Oxy

If this team was laden with gigantic albatross contracts of unproductive veterans I could understand the mentality, but Braun and Lucroy are far from that, and Garza is soon off the books. Our bullpen is young and outstanding. We basically need a #1 and #2 pitcher to be very competitive. That's 2 players. I'm all for trading high and buying low. But that's it. I'm also for winning. Tomorrow. And the next day. And the next day. You never know what might happen.

We all want the same thing, first and foremost a contending major league club, as well as a solid farm system to create consistency in the years to follow. Fact is, the Brewers club from top to bottom was in shambles because since 2012 they focused on the MLB team while the farm system fell apart. not trading guys at peak value for the sake of "going for it" with a mediocre team, free agent contracts to aging pitchers, poor drafting and developing, etc. That is why we are in this mess to begin with. If the Brewers could put a legit contender on the field next year, of course they would. But realistically it is going to take 2-3 years to assemble enough talent to put together an MLB contender. This MLB club is not 1 or 2 players away from contending, and the we do not have the resources - financially or in prospects - for the number and quality of guys that would get us there without mortgaging the future in spectacular fashion. We all want to win now or next year, but most realize that is simply unrealistic and prefer a higher chance at competing - and doing so consistently - in a few years above a short-sighted win-now approach that would likely lead to more mediocre non-playoff teams and a wasteland of a farm system with a bleak future. This is kind of a joke, right? Two short years ago, the Brewers led the division the entire year until a late collapse. Last year, Lohse and Garza were inexplicably horrible and Lucroy got hurt. This year, we are supposed to be terrible, yet keep finding ways to sweep teams like the Pirates despite pitching Chase Anderson and the aforementioned Garza for the weekend and sitting the only two established sticks on the roster (who we would love to trade). I thought Melvin was a great GM, as the last 10 years were light years more fun than the previous 15 years. That was not a "tiny window where we hope to get lucky"--that was 10 years of meaningful games in August and September. How many meaningful August and September games are being played by the Rays and Athletics and Twins this year? Admittedly--I am being a bit of a contrarian, but this site seems a little bit out if balance.

Neither did K-Rod. KRod knows how to pitch though, even as his velocity decreased. In fact, he got better as his velocity decreased. His K rate only decreased a little, but his WHIP the last three years have been 0.98 0.86 1.009 When KRod saved 62 games, his WHIP was 1.288 Peralta throws a lot harder, but has zero clue how to command his pitches and a pitcher without command is largely worthless. I agree. Then again, Turnblow and Axford couldn't even control their pitches let alone command them. And those guys were hella fun to watch for about 1 or 2 years.

I feel like Peralta is a prime candidate to put in the closers role. Tell me why not:

Because he is pretty bad at 3B and likely will never utilize that great arm at 1B. Can he play OF? Is he slow? Wait, is this guy on our team yet?

I say we trade Nottingham, Blazek and Jungmann for Gallo. EDIT: Do we still control Eric Arnett and Jed Bradley? Throw them in too.

Wait. Flores, Liriano and Santana are ALL better than Davis? I don't think that is what you meant but that is what it sounds like you said. If that is what you meant, that is an interesting opinion. Perhaps Santana has a chance to be a similar player to Davis at some point in his career.

Yep. I mean, if they had Betances, Miller, and Chapman that's most of what you need for a WS run, right? Right??

For the life of me, I don't understand this mindset to somehow punish Luc. First, the Brewers included the NTC in the contract. They knew it was there, and it's there for a reason. Secondly, he likely has 1 solid contract in his career, and trying to get to that contract sooner is exactly what he should be thinking about. And lastly, at some point if you do want to get something of value for him, sending him down to AAA or sitting him only hurts the Brewers. You're still paying him, you get nothing from him, and you're further eroding what you can get. I understand emotional responses, but some of these are just short sighted and silly. This is wisdom from Fido McCokefiend--who sports a paint huffing avatar

This is a good thread, at least since MNBrew's excellent post. I have no problem building around Braun and Luc for the next 5 years. I also habe no problem trading them.

At this point, I'd tear up the extension and offer Luc something like a 3yr/$40M or 4yr/$50M deal. I'd be perfectly happy with him behind the plate at that price. If his value is being questioned, then he is undervalued to the point of needing to keep him. We have plenty of cash. The point is to find inefficiencies in the market. Sometimes those will happen on an individual level rather than a patterned approach of "OBP" or "hard throwing relievers" or "young controllable talent.... The point is to get good value, the point is NOT to get younger at all costs or rigidly hold onto a pattern of thinking just because that's what the pattern says and because young players are cheap and fun exciting and PROSPECTS OH GOD ILUV PROSPECTS.

Im guessing the Indians wouldnt guarantee the Luc would be the starting catcher NOT that he wouldnt get playing time (1B/DH). If they would have exercised his option and moved him out from behind the plate his FA value would go from great to very middling. Lucroy doesnt have a cannon, but he has an okay arm. He's great at blocking balls and obviously is a good receiver with the pitch framing ability.

Well, that was fun. Hopefully we can get more for him at the winter meetings. Catcher is such an important position that I think teams are hesitant to just pick a receiver up at the trade deadline and plug and play him with your pitching staff like it is some sort of video game or fantasy team.

While using K/PA would be a better measure to determine the past efficacy and dominance of a pitcher, there is some value in using K/9 as well when determining how good a pitcher's pure "stuff" is, and how good he can potentially be if he could just get some better command of his pitches. A young Randy Johnson or Nolan Ryan might have the same K/PA as a Derek Lowe or Jamie Moyer, and might have even poorer FIP, WHIP and ERAs, which if just looking at the numbers one would/could conclude that those Johnson and Ryan guys stink. However, their through-the-roof K/9 stat might show you that they have something special hidden behind the control issues.

Khris Davis now has 43 home runs since August 6th of last year. I agree with most everything that has been said in this thread about him, but that's a lot of dingers. The most in the Major Leagues.

So, quite honestly, it's not even star power that is missing. You can go a step beyond that, and say we really have no idea who can/will even be a major league player within the next 3 years, let alone a star. Totally agree with the second paragraph. I'm kind of with you on the first, but it seems to me that stars are usually somewhat projectable. By that I am by no means saying that we can predict that most top picks will be stars. But of the stars that make it, isn't it true that most guys were very early picks with that kind of upside? Braun was a guy you could see becoming a star. Prince was a guy you could see becoming a star. Weeks too, but he didn't. All these guys were very early picks. I'm not sure we have that guy right now. Maybe Ray, eventually. If you want to call Lucroy a star, I'd say he is one of those rare types that really outperformed projections. And they're out there. But most guys who become stars were expected to have that kind of upside. The more guys you cycle through that aren't "can't miss" prospects, the more likely you are going to hit upon guys like Lucroy, Michael Brantley, Lo Cain, Nelson Cruz, and even a Marco Estrada. Ideally, you get one absolute stud in the #3/#4 spot in the order, and 1 true Ace pitcher, then you kind of fill in around those guys with a combo of young guys and veteran FAs (a la Mike Cameron and Aramis Ramirez). It's all easier said than done. We'll see what happens. I have doubts that we can assemble anything better than an 85 win team that makes a run every couple years. Basically, the Melvin years.

So, as a laymen reading about this stuff, it kinda sounds like this entire draft sucks--at least at the top. Perhaps it is deeper from players 50-250, but nobody seems very exciting in the first round. Thus, Ray is fine with me.

I think that in the olden days, guys often wore a number that corresponded with the spot they batted in the order. Thus, pitchers did not get single digits.

The Yankees in 09 went hitting first. Maybe Stearns is following that model? ;-)

Yep. As I directly asked, I am also interested in the timeline, which many have laid out nicely. Thank you.

All I want to know is what year this team should be .500 and what year this team should make the playoffs. We are going to be bad this year. We will very likely be bad next year. What year can I expect we won't be bad? How many years of below .500 baseball do I have to endure before I declare the rebuild a failure?

No thanks. I must be getting old, but that's not baseball to me. Every player has their strengths and weaknesses, I hate the idea that you eliminate their weaknesses that way. Plus, like the other changes mentioned above, it eliminates strategy which makes baseball special. Yeah. I'd rather go the opposite route and rotate positions every inning so that everybody has to pitch and everybody has to catch. It's a sport--all around athleticism should be rewarded. (I don't actually want to do what I suggested, but it's better than the offense/defense suggestion)

If we are trying to increase offense AND speed up the game, I'd rather see them implement a rule that says all pitchers who enter the game have to finish an inning. No more of this ROOGY/LOOGY stuff, unless it's the last out of the inning.

So, Brady Clark?

I wonder if this was all just a mole hunt within one of the Front Offices. A strict "no-leak" policy was clearly breached by somebody and now they know. Heads will roll.