade value. We could have gotten a lot for him.

 

If we didn't get back MLB level or very close to it, the window closes with all those other guys. Then you might as well sell off all the rest too. If you do that, what exactly are we ever playing for?

 

We lost Prince for nothing, so a group of prospects would have better than nothing in the "window with the other guys."

 

Managing in a small market is tough, and sometimes you have to make tough decisions like whether or not to trade a good player with limited team control when you've got a good MLB team. I understand why they decided to hold onto Prince. But as I said, holding him and Hart and making two trades that wiped out most of the young talent in the system (pre-arby and prospect) is "all in," and if you're going to go all in, it should be followed by a fire sale.

 

They did neither, so we got bad baseball for half a decade before finally deciding to go into rebuild mode.

 

But I was really looking with a broader scope than just looking at this one scenario. Things like making sure we got Mench instead of a prospect in the Lee trade, getting a bunch of AAAA talent back for Sexson instead of getting high-end young talent, taking "MLB ready" Dave Bush instead of some good young prospects. Things like that.

 

I hope with new management that we won't have a "window closing," but rather that we will maintain a strong farm so that when faced with a scenario of having a good player in his final year, we will have prospects there to replace him. Then, we can trade the vet for a boatload of talent and promote the prospect. You should only have "windows closing" if you construct your roster that way.

[Ennder]

They did neither, so we got bad baseball for half a decade before finally deciding to go into rebuild mode.

 

And by half a decade you mean 2 seasons. The Brewers haven't had half a decade of bad baseball since before Melvin. They were in playoff contention late into the season just 3 years ago. The team this year doesn't look like bad baseball either and I doubt next year will.

[tmwiese55]

Even last year would've surprisingly gotten close to .500 without the Lucroy and relievers all getting traded.

 

Once again, another thing to remember is at the time of all those decisions they were planning on having an MVP level player in the heart of his prime. Brauns' hand injury and suspension was a huge curveball they could not have predicted. That's where I think hindsight they should've pulled the plug the offseason after that happened. I don't want to look exactly back but I'm not sure what more they would've had to sell at that point that they still weren't able to a couple years later.

[markedman5]

Our pitching starting staff is just so bad......What happened to the pin point command that Davies has shown in the past?

 

Don't think Stearns and Mark are going to need to have a battle.... ...

[Oxy]

 

I thought at the time (and still believe) that Melvin shouldn't have been so hell-bent on getting back MLB talent in every trade. Prince signed a nearly $200M deal after the season, so I find it hard to believe the people who say he had no trade value. We could have gotten a lot for him.

 

If we didn't get back MLB level or very close to it, the window closes with all those other guys. Then you might as well sell off all the rest too. If you do that, what exactly are we ever playing for?

 

Weren't the rumors at the time that we wanted Matt Cain for Corey Hart but the Giants were offering Bumgarner instead and Melvin said "no thanks?"

[reillymcshane]

If the young Brewers keep winning Mark A is gonna want to put the pedal to the metal and be buyers at the deadline, I really have to believe that.

 

Maybe you believe this would happen, but I don't. I don't think Mark A is an impetuous man who would risk his investment. He hired Stearns to do exactly what he is doing. He will stick to the course.

 

Stearns has to be feeling cautiously optimistic about how, so far, his rebuild is moving ahead of schedule. MLB is increasingly a young man's game, and with young players, you never know when things will click and they turn the corner. It is just a 1/4 of the way through the season but it seems clear that the Brewers have enough offense to at least contend for a wildcard

 

While I'm excited about the offense thus far, I am skeptical of the team as a whole maintaining their success this year. The pitching just isn't good enough - despite a solid offense. And our defense hasn't been particularly good. We have some streaky hitters as well - and as we are seeing - we will be vulnerable to rough stretches (but also some good ones as well). I just see more rough than good.

 

I have to believe that Stearns' longterm plan for sustained success included trading Braun, Garza if he pitches like he has this season, maybe even Guerra, maybe another relief pitcher (Feliz was a wildcard) for even more prospects. That plan might be changing slightly or at least could be being altered somewhat day by day.

 

Makes sense.

 

And then I just have to speculate that Mark is putting pressure on or dropping major hints or asking pointed questions along the lines of "if we're still in it in July how do we improve our pitching and make a run at this?"

 

I think our pitching needs far more improvement than just a trade or two. So it makes little sense to unload prospects to improve a club that just isn't that good.

 

I think we will be stay the course. Bring up Woodruff at the break. See how Guerra, Davies, Nelson and all the others finish out the season. Maybe in the offseason look at free agents - or perhaps add a decent starter via trade (particularly by taking on salary).

 

It'd be fascinating to be a fly on the wall in the Brewers front office right now. I see a battle brewing. I don't see Mark A just being willing to give up all control. I think Stearns is too smart to divert majorly from his plan, but he is young and might not be able to resist.

 

I disagree. Mark A hired a guy to do a job a specific way. You don't make hundreds of millions of dollars by radically deviating from your strategy to make a long shot play at success. That's like playing roulette with your retirement fund. Building a winning team is a methodical and specific process. I have to believe Mark A is in full support of that process.

 

All this comes with caveats. I mean, if the team has a .600 winning percentage at the all-star break, that's an entirely different story than if they are at .500. Stearns and Mark A would be foolish not to look to shore up the team's pitching (or whatever) if they are one of the best teams in the league.

[monty57]

They did neither, so we got bad baseball for half a decade before finally deciding to go into rebuild mode.

 

And by half a decade you mean 2 seasons. The Brewers haven't had half a decade of bad baseball since before Melvin. They were in playoff contention late into the season just 3 years ago. The team this year doesn't look like bad baseball either and I doubt next year will.

 

"Bad" may have been too harsh. Relative to the low bar set by past Brewer teams, it wasn't so bad, but relative to what a normal fan would expect, it was subpar. My original description ("blah baseball") probably fits better than "bad," but how do you think Yankee or Cardinal fans would react with the following string of seasons? Heck, how would the same Brewer fans react if the Packers put together a string of seasons like this?

 

2012: 83-79 Not too bad, but they were expecting a World Series run this year

2013: 74-88 Very disappointing, late season surge to get this "good"

2014: 82-80 Ridiculously good start to season and bad baseball after that

2015: 68-94 One of the worst seasons in franchise history. Only good thing about this season is it made Attanasio realize he needed to change the way he was doing things

2016: 73-89 Rebuild year, still not too far out of line with our records in the high-budget, "go for it" years.

 

I'd like to see the franchise at a point that we are not happy with strings like this, nor do we think that an NLCS appearance is worth mortgaging the future. I think we're on that path, and I hope that a decade from now fans' expectations will be significantly higher.