OnTheBlack

Well...he doesn't have much time left. He's got the stuff, but he just hasn't gotten it done. I am curious why we're waiting on Devin Williams. The season is hanging in the balance and the results over the next few days will determine if we sell, buy or stand still. Taylor Williams is the type of guy who it seems like we should be throwing out there regularly(along with Shaw, Aguilar, maybe Burnes) if we decide to sell a few guys and chose to reload for next year.

There's really a gold mine of guys from the 90's and early 2000's. I always remember Felder being one of the biggest busts, but in my memory he was picked higher than 12th and then looking at his stats, it's a little confusing why he was done so quickly. I don't remember if it was injury, but he advanced one level at a time and was productive in HiA, really productive in AA and then struggled in AAA and was done. The pitching the Brewers were developing around the late 90's, early 2000's was such an enormous disappointment. Nick Neugabauer looked like a future ace...but like so many others, injuries just doomed him. Later on Rogers always seemed like a huge risk, but he had great stuff and Jones was another guy who looked like a future ace before the injures set in. Still, at least we developed Sheets and got a pretty good run from him. Still the best home grown pitcher since Teddy Higura.

Well, Jed Bradley and Taylor Jungmann we’re first round picks. Teams don’t draft starting pitchers in the top third of the first round with merely the hope they make it to the majors. The expectations are those pitchers will advance to the major leagues and pitch meaningful innings. That Bradley and Jungmann were complete busts resulted in the team making moves like signing Matt Garza and trading for Chase Anderson, for example, to shore up their rotation. Jed Bradley was just an awful pick. He was not top half of the first round material. Taylor Jungmann was pretty similar in a guy who really didn't have much of a ceiling. I remember one outlet calling him #2 potential, but most people thought we took two mid-rotation at best arms. If I was picking draft busts neither of these guys would be near the top of my list. More like a total bust for whoever picked them. Which if I recall was partially influenced by Attanasio wanting to "win now" and get guys they thought could get to the MLB level fast. Also the Chase Anderson trade was fantastic. He has already compiled 7.5 WAR as a Brewer. Not mention it also netted Isan Diaz (traded to get Yelich) and Aaron Hill...who was later traded to acquire Aaron Wilkerson. Not bad for a player we were essentially just trying to move on from in Jean Segura. Agree with you 100 pct on the Chase Anderson trade. His biggest fault is that he HASN'T been a TOR type arm, but he was really never expected to be. I really liked Segura and wished we hadn't given up on him, but at the time, it made sense and as you pointed out, Diaz was a huge part of the Yelich trade and even Aaron Hill was productive with the Brewers before being flipped(As a rental) for Rijo and Wilkerson. I don't really agree with your stance on Jungman or Bradley. Many had Bradley as a top 10 pick, someone who'd be gone before we got to him, and Jungman was an elite, dominant college pitcher for Texas. And actually both were projected to go right where they went if not higher. I believe the fan bases biggest issue with each selection was that they didn't select Jose Fernandez or Sonny Gray who were more well liked. But I don't believe either were the reaches that they've been portrayed. I really think both are just a result of the level of uncertainty in the MLB draft. Did Attanasio's desire to pick pitchers who were more MLB ready play into it? I don't know, but I do know they picked Covey the year before(why they had the Bradley pick), the following two years they picked one college player(Roache) and three HS prospects with their top picks. So perhaps that year they were in fact drafting for need, but based on virtually every site that previewed the draft, Jungmann and Bradley were both drafted in the area's in which they were projected to go.

Salome would be a great pick IMO. I'd think it'd be guys who A-Weren't productive players for multiple years, B-players who are still extremely young and have simply struggled and C-Guys who failed because of injury. Though I'd imagine there'd be a great deal of disagreement on that last one. I'd implore people who are listing Ben Sheets for example...or even Weeks for that matter to just go to Baseball reference and look at a year by year sampling of 1st round picks. You can also see how much recency bias there is with some of these names as well. Some of them are akin to listing the Packers biggest OL busts and going with Jason Spriggs instead of Tony Mandrich. But these are all subjective. I guess I wouldn't put a pitcher who should have or COULD have won a Cy Young award and put up arguably the best single season in Brewers history or a 2nd basemen who hit for power, got on base and just DIDN'T become an MVP type player, nor would I put up guys with ~1 year of service time. I just don't think it's fair to say young players who've struggled are two of the most disappointing players in the history of the franchise. As for guys like Lewis Brinson, not sure I'd say he'd qualify for this list, but if he does, then David Green for example certainly does. I mean, prospects have value in two ways. To produce for your team or to provide talent via trades. One prospect helped bring back a HOF caliber catcher(Simmons) and a HOF reliever in Fingers(with whom we likely win the '82 World Series) while the other helped bring back an MVP and a guy who's probably had the best year and a half in Brewers history outside of maybe Yount in '82.

You certainly could not. I don't know how you take two guys, a 24 year old who excelled for the Brewers last year and in the post-season and a guy who just recently turned 23 years old and has an FIP of 3.94 and declare them "all time Failed expectations team." Of course I also wouldn't go with anyone who was simply drafted high as the "bust rate" is so absurdly high that every team would have probably dozens of pitchers to choose from. Neugherbauer had far higher expectations, Jones had higher expectations. Kenny Felder, Williamson a top 5 pick, JM Gold...all these guys would and many-MANY more would fit this bill.

Ok, and I'm saying it's ridiculous to make a definitive statement saying they're "never" going to do that. Even that deal isn't "30+" million. And I actually do believe that if the Brewers could sign Gerritt Cole to a ~6/160 type deal that they would do so. But I'm guessing people would have said with the same level of authority that the Padres were "never" going to sign Hosmer to a 144 million dollar deal and then some guy named Machado. No, I don't suspect the Brewers are just going to go out and throw money at whatever FA pitcher happens to be on the market in a given year...but I think it's absolutely possible, provided there is mutual interest that the Brewers spend 25+ million per year on a 5-6 year deal for a TOR arm. I won't pretend to make any absolute statements about it ever happening though.

So I think Stearns absolutely could "get the job done" if he wanted to but chooses not to as per above. There are posters on here who say that he doesn't have the courage or will or decisiveness or other related words to make big moves, that he's too passive etc. Which is obviously wrong to anyone who actually looks at what he's done. Trading for Yelich, signing Cain, non-tendering the NL HR champion etc. Which means that he either does not see the value in the big pitching acqusitions, or he does but the right one hasn't appeared yet at a price that makes sense. I'm in the former camp, I don't believe that those acquisitions really make sense unless (1) it's the last piece of an already WS-calibre team and/or (2) you can afford to fail. It just seems to me that the contracts/trades for top starters are priced in a manner that underestimates the risks of pitching; of injuries, of decline etc. By that I mean that in a trade the team(s) involved makes some kind of projection of performance, taking into account risk of injuries, age-related declines etc to form a range of likely outcomes, and based on some median or percentile or most likely outcome therein set the price point of what they demand or are willing to pay. And that price point, in my view, is pushed too far towards the best case scenarios to really make sense. Especially when it comes to the top-end deals. Sometimes it works out spectacularly well, like signing Max Scherzer or trading for Chris Sale. Sometimes it's a bit 'meh' like the Jose Quintana trade. And sometimes you get James Shields, Jordan Zimmerman, Shelby Miller. So taking chances on young homegrown pitching, taking chances on rebound players and so forth is necessary to have a chance at winning for a smaller team. There's no way to fill the roster with acquired star players through free agency or trades, there's just not the resources for that. And even if you could acquire those stars, you still need to fill out the rest of the roster; having Mike Trout means nothing if the supporting cast sucks, and when you have traded away every good prospect and filled out the payroll with star player salaries you have noone to fill those spots. So you need to build (most of) the team through the farm and through the "scrapheap". Because if you can't develop that homegrown pitching (Players in general really, but pitchers in particular) it doesn't matter what else you do, you're not gonna win anything. Going out there and making those big moves puts a clock on you. Every move made to strengthen now is one that weakens you overall (Even in perfectly fair and balanced trades and contracts), often significantly so when it comes to the moves that "move the needle". So you make those moves when the other pieces are in place, or about to be in place. When you know, or feel fairly certain about, which of your homegrown players are going to contribute or not. The prospects you "sell high" on are also the ones most likely to help you in the future. When you make the big moves and empty the farm or reach close to the max payroll you better know that you have the other pieces ready. If not, you're just shooting yourself in the foot by only very marginally improving your chances of winning now or in the extreme near future, at the cost of significantly hurting you for a long time going forward. That part is even more true of the expensive rentals. They give you just one very brief chance, and due to the nature of such trades at a terrible cost for a long time. Basically, there is a lot more risk when it comes to acquiring pitching. That goes for both the big time trades as well as when it comes to drafting, international signings, or acquiring prospects. Compare the signing bonuses and the rankings for international prospects (Usually 16-17 when they sign) between hitters and pitchers. Look at the draft. You can see the same thing to a lesser extent for catchers. Hitters are generally "safer", at all levels. But you still have to get pitching somehow. You can take the development route which will have many failures, but cheap ones, or you could go for the finished products which carries less risk but at astronomical costs and significant consequences when it fails. The Cubs went with the approach of drafting hitters high in the draft, hoping to get lucky with pitchers further down but relying on FA/trades to supply most of their major league pitching. But I believe teams like the Brewers, with a lot less room to fail, have to do it differently. As I alluded to above, developing pitching internally is a prerequisite for success, no matter what other moves are made. It might be augmented by a big money pitching signing, but that can never be the foundation. I believe, and I suspect that Stearns does too to an extent, that you invest the big resources in the more certain thing (To the extent anything is ever "certain"...), where there is the least variability but perhaps less upside. That is to say position players (See Yelich, Cain, Grandal, Moose even Thames to an extent). Anyway, this got too long-winded and rambling. Point being basically that I don't think DS sees value in most big-time pitching acquisitions, and would rather put resources towards position players where it's a safer "investment". Which requires pitching to come from within and from the scrapheap. And which I think is a wise move, because even with big-time pitching acquisitions you *still* need to find most of your pitching from those sources, and if you don't you can't win anything anyway. That being said, I don't think the new breed of GMs that DS represents are categorical about this. They *will* make big moves for pitching when it makes sense. It just hasn't yet. I would expect to see more moves like Chacin, or like the Charlie Morton contract etc for pitching. And I wouldn't rule out bigger moves either. I think Gerrit Cole is far more likely to end up a Brewer than Darvish, Corbin, Keuchel or Quintana ever were, despite being signficiantly more expensive than any of them. He's still extremely unlikely to be a Brewer, but real quality in a young(ish) player for multiple years is what I think Stearns would be willing to pay for. I think this perfectly sums up the situation Stearns is in. Would people consider him to have more "courage" to get a Yu Darvish type starter? Patrick Corbin is a guy I loved, but he was likely never going to sign outside of the North East or at least near there as it had long been discussed his preference to pitch there and he went there. But I agree, for a guy like Cole, I absolutely Believer the Brewers would and could be aggressive in pursuing him and paying the type of money those pitchers get on the open market...which for the record, it seems has actually gone down since the Greinke type deals. So since we've been competitive, the only high priced ace that would fit the criteria that's been laid out would be Corbin. Other than that, it's trades and then you're talking about riding out whatever pitcher you trade for's prime and then going right back into a rebuilding type scenario. Does that seem wise?

Really? They'll NEVER find a way to acquire a top or the rotation arm unless they draft one? Never huh? That's not being as realist, that's stating opinion as absolute fact. I'd be surprised if the Brewers don't at least attempt to go the FA route this year to acquire a TOR type arm. And the 30+ per year is an arbitrary number. Patrick Corbin didn't get 30 million+ this past year. Very few pitchers have gotten 30+ million a year and I don't believe there's been one in the last few years.

Lets take another step to alternate reality. There's one in which the Brewers are paying Yu Darvish right now and the Cubs are not. But lets say the Brewers did trade for this ace pitcher last year. What's the future look like now? Keston? Likely gone. Turang? May well be gone. And if we're talking about Greinke or CC, throw in a guy like Burnes or Peralta as well. Who are all these pitchers that he's "passed," on? He's made an been in on just about every FA pitcher of consequence who was willing to take. But I'd say he's done a pretty good job of picking up pitchers. If you scratch out the name and just look at the production, Wade Miley has been a pretty damn good pitcher since last year. But this answer may well be a very different answer had Stearns not done almost too good of a job right out of the gate and instead of a 2 year rebuild, had the Brewers gone through a 5 year rebuild like the Astros or other teams. It'd may have helped to get a crack at the top college arms a few times over in the draft.

I don't know the Rays prospects well, but the little I know about their trade expectations seem to generally be wildly unrealistic and seldom result in anything fruitful. Lots of guys I'd like to see moved if we're gonna sell. Aguilar is not one of them. He's cheap, he can hit, he's not great on the bases or in the field, but again, cheap. If the Brewers are to do a short little re-load next year, clear some room and go out and get a TOR type pitcher. They have the money and they have enough guys who are cheap/coming off the books in the upcoming years. This "starting pitchers" losing value is a fallacy that we created because we got within a game of the WS with CC and a dominant pen patching together games and getting hot at the right time. I'd be extremely encouraged with a Cole/Woodruff/Burnes(he will get it together) top 3. And we look to have a much better pen next year, Hiura will be in year 2, I would expect Shaw and Aguilar to be much better. Grisham MAY be able to be a productive player, but you know Yellich will be. And as of now, that's the window we should be focused on. The 3 years of cheap, potential MVP like production. If you don't get Cole, there are so many other good pitchers on the market, I guess you just wait and find the best bargain, but I wouldn't break the bank for any others, particularly Strausburg(who may or may not opt out).

Or they could play Braun at 1B, and it would be a way to appease the "bring Grisham up" contingent. And then immediately aggravate the "bring up Grisham" contingent when he doesn't hit like Hiura. Though maybe he will. ATM it doesn't look like anyone can get him out, but he's a different player than Hiura, I'd like to see them take it easy with him. AAA the rest of this year and then to start next year in AAA like Hiura this year and see what you've got over a longer sample size. Pretty damn giddy he's continued to mash like this though.

I don’t see why not. If he’s throwing off the mound he must have been cleared by the doctors and I would think, would need the 6 weeks that ST affords pitchers to be ready for the season, maybe sooner since he’s a reliever. With him and Suter and Woodruff and Nelson and Burnes and possible additions this deadline, this teams September could be a lot like last year’s. Well, there's plenty reasons why not. Everything would have to go right in order for him to get back. The Brewers would also have to have some incentive at that point in the season. Also...at this point, it seems pretty obvious to everyone else that Jimmy Nelson pre-injury isn't coming back anytime soon. Corbin Burnes has been way too erratic this year. Brent Suter? There's almost no scenario in which you want to throw a guy who's coming back from TJ surgery into a playoff push. That leaves Wahl...IF everything goes right. Possible. Though without having pitched all year, he's gonna have to get a feel for his pitches real quick. And Woody. Hoping for the others to contribute is...wishful thinking. I mean, Wahl's also a little wishful thinking, but it's at least a little bit realistic.

This was one of my first thoughts at the time of the injury. IIRC, it happened one of the first days that pitchers and catchers reported. So he had a couple month head start on Yo. Guys respond differently and Yovani was a more established pitcher(barely, but at least we were more familiar with him at the time). But if they were willing to risk it with our prized young prospect, if Wahl can get ready, I'd imagine he'd be given a shot if everything else is in line.

This was hilarious. Haven't decided yet if will positively or negatively impact Brice's placement on my BF.net midseason prospect ballot. Meh, he isn't that good anyway. And yes, I am just completely flipping on this, from comparing him to Trea Turner to a guaranteed future bust after making me feel old. With age comes pettiness. There was one thing in there that I had no clue about. That little white rubber ducky looking thing. Whatever that was, I had no clue. But beyond that, I think I had them all.

My excitement for pitching prospects is always a bit mitigated when I hear they throw a splitter as one of their primary pitches. That's hard on a pitchers arm/elbow. Not that they can't and won't have success, it just seems like they end up injured more often. But I don't know what degree that's perception vs reality.

Agreed. It's a little different counting on a guy like Hiura or...even Braun. An advanced College bat who's continued to thrive at almost every level vs a guy who's struggled(as virtually everyone does) to varying degrees but who now is thriving(which would actually be understating it). But now expecting him to come up and give us a Hiura like boost to the offense? And in place of who? I think we should just hope he continues to hit well in AAA and IF he continues to rake like he has been, then bring him up in Sept.

That's a good point. Halladay was either bad or really bad just about every time out that year whereas Burnes has had stretches where he's pitched well(short ones, but still some stretches). I don't think it's because his fastball is easy to see or anything like that, I just think when you throw a fastball over the heart of the plate to big league hitters in hitters counts, they're going to hit the ball hard. I still believe he'll be a good pitcher, but at least for his sake he should be pitching down in the minors until Sept. And only bring him back up then if he is pitching well.

I guess if you look at the final box score instead of the actual game, that's not a good line. If you watch the actual game without bias, that game he obviously threw the ball well. He left with Riley on after he reached on fly ball to Braun that should have been caught. And other than Freeman's shot, the Braves weren't getting good swings off him. It's one start, it hardly means anything, but it's funny how the person who's a big fan of him thinks it's proof he's finally ready and the guy who has been bashing him...continues to bash him. Clearly he threw the ball well and ended up with a line that wasn't indicative of how he threw the ball. But he'll have other starts to prove one of you right.

Excellent review. I really only get to see the Mudcats in person so it is great when someone can explain the reasons behind a breakout campaign. It makes it much easier to get excited about a player when there are tangible reasons for such a breakout. I watched him a little in Wisconsin, but while I guess in retrospect that scouting report makes a lot of sense, at the time I was just totally uninspired. He didn't look like anything special. And now..he's a stud. In time to split AB's in Braun's last season here and then take over the job the following week.

I'm just loving watching some of these guys. Turang reaching Carolina this year(struggling a bit, but very early, though proving he was a great pick already) and am I crazy for being as excited about Mario Feliciano going 2 for 4 with a HR and a 2B tonight? Or all the other catchers who just keep plugging along and developing. Grisham's looking like he's going to force his way up at some point this year...at worst during Sept callup's once rosters expand, but it could be even before that.

Ok, obviously you're not going to totally reshape your roster at this point. Though, unrealistic as it may be, I really would be all for it, particularly if it included the young PG OKC got from the Clippers as I think he's gonna be a star and maybe a superstar, but why wouldn't Paul fit in with this team? He's an all time great PG and of course he's not as good as he was, but he's still a very good defender, a great ball handler and a really good shooter. And he's played with Harden who's an actual black hole offensively, albeit a very good one. But he'd be the first great passing PG Giannis has played with(and again, I think he's the lesser of the two assets with Gilgeous-Alexander being a really valuable young player. You get a guy who's still probably a top 6 PG in the NBA, a great catch and shoot 3 point shooter, and a guy who can play the point or play off the ball right now. He's gives you a 2-3 year window to really compete.

I don't do absolutes, but this is as close to an absolute as you can get. Like I said, a trade that would get us Paul and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander was a fantastical video game type trade. It would be a really gutsy move, but I only meant to use is as something to debate. It's not realistic. The only issue I'd take with this is that they didn't win and the only reason they'll use that "path" going forward is because...sadly, and I hate saying this, but CHL was right, they went cheap. They let Brogdon walk. That's fine. Maybe they did determine he was an injury risk and at least they got something for him. But for them to NOT ensure they got a 12-15 million TPE out of it is just them...being cheap. There's really no tactful way to put that. That's a loophole to help you replace a player giving you the OPTION to just take on salary without having to give anything up, something that many teams headed for the lottery or a low seed in the playoffs are happy to use to dump a good player. Sorry, not sure how else to put it. That could have been an avenue to add a REALLY good and really impactful player in case all the guys who try to fill in for Brogdon can't or simply aren't good enough to get the job done in a potential finals matchup. At least that option was there. Now because if reports are true, they wouldn't clear another 700K, something they could have easily done? As for them winning, they were up 2-0 and they lost. Now as has been mentioned multiple times, the best of the best superstars almost never win it in their first deep run in the playoffs, but still, they didn't win. And now they lost probably their 3rd best player and sure, it's done and it's time to get over that, but I do think the Bucks should(or should have, still haven't heard about the TPE for certain) about trying to acquire that star player that has fallen out of favor on a rebuilding team. That's not gonna involve the Bucks trading Middleton realistically, but you talk about depth and that will help them to again contend for home court advantage in the playoffs. But in the playoffs, that shrinks. That rotation should shrink at least to 7-8 guys getting most of the minutes. We're putting an awful lot into Sterling Brown becoming a viable replacement when he's really just been a league average or worse player, DDV, a more skilled version of Pat C and more athletic than Brogdon, but he was still not healthy enough to play in the summer league. And then there's Wesley Matthews. He's a good-reliable player, but he isn't going to be able to go too deep. So we're really gonna need Giannis to improve his mid range game...maybe even more than his 3 point shot as that's where the "wall" so to speak really starts and he can so easily rise up over guys who are on their heels and take that 10-12 footer all day, he just doesn't have the touch to hit it consistently yet. I generally agree with what you're saying. They're not going to do much at this point. There are only a handful of FA's available that are worth signing and fewer guards. A ball handler like Shane Larkin might be nice, Trey Burke would be better. If you want a bigger shooter, Ryan Anderson was a sniper on the Rockets a few years ago, Jamal Crawford is 39 years old, yet he still put up 51 on the last game. He could certainly fit the Jason Terry type role. Trey Lyles would be a great pickup and the type of guy who I still think could develop into a really nice player and Justin Holiday is a good, long 3 and D type guy who could help us out. Any trade for a substantial player would likely take place in January. But you look at what the Bulls did last year in dumping Jabari Parker and Bobby Portis to get Otto Jr. and there are a lot of one sided trades that can be made in season to get that 2nd or 3rd tier player that could help take a lot of pressure off Giannis and help them in a playoff series.

Well, the Chris Paul discussion is purely hypothetical. I don't think there's any chance it'll happen, but if there is a sport where those type of deals happen, it's the NBA.

Oh my god....that is not what I was expecting. That's...just wrong man. I hate 99 pct of Gif's. They're way overused. That one..as horrible as it was, was also perfectly placed!

I think you're probably right. Then again, I think McCarthy was a great coach, but like so many others, he just got stale in GB and then you couple that with almost everything going wrong last year, including Rodgers having probably the worst year of his career since his rookie year(don't care what the stats say, he missed a LOT of throws that would have gone for 30-40 or more). I think we're probably a year away, but with a QB as talented as Rodgers, a DC as good as Pettine and all the new additions, It's certainly possible they become this years team that makes that huge jump. The NFL is different. Even in the 90's, there was this period of ascension you went through and then broke through most of the time. That exists in the MLB and the NBA...even if you sign a couple superstars. The biggest factors are going to be; -The Pass rush. How effective are the FA's and rookies mostly, but if Kenny Clark can take that next step and we can squeeze out one more good year from Mike Daniels, the defense suddenly becomes a really good one. -Health of Bulaga, King since there's not a ton of depth there and each have shown how good they can be. Obviously to vastly different degrees as King's looked good in few games and Bulaga's been one of if not the best pass blocking RT in the league when healthy, but they need both of them to be productive. -Rodgers connection with his young recievers. Obviously MVS, St. Brown are the most physically gifted, but Allison and Kumerow look like guys who just know how to get open and then there is still Davis who's the type of guy who may thrive in this system and be able to give us some impact plays. Now a 60 catch, 800 yard season type, but a guy who you can give the ball to on a quick WR screen and he can use his quickness to get into the open field and make guys miss. Plus, he's probably the best bet as a return man we have(though those are really becoming less and less important). I really wish they'd have at least talked to Cobb and Matthews before both left. Cobb at 5 million for one year is a no-brainer to me, if he's willing to, you have to sign him for that and instead he goes to a very dangerous team and Matthews at 2/16.5 is less obvious, but he can play all over the field. And one thing great defenses have in common is they can rotate guys in. I'm really excited to see Rashan Gary play. We heard great things about him and Tony Brown on the defensive side during OTA's..for whatever that's worth. But a guy with his size and his athletic ability...I just love what they're doing on the defensive side. They're going back to BIG athletic guys. They were a smaller, finesse defense, but they didn't really have much finesse. Now they're much bigger and they're not sacrificing speed in order to do so.