Article: Was the Milwaukee Brewers' Offseason a Failure?

[Jake McKibbin]

Just now, Jopal78 said:

See comment above that every year there’s a team that gets hot or lucky. That was the Giants only winning season in the last six years.

Even though they had a  losing season doesn't mean they weren't trying to win. They definitely were

[sveumrules]

30 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

See comment above that every year there’s a team that gets hot or lucky. That was the Giants only winning season in the last six years.

That doesn’t mean they weren’t trying. The 2017 Giants won 67 games with the 5th highest OD payroll. In 2018 it was 73 wins on the 2nd highest OD payroll. In 2019 it was 77 wins on the 6th highest OD payroll. Looks to me like they were trying and failing.

The Angels have had seven straight losing seasons with a Top 10 payroll, have they not been trying either?

Were the Mets ($195M | 77 W) or Padres ($174M | 79 W) in 2021 or Red Sox ($206M | 78 W) in 2022 not trying because they finished under .500?

[SF70]

38 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

Depth is one thing it probably helps them not back track, but the question is do they have the horses to go toe to toe with the best of their league? They didn’t last year, and I don’t think they do this year. Their roster has too many “ifs”: if Winker is healthy and last year was a fluke, if the shift helps Yelich produce more, if the rotation stays healthy, if one of their CFers can excel in the majors, etc etc.

Of course every year a team gets extra lucky or goes on a timely hot streak so anything can happen, I just  think that’s what the Brewers are going to need to stand out in ‘23.

They protected the teams future while at the same time improving the ‘23 team. They also have financial flexibility moving forward for opportunistic acquisitions both by trade (adding salary) or FA. 

[monty57]

51 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

Depth is one thing it probably helps them not back track, but the question is do they have the horses to go toe to toe with the best of their league? They didn’t last year, and I don’t think they do this year. Their roster has too many “ifs”: if Winker is healthy and last year was a fluke, if the shift helps Yelich produce more, if the rotation stays healthy, if one of their CFers can excel in the majors, etc etc.

Of course every year a team gets extra lucky or goes on a timely hot streak so anything can happen, I just  think that’s what the Brewers are going to need to stand out in ‘23.

I don't disagree that some things have to bounce right for the Brewers, but can we at least give them a 2-year average? Last year's team wasn't much different than the '21 team that would have won 100 games if they hadn't sat their starters for the last week plus.

There is a lot of talent on the roster, but last year we lost 20-something games combined between Peralta and Woodruff. That's like losing most of a season of a top-of-the-rotation starter. Not many teams can overcome that without at least losing a few more games. A few more games would have gotten us into the playoffs.

The team will be looking for a bounce-back from Winker, but as I mentioned earlier, he was injured so there's reason for his down season. Prior to the injury season, he was one of the best bats in the game. Anderson's another bounce-back guy, but I think his bounce-back would be "gravy," as the expected scenario is probably that he plays okay for a while, then we bring Turang up and run a rotation of guys in the infield like Counsell likes to do.

Bottom line, give me a $120M team without question marks. I think the Brewers did pretty well with what they have.

[Jopal78]

1 hour ago, sveumrules said:

That doesn’t mean they weren’t trying. The 2017 Giants won 67 games with the 5th highest OD payroll. In 2018 it was 73 wins on the 2nd highest OD payroll. In 2019 it was 77 wins on the 6th highest OD payroll. Looks to me like they were trying and failing.

The Angels have had seven straight losing seasons with a Top 10 payroll, have they not been trying either?

Were the Mets ($195M | 77 W) or Padres ($174M | 79 W) in 2021 or Red Sox ($206M | 78 W) in 2022 not trying because they finished under .500?

You're being too literal to argue the point, every team wants to win as many games as possible.  Go back and look and see if there were any pundits who picked the Giants to win the NL West in 2021, or even be a wild card team, I bet there were virtually zero. The Giants were coming off of 4 consecutive losing seasons and running it back with essentially the same core of players; they weren't viewed as a contender. The '21 Giants were were one of those teams like I mentioned that come out of nowhere and win a pile of games. 

In '21 the Giants had Buster Posey in his last year put up the best year of his career since he won the MVP in '12.  Brandon Crawford had an .895 OPS a full 100 points higher than any other season to date. Brandan Belt with a .975 OPS 160 points above his career average. Darin Ruf (who?) with a .904 OPS across 300+ plate appearances. DeSclafani had a career year on the mound.

Nonetheless, I'll modify my point, in '21 the Brewers were the worst team in the NL amongst those viewed as potential contenders. Have they added enough talent to go toe to toe with the big boys in the NL? In my view they have not, they reshuffled the deck as best they could, but when the pundits release their predictions I anticipate the Brewers will be an also ran in the NL this year. 

But as the '21 Giants prove, you get a couple of hitters to come out of nowhere and get white hot for a long period of time, get some decent pitching you can win the division. I think this is what the Brewers are shooting for in '23.

 

[nate82]

44 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

Braves, Mets, Phillies, Padres, Dodgers, Cardinals don’t have situations where they’re counting on guys bouncing back from horrible seasons to be pillars of their team, or banking on improved health to be able to compete.

The Cardinals are not relying on Flaherty who is coming off an injury or a 40 year old Wainwright who pitched poorly when not throwing to a now retired Molina?

The Dodgers have a lot of starting rotation question marks along with can Lux replace Trea Turner's production?  Will JD Martinez bounce back from a bad year in Boston? 

The Mets are relying on old pitchers being effective as their #1 and #2 pitchers.  If either Scherzer or Verlander start showing their age that could be an ugly mess for the Mets.

The Padres don't have a strong starting rotation.  They have a good offense but their best pitcher would be a #3 or #4 on most of the playoff teams. 

Braves will be relying on Acuna who is coming back from injury and will also be relying on Arcia or gasp a rookie Grissom at SS to replace Swanson.  Then at DH will Ozuna be able to give the Braves anything?  Is Harris really the hitter he was or will he regress?  Is Murphy an improvement at C over what they had in '22? 

The Phillies bullpen could be an absolute mess if Kimbrel is not effective.  Will Castellanos bounce back from a poor season?  How healthy is Harper? 

[Jopal78]

26 minutes ago, nate82 said:

The Cardinals are not relying on Flaherty who is coming off an injury or a 40 year old Wainwright who pitched poorly when not throwing to a now retired Molina?

....

The Padres don't have a strong starting rotation.  They have a good offense but their best pitcher would be a #3 or #4 on most of the playoff teams. 

 

I was going to go through this point by point then I read the comment the Padres best pitcher would be a #3 or #4 on most playoff teams, and realized you're using hyperbole in order to dump on these teams to support your point. 

Yu Darvish bWAR 4.4, fWAR 4.2

Corbin Burnes bWAR 4.0, fWAR4.6. 

If your opinion truly is the Dodgers, Mets, Braves, Padres, Cardinals and Phillies have the same amount of questions with their roster as Milwaukee, you may want to consider laying some action on the Brewers because they're getting much better odds in Vegas than the others. 

 

[MrTPlush]

Feels like we continued our strange not really trying to legit World Series contender...but also not doing the opposite. 

At face value I would give them a B-...but at the end of the year I am betting I will change that to a D- for not trading any of Adames/Burnes/Woodruff with 2 years of control left. We best be at minimum winning the division or making at least the NLCS. A wild card birth just to quickly be booted would be a waste of time with this talent. 

[nate82]

6 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

I was going to go through this point by point then I read the comment the Padres best pitcher would be a #3 or #4 on most playoff teams, and realized you're using hyperbole in order to dump on these teams to support your point. 

Yu Darvish bWAR 4.4, fWAR 4.2

Corbin Burnes bWAR 4.0, fWAR4.6. 

If your opinion truly is the Dodgers, Mets, Braves, Padres, Cardinals and Phillies have the same amount of questions with their roster as Milwaukee, you may want to consider laying some action on the Brewers because they're getting much better odds in Vegas than the others. 

 

Where in my post did I compare them to the Brewers?  You were the one who said they don't have these situations when they do. 

Also Darvish is not a #1 or #2 type pitcher anymore he just isn't.  He is a #3 type pitcher and on most of the playoff teams that is where he would be. 

The only team where Darvish would be the #1 would be the Cardinals.  The Cardinals do not currently have a #1 type pitcher on their staff and Darvish would be a clear upgrade.  The Mets have Verlander and Scherzer, Braves have Fried and Wright, Dodgers have Urias and Kershaw, Phillies have Nola and Wheeler.  So yeah Darvish is a #3 or #4 on most of the playoff teams. 

ERA- is also a better stat to use than WAR for pitchers.  Darvish was the 20th ranked player in 2022 with an ERA- of 80.  The same as Nola so maybe he is the Phillies #2 so a coin flip there.  The only team where Darvish is a clear better #1 are the Cardinals. 

[Brewcrew82]

1 hour ago, Jopal78 said:

I was going to go through this point by point then I read the comment the Padres best pitcher would be a #3 or #4 on most playoff teams, and realized you're using hyperbole in order to dump on these teams to support your point. 

Yu Darvish bWAR 4.4, fWAR 4.2

Corbin Burnes bWAR 4.0, fWAR4.6. 

If your opinion truly is the Dodgers, Mets, Braves, Padres, Cardinals and Phillies have the same amount of questions with their roster as Milwaukee, you may want to consider laying some action on the Brewers because they're getting much better odds in Vegas than the others. 

 

He’s not wrong though…Darvish would clearly be the #3 starter on the Mets, Braves, Phillies, Brewers, etc.

[monty57]

1 hour ago, MrTPlush said:

Feels like we continued our strange not really trying to legit World Series contender...but also not doing the opposite. 

At face value I would give them a B-...but at the end of the year I am betting I will change that to a D- for not trading any of Adames/Burnes/Woodruff with 2 years of control left. We best be at minimum winning the division or making at least the NLCS. A wild card birth just to quickly be booted would be a waste of time with this talent. 

I hear this all the time, but just last year the Mets got beat in the Wild Card game. After all the things Cohen did and money he spent, did they "waste everyone's time" or "prove they weren't trying to win" by getting beat in the Wild Card series? Meanwhile, the #6 seed Phillies (with whom the Brewers were fighting for the final spot) made the World Series. 

As has been said many times, in baseball it's about getting into the playoffs. Once there, any team can win. It's about who's hot at the right time.

The moves made in the offseason are to try to put together a team that can make it through the rigors of the season and get to the playoffs. A lot of things, both positive and negative, can happen between now and October. Right now, I'd say we're a legitimate contender to win the division, which is the first bar that needs to be passed to reach the ultimate goal of winning it all.

Give Arnold another $100M and I'd think that would buy a few more wins. Given what he's got to work with, I think he did pretty well.

[Thurston Fluff]

7 hours ago, Jopal78 said:

Depth is one thing it probably helps them not back track, but the question is do they have the horses to go toe to toe with the best of their league? They didn’t last year, and I don’t think they do this year. Their roster has too many “ifs”: if Winker is healthy and last year was a fluke, if the shift helps Yelich produce more, if the rotation stays healthy, if one of their CFers can excel in the majors, etc etc.

Of course every year a team gets extra lucky or goes on a timely hot streak so anything can happen, I just  think that’s what the Brewers are going to need to stand out in ‘23.

Lack of depth was probably the most significant reason we failed to make the playoffs last year. Seems to me fixing the most significant problem is the best way forward. Getting younger and deeper does that.

An allstar closer, two of the top starters in baseball, an allstar catcher, and no actual weaknesses at any position seems to be enough to go toe to toe with any team in the playoffs. As long as they're healthy in the playoffs I like our chances. We need the depth so they remain healthy in the playoffs and to keep us from face planting if a rash of injuries occur like they did last season.

[Brock Beauchamp]

On 2/9/2023 at 8:16 AM, homer said:

can I say incomplete since the off season isn't over yet? 

NO YOU MUST COMMIT TO A GRADE NOW AND NEVER CHANGE YOUR OPINION EVER

😃