monty57

There are questions surrounding Braun, so any hypothetical "guesstimate" of what will happen in the future should put a negative on him until he proves the negative doesn't exist. How big a negative is debatable, but a negative exists. If the article is talking about "movability," then Braun's suspension most certainly affects his "movability." He could still be traded, but not for as much as he would've garnered prior to the whole PED thing came out. There are fans who will boo him, not buy tickets because he's on the team, and "demand" the Brewers trade him. If this group becomes vocal enough (if ticket sales drop and the presumed cause is Braun's PED case), then Attanasio (who I believe makes decisions based on what will affect ticket sales) will have a decision to make. I don't think he should do it, but it is possible that Braun is traded, and they won't get "equal value" in return. Outside of Braun, we have a few nice complementary players (.800-ish OPS guys) in Gomez, Segura and Lucroy and a lot of question marks for position players, but no one like Braun or Fielder mashing a .900+ OPS in the middle of the order. For pitching, I assume Lohse will regress significantly over the next two years, Gallardo has big question marks around him, and while the young guys have promise, none really project to be top-of-the order/ace-type guys. Of course fans of a team will look for things to be excited about, but I don't see how any neutral outside observer could have much of a positive outlook on the Brewers' future. I think Olney hit it on the head when he said essentially that the Brewers made an effort to go "all in" and now they're suffering the hangover from that party. Throw in bad drafts/development, and you've got a mess. If Braun remains a Brewer and doesn't regress due to PED, age, injury or anything else, then the Brewers should have an average-to-above-average offense, with a below average pitching staff, in a division with three playoff-caliber teams, and one team that's on the upward swing after a big rebuild.

Maybe they look at it as "would you trade Adrian Gonzalez for Caleb Gindl?" How about Zach Greinke for Logan Schafer? If not, then the Dodgers have the more "movable" players. While the Dodgers have looked to rid themselves of the likes of Capuano, the Brewers are potentially looking to salary dump Weeks and Ramirez, who comprise around a third of the Brewers' probable payroll. I get what you are saying, and I am certainly not one who likes paying big money to guys who are past their prime, but it's important to remember that "young and cheap" is one thing while "Young, cheap and good" is another. Peralta and Segura are the only guys who have somewhat shown the ability to be above average MLB players while they are in their pre-arby years, but most teams have one or two pre-arby guys who should be above average MLB players during their pre-arby years. I'd say the Brewers' older players are pretty immovable, and once their contracts are up, they'll "move" to retirement, while the Brewers won't have much talent with which to replace them. It's an insider article, so I can't read it, but I'd say that looking at the franchise as a whole, the Brewers' future is as bleak as any other team in baseball.

Let's get this correct. ARam IS NOT making 20mil next season. That is why I said "making $20MM for the final year of his contract." However you want to say it, unless he is traded he will play one more year for the Brewers and the Brewers will pay him $20MM. Because of this, I would like to see him traded. He is not worth $20MM for a season, and that is exacerbated for a smaller market team like the Brewers, especially when they probably aren't even a .500 team with him on the roster. Plus, he's still one tweak away from knee surgery. If they could get someone to pay the contract, they should do the deal. If they can get someone to pay the contract and give them something of value in return, it will be a coup. Personally, I don't think they'll get enough interest in him in order to trade him, but maybe if they eat some of the contract, they could get a team to take him. But at some point, if you have to pay for him anyway, and you're not getting anything in return, it would make more sense just to let him play for the Brewers. That's where I was going with my posts above. If they can get rid of some dead money contracts then great. If not, they don't have any franchise-altering moves to make, so they should play out the season without doing anything else to hamper the future (signing another older FA to an eight-figure per year, multi-year deal, or trading away any prospects who project to help the Brewers MLB squad in the future). After 2014, several big money contracts will be off the books, and they can start to climb uphill from there.

...then they should also trade ARam and Aoki and get rid of Weeks to whoever will take the least cash included. I think they should do that regardless of other moves. Ramirez is making $20MM for the final year of his contract!! It would be wonderful for the Brewers to get out from under that contract, and even better if they could get some talent in return. Most likely, the only way they could trade Ramirez would be to eat a substantial part of the contract, which would make trading him less appealing, but there's always hope that the free-spending Dodgers would trade for him. Aoki should be traded because he'd probably bring some talent back, he's walking after the season, and we have Davis, Gindl and Schafer all MLB-ready and able to fill his shoes. If anyone would simply take Weeks' salary off our hands, he should be dealt, even if the player we get in return is immediately jettisoned from the system. I don't see any trade of Weeks happening because no one would trade for him. More likely, he'll either start the season in a platoon with Gennett, or will simply be cut with the Brewers eating his contract. It may just depend on whether the Brewers prefer Weeks or Francisco on the bench. It is always possible they'll send Gennett back to AAA, but that may lead to a fan mutiny if Gennett continues to play well through the rest of the season.

Realistically, we don't have a lot of "franchise changing" moves that could be made, Gomez, Braun, Segura and Lucroy aren't going to be traded, and we aren't going to make many smaller moves that may bring back younger talent, but would leave the MLB team with more "unknown/unproven" players. We'll probably go status quo and wait for some of the big contracts to fall off the books, while trying to keep up the image of competitiveness. This seemed to be the plan going into this season until Attanasio signed Lohse, so it will probably be the plan going forward. The following isn't a "wish list," this is simply what I think Melvin will do: Pick up Aoki's option, and trade him for either a MLB setup man or a high upside prospect in the lower minors. Braun will move to RF (he's not going to 1B) and Davis will be our LF, with Gindl the backup corner OF and Schafer the backup CF. Weeks will be shopped, but will not garner any interest. The 2014 season will start with a platoon at 2B, and Weeks getting the "primary RH bat off the bench" role. Ramirez will be shopped, but will not garner enough interest, so he will be our 3B. Francisco will be backup 3B/1B, getting a lot of starts and playing the role of "power LH bat off the bench." *Note: If Weeks in on the roster, either Gennett, Francisco or one of the backup OF (Gindl, Schafer) will not be on the 25-man, as we'll need a backup SS and backup C. This could be the reason the team would simply cut Weeks and eat his salary. Gallardo will be shopped, but Melvin will demand two top prospects for him, so he will not be moved. Lohse will not seriously be shopped, and the two of them will once again be the top of the Brewers' rotation. If Hart can walk without use of a cane, he will be brought back because fans know him and it may sell some tickets. End result: Aoki is traded and the rest of the team will be pretty much the same. If they're able to rid themselves of some salary (Weeks), they will use it on a veteran bullpen arm or back-end "name" starter (someone the fans will have heard of), either of which will probably not be better than we could bring up from our own system. We'll have a big payroll, and will have to be very hopeful that injuries and age don't hit, while numerous players "bounce back."

If he had decent trade value I would pick it up. I think that's the key sentence. We should be able to get someone who projects to be a MLB player, so it would be unwise to let Aoki walk when he should be able to be traded for something of value. I agree with what I believe is your underlying premise that we should go with Braun, Gomez, and some combo of Schafer/Gindl/Davis next year. However, I don't think we should just give away value by letting Aoki go to free agency. Lack of faith in the Brewers' management to do what I think is smart doesn't make me hope they'll do something dumb :-)

The closest WI-based comparison I can make to the decision on Prince / Hart in 2010 is the decision on Brett Favre for the Packers. The Packers had a good team, and Favre lobbied Thompson to upgrade the talent to shoot for the Super Bowl. Thompson refused to scrap his plan for building the team, Favre did his retire/un-retire/retire fiasco and Thompson moved ahead without him. Many thought that would destroy the team, but instead the team won a Super Bowl in the near future and remains one of the top teams in the league, expected to make a good run at winning their division every year. What would have happened if Thompson had scrapped his plan and signed the talent Favre wanted? No one knows, but the Packers likely would have been better in that one year. However, they would've been much worse after that season. Similarly, no one knows what would have happened to the Brewers had they decided to trade Fielder (and others?) in 2010. Everything is speculation. My belief is that they would have been worse in 2011, but would be much better for the long haul. We'll never know. All we know is that we won a division title, won one playoff series, and now have the team we have with the guaranteed financial obligations attached to it. I'd trade in the "one really good year" plan of Melvin for the "continually good team" plan of Thompson. Many Brewer fans would not.

I'm always leery of knee injuries. I really hope this is something that was cured with rest and is now 100%. If they need to "ease him in," substitute for him, and give him a couple of days off a week, then the knee is not fixed. Either it needs more rest or surgery or it will continue to be an issue. I hope they're not foregoing surgery just so he can get some playing time in this season, which may mean he ends up having surgery in the offseason or that he will be a part-time player for the rest of his tenure with Milwaukee. If he needs surgery or to be shelved for the rest of the season, just do it so he's 100% to start next year.

I don't think Gamel can be in AAA unless the Brewers don't offer him arby and he signs as a minor league free agent. I don't think the Brewers have done him any favors over the years, so I'd guess that if they don't offer him arby, he would sign somewhere else. I still think that if he can stay healthy, he can hit at the MLB level. Maybe not a star, but at least an average bat. Since I don't think the Brewers have the payroll room to sign anyone better, and since it doesn't appear that they have much confidence in Morris, I think that if Gamel is healthy, he will be offered arby and will be the first option as our opening day 1B. The big question to me is whether the Brewers are willing to bet on his health. He's already hitting arby and we've barely had a chance to see him play, as most of his MLB career has been spent on the DL.

You consistently(among others) claim you don't want to argue WHAT moves led us there, but that nonetheless the Brewers have chosen instant gratification over long term gratification. Because all the individual moves have been beaten to death, and it gets tiresome. For several years, I've said we're on path to where the team current is, and now we're here, and somehow I'm the one who wants to "re-write history." As we were "opening the window," I said it would hurt us in the future, and was greeted with a chorus of "I don't care." Those who said I was overly pessimistic, or just plain wrong are now mad that I was right. I guess the phrase "truth hurts" is fitting. It's very comparable to people who spend more than they have, laugh at you for saving, and then cry "unfair" when they're going through bankruptcy and you have money. Unfortunately, I had to watch us heading ourselves to bankruptcy, and as long as I cling to Brewer fandom, I have to suffer with everyone else. But, to play along with your desire to beat the dead horse of moves made or not made, just looking at last year, I said we should trade Morgan as soon as we signed Aoki, when he had some value after an exciting 2011. That was laughed at, by people saying we needed Morgan, and Aoki was probably a 5th OF. I said that we were obviously "going for it," but I didn't think we had the horses, so I said we needed to have a quick trigger finger to trade away the guys on the final year of their contract. Had we done this, we could've gotten something of value from Marcum. I strongly believed we should have traded Hart and Ramirez prior to the deadline when both were healthy and productive. The Dodgers were hot after Ramirez, and we probably could have received Eovaldi with LA picking up all of Ramirez's contract. Hart was having a good season and could have brought back a good package in trade. So, just in those few quick moves, we would have a good, young starting pitcher in Eovaldi, a couple of good prospects for Hart and Marcum, and someone with some upside for Morgan. Instead, we're in last place in the division, got nothing for Hart, Morgan or Marcum, and are watching Ramirez sit (untradeable) on the bench collecting a lot of money, and are left wondering if a knee will really heal itself with rest, or if we're going to pay him another $20MM to sit out most of next season. That's just a couple of things I wanted in one season. I have a lot more, but I'm sure I'm living in fantasy land, and Melvin made every possible move he could, and nothing could possibly be any different than it currently is. We're just unlucky and have to accept the fact that the Brewers were fated from the beginning of time to be exactly where they are now. Different goals and/or different management would not have made a difference. Oh yeah, and I should be jumping around doing cartwheels because we lost twice in the playoffs. The same fans who get upset if the Packers don't win the Super Bowl, and call for heads to roll if they miss the playoffs are somehow overjoyed that the Brewers sacrificed their future for one little window of "success" which constitutes one playoff series win. Finally, since we're looking at individual moves. Prince Fielder was not traded because Doug Melvin insisted on two young MLB ready pitchers for him. He was on his final year, so only a playoff hopeful team would trade for him. It seems obvious to me that no playoff hopeful team could possibly give up two members of their rotation for a one-year rental at first. Had Melvin not demanded an unreasonable return for Fielder, then I'm sure he could have been traded for some very good young talent... probably a couple of guys that right now would be some of the best players on our roster. They just wouldn't have been able to step in immediately (instant gratification), which was unacceptable to Brewer management, so we instead ruined a good long-term plan for one more playoff appearance. Had we traded him, we probably wouldn't have made the playoffs in 2011 (no one knows for sure), but we would very likely be in much better shape now. But again, looking at these individual moves, which you apparently want to do, is "revisionist history" which you say you hate. Therefore, I just like saying that it is the aggregate moves made and not made by Brewer management that have us in the current situation. Every other franchise in the division has more talent than the Brewers. It wasn't fated to be this way, it is the natural outcome of foregoing the future to win in the present.

Then you should have left the line: "But, the main argument isn't the extra injury risk (although that is cause for some worry). The main argument is age-based regression. " All I mentioned regarding being injured is that a 35-year-old player x, given the same circumstance as a 25-year-old player x would be more likely to get injured. Not 25-year old "player y" vs. 35-year-old "player x". Not someone ripping a phone book in half or stabbing himself with a pair of salad tongs. Just that the same person at age 35 has more wear-and-tear on their body, so in the same situation would be more likely to get injured than they would have in the same situation when they were ten years younger. The non-chemically-aided body just doesn't heal as well as it ages. There really aren't stats to "prove this," other than the stat that the vast majority of MLB players are retired by their mid-30's, many due to declining skills, many due to injury, and many due to a combination of both. But, as I mentioned in the above referenced quote that you didn't choose to include, the extra injury risk isn't really a big concern to me, the age-based regression is. Since you don't question the age-based regression, then am I to assume that you are also scared that Kyle Lohse will not be very good in at least one of the next two years? Because that's the main reason I wanted Lohse traded this season, not because he may get some freak injury. Expecting Lohse to continue to pitch well at age 35 & 36 is expecting him to defy nature. It's possible, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Well, it appears as far as value goes: first round draft pick > Lohse under current contract > 0 He still has positive value to at least one team, but not the "equivalent to the first rounder we gave up" that the Brewers said they were asking for.

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/07/how-smart-investing-made-the-pittsburgh-pirates-baseballs-best-team/277609/ Here's a quick article on how the Pirates went from laughing stock to one of the best teams in baseball by putting their money into scouting rather than putting it into the MLB roster. I know the Brewers were shooting for the playoffs during this time frame, but there has to be some middle ground. Instead of spending every available penny on the MLB roster, if they had saved some of that extra money to use on scouting, drafting, signing and developing players, they would probably be better off today. Again, I'm not saying the Brewers shouldn't have tried to win at the MLB level since 2008, but I don't think they needed to to go absolutely all in (going over budget on the MLB payroll and showing extreme reluctance to trading any vet away), giving them little chance to have a good franchise going forward. Going "over slot" in the draft was a great way for smaller market teams like the Pirates to build up a strong farm system quickly. Melvin complained about this every year, when he should have been taking advantage of it. His complaints are probably at least part of the reason it is now gone, replaced with the goofy "pool" that made this year's draft pretty ugly. This "pool" seems to be exactly what Melvin was whining for, and now it keeps the Brewers from paying "over slot" to quickly rebuild our farm, and leading to us drafting guys with a ceiling of middle reliever with several of our top picks. Same holds true with signing guys like Chapman and Cespedes, who are "unproven," but have a very high upside. Great way for smaller market teams to get a potential superstar for below market, but Melvin would rather spend the money patching the roster year-to-year on "proven" vets. Even when he got lucky winning Aoki with his lowball bid, (something which seemed to shock Melvin, judging by his quotes at the time), the Brewers won't turn it around with a forward-looking trade. They'll get a couple of decent years from Aoki on losing Brewer teams, and then he'll walk, all because they have to try to convince the fans that they have a playoff-caliber team in 2014, so they'll continue to buy tickets. Was pay Gagne really a better option than spending that $10MM to get a couple of 1st rounders in the later rounds? Instead of offering K-Rod arby in an attempt to get a pick, couldn't we have just apportioned that money to signing our 2nd rounder to over slot money? There are a lot of examples of wasted money on the MLB roster for the Brewers over the past decade, which could have been put to much better use. Melvin is good at some things, but I think he's pretty bad at managing finances. When that is combined with Attanasio's strategy of making sure every move is done to get fans in the seats now, you end up bypassing some things that could really help the franchise. Going "all in, all the time" has hurt us, and we don't seem to ever want to stop. It's not one big move that has broken us, it's the aggregate of all the moves being made with a focus on today at the expense of tomorrow. Holding onto Aoki falls into this category. Trading him won't save the franchise by itself, but it is one step in the direction of building for a better future. Who knows, maybe we'll trade him this offseason, but looking at recent history, I doubt it, because that may, in some small way signal to someone that we're not "going for it," and Attanasio could never live with that perception.

Gamel has to prove he's healthy before he gets offered arby, as he'll probably make $1MM even though he's hardly played. Assuming he's healthy and retained, I think he gets first shot at 1B. It'd be easy to hand 1B to Morris, but if he isn't up now, they aren't overly high on him, so he's really going to have to do something before he'll be starting for the Brewers. If Braun gets moved anywhere, I would say it would be to RF if Aoki is traded, opening up LF for Davis, if they want Davis to play over Gindl/Schafer. If they do this, and keep Schafer as the 4th OF, Halton could be a good bench player as a backup 1B/5th OF, pairing him with Francisco for a good LH/RH power tandem off the bench (assuming Ramirez is healthy enough to play every day, so Francisco isn't the everyday 3B). A wildcard is Taylor Green, who plays 1B, 2B and 3B. I prefer him over Francisco, simply based on his defense, but if it comes to defense vs a high-K/high-power guy, the Brewers won't go with the defense.

This is a good read: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9933 Conclusion I began my investigation into how baseball players age in order to address some potential problems with past studies. It turns out that after correcting for those flaws that the peak age of baseball players appears to be around 29, and possibly 30 for hitters in modern times. Of course, some players will peak earlier and others later, but this is a general benchmark. I find it interesting that despite his unwavering pronouncement of when players peaked when the article opened, James's tone was tempered in his general conclusion: Good hitters stay around, weak hitters don't. Most players are declining by age 30; all players are declining by age 33. There are difference in rates of decline, but those differences are far less significant for the assessment of future value than are the differing levels of ability (James, 1982, p. 205). And that's probably about as technical as we need to get. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/images/9933_02.jpg

I agree that there probably wasn't much offered. My concern is that it is the current management who put together a roster containing a number of guys to whom they're paying eight figure salaries, none of which can generate even a so-so offer. The natural response would seem to be: "Stop offering multi-year contracts for eight figures per year to people who will not be tradeable mid-way through the contract." Since Brewer management is obligated to the contracts they signed unless they somehow pass that obligation on to someone else, I'm looking for the best "out." ...However, taking them out of the equation, someone in their mid-30's is more apt to get injured then they were in their mid-20's.... Please post statistics that prove this. How about the fact that most players are out of baseball by the time they're in their mid-30's? They don't retire because they're healthier and better than they were during the years they played. I'm certain (sorry, no stats to "prove" this) that if a player was capable of being better at 30, 40, 50, 60 (whatever age) than they were when they were in their 20's, they would never retire. Hank Aaron would still be adding to his home run record. Age effects everyone. Some players are able to play a few years longer than others, but betting a lot of guaranteed money that one specific person will be the one to defy the odds is not likely to be a good bet. If Lohse is still a Brewer in two years, I hope he is one of the very few who can defy the odds, but I don't expect it. Also, to your reference to the current Brewers, you'll note that I said players have to be compared to themselves, not others. I didn't say that players in their 20's don't get injured, of course they do. Players who get injured often during their 20's are not really likely to still be playing into their 30's. I said that "Player x" at age 35 is more likely to get injured (and regress) than "player x" was when he was 25. Rogers has never been healthy, and will probably never have much of a MLB career. If Gallardo's lack of velocity is due to anything permanent, he probably won't be pitching beyond his current contract. But, as I mentioned, I'm more concerned about age regression than I am about injury. Even if Lohse doesn't get hurt, I don't expect him to continue to perform at a MLB level for two more years. I hope I'm wrong. To put it simply... if Gallardo is not injured, and continues to pitch with reduced velocity at age 27-28, people will scratch their heads and wonder what happened. If Lohse throws up a 5+ ERA the next two years, people will just say he's old and should retire. No one (other than perhaps Attanasio) will say "boy, never could've seen that coming."

And you can't dump a ton of money into signing domestic and international players - there are limits on the bonus pools for the draft and for signing international free agents, and if you go over those limits you forfeit draft picks. You are aware of this, right? You are aware that when the Brewers won the Aoki bid, they had never seen him play because they don't scout Asia, right? You realize that this is because of money, right? You realize that there are a lot of good players in Asia, right? You realize that when you spend money in one place, you can't spend it elsewhere, right? What you're looking at is throwing big money at the guys everyone knows about. What I'm looking at is developing a system to find and develop the guys that everyone else doesn't know about. The Brewers have decided to spend that money on their MLB roster, limiting their chances of acquiring good international talent. Opening academies and sending scouts all over the world is pretty expensive, but it can be well worth the money... if you choose to spend the money on forward-looking projects, that is. Unfortunately, the team doesn't see immediate gratification for this (fans don't buy tickets now because some guy is watching kids play in Japan), and the Brewers under Attanasio are all about immediate gratification. trading 6 MLB starters Axford will be too expensive to offer arby, so he'll likely be a free agent anyway. Gonzalez is going to be a free agent. Trading these guys won't affect the team going forward, and this year is not worth worrying about. So the players I looked at that count are: (1) Aoki, who I think could bring back a pretty good prospect, and I'd shoot for as high of a ceiling as possible, probably meaning getting someone in the lower minors. I think Aoki's production could be adequately replaced from the mix of Schafer, Gindl and Davis. Sideways step at the MLB level, with a big help to the farm. (2) Lohse, who I have said all along is very likely to regress over his contract. I feel that trading him will free us from having to pay him to be a bad starter/long reliever/dfa candidate in two years. Not everyone believes this, but I think it unlikely that he'll defy age the way some people seem to expect. (3) Ramirez has a knee injury that has hampered him all season. Knee injuries don't generally just go away without surgery, which could cause him to miss a significant portion of the year he has left on his contract. If we don't trade him, we'll owe him $20MM to probably be a part-time, hampered player next year, and we will potentially pay him to get knee surgery and sit out the season. Of course, other teams know this, so we'd have to dupe the free-spending Dodgers, or potentially an AL team who thinks he can handle DH'ing. If not for the perennial chirping of "but we're a playoff team, so we can't trade anyone without ruining our team," we could've traded him last year for Eovaldi, and we'd be much better off right now and going forward. That move might have made even me a bit optimistic. Now we just need to find a way to rid us of this horrid contract, which was structured in a future-breaking deal because we had to "go for it" in 2012 and we didn't have any money (there's that money problem again). (4) Gomez. I think the other moves are no brainers, and this is really the only head-scratcher. Gomez is young and signed through his prime. He looks like something may really have clicked, and he could be a very good player through his contract. Players like that are good to have, which also makes them extremely expensive in trade. The question becomes whether he is more valuable to the Brewers by playing for them for a few more years, or by trading him (this should really be the question for every player at all times). Looking at the talent the Brewers have in their system, and the contract obligations they owe, I don't think the Brewers are going to be very good any time soon. So to me, (assuming we could get a king's ransom in trade), having Gomez adding a couple of wins to a bad team is less valuable than trading him. I don't like using a specific name, because that player may not be available, but if we could get an Archie Bradley-type and another Top 100 prospect, I think that could be a franchise-changing move. Schafer is MLB ready to step into CF. We'd take a step back there, but Schafer is capable, and we'd get a front-line starter of the (near) future and another key piece to fill in elsewhere. Maybe a step back next year, but the potential to take some big steps forward in the not-too-distant future. The rosy projections that would be "torn apart" consider that Lohse can continue to pitch without regression at an age when most pitchers seriously regress (to the point of retirement) and Ramirez will overcome a knee injury that has sidelined him for this season and has not been repaired, to put up the numbers he posted when he was younger. They assume we will re-sign Hart (when once again, we don't have any money) and Hart will bounce back after a full year off and be the player he was, or that we will bring up Morris, and he'll be a savior, when apparently the Brewers themselves don't trust him over Betancourt. We assume our bullpen will remain good, when (as we've seen the past few seasons) that is a huge crapshoot, and that our SP will be even league average, when other teams' scouts apparently think Gallardo is a #4-5 starter, and Peralta, while talented still has to prove he has his control issues mastered. We don't have much young talent coming up, and we're almost assured (without making some moves) to have a $100MM payroll at a time when (after this poor season) ticket sales will almost assuredly drop, meaning a significant drop in payroll. All this at a time when every other team in the division has more talent at the MLB level and significantly better farm systems that are bearing fruit right now. So yeah, everything could "gel" and the Brewers could surprise people and win, but the deck is so heavily stacked against them that "going for it" seems akin to the Titanic captain screaming "full speed ahead."

I'll try, and if the mods want to move this to a new "How would you build the organization" thread, please do so, as this is getting really off topic. I have to start with the premise that we are too far gone for this to be a quick fix. It's kind of like a family in bankruptcy saying "maybe we should stop going out to eat every night." That's great, and it will help, but they should've done that before they got into bankruptcy. Now some "pain" may be necessary in order to get back on track. In my opinion (and Melvin made this comment, so I have some hope), every decision now should be in an attempt to build a good franchise from the bottom up, hopefully leading to sustainable success at the MLB level several years down the road. So, if I took over today looked at the franchise top-to-bottom and wanted to build from there: Starting with #4 (deficiencies in player development), it seems that there is a lot going wrong with the Brewers in this area, so major changes would need to be made. Therefore, a lot of heads would have to roll. I would look to the teams that seem to be "doing it right" like Tampa, Texas, St Louis, etc and see if I could find a good person who was blocked from becoming Director of Player Development in their organization. I would make a very good offer to that person to bring them over, and give them a decent amount of discretion to pick their staff and implement their rules for player development, scouting, draft prep, etc. We should get some good picks over the next few years, so it is imperative they aren't screwed up. As an outsider, it seems to me that the Brewers have put every spare dollar into the MLB payroll, not leaving extra funds for things like player development. I'd reverse this somewhat, as the MLB payroll would be lower over the next few seasons, I'd put a lot of money (dumping the $20MM we owe Ramirez and the $29MM or so we owe Lohse would be a good start) into getting heavily into both the domestic and international markets (scouting, signing and developing). A couple of "finds" in the international market would be as meaningful to the franchise as making good draft picks and developing them properly. Getting both these areas up to par could help us attain sustainable success. For #1 & 2, which kind of go together, we're in a bad situation. Whether through injuries, bad contracts, age, bad play or whatever, there weren't many deals to be made that could have really changed the franchise. (My angst is that they should've moved guys like Hart and Ramirez last year, and they'd be in much better shape now if they had, but lamenting bad moves of the past is not the point of this post). I hoped Gallardo might be that "franchise altering" move, but his loss of velocity seems to have lowered his trade value to the point that the Brewers are better off holding onto him in hopes that he regains his trade value by this offseason or next year's trade deadline. Aoki should have been traded, because I think Melvin could have brought back a high-upside guy at the lower levels that we all would have fallen in love with. But really, since there's no way Segura or Braun was getting traded, Gomez was probably the only guy who could have been traded to bring back meaningful talent. Other than that, we'd have a couple of salary dump trades (Lohse and maybe an August trade of Ramirez) that wouldn't bring back any talent, but would free up a lot of money, and some minor trades of relievers. I am surprised that Axford and Gonzalez weren't dealt, even if the return was small. In any move, I would look for high upside talent, even if it meant going for players in the low minors to get it. The K-Rod deal did this, and I believe that if Melvin were given the thumbs up, he could make some more good deals, but that would mean trading guys who actually have trade value, and not requiring "MLB ready" guys back, as requiring "MLB ready" means we'd get less upside in return for immediate gratification (I think that was the fatal flaw when we looked to move Hart & Fielder a few years back). So, short answer would be trade Aoki for as high-upside a player as we could get, even if he was in the the low minors (someone who could be better than Aoki if he reaches his potential, but has the risk of not reaching the potential), trade Gomez for a some top prospects who have a good chance of being core players for many years, dump Lohse and Ramirez for a minor amount of talent, and a lot of salary relief, much of which would be used on forward-looking upgrades like improving scouting & player development, and trade Gonzalez and Axford for some minor leaguers who project to have a few years' success at the MLB level in the future. Question #3 is a really important one, and is probably more difficult than it should be, because two obvious names should be Braun and Segura. However, the Braun PED situation and Segura's seeming reluctance to sign an extension fog the issue. Personally, I'd hold onto Braun and just let him play. The fans will either accept him or not, but I think time will heal the wound, and trading him when his value is at it's lowest doesn't seem prudent. There will be a vocal group that will scream for his head, so there is a chance he could be traded, which would probably set the franchise back even further. I really hope Segura extends. However, as I felt with Fielder, if he is not going to extend (which is his right, and I support his decision if he wants to go year-to-year for maximum dollar), then we have to look at him as someone who will be a Brewer for a few more years, and then should be traded when he's in his arby years. That makes him an integral piece for the short term, but not a "core player." Lucroy is a good player signed to a good contract, but he shouldn't be extended beyond his current contract (which goes to 2017, when he's 31), so we should probably look to move him in 2-3 years. As I mentioned before, I think Gomez should be shopped because I don't think we'll be good during his contract, and with the season he's having, we should be able to bring back a couple of Top 100 prospects for him (guys who could be long-term core players in the near future). Peralta could be a core player, but he has to prove he's got his control down before I'd extend him. Therefore I really don't know what our core is going forward. We've got some big question marks, some stopgaps, and very little in the minors who look to be core guys in the future. Since I believe in building a "malleable" core, this is troublesome, and needs to be addressed ASAP. We need a good group of 20-somethings playing for little money, willing to (and worthy of) extend their Brewer career to eight seasons while they're still in their pre-arby years, and we don't have any (unless Segura signs). Note that had we done less drastic moves in the past, we would not need to make as drastic of moves going forward. Now I feel that we're in a position where unless we make some drastic moves, both in the "management" and "personnel" areas, we will flounder around hoping to get lucky and reach .500, much like we did through the late 80's and 90's. It's a shame really, because we recently went through this, and just five or so years ago, we looked to be on the "sustainable success" path. Unfortunately, it takes a lot longer to build a franchise up than it does to tear it apart.

I'm tired of hearing the injury risk argument. I hate this word but it is a straw man argument. There isn't enough room on this board to list the pitchers in their early, mid, and late 20's who have gotten injured. It can happen to any pitcher at any time. Strasburg is a much bigger injury risk, but that's not going to stop someone from handing him $100M when he becomes a free agent (if he makes it to 2017 without getting injured again). In this argument, it is not correct to compare different players. Rather, you compare a player to himself. Of course there are players who get injured early on, many of whom never make it to their 30's due to these injuries. However, taking them out of the equation, someone in their mid-30's is more apt to get injured then they were in their mid-20's. If they had an injury in their 20's, they will have the lingering effects of that injury, and even if they didn't have an injury in their 20's, they will have a decade more wear-and-tear on their body. But, the main argument isn't the extra injury risk (although that is cause for some worry). The main argument is age-based regression. Most players don't make it to their mid-30s, and (steroid era aside) those that do generally aren't as productive as they were when they were in their prime. It's nothing personal against a particular player, it's just nature... people age. There's a reason players retire. If age didn't have a major effect on performance, people would play much longer. It's not coincidence that most players call it quits in their early-to-mid 30's. The Brewers' big concerns right now lie mainly in Lohse, who has played well, but will be 36 (an age when almost all starting pitchers are retired) when the contract ends, and Ramirez, who is not only well into his mid-30's but has also been laid up this entire year with a knee injury. Knee injuries scare me with anyone, as they often linger around until (and sometimes even after) surgery is performed. Between these two players, we will owe $27MM next year, and $15MM in 2015 when Ramirez will no longer be on the team. Then we'll still owe Lohse for several seasons after that in deferred salary. That is a substantial chunk of our payroll tied into two 35 year-olds, one with a serious injury and one playing a position where few players are still playing at 35 & 36. It is possible that both will be All Stars next year, but I don't think the odds would favor it. If both of them were 26, they would be far more likely to perform well next year, and in spite of your post I quoted, I'd have to believe you'd agree with that. Yes, it is a risk for the Brewers to hold on to him longer because anything can happen. But you have to take risks in order to increase rewards. It's also a bigger risk for another team to acquire him now than to wait until less years/money are left on the deal. The longer they hold on to him, the less money and years on his deal, the less risk for another team to acquire him, the greater the return the Brewers will get. K-Rod got a guy who was given mid-first round money to sign, and the Brewers gave up a mid-first round pick to sign Lohse. If the Brewers hold on to Lohse and trade him next year for another Delmonico who was a mid-first round pick or given mid-first round money to sign, they will in essence get their first round pick back. The Brewers haven't given up anything for Lohse until they let him go - then evaluate what, if anything they got in return, and compare that to a mid-first round pick. If Lohse is still pitching well when he's 36, then it could be considered a good signing. However, that would defy the odds, and in this day of "Moneyball" management, it astounds me that a team would continually put themselves in positions where they would have to defy the odds for their moves to work out. I know there are some that say "I don't care if they have to DFA him in the final year, as long as they get two good years out of him." I can't agree with this, as we will still have to field a team in two years. Hampering that team with 10-15% of their payroll in dead money (just on Lohse) gives us almost no chance of realistically fielding a winning team, especially when we have very few prospects who will be expected to play at an All Star level for league minimum. There is also a good possibility that we would have a better use for that money that we can't pursue because we're obligated to pay Lohse (opportunity cost). Again, it's not a given that Lohse will be bad in 2015, but he would have to defy nature to still be a good starting pitcher at age 36. Bottom line is, the Brewers weren't looking for a Garza-type return. They said that they only wanted to get value equivalent to the first round draft pick they gave up for Lohse, and no one was willing to give even that much talent for him. It was a panic signing when it happened (apparently against Melvin's wishes) and no one else wants to be stuck with the risk that comes with having a so-so pitcher in his mid-30's signed to a two-and-a-half year deal for eight figures per year. I don't blame them for not trading him when the "trade" would've been a salary dump. I blame them for making a bad panic signing last offseason that looked to me at the time as more of an attempt to boost lagging season ticket sales than it was a move to actually field a playoff team.

The Brewers could be at max payroll already, and it wouldn't change the point that dealing a guy for 'prospects' just because there is a low playoff chance shows a lack of planning. Yes, arbitrarily signing someone and then arbitrarily trading that someone (for nothing because it was a bad signing) is the epitome of working without a plan. That's what our "management" attempted to do with Lohse. They said they were not going to trade Lohse unless they could get talent equivalent to the first rounder they gave up, and no one bit on that. Repeat: no one was willing to give the Brewers the equivalent of a first round draft pick for Lohse... because of his contract (taking him to an age in which almost every starting pitcher to ever play the game is retired) he has little to no trade value. If we wanted to get rid of him, it would have had to be in a salary dump trade, which looks bad to the fans. But that's just one move, and our team unfortunately is the aggregate of all the moves made and not made in the recent past. That's why I don't like arguing the merits of one move, because it has to be viewed in a vacuum. We don't operate in a vacuum. People say we're "going for it" in 2014 because we have a shot. I think we're "going for it" next year (in a PR sense only) because no one would offer us anything of value for our too-old, too-expensive, too-underperforming, and/or too-injured "trading chips," and "management" is unwilling to move the few pieces that may have some value. Our "management" put this franchise together, so there is no one to blame but them. They are now in a position where they can either salary dump, or they can try to make a showing of "going for it" next year. Attanasio is so worried about ticket sales and losing fans that either dumping salary or trading a "fan favorite" with value like Gomez are not things he's willing to do. So, when he couldn't get any value back for the bad contracts he and Melvin have amassed, he is left with only one option, and that is to try to sell the fans on the idea that we've just been unlucky and that we really are a playoff caliber team. I understand your argument, but I think you fully miss mine if you think that I'm a proponent of "win now or burn it to the ground." That is pretty much the opposite of everything I stand for. I own and run two businesses. Every day, I come into the office and think "things are going pretty well, but how can they be better tomorrow, next year and into the future." I have a seven year old, and a two year old, and I try to envision how they can someday take over what I've started, and how it can be far better for them at that point than it is for me now. In other words, I would never sacrifice the future for the present, and I only think "tearing it down" is an option now because the bad moves made over the past few seasons have forced the Brewers into the position where it may be the only valid option. That is what saddens me. This was easy to see coming, could easily have been avoided, but instead "management" kept making things worse. That is why I say they have no long-term plan. When they had the opportunity to build the franchise for continual success, they chose a two year plan and we're now on the backside of that two years. That's why I say they have bad management, and unfortunately, when the bad management seems to be coming from the owner, I don't see how it will change other than for the fans to stop showing up. Taking a big hit in the wallet is probably the only thing that will cause Attanasio to change tack and run the team like the small/mid-market team it is instead of the Yankees, which we are not.

I'd say "simple" is making the easy moves to appease some fans instead of developing a meaningful long-term strategy. I had a long post written, but I'm tired of the same argument. If someone wants to believe that running a business without a plan is a good idea, then that person will love the Brewers' "management." If actually looking up the salaries (which are already conveniently put into a spreadsheet by the good people of Cot's) is too much work, and the numerous posts I have written breaking down the upcoming obligations haven't swayed you, then feel free to believe that the Brewers have all kinds of financial flexibility going forward. I disagree. I lived through too many years of the Seligs feeding us "Kool-Aid," pretending they were trying to compete so that they could sell tickets. I'm not going to listen to the "new owner" doing the same thing. Unfortunately, I think the only thing that will change his mind is for fans to stop giving him their money. I can't support poor management any longer.

I cry fowl on the Powerball analogy. Are you calling me chicken? :-) A playoff run in the 2 wildcard era is not even close to that wildly improbable. I'd ballpark without any major moves that the Brewers would have about a 20% of making the playoffs in some fashion given the true talent level. The analogy was to show that the odds are stacked against it. Of course, with only 30 teams, even the Astros have better than 1-in-a-hundred-million (or whatever Powerball is) chance to win, but you still need to look at the odds. Like the people I know who don't save money, but buy lottery tickets and dream about what they would do with the money, operating without a valid plan generally leads to misery. Instead of ending up with no money for retirement, college, or whatever, when the time's up on the Brewers, they simply look like they do right now, with a bad MLB team, and a bad farm system. When the chances are pretty unrealistic, I would prefer to look more to the future rather than further harming the future by "going for it" in a year when the odds of reaching "it" are pretty long. It's all about planning, and I think that's lacking with the Brewers, who much more worried about today than they are about tomorrow. Attanasio's belief is that fans need "name" players, either ones who spend their career with the Brewers or "name" free agents who the fans have heard of. Unfortunately, the Brewers don't have limitless resources, so the attempt to acquire and maintain players the fans relate to has caused a greater and greater percentage of payroll to funnel to a smaller and smaller group of players. Now, we're in a bind because a few players take up most of the payroll, we don't have the prospects to fill in the gaps, and team management is facing the reality that fans are likely to stop tuning in/buying tickets because of poor play, now compounded with the Braun fiasco. So, they could have "salary dumped" a couple of guys, but chose not to, probably due to fear of losing fans. Maybe it's just that other teams realize that the players who get touted here as being "good trade chips" are really not very valuable. Because we're going to go into 2014 with a team eerily similar to this year's roster, we are now going to be barraged with stories of how unfortunate we are, and how we really are a playoff team... just be sure to re-up your season tickets so you don't miss out on the surprise Brewers of 2014. What they won't relate is that if you don't spend your hard-earned money to watch the likely-non-playoff-bound-2014 Brewers, the owners will have to dig tens of millions out of their own pockets. On point the more Gindl and Davis keep hitting (would be nice if Logan could dial it up) the more it makes sense to deal Aoki one way or another. I would hope that the success or failure over a few MLB plate appearances would not matter much to the Brewers, who have had the luxury of seeing them post several yeas' worth of plate appearances in the minors. They should have a pretty good idea whether or not they are MLB players before they ever reach the MLB level. Unfortunately, it seems that at least Roenicke deems a handful of MLB PAs to be far more important than years of minor league play. If you could get similar RF production from some combo of our prospects as you would get from Aoki, and if you could trade Aoki for someone who could help the Brewers (for league minimum with six years of control) down the road, then you would win, even if Aoki does really well for the team we trade him to. Now, it's possible that the team feels none of their "MLB ready" OF prospects are actually any good, but that doesn't seem probable, as all of them look capable of playing at the MLB level. More likely, they are once again going to make a futile attempt at "going for it," will once again fail, and will once again have foregone a chance to improve their future in order to maintain the perception amongst the fans that they are have a chance to win now. While I've spent countless hours following this team over the past 40 years, I decided a week or so ago to stop tuning in. Somewhat surprisingly, I've found it pretty easy to stop watching them. It looks to me like they're trying to pull the wool over the fans' eyes to get them to continue to spend their money on the Brewers. I've given them enough. Now they'll have to earn my time and money back, and the way this management operates, I doubt it will happen soon. Maybe enough fans will "tune out" and the Brewers will be forced to change. I don't know, I can only control my own actions.

When you start with the premise that the Brewers intend to make a playoff run in 2014, what options do they have for the OF logjam this year? When you start with the premise that you are going to win the Powerball, why should you save for things like retirement and your kids' college education? I'd rather start with a reasonable premise that doesn't defy the odds and create a plan based in reality. Attanasio would rather try to dupe the fans into thinking we're "going for it" so that he can sell tickets, because they guaranteed a lot of obligations, and if people stop buying tickets, the owners' group is set to lose a lot of money next year. Plus, there is trained behavior, and Attanasio realizes that if people who have been buying tickets stop buying tickets, it will be hard to get them back.

Again, I'm done focusing on the micros, because it goes around-and-around, and anything said becomes purely speculation. I am anything but someone wanting "instant gratification." What I've argued for a few years now is the opposite of that. I will gladly give up "instant gratification" for a solid, long-term plan for success in a smaller-market. What the Brewers have done has catered to those seeking "instant gratification." Constantly looking out for "today" at the expense of the future is why our franchise is in shambles. Taking every move made and not made has led us where we are. Not that long ago, we had two players who have put up Hall of Fame numbers in the majors (Fielder and Braun) along with several multiple-time All Stars all coming up around the same time, all playing for league minimum, and a payroll that was rising at an astounding rate. From that, we managed two playoff appearances (no World Series) and are now among the worst franchises in baseball. Was that pre-determined fate, or did Brewer management have something to do with it? So no, I don't want to argue about what may or may not have been a potential outcome had Lohse not been signed. I don't want to argue any move or non-move, as they have all been argued to death. I will just say that it is a summation of everything Brewer management has done (and not done) that has us where we are, and I think that had we taken a different tack, we would probably be in a better situation going forward. I understand that could possibly mean a myriad of things, including potentially not having made the playoffs twice, but that is all hypothetical. The only reality is what has happened and where we are, and I don't like where we are. Right now as a Brewer fan, reality sucks. If any private individual outside of the monopoly that is baseball had run their business the way the Brewers have been run, constantly trading in the future for the present, they would be swallowed up by their better-run competitors. Currently, every other team in the NL Central owns the Brewers, and due to years of bad management/"planning" by the Brewer organization, I don't see that changing for a long time. I hadn't intended to post anything beyond my initial post this morning, so I'll stop my ranting now. I've been saying the same thing for a few years, so if people don't know where I'm coming from by now, they never will. I'm just coming to the point that it's not worth my time caring anymore. If the Brewers want to run their franchise like a rudderless ship, it only matters to me if I let it.

Monty, looking at what the White Sox got for Peavey, would you have been happy with that as a return for Lohse? I'd have been happy if they had never signed Lohse, but now they're stuck with him, as they're stuck with a lot of other dead money deals. As much as some people say Lohse has trade value, he apparently doesn't have the value of the first round pick they lost for him, and now I believe you are correct that all they'd get for him is "junk." So yes, I'd have been happy to get "junk" as long as it would rid the team of the future obligation owed. Really, I'd be content if it appeared that we had a plan in place rather than just trying to throw money at anyone the fans know in order to keep them around, regardless of the future ramifications. Attanasio believes that fans want to watch a team that has players they're familiar with, and I think that's a flawed assumption. But it's not just the "what could we do now" that bothers me. Posters argue back and forth about the micros, but if you look at the whole picture, we had a very promising future not that long ago. I (along with most here) suffered through a lot of bad Brewer teams, and was very excited about the future. Now here we are a few years later, and looking at where we are and where we've been, I've lost all that excitement. I believe that had it been managed differently, we would not have to be in the position we are in, which is a pathetic Major League team with a pathetic Minor League system. While I enjoyed making the playoffs, I can't say that all my dreams were fulfilled, and a decade of futility will be worth it because we almost made it to the World Series. That is the epitome of a loser's mentality. I used the term "suffer" earlier, and I think that our failed attempt to go all in in one year will lead to a lot of suffering in the future. Was it worth it? If I had money invested in the stock of a company that was managed this poorly, I would have sold a long time ago. I have no financial interest in the Brewers, but I have invested thousands of hours into the team, and there is really no logical reasoning for it... just blind loyalty to a logo and an ideal, I guess. I run two businesses, and it's really hard for me to continue to cheer for poor management. I hold nothing against anyone who continues to hold onto hope. Loyalty is great, but as I try to look deeper into what's going on with the team (from a business perspective), I continue to wonder what they're doing to fight to retain my loyalty. Signing "name" players to bad deals? That should be insulting to anyone but the most casual of fans. Yesterday's inaction is just one more brick in a long road of failures to plan beyond next year. It just may be the one brick that breaks my back as a fan.