bill hAll Star

Market size had little to do with it. He cost the Cubs around just $4-6 million this year and he’s a FA after the year if his team option isn’t exercised, Schoop will cost more. If we can’t afford that, then what are we even doing? I think it needs to be noted again that there are 29 other teams in the league and somewhere between 10 and 15 that are competing in playoff races. That's not a cop out for Stearns. Some people wanted Hamels and so far they're right. The point, though, is that yes, the Brewers can afford to make a $5 million dollar "buy" move 2-3 times/year in contending years as we've seen. But with 10-15 other teams bidding over a timeline of 3 weeks and needs and market ever changing...we're not always going to get the ideal set of 3 guys. Throw in Hamels maybe preferring the Cubs and the Brewers maybe having to deal with a no trade clause and maybe there was a prevailing thought that it would've cost them more.

Which STL game are you talking about? On Friday, Peralta lost the game in the 3rd inning essentially. On Saturday, the Brewers were behind 0-3 going into the 8th. They scored 2 runs. It was 2-3 and he left Lyles out there to the "OMG HADER/JEFFRESS HAVEN'T PITCHED IN 10 DAYS" Kato Kaelin and twitter mob tweets. Well, we got shut out in the 9th. So it was in hindsight the correct decision in all likelihood. I was busy over the weekend so didn't really watch much of the games, only followed here and there so is there something that I missed? The first was the claw back within one game where Peralta gave up 3 early then held serve. That was the Hader JJ game. I also believe he should have went to them to hold it and see where the chips fall down one in the 9th. It is a different dynamic being down 1 or 3. Who knows either way. The 2nd game was the Miley game where CC got tossed right away. I conflated the games but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt there because he made the right move in all likelihood. Maybe we heavily use Hader/Jeffress to hold off the Reds and saving them was a great idea because we went out without a peep in the 9th on Friday.

.500 for 28 games against a bunch of good teams (3 vs. San Diego being the only easy games) you've faced in that stretch will absolutely get you into the playoffs. The 0-6 stretch (or 1-7 if you move it 2 games back) @Miami and then 5 @Pit the week before the ASB may kill them.

I understand everyone's points from the most upset to the most supportive of CC. He's not a BAD manager by any stretch. I just wonder how much some moves have cost us. That Cubs game does stand out for me also. That was a head scratching move. Between that, and the StL game one, I think with those both being losses that completely compounded the thoughts many of us had. I know for me it clouded any good he did prior. Of course we are still in the race, and it's a jumbled race at the top in the NL. I just hope he makes sense and doesn't let JJ and Hader waste away mostly unused as we slide down the standings page further and further. It's go time now. Which STL game are you talking about? On Friday, Peralta lost the game in the 3rd inning essentially. On Saturday, the Brewers were behind 0-3 going into the 8th. They scored 2 runs. It was 2-3 and he left Lyles out there to the "OMG HADER/JEFFRESS HAVEN'T PITCHED IN 10 DAYS" Kato Kaelin and twitter mob tweets. Well, we got shut out in the 9th. So it was in hindsight the correct decision in all likelihood. I was busy over the weekend so didn't really watch much of the games, only followed here and there so is there something that I missed?

First, yes, we might need another arm and these guys could fit that need. Again, though, I posted this every time somebody mentions Shields and his innings-eating abilities... The reason Shields goes 7 is because the White Sox are tanking. When the White Sox lead 3-2 and Shields loads the bases in the 6th, he stays in. Also, they have a DH so no worries about that. When the Brewers lead 3-2 with Shields and he loads the bases in the 6th, Counsell is walking out there and bringing in Josh Hader. Other than Peralta, the other guys can all throw 115 pitches and go 7-8 innings if they want to but we are not playing that way. We generally need to pinch hit or bring in a superior reliever if applicable. I wouldn't mind Shields but we also are near the point where we can potentially bullpen ball the rest of the season from the Peralta rotation spot plus Davies should be near a return so I'm not sure it's going to happen.

I think Counsell has mostly managed the bullpen well. I am generally on board only using Hader and Jeffress with leads. I think people like to be mad just to be mad (and understandably we were on a terrible bad streak on Saturday). "Use Hader and Jeffress! We haven't used them for a week [on Saturday night]" - A lot of people like to use hindsight 20/20 when making other criticisms...well, we didn't score in the 9th inning. Lyles gave up 2 runs getting left in for too long but in hindsight, we wouldn't have won no matter what. So that worked out correctly. Didn't use Hader/Jeffress, didn't have to. The one complaint I did have was the Cubs game. Guerra was at 47 pitches through 3 but we had our chance to strike in that game and instead let Guerra bat and end the inning, remaining down 4-2. The bullpen was rested going into that so I'd have pinch hit Aguilar and taken our chance to try to tie/take the lead there. In all, he's doing alright. I think he embraces the newer-age bullpen ball but he hasn't gone full Kapler or Rays on it yet (as seen by the Cubs game example). Could be better but could be much, much worse. So I'm fine with him.

Righty batters are hitting .086 against Freddy Peralta. The Cardinals have Carpenter and Wong (not a great hitter). That's why he's getting one more chance. Granted, that wasn't his late-minors trend so we'll see if the heavy splits are more of just small sample anomalies.

Well, offense was a need at the trade deadline and we are averaging 4.7 runs/game since the Moustakas trade even with Schoop barely contributing in his short stint of games. Now, one can argue that the decreased defensive range is costing us in runs against, I don't know, but the offense seems to be doing better against mostly good pitching staffs in this stint of games. I do wonder why they didn't even just grab a sponge starter to soak up some innings that was on a bit higher of an order than Jordan Lyles, but maybe they'll have enough to get by once they get to September.

I ain't agin it and I think Stearns has done an excellent job (give a raise to whomever holds his ankles!).... Why can't we at least pass the dumpster once in awhile and shop at friggin Goodwill... I am just tired of other teams getting richer for $5M on a cole Hamels deal or Wilson Ramos for change... Gausman (whom I am not all that fond of) was basically a salary dump by taking on Day's salary... And save the small market economics/payrol for the Mark Attanasio sycophants club... The owners of this team are yearly taking home HUGE profits and while they give a lot of lip service about adding payroll when needed, how come it's NEVER needed!???! We couldn't afford the flyer on Hamels or Ramos? No? Of course I'll be lectured that we have no idea they wanted what Stearns offered! Yep, we don't, we only have an extremely reasonable deal that we couldn't match... AGAIN... And AGAIN... AND AGAIN... Well, let's see. We've taken on Soria, Moustakas, and Schoop's contracts this year. Last year we took on Walker and Swarzak. Gausman was not a salary dump. The O's like the high risk/high reward younger prospects. I agree that if we want to pick out moves that could've been good that Hamels might be one. Ramos also may be good, though I think it's going to be PTBNL (maybe a good oen) and not cash given that he came back quickly. There are 29 other GMs and in any given trade deadline, 10-15 of them also have profitable owners willing to open the pocketbooks. We are not going to get every single good trade target at every single deadline. You're going to end up hating the team you cheer for/baseball if all you do is take the list of 5 or so best acquisitions every deadline and say "see, we could've gotten these guys" not considering that there were 10-15 other teams vying for those players and there are also a lot of dud trades. I'll give you that Stearns is gambling on his young/damaged goods starting pitching and may eventually lose. We'll see what happens the rest of this year and going forward.

You're correct that drafting ultimately did them in. Look at 2014 where Overbay/Reynolds manned 1B and Segura had a terrible year at SS. We won 82 games after an absolute collapse in the last 40 games or so. Yes, who knows if we'd have traded for Gomez among other things if we had a different organizational depth chart, but check out these 2014 WARs: Brantley 6.5 Odorizzi 2.0 Lawrie 1.6 (half a season) Cain 4.4 Escobar 3.5 Maybe we'd have been able to spend money on a better 1B and an extra rotation or bullpen upgrade along with Garza/Lohse who performed well that year. Maybe we could've traded Cain or Alcides for a helpful piece that had control from 2012-2017. We might've had more minors depth as well. Those guys flamed out for various reasons but we'd have had more value in our system. We also traded away Mitch Haniger in 2014 to supplement OF depth and get Gerardo Parra. We ended up getting Davies back down the road, but I'd probably rather have Haniger. These things all have a ripple effect. Maybe that group of 5 guys wouldn't have come together for much else and our best results may have been just doing the CC and Greinke trades, but you can see where they could've had a good set of players in the 2012-2015 range or later.

84 innings of 3.74 ERA/3.25 FIP? That's nice contribution but that's not CC 2008-esque. I am on the side of understanding why the Cubs did it even if it was somewhat stupid long-term. 4 years of control on Quintana was pretty good and they have the payroll to fill in holes left by Eloy and Cease. The Brewers may not have that luxury. I'd have been fine with getting Hamels. It was a nice move for the Cubs. My only contribution was rebutting the "we need a guy with playoff experience like Hamels" type of banter. Alas, we didn't get him. It has only been 3 games for the Cubs so far though so let's let this play out a little bit. And again, all teams dumpster dive a lot. We think the Brewers are doing it because we are bombarded with the news today with social media and more access to the team. All teams bring in guys like Jake Thompson. This is nothing new or specific to the Brewers. The Cubs grabbed Jesse Chavez, Jorge De La Rosa, Luke Ferrell, and just recently gave up on Eddie Butler. All of those guys were dumpster dive reclamation projects. Heck, even Hamels and Chatwood were in some way (trying to play up the H/R splits angle). There are probably several other guys on the Cubs 40 man right now that are the "he was once a prized prospect" level that I am not aware about but I'm just looking at the names I recognize.

Top 3 Reasons: Pitching, Pitching, Hitting. We followed up the luckiest playoff appearance on record in 2008 (Mets record collapse + CC win streak) by replacing him with Braden Looper and a cast of stiffs with the exception of Gallardo... 2010 was another rotation to cry over and more futility. 2011 brought the big 2 acquisitions of Marcum and Greinke and finally there were 4 above average SP... leading to a playoff run... 2012 was the first season without Fielder and a collapse in SP (almost 100 more runs allowed in 2012) that masked an actually improved offense with ARam replacing MinusGhee... 2013 Hart was gone and the SP improvement was offset by huge offensive dropoff and really no batters in the system to replace the big 4/5... So while the offense was good, Melvin couldn't find enough pitching and when the pitching was better the hitters were being shipped out and the offense started to drop leading to mostly futility... Look, I'm not saying that Doug Melvin did a great job but I think people are making it sound very easy to acquire top MLB pitching with a small market payroll. In hindsight (and some were saying it at the time) maybe they should've dealt Fielder for a pitcher in 2007 or 2009 and worked from there, but in your example (2011) you note that we finally got our good pitcher(s) that year. Then you mention how we had some mirage seasons after that...which probably has something to do with the fact that we gutted the top end of our farm system to get those pitchers. There is a way that a team can get a good pitcher while also maintaining the offense/depth to have both...it's called being a giant market team like the Yankees and just paying for it with money. Beyond that, small market teams have to choose a path for the most part.

Braun and Fielder went away for different reasons and we drafted so poorly that not only did we not replace them (a near impossibility) we chose guys who weren’t MLB material. Of course it didn’t help that we went picking high due to the Herb Kohl style of leadership. I am one that was somewhat on the bleeding edge of the dislike of the Kohl mediocrity chase and jumped off of Bucks fandom in the 2008 or so range and then finally one more time in 2011 after I gave a second chance... ...I would not put Attanasio anywhere in the same breath as Kohl. There's a difference between overpaying Jeff Suppan or Kyle Lohse when you have an otherwise solid MLB (top 10 team) playoff-caliber roster but zero pitching help in your minor league system than what Kohl did. Kohl had the 20th best team and signed a guy to an $80 million dollar contract to cap them out as the 15th best team with nowhere to go. I get that some of the win now pressure from Attanasio has somewhat ruined their rebuild timelines/efforts, but it's not within miles of Herb Kohl.

This is my favorite thing about these threads. Nobody ever brings up the bad misses, only the hits. Just as many people wanted Cobb, Lynn, Darvish but we can bring up Arrieta in hindsight and say "hey, David...maybe you shoulda done this!." Nobody mentions Stearns holding off on unloading the farm for Archer, Quintana, Gray which many were clamoring for...only that Hamels has pitched well for 3 games. In fact, you say "in retrospect." I don't understand the point of these exercises.

I am by no means a huge supporter of how the Royals did it because there was some luck involved and it takes a lot of things coming together, but that team went from just missing the Wild Card to getting a Wild Card at 89 wins (and a miracle playoff run) to being a division juggernaut the following year with minimal changes. So it can happen. They did acquire Cueto/Zobrist in the 2nd year, neither of which doing a whole lot. Zobrist had a nice impact but I think most would agree that 7 HR and an .818 OPS over 59 games is probably about what Moustakas will give us. I'm not sure if Attanasio is pushing Stearns to the "never tank" route but I think as discussed earlier, we should be somewhere between what the Cardinals were/are and the Royals were. A farm system full of useful players that are decent for a good window of time. The Royals had flat roster of "pretty good" mid/late prime guys that got it done in only a 3-4 year window. That's the hope, I guess.

Carp's cooled off considerably. Lately getting a lot of production from the lower and speedier lower part of the order. Bader is the spark plug. I mean, sure...he's had a not-spectacular week but he's still the most dangerous hitter on the team. Were we expecting him to continue to hit .400 with 5 HR every week for the rest of the season? I'm not throwing fastballs down the middle to Mookie Betts if he's had a 0 HR, 3/19 week so that I can focus on pitching around Eduardo Nunez.

vs. LHB: .865 OPS vs. RHB: .365 OPS (.086 batting average) If there was a game where we could start Jennings as an "opener" for Carpenter, this would be it. I do like it on the whole. Find your way around Carpenter and the Cards are basically all righty.

I'll reply to my own post... Hamels lines so far pitching for the cubs: Date____Opp__IP_H_R_ER_BB_K_HR_ERA__WHIP__BAA Aug-12__WAS__7__1_1__1__1_9__0_1.00_0.83_.177 Aug-6___@KC__6__7_1__1__1_2__0_0.82_1.18_.244 Aug-1__@PIT__5__3_1__0__2_9__0_0.00_1.00_.176 He's up @PIT today helping the Cubs put the Brewers farther and farther in their rear view mirror... OK, here's the thing. I'll give them credit (so far) on the Hamels thing. He's faced the putrid Royals offense and he's faced some offenses that are better against RHP (Pirates, Nats with Dickerson, Polanco, Harper, Murphy, etc.) but so far he's been a nice addition. It's something that carried some risk but the Cubs were in the right place for. However, I find it hilarious that A. the Brewers could've trumped Eloy/Cease and B. that you are calling that a win for the Cubs without context. Unfortunately it's not all a 1-year race discussed in a vacuum here. The Brewers probably still lose the division to the Cubs last year with Quintana and they probably don't have Hiura and Hader in their system or team right now. So...

I know that Swing and a Drive was a Hamels guy, which to be fair, seems to be a good change of scenery (but he's been in a bunch of advantageous situations so far in his short Cubs stint). Also, there are some pitchers that people considered at least close to an ace and were imploring to trade for...Gray, Quintana, Archer, others...for a very strange reason, nobody brings those desired players up anymore as big misses. They just want the right ace to be acquired right now.

Well I believe it's by acquiring a frontline, "ACE" level starting pitcher to not only help us make the playoffs but to win multiple playoff series and get to the World Series. Obviously, I would say the Melvin acquiring CC Sabathia in 2008 and Zack Greinke in 2011 would qualify for this type of move. The Astros acquiring Verlander last year to win it all for the first time ever is another good example of a perfect "time to strike" that obviously paid off. While we didn't reach the World Series with either of Melvin's moves, I think those moves definitely gave us a fighting chance to do so at the time. That time will come most likely for Stearns. Maybe it's this offseason. This year I was still all for feeling it out. Chris Archer just went for 3 former/current prized prospects and he's clearly nowhere near Greinke or CC's stature. I was on board with Verlander thinking it was a unique salary dump type opportunity for a guy that turned it on for 2nd halves later in his career. I would guess 75+% of this board thought it was a bad move for the Brewers (hypothetically) or the Astros. Nobody could've imagined it turning out the way it did for the Astros. I'm all for these moves if and when we make them. I just think there is a weird subset of fans that is all for making one giant splash move and yelling "let's gooooooo" on twitter or something and believe it is some magic "aggressive" wand that makes everything great, forgetting how many times it has crumbled franchises. Mind you, we helped build Cleveland and Kansas City's dynasties (I'll call them dynasties given market size) with those trades. No thought to that. Just want to feel like we're trying to win as opposed to...also trying to win.

Well, this is always an interesting point to me. First, it was Epstein's plan to draft bats and pay for pitching...but disregarding that and knowing you have 10-15 elite/good bats either on your roster or coming up 4-5 years ago and that you have the opportunity to go up to $150 and eventually $200 million...what else are you going to do? Maybe a blind squirrel would also be able to build a pitching staff like this, but if your plan is to get a ton of underpaid bats/defenders via the draft/minors and then pay for a slightly above average WAR pitching staff, he's executing it. Any trade (Arrieta, Quintana (yes, lost value)) is a bonus. This is somewhat akin to the Rockies situation to me. They've got a pitching staff that is literally making $5 million dollars (combined) this year and is under control for several more. They've maybe overpaid Ian Desmond but otherwise have a relatively affordable set of bats (maybe $80 million combined). They also have a window of still having Arenado and Blackmon's prime. So knowing that they had maybe $90 million covered with an OK offense and minors depth (Dahl, McMahon), a good, young starting staff...and your owner tells you that you have a $130-140 million budget...wouldn't it make sense to overpay some relievers on short-term deals? Of course, they're made fun of to no end because Wade Davis is now a $5 million pitcher making $15 million for 3 years. Nothing is really hurting them long term even if some of those contracts were duds. ;tldr - we make fun of any GM of a larger market when they have some overpaid players to fill needs on a competitive team...it's a league full of a finite amount of MLB caliber, imperfect players. If you are a larger market and have money to spend, you knowingly overpay at certain points. I think giving up Torres for Chapman and Eloy/Cease for Quintana can absolutely come into question, but large market GMs sometimes get the opportunity to knowingly overpay players to fill a void. Sometimes it works out very well, of course. Lester seems every week like he's going to regress (hard contact issues this year) and he's still put up very good value on that contract. The Astros did it perfectly but for every Astros there are 10 tank/rebuilds that amounted in very little. I'm all for tanking and being shrewd with prospects/contracts, but it's still very hard to make it work. Also ;tldr - in these same threads we make fun of the Marlins for not spending an extra $30 million to field a 78 win team we rip the larger market GMs for spending an extra $30 million to go from an 87 win team to a 92 win team. The Phillies are paying Arrieta and Carlos Santana $50 million this year to be a solid pitcher and a borderline bench bat. Was it stupid? I don't really think so. They had a window of a few years where they could afford to overpay a few guys to fill needs while they have younger arby guys. It's not going to affect their ability to keep any of their core and they still can attempt to get Harper or someone of that ilk if they want to.

This is the stuff that’s interesting to me? When in your opinion long suffering fan is the time to strike? This is the stuff that's interesting to me? How would you "strike" realistically?

Cosigned.

I think I had posted the % of pitch change in the other Miley thread a week or so ago...I've been watching this with various pitchers around the league lately. Gerritt Cole, potentially Lance Lynn (judging on a handful of games with the Yankees), Trevor Bauer, Kyle Gibson, and others have had renaissances in their careers with a different pitching repertoire. Nothing new I'm sure but I think we are seeing more of it with data-driven approaches.

Herb Kohl and the Brewers' situation is quite a bit different. In basketball, Kohl had basically an even playing field with the salary cap. Good teams were able to go over to keep their players but it's not a Dodgers/Cubs vs. Brewers situation in spending. Also, a team has to make the top 3 to safely make it, top 5 of course with the new wild cards. Kohl could sneak in going .500 certain years as the 8 seed where the Brewers probably need 87 or 88 wins just for the Wild Card. That's not even factoring in that we're a bit unlucky being in the NL Central with the Cubs who may win 95 while the Bucks lucked out in the East where division mean literally nothing for playoff seeding and the conference as a whole has been terrible for 20 years.