David Stearns Free Pass??

[MrTPlush]

I complained? No I didn’t. I just said paying sticker price for something isn’t impressive. None of these guys were particularly garage sale finds. Jeremy Jeffress was a great get, but he wanted to be here and it was basically a no brainer. Lorenzo Cain will be a great get if he produces his entire contract...no one was worried about his production in year one.

 

I actually complimented Stearns and you will find I have not complained during this entire nightmare of a skid. So not sure that makes sense.

 

I’m not saying they were bad moves...just not something hang a feather on your cap for.

 

These moves go in a different category than "garage sale finds", you have to compare them against other FA signings, not other garage sale finds. These are big FA signings shopping from the list of the 30-40 top free agents. There are a lot of FAs to choose from. There were other comparable options and we did better for the price than anyone else. We could have paid for a relief pitcher. Or we could have done nothing (especially in outfield).

 

Look I’m not going to argue about it. They are nice moves, but these aren’t career defining transactions for Stearns. What is going to “make or break us” are the Machado, Gennett, avoiding FA pitchers last winter, Aguilar, etc. type moves.

 

What Stearns has done is inherited a lot of good things and made some major moves that he could do because of prospect capital and payroll room. He has done a phenomenal job getting us back to average-above average....but in my opinion that can be very easy. The true test is getting us to the next level and he has created a great foundation with many great prospects throughout the system.

 

I’m not criticizing him, but I’m also not putting him on a pedestal. For the record I think he will go down as the best GM in Brewers history someday and gets us back to the World Series...so don’t claim I have something against Stearns. He just hasn’t passed the true test yet...and that’s okay because it is still early on.

[JimH5]

To me, Stearns will make or break his legacy through the farm system.

 

The Brewers of the past 10 years have been so weak at turning first round picks into MLB stars. If he can reverse that course, either through better selections or better minor league development, then he'll be worthy of all the praise he's being given.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Signing Jeff Suppan was also a career-defining move.

 

You're moving the goal posts.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Let’s also not forget his inability to trade Santana. Santana’s value has tanked and next year we’ll have the problem we had last year. Yelich. Cain. Braun. Santana. Phillips. Broxton. Now add Thames because Aguilar has to be an every day player at first base.

Had Samtana hit anywhere near what he did last season, keeping him would have been a great thing for the team given the massive trouble the lineup has had scoring runs.

 

The lineup has been so lacking run producing bats the last few weeks, Tyler friggin Saladino has often been hitting 5th in the order. If instead we had Santana of last year or something close to that, he'd be ideal batting 5th after Aguilar or Shaw.

 

There is no way though that Stearns could have predicted Santana would go from a 30 HR/.875 OPS guy to someone with a slap hitting .354 SLG percentage.

 

Sports are volatile. For every good surprise like Aguilar in a season, there are bound to also have a Santana who inexplicably loses all of his power.

 

People keep bringing the Santana thing up. The reality is, Santana had very little value on the market, because teams knew exactly what he was. An inconsistent free swinger with no track record.

[Montezuma]

Building a quality farm system will be his legacy...

[paul253]

people keep bringing the Santana thing up. The reality is, Santana had very little value on the market, because teams knew exactly what he was. An inconsistent free swinger with no track record

 

That’s easy to say now. But I doubt people would have been calling him that last year when he was hitting close to .280 with an OBP over .370 and 30 home runs.

 

Beside, if is really that bad of a player then Stearns should have taken anything he could have gotten for him shouldnt he have?

[superfly]

I think it's terrible that some fans think this way. Fans like that don't even deserve a good team. Stearns has done an absolutely incredible job to get them where they are today, but instead of appreciating it, some fans let the incredible success warp their expectations. If the brewers had won 75 games last year and 80 this year, with the farm system they've built and the low payrolls during that time, fans would appreciate the progress they've made. But they won 86 last year after being on pace for 90+ most of the year, and they'll probably win 85-90 again this year after being on pace for 95+, and instead of seeing how amazing it is that they've been this good, certain fans act like it's a given that they should be a 90+ win team at this point. It's absurd to make the front office a victim of their own remarkable success, and I think it's a plague on this message board.

 

They have gaping holes in the lineup and rotation because they are just a few years removed from a tear-it-down rebuilding effort. You can't just plug those holes in 1 year. They spent 10 years decimating the farm system while the major league talent deteriorated to nothing. They had a terrible situation at both levels just 3 years ago at this time, with little hope for the future. And now fans cry because they can't sustain best-in-the-NL play all season instead of realizing how amazing it is that they played at the level at all. Be patient, make Walker/Swarzak type trades, develop Peralta, Burnes, Hiura, Arcia, and Nottingham, among others, and they'll be able to play like a top-3 team all year. In the meantime, being in the playoff picture was a bonus last year, and getting to the wild card game is a realistic goal this year given that the Cubs are all-in now and the Brewers are wisely setting up their best ball for the near future.

 

A plague to the board? Don't deserve a team? Really? I know David Stearns has reached Ted Thompson god-like status around here but aren't you going every bit as far as the folks you claim to be nuts?

 

On the whole I think Stearns has done a very good job here, but it's time to make a move for some pitching. The staff was sketchy before the most recent injury, and it's been sketchy for some time. Anderson was a career sketchy to decent arm who experienced a crazy year in 2017, Chacin was a career sketchy to decent arm, Miley is a career sketchy arm, Davies is a career sketchy arm, etc. If the bullpen at all falters or regresses in the second half this team will run downhill in a hurry. It's time to reward the guys with an innings eater and lighten the load. I'm fine with it being a R/R guy like Bundy or Syndergaard, but it's time to lay the chips down so long as the guy fits in the window of the Cain/Yelich/Chacin etc contracts and the guys like Hader who are also controllable within this window we've entered.

 

If you want to talk plagues, head on over to a Yankees or Red Sox board and hammer them for freaking out over their #8 and #9 hitters.

[Brewer Fever]

It is not time to simply "make a move for pitching" if the players who would make any kind of difference mean mortgaging the future.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

people keep bringing the Santana thing up. The reality is, Santana had very little value on the market, because teams knew exactly what he was. An inconsistent free swinger with no track record

 

That’s easy to say now. But I doubt people would have been calling him that last year when he was hitting close to .280 with an OBP over .370 and 30 home runs.

 

Beside, if is really that bad of a player then Stearns should have taken anything he could have gotten for him shouldnt he have?

 

 

No? Because he might have actually been good. It's too funny you began with "It's easy to say that now." The premise of your argument is that Stearns should have traded him because he should've known he wasn't good.

 

Again, you guys are moving the goal posts. You've decided something about DS and just frame the circumstances to reach your conclusion.

[coolhandluke121]

It is not time to simply "make a move for pitching" if the players who would make any kind of difference mean mortgaging the future.

 

Yep. The armchair quarterbacking is unreal. What's really laughable about it is that you just know you could look through the posting history of the people criticizing him and the team wouldn't be even close to this good if they got their way. But they're definitely right this time. Whatever.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Something really funny about people saying they're sick of losing so let's bet the farm on a big splash. The exact impatient mentality responsible for why we can't put together any sustainable success. Doug Melvin will always have a place in my heart for bringing the playoffs back here, but he was very short sighted.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Something really funny about people saying they're sick of losing so let's bet the farm on a big splash. The exact impatient mentality responsible for why we can't put together any sustainable success. Doug Melvin will always have a place in my heart for bringing the playoffs back here, but he was very short sighted.

 

I don't remember anyone advocating betting the farm for a big splash. This system is deep and talented. Probably deeper than it's ever been, actually. People worried about "gutting the farm" by making trades to improve the MLB club are looking at it pretty myopically in my opinion.

[coolhandluke121]

Whether through tanking in the early 2000's or the brilliant bargain bin talent-mining of the last few years, the Brewers have built an extremely bright future twice this century. There's something profoundly ironic about anyone suggesting that mortgaging that future to make the playoffs about half as often as you probably should with that kind of foundation is what would make the gm truly brilliant. Because trading away the future for rentals is so shrewd and it gives you a huge advantage over teams who haven't thought of that strategy, right?

[trwi7]

This system is deep and talented. Probably deeper than it's ever been

 

Not a chance.

[superfly]

Something really funny about people saying they're sick of losing so let's bet the farm on a big splash. The exact impatient mentality responsible for why we can't put together any sustainable success. Doug Melvin will always have a place in my heart for bringing the playoffs back here, but he was very short sighted.

 

I don't remember anyone advocating betting the farm for a big splash. This system is deep and talented. Probably deeper than it's ever been, actually. People worried about "gutting the farm" by making trades to improve the MLB club are looking at it pretty myopically in my opinion.

 

It's no different than the Ted Thompson mindset of hoarding draft picks and avoiding outside moves. We simply CANNOT keep everybody we have and we are going to probably lose some next year via rule 5. It is not possible. I don't know what is difficult to comprehend about it for some. Like you I haven't seen any "gut the farm" posts either.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

This system is deep and talented. Probably deeper than it's ever been

 

Not a chance.

 

Thanks for contributing! That viewpoint is compelling.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Something really funny about people saying they're sick of losing so let's bet the farm on a big splash. The exact impatient mentality responsible for why we can't put together any sustainable success. Doug Melvin will always have a place in my heart for bringing the playoffs back here, but he was very short sighted.

 

I don't remember anyone advocating betting the farm for a big splash. This system is deep and talented. Probably deeper than it's ever been, actually. People worried about "gutting the farm" by making trades to improve the MLB club are looking at it pretty myopically in my opinion.

 

It's no different than the Ted Thompson mindset of hoarding draft picks and avoiding outside moves. We simply CANNOT keep everybody we have and we are going to probably lose some next year via rule 5. It is not possible. I don't know what is difficult to comprehend about it for some. Like you I haven't seen any "gut the farm" posts either.

 

Exactly! It's a great problem to have. The system is so talented that they risk losing several players to the Rule 5 draft next year ... for the first time I can remember. There is a ton of talent across all levels. 7-8 years ago a guy like Jake Gatewood would have been our #1 prospect, and probably be rushed at AAA right now as the next big star. Now he is having trouble sniffing the teens on our prospect lists. Great problem to have.

[coolhandluke121]

There's still plenty of inconsequential players on the 40. I'm not worried about the rule 5 draft at all. And Ted Thompson's strategy was correct; he just didn't execute it well because of scouting deficiencies. Stearns has the right strategy and is executing it incredibly well.

 

I'm obsessed with sports and especially the personnel side of it, and off the top of my head the only team in my lifetime that has consistently gotten more incredible value for their payroll and assets is the Spurs. These guys obviously don't have the same lengthy track record, but the percentage of decisively successful moves (and prudent non-moves) they've won is absurd. It's like playing hearts against the windows 96 A.I. and shooting the moon every 3rd hand.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

There's still plenty of inconsequential players on the 40. I'm not worried about the rule 5 draft at all. And Ted Thompson's strategy was correct; he just didn't execute it well because of scouting deficiencies. Stearns has the right strategy and is executing it incredibly well.

 

I'm obsessed with sports and especially the personnel side of it, and off the top of my head the only team in my lifetime that has consistently gotten more incredible value for their payroll and assets is the Spurs. These guys obviously don't have the same lengthy track record, but the percentage of decisively successful moves (and prudent non-moves) they've won is absurd. It's like playing hearts against the windows 96 A.I. and shooting the moon every 3rd hand.

 

I'm not worried about the Rule 5 because I think Stearns is going to be able to move multiple guys who need protecting for either MLB pieces during the season, or young minor leaguers during the off-season.

[superfly]

There's still plenty of inconsequential players on the 40. I'm not worried about the rule 5 draft at all. And Ted Thompson's strategy was correct; he just didn't execute it well because of scouting deficiencies. Stearns has the right strategy and is executing it incredibly well.

 

I'm obsessed with sports and especially the personnel side of it, and off the top of my head the only team in my lifetime that has consistently gotten more incredible value for their payroll and assets is the Spurs.These guys obviously don't have the same lengthy track record, but the percentage of decisively successful moves (and prudent non-moves) they've won is absurd. It's like playing hearts against the windows 96 A.I. and shooting the moon every 3rd hand.

I almost thought you were going to say the Bucks, after all we're supposedly modeling after the Spurs aren't we?

[coolhandluke121]

This system is deep and talented. Probably deeper than it's ever been

 

Not a chance.

 

Thanks for contributing! That viewpoint is compelling.

 

Eh, he's right. Fielder, Braun, Weeks, Hart, Hardy and Gallardo were all better prospects than nearly anyone the Brewers have had since. If it seems like that era didn't have the same depth, it's only because they had so much blue-chip talent that the other prospects were afterthoughts in comparison. La Porta, Gamel, Manny Parra, Lucroy, Escobar, Brantley, Cain, Odorizzi, and Lawrie were pretty good prospects too.

 

That was one of the best minor league systems any team has built this century, and they did an absolutely terrible job with it. All their short-sighted moves resulted in just a few playoff appearances and roughly a .500 overall record in the first decade of the Mark A era. That's horrible considering how much talent they inherited. They should have won 85-90 nearly every year for 10 years, with a few better years thrown in and maybe a couple random 78-win hard luck years. But all their short-sighted trades destroyed their depth, and they ended up with a stars and scrubs team nearly every single year - even in 2011. They have a stars and scrubs team now, but the difference is that they're not going to lock themselves into having that type of team for 7-8 of the next 10 years just to patch some of the holes now, when they can eventually patch nearly all of the holes with players under team control for years.

[trwi7]

This system is deep and talented. Probably deeper than it's ever been

 

Not a chance.

 

Thanks for contributing! That viewpoint is compelling.

 

Right, because our current group is as talented as 2006 which included Fielder, Braun, Gallardo, Hart, Escobar and Nelson Cruz in our top 10. Go back to July of 2005 and add Weeks and Hardy to that list. This group might not even be as good as the 2009 group which had Escobar, Gamel, Lawrie, Jeffress, Cain and Lucroy.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

 

Eh, he's right. Fielder, Braun, Weeks, Hart, Hardy and Gallardo were all better prospects than nearly anyone the Brewers have had since. If it seems like that era didn't have the same depth, it's only because they had so much blue-chip talent that the other prospects were afterthoughts in comparison. La Porta, Gamel, Manny Parra, Lucroy, Escobar, Brantley, Cain, Odorizzi, and Lawrie were pretty good prospects too.

 

That was one of the best minor league systems any team has built this century, and they did an absolutely terrible job with it. All their short-sighted moves resulted in just a few playoff appearances and roughly a .500 overall record in the first decade of the Mark A era. That's horrible considering how much talent they inherited. They should have won 85-90 nearly every year for 10 years, with a few better years thrown in and maybe a couple random 78-win hard luck years. But all their short-sighted trades destroyed their depth, and they ended up with a stars and scrubs team nearly every single year - even in 2011. They have a stars and scrubs team now, but the difference is that they're not going to lock themselves into having that type of team for 7-8 of the next 10 years just to patch some of the holes now, when they can eventually patch nearly all of the holes with players under team control for years.

 

Those guys you mentioned were not all in the system at the same time. Heck I could go back through the Brewers' system for the last five years and put together a mighty fine list of prospects too. I agree that those systems back then had a ton of talent, but they were top heavy, and severely lacking in top pitching talent. My argument is that, top to bottom, the current system is as deep and talented (across multiple positions, especially pitching) as it's ever been.

[trwi7]

 

Eh, he's right. Fielder, Braun, Weeks, Hart, Hardy and Gallardo were all better prospects than nearly anyone the Brewers have had since. If it seems like that era didn't have the same depth, it's only because they had so much blue-chip talent that the other prospects were afterthoughts in comparison. La Porta, Gamel, Manny Parra, Lucroy, Escobar, Brantley, Cain, Odorizzi, and Lawrie were pretty good prospects too.

 

That was one of the best minor league systems any team has built this century, and they did an absolutely terrible job with it. All their short-sighted moves resulted in just a few playoff appearances and roughly a .500 overall record in the first decade of the Mark A era. That's horrible considering how much talent they inherited. They should have won 85-90 nearly every year for 10 years, with a few better years thrown in and maybe a couple random 78-win hard luck years. But all their short-sighted trades destroyed their depth, and they ended up with a stars and scrubs team nearly every single year - even in 2011. They have a stars and scrubs team now, but the difference is that they're not going to lock themselves into having that type of team for 7-8 of the next 10 years just to patch some of the holes now, when they can eventually patch nearly all of the holes with players under team control for years.

 

Those guys you mentioned were not all in the system at the same time. Heck I could go back through the Brewers' system for the last five years and put together a mighty fine list of prospects too. I agree that those systems back then had a ton of talent, but they were top heavy, and severely lacking in top pitching talent. My argument is that, top to bottom, the current system is as deep and talented (across multiple positions, especially pitching) as it's ever been.

 

I strongly disagree that they were top heavy and I'd rather have 3 or 4 elite prospects than like 8 "good" prospects.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

 

Right, because our current group is as talented as 2006 which included Fielder, Braun, Gallardo, Hart, Escobar and Nelson Cruz in our top 10. Go back to July of 2005 and add Weeks and Hardy to that list. This group might not even be as good as the 2009 group which had Escobar, Gamel, Lawrie, Jeffress, Cain and Lucroy.

 

Besides Jeffress, I see no pitching. I don't deny that the 2006 Top 10 was great. But that system wasn't deep whatsoever.

 

As a reference, take a look: http://www.brewerfan.net/ViewPower50.do?power50Id=73