Dubon to SF for Pomeranz and Black

[The stache]

This...all of this. As much as I wanted a "big" move, I would have been perfectly happy with a couple of Tanner Roark type acquisitions for the rotation. Instead they want to be taken seriously in a pennant race, when the only acquisition they make to their starting rotation is Jordan Lyles?? Really?? Sure, I get prices were high on the big fish, but it didn't cost Oakland much to get Roark.

 

For the love of God, please stop, already! You're like a broken record. People repeatedly tell you that we didn't have the resources to add a top arm, and yet still you persist with that narrative.

 

"I wanted a big move".

 

And what is your obsession with Tanner Roark? You whine about Jordan Lyles, but think Tanner Roark is a "needle mover"? You think he's that much better than Lyles?

 

Here's a comparison of the two, 2017-2019

 

K:BB ratio:

 

Roark 2.76:1 (420 K: 152 BB)

Lyles 2.74:1 (233 K:85 BB)

 

FIP

Roark 4.20

Lyles 4.76

 

WHIP

Roark 1.335

Lyles 1.451

 

BB/9 IP

Roark 2.9

Lyles 3.1

 

Roark is only slightly better than Lyles in these metrics.

 

This year, Roark has been marginally above league average as a pitcher. His ERA+ is 107, but below league average (99) the last three years. His WHIP this year is pretty bad, 1.423. He's giving up 9.7 hits and 3.1 BB per 9 innings pitched. And last year, he led the National League with 15 losses. The Nationals were were 13-18 in his 31 appearances, and 69-62 when he did not take the mound.

 

And it didn't cost the A's much? They sent their second round pick from 2018, Jameson Hannah, to Cincy. #50 overall. Hannah's going to be a pretty good player, I think. He's from Flower Mound, the city I live in, and there was a good deal of buzz around his possibly being a first round draft pick. He's a young, toolsy outfielder with outstanding speed. The A's will only have to pay about $1.1 million for the remainder of the season, as the Reds also sent $2.1 M in cash. But giving up a 21 year old second rounder is a pretty steep price for what will, essentially, be a two month rental. His 2018 salary is $10 million. I don't see the A's coughing up the kind of money he'll be looking for.

 

Roark wasn't going to be a difference maker for the Brewers.

[StearnsFTW]

Yeah, the Tanner Roark obsession is baffling.

 

I get the point that somehow 2 league-average pitchers were going to make some big difference......problem is the point is a poor one.

[Greenleaf1]

Thoughts about this trade:

 

1. Even when Stearns is shipping out a top prospect, he's still bringing in more players than he's shipping out. This was something he discussed a lot during the rebuilding cycle, but it's hard to do when buying vs. selling. If Pomeranz helps stabilize the bullpen and get us to the playoffs, it's probably a fair deal. If Black can turn into a late inning reliever for a few years, it's probably a fair deal. Stearns would rather have multiple avenues to get value out of this trade.

 

2. At the same time, Black is a weird trade target. He just turned 29, he has no options remaining next year, which means he probably better figure something out in the next couple months, otherwise he may not even make the team next year (same reasoning applies to Faria, except he's a few years younger).

 

I think you have to look at this deadline's moves all at once rather than individually, especially the Aguilar/Dubon trades. Stearns is essentially trying to buy upside for as low a cost as possible, and if he buys enough upside, maybe one of these guys will turn out and be worth all the trades. Even if Lyles can keep us in games for the next month or two, that will go a long way to justifying all of these trades.

 

For this year and the future, I'd kinda rather take my chances that Grisham is an impact bat than make a deal depleting what's left of the farm to get a "TOR" guy with huge question marks, which is pretty much all that was available at the deadline. I think the Stroman deal just got everyone's hopes up that all these guys might be available for a price we'd be willing to pay, but that just wasn't the case. I think these moves aren't the best to help us win this year, but they're the best when taken as a whole (also combined with the moves Stearns didn't make) to help us win for the next 2-3 years.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Yeah, the Tanner Roark obsession is baffling.

 

I get the point that somehow 2 league-average pitchers were going to make some big difference......problem is the point is a poor one.

 

Brewcrewin07 went from shooting for the moon (Syndergaard), to shooting for an airplane (Ray), to shooting for a sparrow (Roark). He got to the point with his "grass is always greener" philosophy that he literally wanted to grab anyone that wasn't familiar. All he cared about was wanting a big name guy at first, damned the current results or price. At the end, he simply wanted anyone, yet at the same time he knocked Jordan Lyles and Jacob Faria because he self-appointingly called them "non needle-movers". The guy was all over the map in his disgust.

[liveforoctober]

so REALISTICALLY, what did you want the Brewers to do today?

 

We all were expecting one decent starting pitcher, right? That didn't happen.

 

This...all of this. As much as I wanted a "big" move, I would have been perfectly happy with a couple of Tanner Roark type acquisitions for the rotation. Instead they want to be taken seriously in a pennant race, when the only acquisition they make to their starting rotation is Jordan Lyles?? Really?? .

 

 

5 IP, 1 ER.

[Oxy]

Faria and Pomeranz have the capability to start as well--although they aren't likely to turn into guys who will consistently give you 7 strong innings. Neither is Lyles. But when you add them together along with Houser, Burnes, Peralta, Chacin and Gio (not to mention Woody, Davies and Anderson), you have a LOT of guys with the capability to give you 3-5 strong innings to cycle through and to see who steps up during the stretch run and the playoffs. The competition to make the playoffs as well as the playoff roster will be fierce and hopefully bring out the best in a few of these guys. We don't need all of them, but we do need some of them to really get hot at the right time.

 

The fact that none of them are big name/big salary guys means that we aren't tied down to anybody in particular. We don't have to stick with a guy who is fatigued or slightly injured or falling apart at the wrong time.

[jjfanec]

Overall I think the only people who should be really frustrated with this deadline is people who thought the Brewers should be very aggressive buyers or sellers. They didnt have the ammo though to be really aggressive buyers. People look at the prospects in certain trades and say "these guys were only the 3rd and 5th best guys in so and so's system. We should have beat that." The problem is our 3rd and 5th are probably those teams 10th and 12th. Our farm system just didnt have the pieces to be super aggressive. Those who wanted to aggressively sell had to recognize a team 1 game out of the playoffs (both division and wild card) wasnt going to do that.

 

They ended up doing what most people wanted - making small moves that dont mortgage the future and get a couple controllable players. These werent trades that make huge headlines but after what we saw last night they can really help a team be more competitive.

[A Swing and A Drive]

Stearns is sticking to his stategy that he got lucky with last season...

 

Bargin bin starting pitchers.

 

Lyles, Pomeranz and Faria are all type of pitchers any other team could have had and no one bothered.

 

"Cycling" through these type of pitchers is not a recipe for sustained success IMO.

 

As his job description as GM, Stearns plugged some holes at the MLB level without damaging our already weak farm system too badly. (just Dubon IMO)

 

Don't think it will get us to the postseason this year, but he at least did a little bit to give us a shot.

[Zad Fnark]

Stearns seems to have a history of finding nuggets in the deepest pile of poo.

 

I'll trust him on this.

[Oxy]

Stearns is sticking to his stategy that he got lucky with last season...

 

Bargin bin starting pitchers.

 

Lyles, Pomeranz and Faria are all type of pitchers any other team could have had and no one bothered.

 

"Cycling" through these type of pitchers is not a recipe for sustained success IMO.

 

As his job description as GM, Stearns plugged some holes at the MLB level without damaging our already weak farm system too badly. (just Dubon IMO)

 

Don't think it will get us to the postseason this year, but he at least did a little bit to give us a shot.

 

They signed Moose and Grandal before the season, and had young pitching coming up. It's easier to accumulate lots of cheap arms and cycle through them than it is cheap bats and "cycle" through them.

 

I think it is a sound sustainable strategy for the 4 and 5 spots in the rotation, but you need 3 reliable starters anyway. Woodruff's injury really put a crimp on the staff though.

[A Swing and A Drive]

I don't fault the Brewers for not bothering with the likes of Lyles or Miley and starting the season with Woodruff, Peralta and Burnes in the rotation. My guess is that they were hoping that 2 of the 3 would solidify themselves as rotation fixures moving forward and at the very least the third one would be an addition to the bullpen.

 

Experiment results:

Woodruff- All Star

Burnes- Disaster

Peralta- Inconsistent and unreliable in either role

 

Now with Woodruff sidelined, they go into the deadline still sniffing 1st place somehow but basically nothing from this trio to count on.

 

And in the fall back to earth that Chacin has taken this season and it's just not good.

 

This gave Stearns little choice but to make the hole plugging/desperation type moves this week.

Edited August 1, 2019 by A Swing and A Drive

[True Blue Brew Crew]

Stearns is sticking to his stategy that he got lucky with last season...

 

Bargin bin starting pitchers.

 

Lyles, Pomeranz and Faria are all type of pitchers any other team could have had and no one bothered.

 

"Cycling" through these type of pitchers is not a recipe for sustained success IMO.

 

As his job description as GM, Stearns plugged some holes at the MLB level without damaging our already weak farm system too badly. (just Dubon IMO)

 

Don't think it will get us to the postseason this year, but he at least did a little bit to give us a shot.

 

This is a gross mischaracterization. Peralta and Burnes were supposed to be fixtures in the rotation. And leap of faith or not, Jimmy Nelson was going to get his shot at some point this year as well. All the talk coming into this year was how they had accumulated all this SP depth and how there were 9-10 legitimate rotation options. They're scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point because just about everything that could go wrong, went wrong. What is a small market team with a limited budget and a depleted farm system supposed to do? I don't think for a second that Stearns sees this is a recipe for sustained success. It's simply being creative with limited resources.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

I don't fault the Brewers for not bothering with the likes of Lyles or Miley and starting the season with Woodruff, Peralta and Burnes in the rotation. My guess is that they were hoping that 2 of the 3 would solidify themselves as rotation fixures moving forward and at the very least the third one would be an addition to the bullpen.

 

Experiment results:

Woodruff- All Star

Burnes- Disaster

Peralta- Inconsistent and unreliable in either role

 

Now with Woodruff sidelined, they go into the deadline still sniffing 1st place somehow but basically nothing from this trio to count on.

 

And in the fall back to earth that Chacin has taken this season and it's just not good.

 

This gave Stearns little choice but to make the hole plugging/desperation type moves this week.

 

It's not an experiment. It's literally what they have to do. They have to develop cheap young talent and pitching from within. They had to give Peralta and Burnes and Woodruff their shots at some point. Good starting pitching is ridiculously expensive to come by in either dollars or prospect capital. Neither of which the Brewers can ever spend recklessly. 1 of 3 panned out in 2019. I still believe the 2 that didn't, have bright futures.

[A Swing and A Drive]

For Stearns model to work, it's essential that the Brewers draft and develop, cost controlled young starting pitchers for their rotation.

 

Something this franchise has long struggled to do.

 

His model:

1. Cheap home grown starting pitchers (Woodruff, Nelson, Peralta, Burnes etc) paired with bargin bin free agent pitchers on short contracts (Miley, Chacin, etc)

2. Build a powerful offense with franchise cornerstones (Yelich, Huira, etc) and pair them with Free Agents on short term deals (Moustakas, Grandal, etc)

3. Build a deep and dynamic bullpen

 

All three of these clicked for the Brewers last year, with the Bullpen of Knebel, Hader and Jeffress carrying us.

 

Combine the Knebel injury, the Jeffress suck and the Claudio bust, and this year's bullpen is nothing special.

 

If you remove Hader from our bullpen, the Brewers might have one of the the worst pens in the league.

[xisxisxis]

Do you really believe he forgot how to play defense? I certainly can't explain the dropoff this year, but it don't think he's destined for it to be a permanant issue.

 

But while on the topic of poor comparisons, Yuni B.'s playoff success came as a 29 year old, and Arcia's was at 24. There's still reason to think Arcia can develop from that, where as Yuni was at his hypothetical peak, if he had that.

I'll just borrow a post in response:

There are 26 SS with at least 2,000 innings from 2016-2018.

 

Among those 26 Arcia ranks 9th in DRS (+9) & 19th in UZR (-5.3), so the metrics are mixed.

 

From the eye test I tend to side more with DRS than UZR in this case, but even then he is a loooong way from someone like Andrelton (+71) or even the next tier of guys like Crawford (+35), Lindor (+36) or even someone like Nick Ahmed (+37).

Arcia was never elite. His dropoff in 2019 isnt even in the quoted numbers. Different aspects of defense deteriorate at different levels. If you look at range for Escobar, he clearly has an age related decrease in his ability to get to balls that are in the "Remote" category. Personally, my lateral athleticism gave way a long time before my forward/back athleticism decreased.

 

Since you missed the point about Yuni, let me try to restate the conclusion first. Funny how the timing of a hot streak can negate a career of crapitude for some. To the point of Yuni having a hot streak, his career was crapitude. To the point Arcia had his hot streak his career is crapitude (worst hitter in baseball during his time in MLB - a not insignificant window; defense that is much more average for a SS than elite = overall crap). Sure, a miracle could occur and he finally gets it, like 0.1% of hitters who were crap their entire careers (MiLB and MLB) all of a sudden become good. At that point the analogy fails, because the "hot streak" was the prelude to a "break out", not just a hot streak in the middle of pretty horrible performance. Is that "reason to think"? no that's a possible outcome, not a probable outcome.

 

Because it'd mean we hypothetically gave up on him too early as well. Pretty straight forward.

As you bolded my statement "How is Arcia like either of those two?", I'll just point out one of the key words: "is". Now "is" is a present tense. You may have learned about this in school. Present tense is the present. Now. Currently. Past tense is previous time, before current (i.e. before present). There's also future tense, which represents future time/events. These will occur later or after the present tense. "Hypthetically" applies to a possible outcome in the future or to an alternate event then what happened in the past or present. Sure, Arcia could by a rare probability become a decent hitter in the future for another team and the Brewers weren't the beneficiaries of that improvement and then Arcia would be like Escobar and Segura. Possible? yes. Probable? no.

 

Which brings me to the difference between 2 very similar sounding, but distinct words: Probable and Possible. These words refer to future events. Possible means it "can be done" without any degree of conversion from a possibility to a reality. Therefore, possible is a boolean or a true/false where something "can be done" or "can't be done". Something is either possible or not possible. Probable is related to a word called probability or likelihood. Probability or likelihood can be expressed as an infinite range of values between 0 and 1, with 0 being absolute not going to happen and 1 being absolute certainty to happen. In practice, 0 and 1 are not events that happen when looking at probability or likelihood. The word "probable" is related to "probability" and is defined as "likely to be the case or to happen." The problem with "likely to be the case or to happen" is that it is subjective. If an event has a likelihood of 0.500000001 then that means there is likelihood that the event will not occur of 0.499999999. Many would not define that as "Probable". In fact, some argue that for something to be "probable" it has to be significantly more likely than a flip of a coin (0.5 probability). To me, I feel comfortable saying that it is possible that Arcia could become an average or above hitter, but it is not probable.

[StearnsFTW]

Yeah, the Tanner Roark obsession is baffling.

 

I get the point that somehow 2 league-average pitchers were going to make some big difference......problem is the point is a poor one.

 

Brewcrewin07 went from shooting for the moon (Syndergaard), to shooting for an airplane (Ray), to shooting for a sparrow (Roark). He got to the point with his "grass is always greener" philosophy that he literally wanted to grab anyone that wasn't familiar. All he cared about was wanting a big name guy at first, damned the current results or price. At the end, he simply wanted anyone, yet at the same time he knocked Jordan Lyles and Jacob Faria because he self-appointingly called them "non needle-movers". The guy was all over the map in his disgust.

 

I hear ya. It's fairly comical actually.

 

I personally don't think this is the season to go for it, nor do I think any of the pitchers moved were particularly great answers for various reasons, so I'm fine with what they did.

 

This team probably isn't good enough to do much in October if they do manage to get there. I don't see the sense in mortgaging the future this season.

[Warning Track Power]

I know not everyone has the Athletic but the article below analyzes the Brewers acquisition of Pomeranz and Black:

 

https://theathletic.com/1110345/2019/08/01/drew-pomeranzs-addition-gives-brewers-valuable-flexibility-in-bullpen/

 

The most interesting thing I found though was in the comment section, Robert Murray's explanation for calling the trade "significant":

 

When I first got the information, I was told it was Dubon-for-Will Smith. I confirmed Dubon, tweeted it was Dubon-to-SF and a “significant” trade anticipating that it would be Smith coming back. Of course, it was not. I apologize for misleading. It is never my intention to do that.

 

Good enough for me.

[homer]

So a human being made a mistake. Will wonders never cease.

[pacopete4]

So a human being made a mistake. Will wonders never cease.

 

Well, I guess we need robot reporters too.

[TJseven7]

For Stearns model to work, it's essential that the Brewers draft and develop, cost controlled young starting pitchers for their rotation.

 

Something this franchise has long struggled to do.

 

His model:

1. Cheap home grown starting pitchers (Woodruff, Nelson, Peralta, Burnes etc) paired with bargin bin free agent pitchers on short contracts (Miley, Chacin, etc)

2. Build a powerful offense with franchise cornerstones (Yelich, Huira, etc) and pair them with Free Agents on short term deals (Moustakas, Grandal, etc)

3. Build a deep and dynamic bullpen

 

All three of these clicked for the Brewers last year, with the Bullpen of Knebel, Hader and Jeffress carrying us.

 

Combine the Knebel injury, the Jeffress suck and the Claudio bust, and this year's bullpen is nothing special.

 

If you remove Hader from our bullpen, the Brewers might have one of the the worst pens in the league.

 

Except that with the loss of Knebel and the implosion of Jeffress the model broke for a long time. You need 3 RP who are sub 3 high leverage. MKE has that. It just took a long time to figure them out and due to short comings in the starting group they are still getting bounced around. Hader Houser Peralta are all between 1.5 and 2.5 in the pen. The rest of the 8 need to pitch right around 4.0. Claudio hasn't been a bust. He's been a filler piece. Guerra filler piece. The loss of Knebel and the flame out by Jeffress has caused a ripple effect and had the team throwing a number of pen arms that couldn't manage to stay close to 4.0 era.

 

Because all the starters we threw at the wall flopped this year. No Miley Chacin gem. No Guerra or Suter even. They didn't want to block the young arms and when they young arms didn't work the emegency options behind them didn't hit the mark.

 

It's sustainable. You can always stock up, hit some miss some and do it all over again the next year cheaply. Year to year its not consistent. We dealt with the high of highs in 2018 and the low of lows in 2019.

[OnTheBlack]

Do you really believe he forgot how to play defense? I certainly can't explain the dropoff this year, but it don't think he's destined for it to be a permanant issue.

 

But while on the topic of poor comparisons, Yuni B.'s playoff success came as a 29 year old, and Arcia's was at 24. There's still reason to think Arcia can develop from that, where as Yuni was at his hypothetical peak, if he had that.

I'll just borrow a post in response:

There are 26 SS with at least 2,000 innings from 2016-2018.

 

Among those 26 Arcia ranks 9th in DRS (+9) & 19th in UZR (-5.3), so the metrics are mixed.

 

From the eye test I tend to side more with DRS than UZR in this case, but even then he is a loooong way from someone like Andrelton (+71) or even the next tier of guys like Crawford (+35), Lindor (+36) or even someone like Nick Ahmed (+37).

Arcia was never elite. His dropoff in 2019 isnt even in the quoted numbers. Different aspects of defense deteriorate at different levels. If you look at range for Escobar, he clearly has an age related decrease in his ability to get to balls that are in the "Remote" category. Personally, my lateral athleticism gave way a long time before my forward/back athleticism decreased.

 

Since you missed the point about Yuni, let me try to restate the conclusion first. Funny how the timing of a hot streak can negate a career of crapitude for some. To the point of Yuni having a hot streak, his career was crapitude. To the point Arcia had his hot streak his career is crapitude (worst hitter in baseball during his time in MLB - a not insignificant window; defense that is much more average for a SS than elite = overall crap). Sure, a miracle could occur and he finally gets it, like 0.1% of hitters who were crap their entire careers (MiLB and MLB) all of a sudden become good. At that point the analogy fails, because the "hot streak" was the prelude to a "break out", not just a hot streak in the middle of pretty horrible performance. Is that "reason to think"? no that's a possible outcome, not a probable outcome.

 

Because it'd mean we hypothetically gave up on him too early as well. Pretty straight forward.

As you bolded my statement "How is Arcia like either of those two?", I'll just point out one of the key words: "is". Now "is" is a present tense. You may have learned about this in school. Present tense is the present. Now. Currently. Past tense is previous time, before current (i.e. before present). There's also future tense, which represents future time/events. These will occur later or after the present tense. "Hypthetically" applies to a possible outcome in the future or to an alternate event then what happened in the past or present. Sure, Arcia could by a rare probability become a decent hitter in the future for another team and the Brewers weren't the beneficiaries of that improvement and then Arcia would be like Escobar and Segura. Possible? yes. Probable? no.

 

Which brings me to the difference between 2 very similar sounding, but distinct words: Probable and Possible. These words refer to future events. Possible means it "can be done" without any degree of conversion from a possibility to a reality. Therefore, possible is a boolean or a true/false where something "can be done" or "can't be done". Something is either possible or not possible. Probable is related to a word called probability or likelihood. Probability or likelihood can be expressed as an infinite range of values between 0 and 1, with 0 being absolute not going to happen and 1 being absolute certainty to happen. In practice, 0 and 1 are not events that happen when looking at probability or likelihood. The word "probable" is related to "probability" and is defined as "likely to be the case or to happen." The problem with "likely to be the case or to happen" is that it is subjective. If an event has a likelihood of 0.500000001 then that means there is likelihood that the event will not occur of 0.499999999. Many would not define that as "Probable". In fact, some argue that for something to be "probable" it has to be significantly more likely than a flip of a coin (0.5 probability). To me, I feel comfortable saying that it is possible that Arcia could become an average or above hitter, but it is not probable.

 

 

Are you being serious or are you just the type of clown who likes to walk around with an air of superiority talking to people in the usual pedagogical tone only those who just love hearing themselves talk like to speak with? This is something people who generally feel insecure with their particular level of education tend to do in an attempt to make people think they're smarter than they are. And my god...I am impressed with your ability to explain present tense and past tense. But wait...you topped it with your ability to differentiate between probable and possible.

 

 

The question, how is Arcia like either of those two. I really wouldn't think I'd need to hold your hand and walk you through how he's similar to Alcides Escobar if you're looking for players who LITERALLY share similar traits with him, I assumed we were talking about the situation he was in vs where the two other players we traded away. But forgive me, I really didn't think you were asking such a stupid question. My fault for giving you too much credit.

 

Which brings me to a question. Is it possible you'll be able to discuss baseball without the obnoxious tone? Sure. It is probable? Given you still have a quote someone made over a year ago so you can...I don't know, presumably boast about how you were right? I'd say there's a small chance.

 

 

Arcia

Age 22- .277/.324/.407 .731 OPS 1.3 Dwar,

Age 23-.236/.268/.307 .576 OPS .9 DWar

First 3 full years-.260/.302/.367 .668 OPS 2.6 Dwar in 431 games, but a year younger.

Alcides Escobar

Age 23(First full year)-.235 /.288/.324 .614 OPS

Traded

Age 24-.254/.290/.343 .633 OPS 1.9 Dwar

 

First 3 full years-.262/.304/.355 .659 OPS 4 Dwar in 599 games. LIKE Arcia, his Dwar fell his 3 year as well to .6

 

Yeah, not alike at all. Both players weren't up and down, both players didn't see a drop in their 3rd year in their defensive value, Batting Average and OBP within 2 points, Arcia with a ~30 point edge in OPS.

 

 

Oh, but then you went through a rather exhaustive effort to try and teach me what present and past tense means. So how is Arcia like Escobar? Well here ya go buddy.

 

Arcia-2019

.230/.298/.373 .671 OPS and a .4 Dwar

Escobar-2019

.231.279/.313 with a sub .600 OPS and a -.6 Dwar

 

So I guess Arcia is considerably better. Both offensively and defensively. Now. Currently. In the PRESENT tense. Though I wouldn't have a clue why anyone would be asking how the 24 year old compares to the 31 year old Escobar. I didn't see how it was particularly relevant, so I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you weren't asking a question that stupid. Though perhaps if I'd have read your absurd Yuni Betancourt comparison from one year when he was 29 or your assertion that it would be a "miracle," that he "gets it," I'd have had more context and appreciation for the level of intellect I was dealing with.

 

 

To me, I feel comfortable saying that it is possible that Arcia could become an average or above hitter, but it is not probable.

 

That's odd. In the same post you said it would be a "miracle."

[PeaveyFury]

Do you really believe he forgot how to play defense? I certainly can't explain the dropoff this year, but it don't think he's destined for it to be a permanant issue.

 

But while on the topic of poor comparisons, Yuni B.'s playoff success came as a 29 year old, and Arcia's was at 24. There's still reason to think Arcia can develop from that, where as Yuni was at his hypothetical peak, if he had that.

 

 

Arcia was never elite. His dropoff in 2019 isnt even in the quoted numbers.

'

 

I never used the word elite in my post.

 

He used to play defense at an above-average level that offset a lot of his offensive limitations. This year, that has decreased dramatically. You seem to think that's the sign of a long-term issue, but I question whether a 24 year old is experiencing permanent physical declines. He's hit better this year, and if his defense does rebound, he'd be above replacement level if he can sustain his 2019 offensive production going forward.

 

Since you missed the point about Yuni, let me try to restate the conclusion first. Funny how the timing of a hot streak can negate a career of crapitude for some. To the point of Yuni having a hot streak, his career was crapitude.

 

I didn't miss the point, I just don't think it was a particularly valid one. As your point was that Yuni was terrible for his career, had a good playoff run which was magnified because it was in the playoffs, people overlooked a bad career? Not buying it. Everyone here knew Yuni was bad.

 

My issue with said point is that Arcia is 5 years younger than Yuni was, and didn't have nearly the crappy career Yuni had had at that point. Arcia has already had a better season in 2017 than Yuni ever had, which is why people still think that there's room to grow for a 24 year old. You seem to think that he's reached his ceiling. As others have pointed out, we gave up too early on Segura because we weren't patient enough, and it is POSSIBLE that they're heading toward the same situation here.

[wntrtxn21]

I don't fault the Brewers for not bothering with the likes of Lyles or Miley and starting the season with Woodruff, Peralta and Burnes in the rotation. My guess is that they were hoping that 2 of the 3 would solidify themselves as rotation fixures moving forward and at the very least the third one would be an addition to the bullpen.

 

Experiment results:

Woodruff- All Star

Burnes- Disaster

Peralta- Inconsistent and unreliable in either role

 

Now with Woodruff sidelined, they go into the deadline still sniffing 1st place somehow but basically nothing from this trio to count on.

 

And in the fall back to earth that Chacin has taken this season and it's just not good.

 

This gave Stearns little choice but to make the hole plugging/desperation type moves this week.

 

It's not an experiment. It's literally what they have to do. They have to develop cheap young talent and pitching from within. They had to give Peralta and Burnes and Woodruff their shots at some point. Good starting pitching is ridiculously expensive to come by in either dollars or prospect capital. Neither of which the Brewers can ever spend recklessly. 1 of 3 panned out in 2019. I still believe the 2 that didn't, have bright futures.

 

The Brewers have the worst track record for developing starters in all baseball. Woodruff is the first really good one since Ben Sheets over 25 years ago! Stearns went into the season with no back-up plan knowing full well the Brewers' miserable results with developing starters. The pen is an absolute mess and he did little to fix it from the start.

[OnTheBlack]

Do you really believe he forgot how to play defense? I certainly can't explain the dropoff this year, but it don't think he's destined for it to be a permanant issue.

 

But while on the topic of poor comparisons, Yuni B.'s playoff success came as a 29 year old, and Arcia's was at 24. There's still reason to think Arcia can develop from that, where as Yuni was at his hypothetical peak, if he had that.

 

 

Arcia was never elite. His dropoff in 2019 isnt even in the quoted numbers.

'

 

I never used the word elite in my post.

 

He used to play defense at an above-average level that offset a lot of his offensive limitations. This year, that has decreased dramatically. You seem to think that's the sign of a long-term issue, but I question whether a 24 year old is experiencing permanent physical declines. He's hit better this year, and if his defense does rebound, he'd be above replacement level if he can sustain his 2019 offensive production going forward.

 

Since you missed the point about Yuni, let me try to restate the conclusion first. Funny how the timing of a hot streak can negate a career of crapitude for some. To the point of Yuni having a hot streak, his career was crapitude.

 

I didn't miss the point, I just don't think it was a particularly valid one. As your point was that Yuni was terrible for his career, had a good playoff run which was magnified because it was in the playoffs, people overlooked a bad career? Not buying it. Everyone here knew Yuni was bad.

 

My issue with said point is that Arcia is 5 years younger than Yuni was, and didn't have nearly the crappy career Yuni had had at that point. Arcia has already had a better season in 2017 than Yuni ever had, which is why people still think that there's room to grow for a 24 year old. You seem to think that he's reached his ceiling. As others have pointed out, we gave up too early on Segura because we weren't patient enough, and it is POSSIBLE that they're heading toward the same situation here.

 

 

I'd also be curious how Segura "always" had a higher upside than Arcia.

 

Arcia was ranked among the top 10 by nearly every scouting service, 6th by MLBpipline.

Segura was roughly a top 50 prospect.

Arcia is playing in his age 24 season. Segura's age 24 season he hit .246/.289/.326.

 

Not seeing the argument how it'd take "a miracle" for Arcia to develop, but those guys were expected to.

[trwi7]

I know not everyone has the Athletic but the article below analyzes the Brewers acquisition of Pomeranz and Black:

 

https://theathletic.com/1110345/2019/08/01/drew-pomeranzs-addition-gives-brewers-valuable-flexibility-in-bullpen/

 

The most interesting thing I found though was in the comment section, Robert Murray's explanation for calling the trade "significant":

 

When I first got the information, I was told it was Dubon-for-Will Smith. I confirmed Dubon, tweeted it was Dubon-to-SF and a “significant” trade anticipating that it would be Smith coming back. Of course, it was not. I apologize for misleading. It is never my intention to do that.

 

Good enough for me.

 

So he was told it was for Smith but wasn't confident enough to actually say it was Dubon for Smith? If you can't confirm the significant piece is coming back, either wait until you can confirm or don't say it's a significant trade and just say Dubon has been traded and am working on the details for who. I wouldn't even consider Dubon for Smith to be a significant trade either. The explanation is crap.