2023: Where do we go from here?

[NBBrewFan]

18 minutes ago, monty57 said:

We have had some teams in the past who had more "good-to-great" players, surrounded by a bunch of below average guys, and we didn't have the success we've had recently. The Angels are today's example of why that doesn't work.

Before making that grand conclusion, how about going to the most likely excuses first - the Angel's management isn't very good & their pitching has been bad for a long, long time (the only improvement has been with Ohtani and he only pitches once a week).

[monty57]

1 minute ago, NBBrewFan said:

Before making that grand conclusion, how about going to the most likely excuses first - the Angel's management isn't very good & their pitching has been bad for a long, long time (the only improvement has been with Ohtani and he only pitches once a week).

Right. I know this will be an unpopular statement, but Owner/Management are the most important people in sports. Well managed teams are regularly at the top of the standings, while poorly managed teams are routinely at the bottom of the standings. The players change over the years, but long-term owners (who hire the management staff) bring long-term winning or losing to a franchise.

Since Arte Moreno bought the team from Disney, he's tried to throw money at superstars and that hasn't worked. A few superstars playing with below average teammates is not a recipe for a winning franchise. That was the point of my post.

I don't want the Brewers to bring in more star talent if it means they either (a) have to trade all their prospects, (b) have to spend so much they can't afford talent at other positions, or (c) a combination of a & b.

Melvin was one of the best GMs the Brewers have ever had, but after some success he got us to a point where we had a poor farm and maxed out payroll, and the MLB team was in decline. Attanasio realized what was going on, made some changes, and our franchise is in better shape for it.

What the team's management has been doing has worked. People are frustrated with the team right now, and that's understandable. They're hard to watch. Decisions made out of emotions are generally not good decisions. The team needs to stick with the goal of remaining "continually competitive" and we as fans will be able to continue to see winning teams.

Blowing things up because {name what is currently frustrating the fanbase} is an emotional response that would probably not be in the best interest of the franchise. Neither would holding onto a "name" player because the fans know the name (that he liked having "name players" on the team was something Attanasio used to say early in his tenure that he doesn't say now).

The management has been so successful (relative to Brewers' history), that fans are in an uproar about an 80-something win team that might miss the playoffs, breaking the team-record playoff streak. Prior to Attanasio, we went something like 25 straight years without a .500 or better record. Wisconsin needs to take a deep breath, count to ten, and realize that Brewers' management knows what they're doing.

[monty57]

I'll throw the Dodgers out there as the counter to the Angels. When the "Magic Johnson group" bought the Dodgers, they thought they could just throw money around and win. They made a horrific trade with the Red Sox to "win now" that had the opposite effect:

https://www.latimes.com/sports/la-xpm-2012-aug-25-la-sp-dn-dodgers-trade-magic-20120825-story.html

Unlike the Angels (but like Attanasio), they studied their franchise to determine what they were doing wrong, and realized that bringing in Andrew Friedman (the guy who was beating the big money AL East teams with a low payroll) made sense. Now, they are the envy of every team in baseball as teams try to figure out how they can have a ridiculously talented MLB team, but still have one of the best farm systems in baseball.

Give Attanasio/Stearns the Dodgers' TV deal, and the Brewers could be the Dodgers. For the market we have, we're doing very well. Unfortunately, sometimes teams play under their expectations for a season.

[WICKDADDY]

With our glut of OF prospects nearing MLB, what do we have with Ruiz? Baseball Reference lists his positions as OF and 2B. Why are we not giving him a look at 2B given that its unlikely we pick up Wong's option? 

 

 

 

[monty57]

1 minute ago, WICKDADDY said:

With our glut of OF prospects nearing MLB, what do we have with Ruiz? Baseball Reference lists his positions as OF and 2B. Why are we not giving him a look at 2B given that its unlikely we pick up Wong's option? 

 

 

 

The scouting reports I read say he had "heavy hands" at 2B and got moved. He's learning CF and it sounds like people think he'll be fine there, but I don't think he would have been a good 2B.

[WICKDADDY]

4 minutes ago, monty57 said:

The scouting reports I read say he had "heavy hands" at 2B and got moved. He's learning CF and it sounds like people think he'll be fine there, but I don't think he would have been a good 2B.

Appreciate that insight. Kinda makes me question that Hader deal even more (despite really liking Gasser). Maybe we should invest in a "fielding lab." 

[NBBrewFan]

10 minutes ago, monty57 said:

The management has been so successful (relative to Brewers' history), that fans are in an uproar about an 80-something win team that might miss the playoffs, breaking the team-record playoff streak. Prior to Attanasio, we went something like 25 straight years without a .500 or better record. Wisconsin needs to take a deep breath, count to ten, and realize that Brewers' management knows what they're doing.

I'm definitely not happy with the team, but I wasn't happy last year or the year before too.  The record is irrelevant when you have the type of pitching that we've never seen before and it is being wasted because management isn't adding enough pieces. McCutcheon was an owner approval because it maxed out the budget! The team far exceeded my expectations in 2021 thanks to a near record injury-free pitching staff.  Enter 2022 with most of that staff intact and an offense better than 2021 and we have a "normal" year for injuries and this team is likely missing the playoffs.  

Comparing any owner to Selig is really a win-win for that owner.  It would be hard to find a more incompetent ownership group than the Seligs and just making every decision using a coin toss would lead to a better team than the Seligs were ever able to muster. I am not questioning that the current Brewers management knows what they are doing.  I question whether their goals are the same as my goals as a fan. I want them to try to win a World Series.  If that means tearing it down to do that then do it now.  If they are happy just getting into the playoffs where 1 game/series and done is the pattern then we have differing goals.  Other fans are fine with a winning team and the playoff loses in case there's a miracle and the team wins 4 series against the best teams in baseball to win a World Series. At this point we are all hoping for a miracle.

[monty57]

2 minutes ago, NBBrewFan said:

I'm definitely not happy with the team, but I wasn't happy last year or the year before too.  The record is irrelevant when you have the type of pitching that we've never seen before and it is being wasted because management isn't adding enough pieces. McCutcheon was an owner approval because it maxed out the budget! The team far exceeded my expectations in 2021 thanks to a near record injury-free pitching staff.  Enter 2022 with most of that staff intact and an offense better than 2021 and we have a "normal" year for injuries and this team is likely missing the playoffs.  

Comparing any owner to Selig is really a win-win for that owner.  It would be hard to find a more incompetent ownership group than the Seligs and just making every decision using a coin toss would lead to a better team than the Seligs were ever able to muster. I am not questioning that the current Brewers management knows what they are doing.  I question whether their goals are the same as my goals as a fan. I want them to try to win a World Series.  If that means tearing it down to do that then do it now.  If they are happy just getting into the playoffs where 1 game/series and done is the pattern then we have differing goals.  Other fans are fine with a winning team and the playoff loses in case there's a miracle and the team wins 4 series against the best teams in baseball to win a World Series. At this point we are all hoping for a miracle.

As I said, give the ownership group the Dodgers' TV deal, and they will be the Dodgers. Of course, the Dodgers have only won one World Series (in the crazy 2020 season that some people say shouldn't even count), and have been ousted from the playoffs every other season even with all their talent, but that's another story.

It's easy to say "...they should just..." but the resources aren't always there. When I fly, I'd love to have a private jet, but guess what, I fly right there with all the other "common folk." Everyone has a budget and has to live within that budget. The team can only afford so much, and their capital has been spent compiling the current team. Bear in mind, that team still has a four-year playoff streak intact.

I've heard the "we can't waste..." argument before. Remember "we can't waste Fielder," or "we can't waste Braun?" As long as we maintain the current strategy, we can continue to argue about what "we can't waste," because we will continue to have winning teams to argue over. I prefer that to arguing whether Rickey Bones is a valid #1 starter. 

I try to stay in the realm of what's realistic for the Brewers. Of course putting Harper or Trout in our lineup would make us better, but that's just not going to happen. What is realistic and in the theme of this thread is trading away Burnes or Woodruff and getting a prospect back that could become a star player. Or, more likely (because stars are rare), getting several prospects back that help form the next "core" for a successful playoff run.

It'd be cool to remain in the playoff hunt next year, and I think we will. It'd also be cool if Chourio does become the next Juan Soto, and he actually has some talented players around him. Those guys will probably come from trading away Burnes, Woodruff, Adames, and others over the next couple of offseasons.

[Jopal78]

55 minutes ago, monty57 said:

Right. I know this will be an unpopular statement, but Owner/Management are the most important people in sports. Well managed teams are regularly at the top of the standings, while poorly managed teams are routinely at the bottom of the standings. The players change over the years, but long-term owners (who hire the management staff) bring long-term winning or losing to a franchise.

 

I don't know if Owner makes a difference, other than if they meddle in the operations of the team.  Moreno has a once in a lifetime player in Trout and his management staff has made some decisions to acquire players to team with Trout that haven't worked out. Plus the Angels have been really bad at developing starting pitching, but that certainly isn't 100% the fault of management and even if it was certainly the Angels are not alone in that regard. Heck, the Brewers went a quarter of a century without developing more than 3 quality starting pitchers. 

 

34 minutes ago, monty57 said:

I'll throw the Dodgers out there as the counter to the Angels. When the "Magic Johnson group" bought the Dodgers, they thought they could just throw money around and win. They made a horrific trade with the Red Sox to "win now" that had the opposite effect:

https://www.latimes.com/sports/la-xpm-2012-aug-25-la-sp-dn-dodgers-trade-magic-20120825-story.html

Unlike the Angels (but like Attanasio), they studied their franchise to determine what they were doing wrong, and realized that bringing in Andrew Friedman (the guy who was beating the big money AL East teams with a low payroll) made sense. Now, they are the envy of every team in baseball as teams try to figure out how they can have a ridiculously talented MLB team, but still have one of the best farm systems in baseball.

Give Attanasio/Stearns the Dodgers' TV deal, and the Brewers could be the Dodgers. For the market we have, we're doing very well. Unfortunately, sometimes teams play under their expectations for a season.

This is an over simplification too. Friedmann took over a squad that had just finished in first place and lost in the NLCS. He inherited Zack Greinke, Clayton Kershaw, Kenley Jansen Yasmani Grandal, Justin Turner, and Yasiel Puig. He also inherited several talented prospects: Corey Seager, Julio Urias, Ross Stripling, Alex Verdugo, Cody Bellinger. I don't think they really changed what they're doing. Their roster still is filled players who are amongst the highest paid in the game. The one thing Friedman did was hit a grand slam in the 2016 draft selecting Lux, Will Smith, Tony Gonsolin, Dustin May and Mitch White all in the same draft. To demonstrate Friedman's fallibility he whiffed on both his 2017 and 2018 draft. 

[Harold Hutchison]

With a lot of very talents OF prospects, one or two could go for some help elsewhere. It has happened before (Grisham, Harrison, Brinson). It will happen again.

If the Crew can't work out a deal with Burnes that includes Bonilla-esque deferred money, then they probably have to make a trade. Burnes+Ruiz/OF prospect could bring a nice haul.

[monty57]

1 hour ago, Jopal78 said:

I don't know if Owner makes a difference

The owner hires the management team, approves (or disapproves) their decisions, and pays every person employed by the organization. That's pretty important.

I agree that the best owners seem to be ones who hire good "baseball people" and let them make the baseball decisions, but they are still where the proverbial buck stops.

[monty57]

1 hour ago, clancyphile said:

With a lot of very talents OF prospects, one or two could go for some help elsewhere. It has happened before (Grisham, Harrison, Brinson). It will happen again.

If the Crew can't work out a deal with Burnes that includes Bonilla-esque deferred money, then they probably have to make a trade. Burnes+Ruiz/OF prospect could bring a nice haul.

It would makes sense for some of the OF prospects will be used in trade this offseason to help at a position of need. Another option would be for them to trade Renfroe, who is heading into his final year of arby and should make somewhere around $10M, but that would leave them with two rookie OF next year, plus Turang possibly starting, and Ashby in the rotation. The Brewers need to rely on talent from the farm, but that would be a lot.

Bobby Bonilla's deal is laughed at every year by everyone in and out of baseball. I doubt any team will ever consider doing something like that ever again, and I certainly hope it's not the Brewers. That said, I agree that Burnes (along with Woodruff, Adames, and Lauer) will need to be traded in the next two offseasons prior to hitting free agency. 

[NBBrewFan]

2 hours ago, monty57 said:

I'll throw the Dodgers out there as the counter to the Angels. When the "Magic Johnson group" bought the Dodgers, they thought they could just throw money around and win. They made a horrific trade with the Red Sox to "win now" that had the opposite effect:

https://www.latimes.com/sports/la-xpm-2012-aug-25-la-sp-dn-dodgers-trade-magic-20120825-story.html

Unlike the Angels (but like Attanasio), they studied their franchise to determine what they were doing wrong, and realized that bringing in Andrew Friedman (the guy who was beating the big money AL East teams with a low payroll) made sense. Now, they are the envy of every team in baseball as teams try to figure out how they can have a ridiculously talented MLB team, but still have one of the best farm systems in baseball.

Give Attanasio/Stearns the Dodgers' TV deal, and the Brewers could be the Dodgers. For the market we have, we're doing very well. Unfortunately, sometimes teams play under their expectations for a season.

Yes, I never feared the Dodgers when they had GMs from Malone to Colletti (DePodesta was never given a real chance). Hiring Friedman was the worst thing for 29 teams as it gave the Dodgers with their vast resources an Excellent head of operations. 

The Brewers shouldn't be trying to compete with the Dodgers, Mets, Yankees or even the free-spending/dim-witted Padres/Phillies.  They need to be positioning themselves to be competitive against the vast majority of the teams that make up the next tier, middle and bottom.  They are within striking distance of those teams and having the 3rd or 4th best team in the NL makes it much easier to get past the early rounds of the playoffs and closer to the promised land.  There's no reason the Brewers can't compete monetarily with the Cardinals and for now, the Cubs. Stop making mistakes like the 2nd Braun contract and the Yelich contract.

I know there's a lot of hesitancy of going that route, but the Braves and Astros both did a tear down rebuild and both of those organizations are in much, much better situations than the Brewers are today and probably for several years.  Where the Brewers made the mistake was to try to field a decent team while building up a bottom of the league minor league system leading to mid to late round draft picks and really never adding assets to the organization, just churning of vets and FA signings. Sure we got a few winning seasons and a playoff streak, but up and down this organization there are only 2 or 3 "stars" (all pitchers) and they are headed to free agency in 2ish years.  They may have hit HR on Chourio and Quero, and Frelick could be, but he isn't there yet and neither is Weimer.  By the time those guys are performing at a level needed to lift this team, both Burnes and Woodruff will be gone. I was always high on them when they were youngsters and I don't see anyone that will likely take their place currently in the Brewers system.

[LouisEly]

11 hours ago, NBBrewFan said:

I don't think it's a stamina issue.  They are committed to reducing the number of times a pitcher goes through the order without regard to whether the drop in effectiveness of those elite starters the third time through the order is likely better than the effectiveness of an average relief pitcher.  Third time through the order and they are looking to yank the starter as soon as possible.  No matter how well they are doing.  It's not the pitchers, it's the team philosophy.

That, and Woodruff has spent time on the DL this year and they want to minimize the risk of having what just happened to Peralta happen to him.  Burnes is a different story, thus why letting him go 100 pitches.

[Never Outhustled]

15 hours ago, UpandIn said:

You apparently did;

Your response;

So yes...the last "few seasons," as in in the last 4, they've won 95 twice and 89 a 3rd and then had a Covid shortened season. 

Again, how is 18 or 19 even slightly relevant? We have a completely different roster. Prime Yasmani Grandal coming back?

[UpandIn]

13 hours ago, monty57 said:

I'll throw the Dodgers out there as the counter to the Angels. When the "Magic Johnson group" bought the Dodgers, they thought they could just throw money around and win. They made a horrific trade with the Red Sox to "win now" that had the opposite effect:

https://www.latimes.com/sports/la-xpm-2012-aug-25-la-sp-dn-dodgers-trade-magic-20120825-story.html

Unlike the Angels (but like Attanasio), they studied their franchise to determine what they were doing wrong, and realized that bringing in Andrew Friedman (the guy who was beating the big money AL East teams with a low payroll) made sense. Now, they are the envy of every team in baseball as teams try to figure out how they can have a ridiculously talented MLB team, but still have one of the best farm systems in baseball.

Give Attanasio/Stearns the Dodgers' TV deal, and the Brewers could be the Dodgers. For the market we have, we're doing very well. Unfortunately, sometimes teams play under their expectations for a season.

Yes...just IMAGINE if the Brewers got a check each year that would cover the payroll through the Cohen tax? That's before the national TV money, and of course before attendance and any other sources of revenue. They have to pay into revenue sharing to MLB(though a fraction of what they're actually supposed to as the Dodgers were a bit underhanded in how they went about their latest TV deal)...but it's tax free.

Give the Brewers another 250M dollars a year...

The idea that Attanasio just bought this team to pad his pockets is an absolute farce(not that the argument has been made on here, but it's made plenty). 

They'd have signed Burnes, Woodruff, could have signed Cody Seager and still has 30M to play with and Attanasio would still pocket over 100M.

I really think Attanasio is a fan who bought a team...and wants to win. He's also not "Sports Owner," rich. Even compared to the Bucks ownership group which has 3 owners who are worth billions. They can afford to spend near the top of the league for a period when they're contending. 
 

But that's not how it works in MLB...and while we've got more money coming in, it's not going to change in any substantive way. It's real simple. There are fewer of us. It's easier to be a Cubs fan...though frankly, I'd be pissed, because then the argument that ownership isn't putting resources into the team, it'd have FAR more merit. But Cubs, Yankees, Braves even, larger fan bases=more money.

The Brewers DO have one of of the most loyal fan bases. They spend more per fan than any other team, the TV ratings are 4th in MLB, but that's still based on a percentage. 

Bottom line, if you think just "spending more," is the way out, then you're always going to be disappointed by ownership. They are at least putting their money back into the franchise. It just sucks they don't have more of it. 

[UpandIn]

2 hours ago, Never Outhustled said:

Again, how is 18 or 19 even slightly relevant? We have a completely different roster. Prime Yasmani Grandal coming back?

It's slightly relevant because you MADE it slightly relevant when you said the "outlier" in the Brewers playoff run was last years 95 win team and then sited the 2020 team that went 29-31 while ignoring the previous two teams. If 3 out of 4 years a team wins 96, 89, and 95 games, then...surely the 29-31 team on the 60 game roster would be "outlier," would it not?

Again...this is literally a point YOU were arguing. Now you're asking me how it's relevant.  

 

[UpandIn]

12 hours ago, monty57 said:

It would makes sense for some of the OF prospects will be used in trade this offseason to help at a position of need. Another option would be for them to trade Renfroe, who is heading into his final year of arby and should make somewhere around $10M, but that would leave them with two rookie OF next year, plus Turang possibly starting, and Ashby in the rotation. The Brewers need to rely on talent from the farm, but that would be a lot.

Bobby Bonilla's deal is laughed at every year by everyone in and out of baseball. I doubt any team will ever consider doing something like that ever again, and I certainly hope it's not the Brewers. That said, I agree that Burnes (along with Woodruff, Adames, and Lauer) will need to be traded in the next two offseasons prior to hitting free agency. 

The Bobby Bonilla deal worked out pretty well for the Mets...despite the "Bobby Bonilla day," and all that goes with it.

That said...they were buying out a guy who didn't want to be there so they could spend that money on another player. Paying him in the future because they were making SUCH good money from their investments with the honorable Bernard Madoff, chair of the NASDAQ! What could go wrong...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-03-16/bobby-bonilla-contract-was-good-for-baseball-s-new-york-mets

Jacob deGrom's extension is probably the most realistic outline...and I'd suck it up and do that...but as great as Burnes is, he's not deGrom. I'd need the options going the other way. I'd suggested 5/130 with 2 additional options at 35M with a 10M buyout bringing the total to 5/140.

I'd offer it. He can look at Woodruff and the scare he's dealt with this year, look at Peralta and the shoulder injury that has zapped much of the velo from his FB and maybe that makes some sense to him.

 

I actually think it makes more sense to extend Woodruff and trade Burnes and I've suggested before(maybe just more reasonable). Look for a good 3B prospect and then 3 power arms. I saw someone say they don't see anyone like Burnes and Woodruff in our system. I agree with that to an extent, but I also disagree. We've got some high ceiling arms. I think Ashby upside is huge, the kid we just drafted is almost comically talented. We've got several pitchers thriving in HiA right now like Cruz and Rodriguez. Guys like Henderson, Smith and Uribe, a pitcher with such incredible raw stuff, he's struggling to command it. 
Gasser probably won't be the power arms they are, but he looks like a helluva prospect. 
And then we've got some other nice prospects further down.

If we trade both, we're looking at a staff in the near future with;
Ashby
Peralta
Lauer
Gasser
Houser
Small

That doesn't strike fear into the hearts of opponents, but you just keep trying to develop guys, try and get some high upside pitchers back for one or both of our current aces and you take the inherent risk that comes with said upside. 

 

But this is how a team like the Brewers stays competitive. There's also a version where the Brewers do kinda push the payroll, extend Burnes...making a massive commitment and obviously SOME concessions on his behalf and he starts dealing with injuries as virtually every power pitcher does and people chastise the Brewers front office for extending their Cy Young winning pitcher as they're getting now for extending their MVP LFer. 

Beyond MLB2K...which I don't play, I wouldn't want to make these decisions. Get it wrong and you're handcuffing the organization for the next decade..,

[Robocaller]

15 hours ago, WICKDADDY said:

With our glut of OF prospects nearing MLB, what do we have with Ruiz? Baseball Reference lists his positions as OF and 2B. Why are we not giving him a look at 2B given that its unlikely we pick up Wong's option? 

 

 

 

He's a terrible 2B, that's why he was moved to the OF, where he's still a work in progress. If we want to slide someone into 2B, we have it in Turang (Turang and Urias would both be some sort of super-utility, depending on if they bring back or bring in a 3B).

 

[Robocaller]

14 hours ago, clancyphile said:

With a lot of very talents OF prospects, one or two could go for some help elsewhere. It has happened before (Grisham, Harrison, Brinson). It will happen again.

If the Crew can't work out a deal with Burnes that includes Bonilla-esque deferred money, then they probably have to make a trade. Burnes+Ruiz/OF prospect could bring a nice haul.

That's like saying a million dollars and ten thousand dollars could get you a house worth more than a million dollars.
Sure, there might be some trading partner where you can get a better deal packaging those two, but it's almost all due to Burnes' value.

 

[Robocaller]

13 hours ago, monty57 said:

The owner hires the management team, approves (or disapproves) their decisions, and pays every person employed by the organization. That's pretty important.

I agree that the best owners seem to be ones who hire good "baseball people" and let them make the baseball decisions, but they are still where the proverbial buck stops.

owner = budget. That's the importance of an owner. If they are getting involved in baseball operations, it's a negative.

 

[Robocaller]

We might have been able to extend Burnes and/or Woodruff if we weren't saddled with Yelich's contract. Have the OF filled with new guys (mostly) and bring in Turang and Feliciano, and save a ton of money on batters. But . . . Yelich is the albatross we bear.

 

[Never Outhustled]

5 hours ago, UpandIn said:

It's slightly relevant because you MADE it slightly relevant when you said the "outlier" in the Brewers playoff run was last years 95 win team and then sited the 2020 team that went 29-31 while ignoring the previous two teams. If 3 out of 4 years a team wins 96, 89, and 95 games, then...surely the 29-31 team on the 60 game roster would be "outlier," would it not?

Again...this is literally a point YOU were arguing. Now you're asking me how it's relevant.  

 

The team has had a similar roster the last 3 years, one of the 3 years was great and the other 2 not so much. Last year included career years from a bunch of pitchers. That's the outlier. The previous years are irrelevant be cause it was a completely different roster 

Going forward, the Brewers are hurt by the fact that Peralta can't physically handle a starters workload. That will help the bullpen though,  and that area needs help because Stearns has struck out there the last few years. 

[monty57]

1 hour ago, Never Outhustled said:

The team has had a similar roster the last 3 years, one of the 3 years was great and the other 2 not so much. Last year included career years from a bunch of pitchers. That's the outlier. The previous years are irrelevant be cause it was a completely different roster 

Going forward, the Brewers are hurt by the fact that Peralta can't physically handle a starters workload. That will help the bullpen though,  and that area needs help because Stearns has struck out there the last few years. 

To the first paragraph, they are relevant because they are recent past and were put together by the same team that's currently in charge. This is a thread about "where do we go from here," so my argument is to stick with the strategy that has given us four consecutive playoff teams with a goal of remaining "continually competitive." Part of that strategy is that there will be moving parts, and I'd guess there will be a lot of them over the next couple off-seasons.

To the second, I don't think it's a fact that Peralta can't handle a starter's workload. Just last year, he pitched in 28 games, starting 27, for 144.1 IP. In today's baseball, not that many guys pitch 200+ innings, so he pitched a "starter's workload" last year.

He is unfortunately experiencing some injuries this year, which isn't uncommon. I hope they don't hurt his future production, and I don't believe there is anything that shows they will. The current diagnosis is "arm fatigue," so unless I hear any different, I'll have to hope that's all it is.

You are right that a long-term injury to Peralta would hurt the Brewers going forward. He's a good player, so you could say the same thing about any good player on any team. Most players have had a stint on the IL at some point, especially pitchers.

[Never Outhustled]

43 minutes ago, monty57 said:

To the first paragraph, they are relevant because they are recent past and were put together by the same team that's currently in charge. This is a thread about "where do we go from here," so my argument is to stick with the strategy that has given us four consecutive playoff teams with a goal of remaining "continually competitive." Part of that strategy is that there will be moving parts, and I'd guess there will be a lot of them over the next couple off-seasons.

 

The problem is we've already about abandoned the strategy that produced the good teams in 18-19. Those teams including a blossoming Yelich acquired in a huge prospect for established player trade. We haven't made a deal like that again. It also included a major free agent signing in Grandal. That's another avenue we now ignore. 

Now we're stuck with a mediocre team, while this thread suggests we deal our best players instead of adding to the team.