04/18/2004 - Milwaukee (Capuano) @ Houston (Clemens)

[PeaveyFury]

Long-term Sheets is the only one in the current lineup who will be CONTRIBUTING to the next winning Brewers team.

 

Giving up on a 25-year old Lefty after 13 IP?

 

 

 

Simply astounding.

[gregmag]

I prefer to see the glass as . . . well, okay, not half full, but a third full. Each of the 2-5 guys has pitched at least one good game. They're all under 30, with limited big league experience. No one is pushing them -- de la Rosa and Hendrickson definitely aren't ready. No actual fact suggests that Burba or Ford would have a greater likelihood of success than any of the present starters.

 

So leave these guys out there. See what you have. Will the Brewers lose a lot of games? Hell, yes, but we knew that already. If two of these four pan out, we may be looking at a rotation next year (if we can add two of Hendrickson / Ford / de la Rosa / FA). But there's no objective evidence (especially after 3-4 appearances a piece) of who, if anybody, is going to improve. I'm glad management isn't freaking out about this.

 

Greg.

[xisxisxis]

Giving up on a 25-year old Lefty after 13 IP?

 

Giving up? No, but I think it's time for people to realize that to have a successful team (you know, one that gets to the playoffs, etc.) you have to stop filling your team with #5 starters. Capuano is a back end of the rotation guy that can be picked up on any street corner by winning teams. The Diamondbacks have a better track record at developing pitchers over the last 5 years and I think there's a reason they packaged him so easily in the Sexson trade. Just because we're used to finding deals in the dumpster outside Yankee stadium doesn't mean these players will be contributing to a winning team, they're the reason the team won't win because they simply don't have the talent to make this team a winner.

 

Let Capuano flounder around for a year or 2, but I don't have any illusions that he won't be replacable in a nanosecond when the Brewers have enough talent to be successful. Sheets isn't as easily replaced.

[PeaveyFury]

Capuano is a back end of the rotation guy that can be picked up on any street corner by winning teams.

 

And you can make that assessment based on CAREER 46 IP??

 

Let's look at those career numbers so far: 46 IP, 40 hits, 35ks, 18 BB with a 4.30 ERA.

 

Yup, a 25-year old rookie lefty that allows fewer hits than IP with a 2-1 K-BB ratio is a #5 starter at best, even though he's pitched very well so far and has room to grow and get better.

 

The Diamondbacks have a better track record at developing pitchers over the last 5 years and I think there's a reason they packaged him so easily in the Sexson trade

 

Yup, because no great young players ever get traded by good teams. Just ask future hall of famers Jeff Bagwell and John Smoltz.

 

Let Capuano flounder around for a year or 2, but I don't have any illusions that he won't be replacable in a nanosecond when the Brewers have enough talent to be successful

 

Because you're extremely qualified to make personel evaluations, right? After all, weren't you the person basically calling for Jack Z's head after drafting Gwynn and Captain Lou? And the person that called the Cruz and Ford rule V picks horrible despite seeing these players play a combined 0 times and then pretending that most of the above players didn't exist after they proved you wrong? That Wes Helms guy sure looked crappy putting up that 23 Hr .780 OPS season after you proclaimed the trade that netted him a disaster, saying that we should have received a Jack Cust-like player in return for a player like Ray King- and how many times has Captain Jack been DFA'd since then?

 

Yup. You're more qualified than the rest of us in making personel evals.

 

I'll make sure to call Cap when they get back to Milwaukee to tell him there's no point in making the rest of his starts this year, and he might as well retire since its a forgone conclusion that his career in Milwaukee is pretty much futile.

 

It's been a while, but: Sheesh.

 

Sorry if this is overly-vicious, mods may edit what they wish.

[xisxisxis]

Yup, a 25-year old rookie lefty that allows fewer hits than IP with a 2-1 K-BB ratio is a #5 starter at best, even though he's pitched very well so far and has room to grow and get better.

 

I don't think he won't have a productive career. Heck he might even top out as a number 3 starter for some teams (like the last place Brewers), but is he good enough to be the #4 starter on legitimite playoff contenders like the Red Sox, Yankees, A's, Angels, Phillies, Astros, Cubs, Marlins? No chance in hell. He might be productive eating innings and not sucking, but he isn't good enough to help elivate the Brewers into the top level of pitching staffs. Kinney, Capuano, Davis, Obermueller are all ok pitchers for a bad team because they are reasonably young and have some upside, but they are a group of pitchers that I don't want on a team that has Fielder, Weeks, Podsednik, Hardy, Hart, Jenkins and Nelson. That group might hit well enough to have an average pitching staff and be a playoff caliber team, but I want more guarantees than simply hoping that will be the case.

 

 

Yup, because no great young players ever get traded by good teams. Just ask future hall of famers Jeff Bagwell and John Smoltz.

 

Because 2 HOF were included as minor parts to trades in the past then the Sexson trade will net us at least one hall of famer. Exceptions don't prove the rule and if you make trades hoping that you get a diamond in the rough as a key to the trade then you'll always be running a crappy organization.

 

 

After all, weren't you the person basically calling for Jack Z's head after drafting Gwynn and Captain Lou?

 

I wasn't happy with Josh Murray either. As I see it out of those 3 I'm right on 2. I'll take 66.6% any day. I was more unhappy by the fact that they have a hard time saying they went with the best player possible with their 5 position, 5 pitchers, 5 position, 5 pitchers picking. I believe they should have picked the best player available at the time and I wasn't convinced that was what was happening. And I have stated on numerous times that I think that Jack Z is the best thing to happen to the Brewers organization over the last 10 years and as long as he continues to have a free hand then he might pick some crappy #3s and I don't see every pick he's made on the direct route to the majors so he does make a mistake or 2. I guess a truely perfect Brewer fan never questions anything Jack's done, or Dougie, or Nedly, because it's obvious they never make a mistake.

 

 

And the person that called the Cruz and Ford rule V picks horrible despite seeing these players play a combined 0 times and then pretending that most of the above players didn't exist after they proved you wrong?

 

Yeah Enrique Cruz was so productive to the Brewers in 2003. Wow I really had a hard time ignoring his exploits. I do recall on several occasions pushing that he get some playing time, but that seems to be forgotten. And Gwynn? Yeah he's just tearing up the minors. I'm so embarrassed how will I ever live down those 2 players. And who was one of the first few supporting using Ford in the starting rotation? Most of the people who didn't believe he should start were worried that he might get his confidence bruised, yet were waiving the Yost flag for having Kinney throw to Bonds on 3 and 1 to learn how to battle in difficult circumstances.

 

 

That Wes Helms guy sure looked crappy putting up that 23 Hr .780 OPS season after you proclaimed the trade that netted him a disaster, saying that we should have received a Jack Cust-like player in return for a player like Ray King- and how many times has Captain Jack been DFA'd since then?

 

If he ever hits outside of Miller Park I'll be wrong, but I doubt anyone could seriously get credit for prediciting that the only place he can hit is Miller Park based on his past performance. Wes has value as a Home only platoon player and no other team will trade for him so he has no trade value. He didn't earn a second year on his contract, but was handed one for being Nedly's buddy and he may be overpaid for production depending on how much Ned decides to bench him. I don't see that happening even as the evidence mounts.

 

And yes, I felt at the time that Ray King had more value than a Braves throw-away. (Gee for the second time today I'm defending not being glad to get World Series teams throw-aways. What a novel concept for Brewer fans.) Playoff caliber teams were paying for setup men, especially with very friendly contracts, however, we just happened not to be one of the few organizations that was able to get a decent return for one. It doesn't happen often so I shouldn't be so upset, but the fact it never happens to the Brewers is definitely frustrating.

 

 

I'll make sure to call Cap when they get back to Milwaukee to tell him there's no point in making the rest of his starts this year, and he might as well retire since its a forgone conclusion that his career in Milwaukee is pretty much futile.

 

I don't know if that's really productive Peavey, why don't you spend the time drafting his Cooperstown speech.

[berniebrewer4life]

Capuano has given up 5 homers in 13 innings

 

Dear God, i thought we got rid of wayne franklin already.

[PeaveyFury]

Heck he might even top out as a number 3 starter for some teams (like the last place Brewers), but is he good enough to be the #4 starter on legitimite playoff contenders like the Red Sox, Yankees, A's, Angels, Phillies, Astros, Cubs, Marlins? No chance in hell.

 

Like I said, how the heck can you make those assumptions on 46 IP with SUCCESS in those 46 innings? Quite simply, you're being negative just to be negative. You've got no clue as to what type of pitcher he'll be in 4-5 years, no clue at all.

 

Here's some stats for you: 25 year old pitcher, 68 IP, 4.63 ERA, 42 K's, 32 BB for a pretty terrible walk to K ratio. About to start for my 2nd team. Who am I? A #3 starter on a bad team like the Brewers according to David- especially since I have worse #'s than Cap and since I've been moved by my former team, I'll never amount to anything.

 

That's right, I'm the horrific Curt Schilling.

 

Ok, lets try 1 more: 186.2 IP, 225 hits allowed, for 1.2 hits/IP. 5.61 ERA. 121 K's, 85 BB. Again, based on David's system, I'm destined to be considerably worse than Capuano's eventual fate since I've put up horrendous numbers in considerably more innings. Who am I?

 

That's right, I'm the unbelievably mediocre Greg Maddux.

 

Got my point yet? After 46 measly IP, making any sort of claim that you know Capuano's ceiling or what he'll become is pretty silly.

 

Because 2 HOF were included as minor parts to trades in the past then the Sexson trade will net us at least one hall of famer.

 

Yup, minor parts to trades:

 

August 31, 1990: Jeff Bagwell traded from Boston to Houston for Larry Anderson.

 

So he was a minor part of a straight up deal? Sure.... let's try again:

 

September 1987: John Smoltz traded from Detroit to Atlanta for Doyle Alexander.

 

Again, a minor part of a straight up deal? That's 0-2.

 

I wasn't happy with Josh Murray either. As I see it out of those 3 I'm right on 2.

 

I'll give you Murray for 1 of 3. Should I go back and dig up your feelings on drafting Prince to lower that percentage?

 

Yeah Enrique Cruz was so productive to the Brewers in 2003. Wow I really had a hard time ignoring his exploits.

 

Because apparently everyone except for you realized that Cruz was going to spend a year on the bench in the majors before being sent down to AA this season where he rightfully belongs and is off to a decent start so far this year and back on pace as a legitimate prospect.

 

And Gwynn? Yeah he's just tearing up the minors.

 

I'd hardly call .280/.360 season with 32 BB to 31 Ks, with demonstration of great speed, plate discipline and fantastic defense justification for your claim. #15 on the Power 50 in a farm system loaded with prospects, but you're more qualified to make talent evaluations on our prospects than Toby, right?

 

And who was one of the first few supporting using Ford in the starting rotation?

 

Only after you threw nothing short of a tantrum about his selection on Rule V draft day..... true or false?

 

I guess a truely perfect Brewer fan never questions anything Jack's done, or Dougie, or Nedly, because it's obvious they never make a mistake.

 

That's not the point I'm trying to make. I'm saying that if you make assumptions or claim that you know what the future holds for certain players based upon a small sample size and/or never having seen them play, you're setting yourself up to look like a dope somewhere down the line.

 

Its one thing to criticise a move or a draft pick, but what you're doing is complaining just to complain. Were you posting here when the Brewers started out 3-1? 4-2? Nope, not one single word of praise for the Brewers coming out of a few tough series vs. world series contenders over .500 and looking pretty darn good. Then the Brewers, still playing a tough schedule vs. WS contenders go on a slide, and you magically re-appear, slamming anyone within the organization that you can. Why the sudden re-appearance? Were your fears that the Brewers might be pretty decent this year and make you look like a dope for all the stuff you said about the offseason moves suddenly relieved?

 

He didn't earn a second year on his contract, but was handed one for being Nedly's buddy and he may be overpaid for production depending on how much Ned decides to bench him. I don't see that happening even as the evidence mounts.

 

Please don't make me go and look up the numbers to prove that he was at worst average at his position last year, and probably slightly above average. I though it had been adiquately proven by (IIRC) SoCal when he signed his deal, but apparantly you missed that thread. We'll see how the year plays out, but if Helms is proven slightly above average again, will you be posting here praising the deal that you repeatedly have slammed all along?

 

I don't know if that's really productive Peavey, why don't you spend the time drafting his Cooperstown speech.

 

Like I said, that's not my point. I'm not making any predictions on what a 25 year old rookie pitcher's ceiling is and not making claims about where he'll be in 4-5 years, because I don't know any better than you do. Again, to claim that you know he'll suck based on 46 innings is pretty foolish.

[xisxisxis]

Like I said, how the heck can you make those assumptions on 46 IP with SUCCESS in those 46 innings? Quite simply, you're being negative just to be negative. You've got no clue as to what type of pitcher he'll be in 4-5 years, no clue at all.

 

No I don't have a crystal ball, but I do look at several sources of information including stats. Here's what Jim Callis had to say (one of my sources is BA (Baseball America)):

 

Quote:

---

Capuano, a 25-year-old lefthander, was a 1999 eighth-round pick from Duke. After missing most of 2002 recovering from Tommy John surgery, he made his major league debut in 2003, going 2-4, 4.64 in nine games (five starts). In 33 innings, he had a 23-11 K-BB ratio as opponents hit .233 with three homers. He spent most of the year at Triple-A Tucson, where he went 9-5 with a 3.34 ERA that led Pacific Coast League southpaws. His fastball sat at 87-89 mph in 2003 and topped out at 91. He also throws a slurvy breaking ball, a changeup and a cutter. Because he doesn't have an out pitch, he must rely on location. He projects as a fifth starter or middle reliever and will get a chance to make Milwaukee's pitching staff in spring training.

---

 

That would be the same Jim Callis who is adored whenever he says something nice about the Brewers minor league system/players. He might make mistakes and if I was truely a knowledgeable Brewer fan I would know he's right about the Brewers when he's positive and wrong when he's negative.

 

 

Got my point yet?

 

That you can name a few major leaguers who didn't succeed their first year? yeah you can. I don't have the numbers, but I bet if you took the 1st year stats of most major leaguers and compared them to their stats in years 2-6 you'd find that year 1 wasn't as good as 2 thru 6. Does that mean that all of them are going to have good careers? No. I bet there's quite a few who get worse and disappear. Maybe as many as have hall of fame careers. The point is not to take several exceptions and make a conclusion, but to look at the general trend. At least 1 scout (probably a few) has looked and seen that Capuano does not have an out pitch, he doesn't have good velocity on his fastball and he pretty much needs to rely on location to succeed. I bet the chances are much higher that the BA conclusion as to his projection is correct than the chance he'll become the next Greg Maddux.

 

 

Should I go back and dig up your feelings on drafting Prince to lower that percentage?

 

Yeah I wasn't happy with the Prince selection, but it differs from my feelings about Murray and Gwynn. I preferred a pitcher (specifically Kazmir to Prince), not because I didn't believe he'd make a decent major leaguer, but because he was probably destined to be a DH, we had a logjam at 1B and we were in need of pitching help. Several people had Kazmir as the top pitching prospect in the draft that year. In the cases of Gwynn and Murray I didn't think they should be drafted and both were reaches because I had doubts to there abilities to become ML regulars.

 

 

Because apparently everyone except for you realized that Cruz was going to spend a year on the bench in the majors before being sent down to AA this season where he rightfully belongs and is off to a decent start so far this year and back on pace as a legitimate prospect.

 

You stated that I ignored him because he proved me wrong. I replied that he didn't do squat last year and I didn't ignore him because I proposed that Yost missed opportunities to get him into games. Then you state that nobody expected him to play so I'm an ass for suggesting he get into games. Which is it? I ignored him or I was wrong to not ignore him?

 

 

I'd hardly call .280/.360 season with 32 BB to 31 Ks, with demonstration of great speed, plate discipline and fantastic defense justification for your claim.

 

Age and level. Considering Gwynn's age and the level he was playing at he should have put up better numbers.

 

 

Only after you threw nothing short of a tantrum about his selection on Rule V draft day..... true or false?

 

I recall being much more upset about the Cruz pick, but my memory is going and you seem to have a pretty good catalog of my mistakes so if you could check your hard drive and pull up the relevant post then I can refresh my memory. Generally Rule V pitchers are easier to keep than position players so if I was pissy about Ford it was just my nature overruling my senses.

 

 

you posting here when the Brewers started out 3-1? 4-2? Nope, not one single word of praise for the Brewers coming out of a few tough series vs. world series contenders over .500 and looking pretty darn good..........Why the sudden re-appearance? Were your fears that the Brewers might be pretty decent this year and make you look like a dope for all the stuff you said about the offseason moves suddenly relieved?

 

You complain that I shouldn't criticize a player based on a small sampling then complain that I wasn't running around like a schooldgirl after the team won 3 out of their first 4 games. Talk about small sample. Sheeesh. If you look back at last year I didn't post very often in the first week or 2 because it's too early to worry about what the record is until you've played about 50 games. If I am so invested in the team doing bad then how come I wasn't doing cartwheels last year?

 

You say that I get some enjoyment out of the Brewers losing because it proves me right and if they win it proves me wrong. Well if you look back at the preseason projections you'll see that I projected the team to win 73 games. The average of all the people who posted was 72.6 and there were 20 people that picked a worse record, 12 a better record and 1 the same record as me. If I'm getting off on the possibility that the Brewers might do bad then there's a good 60% of the Brewerfan faithful who must really be happy when the team loses. It's pretty clear that you take great pleasure in cataloging my negative comments (you must have gotten at least 1 hard drive upgrade the last few years) which is entirely your right, but you seem to forget any positive or reasonable posts. Fine.

 

 

I though it had been adiquately proven by (IIRC) SoCal when he signed his deal, but apparantly you missed that thread.

 

As I recall he was in the average range at 3B. I also recall that SoCal didn't like that he was signed to a 2 year contract given a host of factors including that he really needed to establish a track record that he could perform at that level before being awarded a 2 year contract.

 

 

Again, to claim that you know he'll suck based on 46 innings is pretty foolish.

 

I never stated that he sucked or will suck, but that I doubt he will ever be more than a 5th starter and that is the easist piece to find when completing a rotation (they can be found almost anywhere). If you've implying that a #5 starter sucks then we disagree completely. I do believe that it takes a great deal of talent to make it to the major leagues. Any player who walks onto a major league field should realize he has a great deal of talent and that a vast majority of the players who try to attain that goal never succeed. That doesn't mean that any player that makes it to the majors is going to be my choice if I'm trying to assemble a playoff contender. You need to shoot for 5 #1 starters, not throw out 5 #5's and hope 1 might pitch better.

[PeaveyFury]

Does that mean that all of them are going to have good careers? No. I bet there's quite a few who get worse and disappear.

 

Was I making the claim that there weren't? I'm simply stating that condemning a guy after 46IP would have resulted in you condemning Schilling and Maddux as 5th starters at best too.

 

At least 1 scout (probably a few) has looked and seen that Capuano does not have an out pitch, he doesn't have good velocity on his fastball and he pretty much needs to rely on location to succeed.

 

Yup, because pitchers can't learn new pitches and he wasn't recovering from arm surgery last year which could account for his velocity. Oh wait, he was. I'm honestly not sure what his velocity range has been this year, but I'll watch the radar during his next start more carefully.

 

In the cases of Gwynn and Murray I didn't think they should be drafted and both were reaches because I had doubts to there abilities to become ML regulars.

 

How can Gwynn be classified as a reach when other teams were also prepared to take him in the 2nd round?

 

Which is it? I ignored him or I was wrong to not ignore him?

 

My fault, I shouldn't have lumped Cruz in with the others in the 1st post.

 

Age and level. Considering Gwynn's age and the level he was playing at he should have put up better numbers.

 

Still #15 in a system loaded with prospects. Apparently Toby doesn't agree with your assessment.

 

so if you could check your hard drive and pull up the relevant post then I can refresh my memory.

 

After checking, the archives don't go back far enough to pull up the relevant posts.

 

You complain that I shouldn't criticize a player based on a small sampling then complain that I wasn't running around like a schooldgirl after the team won 3 out of their first 4 games. Talk about small sample. Sheeesh.

 

That's exactly why I was pointing out the double standard.... we can condemn a guy to 5th starter status after a few starts, but going 3-1 or 4-2 to start the season vs. good teams isn't anything to get excited about. You don't see that as odd?

 

but you seem to forget any positive or reasonable posts. Fine.

 

The major league forums go back through February. Find me one positive post you've made in that time. You say I forget the positive posts, but I'll claim that in that time frame there haven't been any to forget.

 

You need to shoot for 5 #1 starters, not throw out 5 #5's and hope 1 might pitch better.

 

And when do those #1 starters become #1 starters? Through hard work and being thrown out there every 5 days as a 5th starter early in their careers- Mark Priors are rare. If you were running a team in the late 80s/early 90s, your philosophy would have had Schilling and Maddux toiling in the minors or somewhere else because you were shooting for 5 #1s instead of seeing the potential that your pitchers actually have.

 

My contention is that right now you're claiming that Cap is a 5 at best, but if we had gotten someone else instead of him in the Sexson trade and he turned into a solid pitcher for the D-backs, you'd be on these boards slamming Melvin for not aquiring him while saying that he should have been trying for a guy with his potential all along. You've made it abundantly clear that you don't like Melvin, so you're going to slam any and all moves that he makes, even if they prove you wrong in the end. Its a lose/lose situation for the front office with you.

[batman]

This is one of the better two-person feuds we've had on BrewerFan in a while. Nicely done, fellas http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif .

 

~Bill

[Al the Thinking Man]

And yet, no one comments on the fact that the guy everyone wanted from LA blew out his arm. DLR is even a couple years too young for me, as those years under 23 are especially strenuous on the arm.

[DHonks]

XIS^3, just adding a point on why I'm so high on Capuano. He pitched in the same infields in El Paso and Tucson as Webb, so there's a chance he could exceed all of those projections if he proves to be a groundball pitcher (in 2003 he favored GO, in 2004 so far it's FO). So his ERA's would have been lower if not for the extreme offensive parks. Just something to think about.

[Al the Thinking Man]

I've said that about Caps as well, DHonks. His ERA was low for that park, and his K/BB was outstanding. I like him much more than most do.