Did we give up World Series chances?

[Ghostbear]

By trading Josh Hader did we give up our World Series chances? If what Stearns got in return for Josh can't achieve what Josh did, and they must very soon, the rest of the team will lose trust in them and then the any chance at the series is gone. Pittsburgh losses have spooked the team. Two of those games would have been wins had Hader still been on the team. Bush is a bust and where is Rodgers? He pitched one decent inning but that inning showed he does not have the elite stuff Hader has. Now, that all puts extra pressure on Williams, Boxberger, and Rodgers to perform at their highest level. This may includer Suder as well. With Hader players knew if they had a lead going into the 7th, they had at least a 90% chance to win. Now that's all gone. Stearns move looks like it's not only a bust from a team disposition but also from a chance at the big one. The big question also remains, what message did this send to guys like Woody, Burns, Peralta and Burns? If you're too successful will you be traded because the executives don't want to pay you? So, what's my motivation now? Counsel and the execs better address very soon. If the team mood and play against the Reds continues like it did against the lowly Pirates, chances at the big one may really be gone. The team guys wanted Josh with them in the big hunt, but now he's gone. Stearns didn't consider alot of things.  People like me paid to see Hader time. Who will pay to see Rodgers? Nobody. Stearns traded an elite shining diamond and got a bag of rough cut pebbles.  Greg

[stalton]

This is a gross oversimplification but I think it boils down to perennially competitive versus the window theory.  Personally, I don't think either philosophy is right or wrong.  Marlins won the WS and then promptly had a fire sale leading to an absolutely horrendous following the next couple of years.  The Brewers in 08 and 11 went all in and missed.  

Teams like TB and the current Brewers are trying to always get a bite of the apple because once you hit the playoffs, you never know. Just ask the Cards.  

Using statistics, the expected value of the WS is the same whether it's 5 years of 5% or 1 year of 25% and 4 years of 0%.  Only difference is that it's possible to get multiple WS with our current approach even if the team is sacrificing a part of the current year to maintain the team in the future.

[Oxy]

I think it's way more fun as a fan to have a chance at winning division titles every year, and having competitive, meaningful games every September and most Octobers.

[Simba2020]

Generally, I'd lean towards the sustainability versus all-in approach. However, at some point, I think you have to try for the latter on occasion. The Packers, to me, have had as their goal, winning the NFC North, not winning the SB. With Rodgers in his prime, adopting the all-in approach, which I don't think they have ever done, might have led to more SB appearances.

The Brewers are currently in a Rodgers-like scenario with an elite pitching staff. I think the time to go all-in, or at least somewhat, was last year's trade deadline or the offseason. They either didn't want to do it or couldn't because MA wouldn't let them. I'm not sure this team was one that could have been significantly improved to make a difference. 

If the three moves they did make were the only ones they were going to make, I think I would have preferred them to do nothing. I personally would have looked to trade Hader the past two years. But with his value declining as he gets closer and closer to free agency, again not sure now was the time.

[Brewcrew82]

1 hour ago, Ghostbear said:

By trading Josh Hader did we give up our World Series chances? If what Stearns got in return for Josh can't achieve what Josh did, and they must very soon, the rest of the team will lose trust in them and then the any chance at the series is gone. Pittsburgh losses have spooked the team. Two of those games would have been wins had Hader still been on the team. Bush is a bust and where is Rodgers? He pitched one decent inning but that inning showed he does not have the elite stuff Hader has. Now, that all puts extra pressure on Williams, Boxberger, and Rodgers to perform at their highest level. This may includer Suder as well. With Hader players knew if they had a lead going into the 7th, they had at least a 90% chance to win. Now that's all gone. Stearns move looks like it's not only a bust from a team disposition but also from a chance at the big one. The big question also remains, what message did this send to guys like Woody, Burns, Peralta and Burns? If you're too successful will you be traded because the executives don't want to pay you? So, what's my motivation now? Counsel and the execs better address very soon. If the team mood and play against the Reds continues like it did against the lowly Pirates, chances at the big one may really be gone. The team guys wanted Josh with them in the big hunt, but now he's gone. Stearns didn't consider alot of things.  People like me paid to see Hader time. Who will pay to see Rodgers? Nobody. Stearns traded an elite shining diamond and got a bag of rough cut pebbles.  Greg

The idea that we lost the games in Pittsburgh solely because we didn't have Hader is a fallacy. Do you not remember how Hader had been pitching before the trade? Williams has been significantly better than Hader this year and he gave up the game-winning home run to Reynolds on Wednesday night. Simply put, we lost those games because the entire team crapped the bed by not taking advantage of scoring opportunities, playing awful defense, and putting far too many opposing runners on base.

And how can you possibly call Bush and Rogers (not Rodgers) a bust when they've combined for less than 5 innings between them? The stats show that they are good pitchers, and we will likely start to see that going forward. 

The Brewers, like the Rays, will always have to make moves like this to remain consistently competitive in an environment that is geared so heavily towards large-market teams. Do you remember when Melvin and Attanasio decided to go "all in" in 2008 and 2011? How did that turn out for us? We had good seasons, but no World Series and nothing better than what Stearns has accomplished. And, in doing so, we completely gutted our farm system by trading players like Brantley, Cain, Escobar, etc., setting ourselves up for even more down seasons and an eventual rebuild. 

 

[folly412]

11 minutes ago, stalton said:

This is a gross oversimplification but I think it boils down to perennially competitive versus the window theory.  

Yep, Stearns laid out this philosophy a few times, most recently after the trade.  Baseball's playoffs are practically a crapshoot.  Look no further than the '19 Nationals for that.   Perhaps even more so now that they're letting anyone halfway decent in.  Get a ticket for every raffle and you've got a chance to to win each time.  

 

7 minutes ago, Oxy said:

I think it's way more fun as a fan to have a chance at winning division titles every year, and having competitive, meaningful games every September and most Octobers.

I think there's a balance.  The rebounds after a rebuild with new players emerging and winning when you don't expect to is very fun.  Part of it is probably roster construction - less than being "tired of winning", I've said before that the only players I would pay to see on this roster are Burnes and Peralta.  But that would change if some of the guys in the Nashville lineup emerge next year.  

[Jim French Stepstool]

Bush has had, if I remember correctly, 2 outings in the last six weeks where he's allowed an earned run. They both came this week. Williams allows his first earnie in what, 2 months? The Hader trade results won't be in for a long time, but this week was more about hugely unexpected failures by others, poor defense, and very untimely BBs by starters to light a fire.

[edfunderburk]

To address the question in the topic for this thread …

My answer is NO

I honestly don’t believe we were World Series worthy BEFORE the trade deadline & I don’t believe we are now

ATL proved last Fall that if we were to get “hot” at the right time … like our first week out of the All-Star break … we may surprise some folks & get there 

That said, there are at least four teams in the NL right now (LA, NYM, ATL, & San Diego) that are clearly better than the Brewers & two more (STL, Philly) that are as good

I certainly want to be wrong, but I don’t believe this is our year

Even if - by some miracle chance - we get to the 2022 World Series, I can’t imagine the Brewers beating the NYY or Houston

[NBBrewFan]

The difference in strategies 

36 minutes ago, stalton said:

This is a gross oversimplification but I think it boils down to perennially competitive versus the window theory.  Personally, I don't think either philosophy is right or wrong. 

Exactly.  If you simply think that the playoffs are a crap shoot then you would be inclined to prefer the sustained success model.  I don't believe that it's a crapshoot.  Most people rank teams by their 162 game season record and that's the basis for the idea that it's a crapshoot (I don't know how fangraphs or 538 bases their odds).  The problem with that is there are a myriad of reasons why a very good/the best team over the entire season would end up with 93 wins while another team has 101.  Injuries and schedule are 2 as is the team makeup for the playoffs compared to the regular season (trades/acquisitions).  As we have seen this year, the Brewers have an advantage because of the unbalanced schedule and their competition in the NL Central.  That difference could lead to multiple game swing in wins compared to a team that is better in talent in a tougher division.  Simply ranking by regular season wins ends up leading to a misconception about the "rankings".  Some teams have a really bad year for injuries and end up with a worse record than their talent when some of those players return for the post-season or the opposite, a team with a great record could have players with nagging injuries come playoff time that impact their ability to perform at the level they did during the season.  Deadline trades and acquisitions clearly have an impact on team talent that only impacts the roughly last 60 games. The key to the Braves success last year was in the talent added at the trade deadline or in-season callups/injury.  The other factor is that the regular season record often is the cumulative effect of most of the 40-man roster as teams have injuries, add/lose players at the fringe of the 26 man, etc.  In the playoffs the bench and back end relievers/starters are not used as much as most teams go with the top 9 batters and usually a 3 or 4 man rotation of the best SP and a shortened bullpen. That needs to be part of the analysis as to how teams are ranked. The Brewers do well using that depth, especially previously with expanded september rosters, but that won't help in the playoffs.  The playoffs are pitting the best teams so the talent level is closer so some of the outcomes can come down to chance (the most recent example was Daniel Murphy's error 7 years ago for the Mets). The Dodgers have had a long run of making the playoffs, but outside of the pandemic year have not won anything. What would happen if Corbin Burnes pitched like Jason Alexander during the playoffs?  Probably what has been happening to the Dodgers with Clayton Kershaw,  He hasn't been horrible every game, but when your TOR starter is blowing up a game a series that's a big impact when you are playing a team with similar talent. But that is likely to determine 1 series, not every one and now with the expanded playoffs 3 series gets you to the World Series (2 for the 2 top teams in each league), which makes a chance driven outcome harder 3 series in a row. I met a statistician/data modeler through work that basically taught me there is some chance in everything that humans do, but there is a lot of activities that can be modelled with enough information those models are more accurate.  Over drinks he told me that anyone who tells you anything in life (outside of games of chance) is all based on chance hasn't looked at enough data. 

[edfunderburk]

48 minutes ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

Bush has had, if I remember correctly, 2 outings in the last six weeks where he's allowed an earned run. They both came this week. Williams allows his first earnie in what, 2 months? The Hader trade results won't be in for a long time, but this week was more about hugely unexpected failures by others, poor defense, and very untimely BBs by starters to light a fire.

The defense has been an issue all year

For a team built on “run prevention” both pitching (mostly due to injuries) & defense (underperformance by several players) have been woefully bad & disappointing 

[Pugger]

You can't compare the Packers and the Brewers.  They are in vastly different situations financially.  And the NFL playoffs you win or go home whereas in MLB you play a series so if you lay an egg in the first game you aren't done.

 

[wallus]

No, one relief pitcher would not do it.

[Robocaller]

Our only chance for a World Series (appearance, even) is if our starting pitchers dominate and the back end of our bullpen closes out the games. Trading Hader might have IMPROVED our chances since Bush and Rogers should be more valuable than Hader and one of the AAAA guys we've been using.

But let's not kid ourselves, the biggest part of the equation is our starters dominating. When they don't, even the Pirates can sweep us, as we just found out.

 

[StearnsFTW]

Hader to Rogers will make almost no difference this season.  Next season when Rogers is gone is where it's going to matter.

 

 

[UpandIn]

2 hours ago, folly412 said:

I think there's a balance.  The rebounds after a rebuild with new players emerging and winning when you don't expect to is very fun.  Part of it is probably roster construction - less than being "tired of winning", I've said before that the only players I would pay to see on this roster are Burnes and Peralta.  But that would change if some of the guys in the Nashville lineup emerge next year.  

I'm not gonna get into the whole "Blow their WS chances," but Burnes and Peralta? Woodruff isn't in there? 

I'll pay to watch really any of the top 3(well...also Ashby and Lauer, but the two aces in particular). 

[brewcrewdue80]

10 hours ago, stalton said:

This is a gross oversimplification but I think it boils down to perennially competitive versus the window theory.  Personally, I don't think either philosophy is right or wrong.  Marlins won the WS and then promptly had a fire sale leading to an absolutely horrendous following the next couple of years.  The Brewers in 08 and 11 went all in and missed.  

Teams like TB and the current Brewers are trying to always get a bite of the apple because once you hit the playoffs, you never know. Just ask the Cards.  

Using statistics, the expected value of the WS is the same whether it's 5 years of 5% or 1 year of 25% and 4 years of 0%.  Only difference is that it's possible to get multiple WS with our current approach even if the team is sacrificing a part of the current year to maintain the team in the future.

This part-Teams like TB and the current Brewers are trying to always get a bite of the apple because once you hit the playoffs, you never know. Just ask the Cards

Cards last won the WS in 2011. Far better hitting than the Brewers possess today. Late prime Pujols-Prime Molina-Berkman-Holiday. The random was Allen Craig beasting that season.  They had the hitting addressed pitching at deadline where all acquired had positive impact for their WS. 

2011 roster Cards was filled with good players young and old, near atop baseballs best.  We've got the pitching aspect to say that, but hitting theres 0.  And we gave away the best closer to a team that now has the look of the 2011 Cards. Should have traded some more away.

[SoCalBrewfan]

Quote

I don't believe that it's a crapshoot.  Most people rank teams by their 162 game season record and that's the basis for the idea that it's a crapshoot (I don't know how fangraphs or 538 bases their odds).  

Crapshoot as in completely random roll of the dice?  No.  But I think two things are true:

1.  There's no guarantee that the 'better' team wins a short series.  A one game playoff is closest to a coin flip, but baseball being baseball means that the lesser team can win a five or seven game series.  This year of course there are three game series...

2.  The playoffs are different and 'better' is different from the regular season. Rotation depth is less critical, you go to the bullpen a lot, your 4 and 5 starters might be in the 'pen or off the playoff roster altogether.  You face more good pitching and defense, so stringing together base hits is harder, and historically IIRC home runs account for a bigger fraction of runs.

We of course have a very strong 1-2 combo of starters, several good choices for a third or fourth starter allowing us to play matchups a bit, and an offense that is well above average in HRs. Whether the bullpen is up to the task remains to be seen but the pieces are there. So while the Brewers are not the best regular season team from among the Dodgers / Mets / Braves / Padres, there's reason to believe that getting into the playoffs gives them a puncher's chance.  

[BruisedCrew]

16 hours ago, Robocaller said:

Our only chance for a World Series (appearance, even) is if our starting pitchers dominate and the back end of our bullpen closes out the games. Trading Hader might have IMPROVED our chances since Bush and Rogers should be more valuable than Hader and one of the AAAA guys we've been using.

But let's not kid ourselves, the biggest part of the equation is our starters dominating. When they don't, even the Pirates can sweep us, as we just found out.

 

I think there are many points in between going “All in”, making minor acquisitions to prop up the current team, and going into total rebuild mode. 
 

I also think what the Brewers did reduced their chances of reaching the World Series from slim to slimmer. In combination with what other teams did, including the Cardinals and Phillies, I think their chances of missing the playoffs completely have gone up significantly. Those teams addressed some of their weaknesses while the Brewers did nothing to their hitting and arguably made one of their strengths weaker. 
 

I don’t lump the Hader and Bush deals together because they could have done one without the other. I assumed they would make a deal to acquire a veteran setup reliever and that would give some support to the bullpen. But taking away Hader creates a cascading effect through the back end of the bullpen that might make things worse, and isn’t going to make it better unless you think that Hader’s recent problems were more than just a bad stretch. 

As a matter of philosophy I’m good with trying to be competitive on a regular basis over hoping to hit the jackpot in a 2-3 year window of competence surrounded by many years of sub .500 teams (see KC Royals).

I don’t like the Hader trade because I think it made the team worse in the short term and disrupts team chemistry and familiarity with roles. I also don’t see that the prospects they got were so special that the Brewers couldn’t have made a similar deal in the off-season. In the off-season they might have been able to include Hader in a deal that would have returned an established hitter to cover one of the Brewers many positions of mediocrity.

I am also disappointed that the Brewers couldn’t pick up a veteran right handed hitting 1B/OF who could serve as a platoon with Tellez, provide some depth in the OF and at DH, and be a better PH option than what they have now. The Astros were able to get Mancini and the Mets didn’t make any big moves, but bolstered their roster with platoon pieces (Vogelbach, Ruf, and Naquin). The Brewers did nothing.

 

 

 

[rickh150]

Yeah, the argument shouldn’t be “Did the Brewers get better at the deadline?”  They did not. If you want to argue that they did not get worse, ok.  If you love the prospects, it’s great for 2024-2028. 
 

The question should be “Did Stearns and Attanasio have talks about payroll in 2023/2024?” THAT should be a given, but I don’t know if it was given comments from both recently. If I’m Stearns, I would want to know if we could add significant payroll, albeit from arby increases in 2023 and 2024, to temporarily go above what is budgeted. If Stearns thinks, I cannot keep EVERYONE (Burnes, Woodruff, Hader, Adames, etc..) next year, I better make life easier for myself this season and make a prospects trade at an opportune time, rather than having more issues in $ and trading this offseason, then the optics are tricky.  I really hope they are communicating, even now, about the futures of Burnes and Woodruff, especially.
 

Then the question is…Did we trade Hader to get better long term or was it more about trading to better afford 2023/2024 payrolls?  

[Brock Beauchamp]

20 hours ago, Oxy said:

I think it's way more fun as a fan to have a chance at winning division titles every year, and having competitive, meaningful games every September and most Octobers.

I generally agree but after awhile, I need to see at least a World Series APPEARANCE. Division titles are fun but getting bumped from the postseason before Oct 15th every year grows tiresome.

[DuWayne Steurer]

2 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

I generally agree but after awhile, I need to see at least a World Series APPEARANCE. Division titles are fun but getting bumped from the postseason before Oct 15th every year grows tiresome.

I agree with the basic premise of this.  I'd definitely like the Brewers to recognize a "go for it" year, and add a big piece of two, but remain competitive yearly.  I don't want them to go for the enchilada at the expense of being bad/rebuilding for 4-6-10 years, ala the Royals, as someone else mentioned.

The thing is, there are years we don't make a "big" deal, where they may well have tried, and it didn't happen.  We always look at what was offered for Soto, Machado, all the big names that get traded for and say "we could have done better", and we don't know what Stearns (or Melvin, before him) offered, or is willing to part with. We also don't know the exact valuation these teams put on their prospects.  Maybe the Orioles REALLY wanted the guys they got in the Machado deal, and they didn't want a different offer.  It's not as simple as saying "We could have beat THAT offer!" 

I get it, and I agree... 100%.  

2011 was definitely a "go for it" year. A fantastic offense (except Yuni B), a solid rotation top to bottom, a really good bullpen.... they were built to win it all, and then Sean Marcum broke down right before the playoffs and Ron Roenicke made a series of.....questionable decisions in the post-season.  It is what it is though.  

 

[edfunderburk]

17 hours ago, StearnsFTW said:

Hader to Rogers will make almost no difference this season.  Next season when Rogers is gone is where it's going to matter.

 

 

Any chance Milwaukee re-signs Rogers for $8M?

[Brock Beauchamp]

18 minutes ago, DuWayne Steurer said:

I agree with the basic premise of this.  I'd definitely like the Brewers to recognize a "go for it" year, and add a big piece of two, but remain competitive yearly.  I don't want them to go for the enchilada at the expense of being bad/rebuilding for 4-6-10 years, ala the Royals, as someone else mentioned.

The thing is, there are years we don't make a "big" deal, where they may well have tried, and it didn't happen.  We always look at what was offered for Soto, Machado, all the big names that get traded for and say "we could have done better", and we don't know what Stearns (or Melvin, before him) offered, or is willing to part with. We also don't know the exact valuation these teams put on their prospects.  Maybe the Orioles REALLY wanted the guys they got in the Machado deal, and they didn't want a different offer.  It's not as simple as saying "We could have beat THAT offer!" 

I get it, and I agree... 100%.  

2011 was definitely a "go for it" year. A fantastic offense (except Yuni B), a solid rotation top to bottom, a really good bullpen.... they were built to win it all, and then Sean Marcum broke down right before the playoffs and Ron Roenicke made a series of.....questionable decisions in the post-season.  It is what it is though.  

Yeah, exactly. While what the Padres are doing is SUPER FUN right now, the piper will need to be paid. I prefer a competitive window of 4-5 years over seeing two intense high profile seasons followed by an extensive rebuild that takes half a decade. 

[brewers888]

26 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Yeah, exactly. While what the Padres are doing is SUPER FUN right now, the piper will need to be paid. I prefer a competitive window of 4-5 years over seeing two intense high profile seasons followed by an extensive rebuild that takes half a decade. 

The piper does not have to get paid if you are a fantastic scouting and developing organization as the Padres are under Preller. I do not think he is that great of a GM but Preller has been great at the scouting part of the game going back to his time in Texas when it was his players that got to the World Series and that team hasn't been the same since he left.

[brewers888]

My problem with the Hader trade is we didn't get nearly enough for the best reliever in baseball and it was made worse by dropping Lamet who at least had some upside.