I just looked up the Pirates recent finishes, 3 consecutive second place finishes and what seems like a likely 3rd place this year with no post season birth. Their pitching staff is doing nothing and their star player has looked terrible. So that's a 4 year span, the Brewers best five year span 07-11 started with 2 second place finishes, 2 3rd's and a 1st. And without diving deep into the archive, I'm pretty sure the calls for tear it all down were starting to beat already in 2010. One could parse those seasons a number of different ways to argue who has been more successful, but that is kind of the point (Pirates 3 playoff appearances vs. 2 for the Brewers, but the Brewers have 10 post season games compared to only 7 for the Pirates If one accepts the high level of real variation that exists in teams year to year as a reason for not trying to predict prospect waves (perfectly rational), then being overly critical about a management strategy that did in fact yield comparable results to a team lauded for doing it the right way seems a bit odd. This is not intended as an argument for going for it this year or anything like that, but there is a lot to be said for having a team with a reasonable chance of making the playoffs at the beginning of the year and keeping that going instead of hyperfocusing on 1 or 2 year windows and hoping all of your prospects develop and staff cheap at the same time. Getting a collection of prospects that develops enough together to be a threat could take as little as 2 years or it could take quite a bit longer (which is the risk of the rebuild you keep cycling through talent hoping to get a critical mass).