monty57

"The owner signed free agent pitcher Kyle Lohse for $33 million over three years practically on the eve of the season over the objections of his general manager Doug Melvin" I'd heard rumors that Attanasio was behind the Lohse signing, but nothing stating that Melvin objected and Attanasio did the deal anyway. I've said before, if the problem is Melvin, it's an easy fix. If it's Attanasio, we have to hope he learns that a team in Milwaukee cannot be run like the Yankees.

Monty, I agree with a good number of your points but I fail to see the restrictive future financial obligations that you mentioned. Hart's ($10m) contract is done after this season 2013, Weeks ($11m) and Ramirez ($16m w a $4m buyout for 2015) after 2014 and Lohse ($11m) after 2015. Other than Braun and Lucroy's extensions, where are these financial restrictions? Am I missing something? The big hit (the bottleneck I've been worried about for a while) is next year, when I don't see how we will have any room to move, so unless we find a way to trade away some salary we will not be able to do much. We'll basically have this year's roster minus Hart and a few relievers, and a $100MM payroll. While Weeks' poor play hurts the Brewers, it may help the financial obligation, as long as they either cut him or sit him so that his option doesn't automatically exercise (2015 option guaranteed if Weeks is healthy at end of 2014 season and has 600 PAs in 2014 or 1,200 PAs in 2013-14). If his option exercises, we will owe a 36-year old Lohse $11MM (not incl his deferred money) and Weeks $11.5MM, and we'll still owe Ramirez $4MM to not play. I'm just going on my opinion of how Lohse and Weeks would play in 2015, but I'd consider this a "dead" $26.5MM. Braun ($13MM), Lucroy ($3.1MM) and Gomez ($8MM) would be the only other guaranteed money, and the Brewers have a $13MM option for Gallardo if he re-discovers his velocity ($0.6MM buyout if he doesn't). If Weeks plays enough for his contract to exercise, we'd have $63.6MM for six guys. We don't have much help coming up through the system, so there's a chance we'd still have Estrada in year 3 arby, which would probably be around $7MM, but I don't envision Axford still being around even next year for the price he'll demand in arby. That's $70.6MM for seven guys. We need 25 guys on the roster, so if we have a $100MM payroll, that's $29.4MM for the remaining 18 guys. If Weeks is out, it's $40.9MM for 19 guys which is certainly more doable. So, we have: C Lucroy $3.1MM 1B ? - Gamel at around $2-3MM or Morris at $500k if either proves worthy 2B ? - Weeks at $11.5MM or Gennett at $500k SS Segura $500k 3B ? LF Braun $13MM CF Gomez $8MM RF ? Aoki at around $4MM or Schafer/Gindl/Davis SP ? SP Gallardo $13MM SP ? SP Estrada $7MM SP Lohse $11MM Since it'd be hard to sign anyone next year because of the outstanding liabilities, and since we don't have good prospects to fill in the question marks on the board, I find it hard to believe we'll turn the list above into a playoff contender. Then we'd lose Gallardo, Estrada, Lohse and Weeks to free agency. Again, with very little in terms of prospects to bring up to replace them.

If it's Roenicke's fault that some players aren't performing to what some people expect, then why isn't Roenicke given all the credit for those who are overperforming? Segura wasn't an elite prospect, but he's playing at an All Star level. Gomez was a DFA candidate in many people's mind, and played the small side of a platoon under every other manager he had. Aoki has outplayed most people's expectations in his time as a Brewer. I personally don't think Roenicke has too much sway either way, but he can't be at fault for the bad starting pitching and not be credited with those playing well. Realistically, I think that there are players who are playing poorly who will play better, and there are players who are playing well who will cool off. I think (hope) that Gallardo's drop in velocity stems from playing in the World Baseball Classic, and doesn't stem from (if the articles Ennder linked in another post are correct) the flawed mechanics he's had since hurting his knee in his rookie year catching up with him. I hoped Peralta would be kept in the minors to start the season, as he's always had control issues that I'd rather he work out in AAA instead of the majors, and we could've held him for another year (in his prime) if we kept him in the minors for a couple months. Gallardo's drop in velocity is surprising. Peralta's lack of control and Estrada not pitching well aren't big surprises. Fiers getting knocked around and Burgos being pretty pedestrian shouldn't surprise anyone. Our minor league guys' poor play shows why "prospect raters" said we were one of the worst systems in the majors. I think that many posters, looking optimistically at their favorite team, underweighted some of the warts the team has and overweighted the hot finish to last season, and with that optimisitc viewpoint figured the Brewers could be above .500, and with some luck could make a run for the second wild card. That's all well-and-good on a message board, but I'd guess that if you had asked people to put money on the Brewers' chances this year, I doubt many would've bet that the Brewers would be a playoff team. But, to me it's not about what could've been done differently this offseason, it's about the decisions made over the recent past when we were all about going "all in." We started with a group of great prospects, two of whom have a good shot at ending up in the Hall of Fame and several other multi-time All Stars along with a rapidly expanding payroll. From that, we got two playoff appearances and one playoff series win. We are now team laden with guaranteed future financial obligations that severely restirct us, tied to a team that has gotten less talented each of the last two years and figures to continue to get less talented into the foreseeable future as our good players leave and our weak farm system can't replace them with similarly talented players. Some are happy since we finally made the playoffs. All along, they said it didn't matter if we sucked in the future, because they wanted to see the Brewers win now. Well, it's the future, so again, there shouldn't be surprise when the expected outcome became reality. This year's team isn't as bad as it's been playing, but it's not a good team. We're going to have a $100MM roster next year basically made up of this year's team minus Hart and with everyone a year older. I had hoped that some of the minor leaguers would step up this year, but unless something changes it doesn't look like anyone's proving they're worthy of a MLB rotation spot. I could go on, but it gets me depressed. As I said after the Lohse signing, Melvin was trying to open a "second window," only this time with far less talent than the first. I said that it may work, but it would increase the likelihood that we'd need a complete rebuild. I said I'd really cheer this team on, as I thought that slim as the playoff hopes were, this year was going to be the best shot for the playoffs we'd have for a while. I guess the "silver lining" is that maybe, just maybe the horrible start to this season will open Attanasio's eyes that we need a new strategy, and it needs to start sooner rather than later. But, instead, I'd bet that Roenicke will get the blame.

WTP, the entire MLB roster and the state of the minor leagues has to fall on Melvin's (or Attanasio's) shoulders. His aggregate decisions have led to us having the lopsided (all offense), aging, expensive team we have, and have led to us not having anyone in the minors to complement the MLB roster. He's the guy who selected the manager, scouting director, etc. He's the guy who is ultimately responsible for what's right and wrong with the franchise. This board has gone round and round about the success of individual moves, but in aggregate, the MLB team is not good and the minor league system stinks. We don't have a first round draft pick next year, we don't have many tradeable pieces that make sense to trade to bring young talent into the system, and we're going to have a $100MM roster next year that will look like a less talented version of this year's team. At what point do we stop looking at individual trees and realize that the forest is on fire?

Hard to make the call without inside knowledge, but it seems to me that they should be really cautious about Lohse's elbow. A couple of starts now are relatively meaningless, but we have him under a fairly large contract for the next few seasons, so doing something that causes further damage could really hurt the team. I would think a DL trip for Lohse to rest and further evaluate the elbow might be a good thing. Of course, this is the team that rushed Ramirez back on the field this spring on a bad knee, so short-term thinking seems to prevail.

If he winds up being fired, the team's results won't wind up changing much The thing is, we're underperforming so much right now that we have to get better. If Roenicke is not fired, we'll get better, and if he is fired we'll get better. The problem with firing him right now is that the new coach will get the credit for "turning things around," and then this offseason everyone will have their excuse for the bad season, allowing them to act as if the strategy is sound, which it's not. Just like the final 1/3 of last season was used by many (including management) to believe that that was our true talent level, and not the crappy play that led to the mid-season sell-off, the post-Roenicke surge would be used next offseason as a reason to continue in "go for it" mode. Other than that, I'm with you. I look at things from a business standpoint, because I understand that a lot better than I understand things like the mechanics of throwing a pitch or swinging a bat. Whether your looking at personal finances or business finances, continually foregoing the future for the present is a bad strategy. Racking up guaranteed future liabilities with seemingly no comprehension that revenues could decline is a mistake that no qualified manager should make. I'm 41, so I do understand the effects of age, but at 60-something, Melvin hasn't seemed to grasp the concept that all players decline as they get older. Combining the last two and guaranteeing large future obligations to players who will almost certainly decline significantly is very bad judgement. But I digress. You are correct that this is a Roenicke thread and should not travel down the same hijacked thread. Deservedly or not, Roenicke is probably on the hot seat. Getting blamed for losing while not getting credit for winning is part of being a MLB manager. I just hope that Attanasio does some deep soul-searching and doesn't just make a knee-jerk move. Firing Roenicke and letting Melvin pick the next manager and continue to put the team together is the same strategy he's used for the last few managers he's hired and fired. What's that Einstein quote about insanity?

I think a lot of people thought the Brewers had a chance to compete for a wild card spot, and when I was down in St Louis last weekend, the Cards' TV announcers said as much. The Brewers weren't expected to be great, but they were expected to be competitive, which they certainly are not right now. Yeah, the second wild card really changes the meaning of "competitive." If not for the second wild card spot, we were not in the playoff race last year (Atlanta ended with 94 wins, so they had the first spot locked). With the new rules, pretty much any team over .500 is now "competitive." Since I expected this year's Brewer team to be around .500, I thought that with a little luck they could sneak into the 2nd wild card spot (won last year with 88 wins). On a side note, this could be a positive for the Brewers this year, as less teams will be sellers. With less supply and greater demand comes a higher price for the players that are put on the market. It may be time to hit the "reset" button. I agree. Maybe someone knows the answer to this: has any GM ever been allowed to hire and fire as many managers in so short a period as Melvin would if Roenicke is fired and Melvin hires the replacement? Seeing Attanasio yesterday, he appeared to be in the "denial" phase. If he hits "acceptance," he'll probably clean out the front office. Then I'd just wonder whether he accepted that the strategy was the problem, or if he just thinks the captain was the reason for the sinking ship. If he brings in a group similar to what the Cubs brought in, we'd have some down years, but at least I would have good hope for a brighter future. If he brings in someone who says something like "all the pieces are there, we just need one more pitcher" and then goes on to sign a FA or trade prospects for that pitcher, I'd have a hard time continuing to watch the ship sink.

I don't really care one way or the other if Roenicke stays or goes, but I will say that Roenicke isn't the main problem for the Brewers. Unfortunately, saying "we're better than this" makes it sound like he feels the team is using the correct "franchise building strategy," and until that changes, we'll probably be firing and hiring a new manager every couple of years.

The Brewers are already ~120K fewer fans in attendance this year than last year. Factoring in tickets, food/beverage, merchandise, and parking at an average of $50/fan/game that's already $6M in less revenue right there. Fans may have already purchased tickets, but if they don't show up that is lost revenue for parking/concessions/merchandise (how much profit do you think they pull in per year selling 16 oz tap beers for $8/9 that costs them maybe 50 cents per cup). The Brewers are averaging 5,000 fewer fans per game this year - over the course of 81 home games at $50/fan/game that amounts to over $20,000,000 less revenue this year than last year. If having terrible starting pitching causes an additional 3000 fewer fans to attend each game that equals Lohse's salary of $12M. If the Brewers draw 2M fans this year instead of the 2.8M they did last year because of poor starting pitching, that's $40,000,000 less in revenue. Aren't you kind of defeating your own argument? Lohse was signed, so his signing didn't keep the attendance from falling, but it does add to the pile of guaranteed obligations Melvin has amassed, which will pretty much necessitate a $100MM payroll next year. The "strategy" is backfiring on Attanasio and Melvin. Signing, extending and trading for aging vets to eight figure salaries was supposed to assure that fans would flock to the stadium, allowing them to continue to be able to pay for all the guaranteed eight figure salaries they were amassing. They failed understand that spending money on guaranteed contracts to "name" players didn't guarantee success. Attendance can drop whether you're guaranteeing $100MM in contracts or not. But, with the big money, guaranteed obligations, you're in a lot more trouble when the attendance drops than you are if you have more pre-arby/arby guys on the roster. Melvin/Attanasio have built the ship they're sailing. They are the reason the entire system is filled with the players we have. The moves they've made are the reason we have an aging, expensive MLB team and a weak farm. Now that we're here and the rosters are set along with the guaranteed liabilities attached to them, what are we going to do to solve this? I've harped on this for a while, but Melvin/Attanasio have over-leveraged themselves to a point that a drop in revenue will really hurt. If attendence drops, what do they do? They can borrow money to get over the hump, but that adds another future liability which will have negative impact on the future. Or, they can start selling off the expensive pieces that still have value, which also bears risk of alienating the fans who haven't already jumped ship. The strategy they've implemented to get where we are is a bad one. No business can succeed by living for the present at the expense of the future. We're not doomed, but Melvin and Attanasio really need to pull their heads out of the sand and change tack soon. Maybe the horrific start to this season will be the wake-up call they need. Maybe the empty seats will do it. Whatever the impetus, I hope it happens. I wouldn't call $11M each of the next two seasons as backloaded. As for the deferred part, that is strictly earned in 2013. So assuming a trade, something would be figured out between the Brewers and the other team so that they aren't prorating something to be paid out three years from now - that isn't a big deal. The Brewers haven't spent the money, so it is a future liability, meaning it has negative value in a trade. It would need to be negotiated in the trade, giving leverage to the team the Brewers are negotiating with. Before the "elbow irritation," I didn't think we'd get much for Lohse in trade. Now I doubt we'd get anything, as I couldn't see a GM taking on a three year guaranteed obligation for a 34-year-old with potential elbow issues who isn't that good a pitcher to begin with.

The reason Weeks has not been permanently benched has as much to do with WHY he is being paid as much money as he his. There are too many baseball fans who think that all a replacement for Weeks has to do is match his (poor this year) defense and hit better than .168/.283/.268 to justify the move. Unsurprisingly, those are the same fans that are going to constantly demand established players be benched for utility players (an epidemic among MLB fans). Weeks' updated ZiPS projection is .237/.333/.413/.746. We can certainly debate about how "right" that is but everyone should recognize that just like last year, we shouldn't expect Weeks to continue hitting terribly. Now if someone think Bianchi's projected offense and defense projects better than a reasonable projection for Weeks, so be it. I would strongly disagree but at least the question is being framed correctly. Actually, this is what I was thinking when I said "seem to be" instead of "would be." Weeks still has talent, and should start playing better at some point. The Brewers have the 2nd worst record in the National League, only bested (worsted?) by the lowly Marlins who are running a AA team out there every day. It's not like a win or two will get us to the playoffs, so as hard as it is to stomach, I think Weeks should continue to see a lot of playing time. Hopefully, he can get hot enough that we will be able to get some other team to take his salary off our hands. Weeks is the poster child for why I don't like waiting until a player is near the end of arby before offering an extension. His early injuries and inconsistencies are the reason he wasn't extended when he was in pre-arby. The extension he eventually signed really didn't give much discount from a free agency deal. When the injuries and inconsistencies continued after he signed the extension, people act surprised. He is exactly what he's always been, someone who looks really good for long stretches and really bad for long stretches. He's now likely in the decline, so I expect the bad stretches to outweigh the good, but all-in-all, Melvin should've just realized that there was a reason he didn't extend him early. I'd like to think he'd learn from his mistakes, but I don't think that's the case.

Nobody wanted to give up their pick for him this year. What makes you think teams will want to give up as much or more value a year from now when he's older, more expensive and probably a worse pitcher? Agree. Right now, we probably couldn't get close to the perceived value of a first round pick. By this time next year, we probably won't be able to get someone to take on his remaining contract in a salary dump. By his age 36 season, I'd be surprised if he's still an MLB-caliber starting pitcher. Our difference comes down to 1 thing, will the Brewers be able to compete next season should they add 2 solid pitchers, dump Weeks and Axford, and find average replacements for those two. I believe it's doable We owe Weeks his salary for next year and no one is going to take that on. He's either going to be our 2B, sit on the bench, or get cut, but we'll have to pay him. We could get rid of Axford's salary by not offering him arby if we're willing to let him become a free agent, and I think that's looking likely. However, Ramirez, Lohse and others have big salary bumps next year which more than make up for the money we save with loss of Hart and Axford. Have you looked at the Brewers' 2014 contract obligations? Even if we let Axford go, we'd need about 18 pre-arby guys on the roster to keep the payroll below $100MM. There's no way we'll be able to "add two solid pitchers" unless those two solid pitchers are pre-arby guys. The only pitcher in our system that is pitching like someone who may want a job with the Brewers next year is sitting in AA, so it's not looking really promising that we will add two solid SP rookies from our farm. Looking at our offensive players and how well many of them are doing you bet we could trade for that pitching. Many posters here have been begging for us to trade some vets for young players for quite a while. We're always greeted with "we can't trade {enter player name here} when we're going for it." I'm glad you're coming on board with the concept that trading away a vet does not necessarily mean we're giving up. However, let's look at where we're at instead of simply saying "I believe we could do it." The aggregate moves we've made over the past handful of seasons (including the Lohse signing) have left us in a precarious position. We don't have quality in-house replacement for most of the guys we could trade, so the concept of trading someone from the MLB roster for another player to put on the MLB roster would generally have us seriously downgrading one position in order to moderately upgrade another... you don't generally want to make those trades. Sure, we could trade Segura or Braun for good MLB starting pitching, but where would that leave us? Gomez just signed, so Melvin won't trade him. Ramirez is owed $20MM next year and has a bad knee, so he's not bringing anything back. Lucroy and Maldonado are hitting like little leaguers, and no one is trading for Weeks. Meanwhile, no one is giving up a top-of-the-rotation starter for any of our minor leaguers. Aoki might bring back something, and is probably the best chance for a trade, as we do have Davis, Schafer and Gindl waiting in the wings. The question is, should we look to trade Aoki for a "proven vet," or for a young "unproven" guy? In your scenario (going for it), we would likely target a "proven" vet with limited team control remaining. So, if Attanasio still hasn't reached the acceptance phase by next season, and insists on "going for it," we won't be able to do it by throwing money at the problem (we've got too many obligations already). We won't be able to trade Ramirez, Lohse or Weeks, and we won't trade Braun, Segura, Gallardo or Gomez. Therefore, the only real move I'd see would be to trade Aoki and someone like Nelson (our only near MLB-ready minor leaguer doing anything) for two years of a slightly above average veteran SP. In this scenario, we'd basically have this year's team minus Aoki and Hart, plus some middle-of-the-rotation vet SP. Everyone would be a year older, which may be good for Peralta and Segura, but not for Lohse, Ramirez, Weeks and anyone else on the other side of 30. We'd have a payroll north of $100MM, but I don't see us as a playoff contender. Rather, I think we'd be odds-on favorite to take last in the NL Central. All this would be is another move that increases the likelihood that we will need a major rebuild, and make that rebuild a little more painful when it hits. Unfortunately, I could see us doing this. It keeps the perception among fans that we still have a playoff caliber team. That perception breeds hope, and hope sells tickets. It seems that teams who choose to play the "window" strategy generally continue to live on hope for a while after the window has closed before they finally accept that the natural progression of playing the "window" strategy is that it leads to either a rebuild or a long period of "meh" baseball. Personally, I'd prefer a rebuild where we bring in a bunch of young, talented players to a decade+ of bringing in the next Kyle Lohse in an attempt to crack .500.

would love to see bianchi have great at-bats against zach greinke tonight. It'd be better karma if Segura had a huge game against the guy we traded for him. keep starting bianchi! You have to wonder how this will play out. Weeks looks so bad that virtually anyone would seem to be a better option right now, but we owe Weeks a lot of money, and the only way we get any return from that money is by playing him. The Brewers are in a "darned if you do, darned if you don't" situation. I guess the ideal situation would be that Weeks would get so hot over the next two months that someone would trade for him and take his contract off our hands. Of course, if Weeks got really hot the board would be loaded with people saying "we can't trade a hot Weeks when we're on a playoff run," and Melvin would likely agree with them. Bianchi is a good guy to have on the team. He plays a lot of positions, isn't overmatched at the plate, and is still in his cheap years. Bianchi could see some playing time this year if Weeks continues his bad play, or if Ramirez's knee continues to give him problems or if he were to be traded at the deadline. The Brewers may not want to bring Gennett up yet, and we don't have a lot of options at 3B. I'd rather give Bianchi a chance to shine than see us trotting Yuni and Gonzalez out there all year.

From a May 8, 2012 article: Melvin's new deal runs through the 2015 season. Roenicke's contract will go through 2014 with a club option for 2015. Melvin was under contract through 2012 in Milwaukee after signing an extension in 2008. Roenicke previously was signed through the 2012 season with a club option for 2013. It's kind of silly, but I think there's an unwritten rule that managers (other than LaRussa) don't do one-year deals. They're either let go or extended when there's one year left on the deal. I'd guess that Roenicke is safe for this season, but if the team continues to tank, he will probably be shown the door when the season's over. If they start playing better soon, and come close to getting in the playoffs, his option will probably be exercised. The question in my mind if they end this season out of contention and Roenicke is let go is whether Melvin will decide it's time to retire (I don't think he wants to GM a rebuild) or if he will finish out his contract, meaning that he'd be the guy picking the next manager. How many GMs get the opportunity to hire so many managers in so short a time frame?

I should probably stop referencing the Cardinals, as they're only one team that seems to "get it" and stay ahead of trends in order to remain successful. There are certainly other teams that "get it" as well. It is worrisome that the Cardnials, Reds and Pirates all seem to have better MLB talent than us, as well as much better farm systems, while the Cubs probably aren't there yet on the MLB level (even though we're currently behind them in the standings), but they have a lot more young talent then the Brewers, and have deep pockets once the young talent matures. I have a hard time seeing the Brewers competing in the NL Central for the foreseeable future, which is why I hope we change tack soon and implement a long-term strategy better suited to a team playing in Milwaukee. Unfortunately, due to the guaranteed obligations Melvin has amassed, we probably either have to tear some walls down to rebuild, or we will have a long, painful period ahead of us. I just think that Attanasio has to reach the "acceptance phase," where he realizes that while he grew up cheering on the Yankees, the Brewers cannot be run like the Yankees. He has done a lot to make the Brewers a relevant team, so I'm not going to hammer him too much, but more and more I'm believing he has a lot more to do with the make-up of the Brewers than I thought.

I guess it depends on what they're going to do with Bianchi. If he ends up taking over 2B, then we need another backup SS, and Gonzalez is the more capable defender. If Weeks continues on as the everyday 2B, then Bianchi is a capable backup SS, and Yuni is a better bat off the bench than Gonzalez. As it stands right now, there is no way Gonzalez should be anything but a backup SS. That he is still getting time at 1B is insane.

In management, I believe the system put in place is far more important than the individual pieces. A leader who can implement a successful system is going to "win" more often than he "loses." There's a reason some people can sustain success no matter what they do, while others continue to fail even when given good opportunities. What we need is for the owner to hire someone who can implement a successful system, and then have the owner step out of the way to allow the GM free reign to do what is necessary. Since we need to put people in charge who will implement a successful system, I would look to target someone who has had a big hand in implementing strategies that have shown sustained success in other organizations. The Brewers would have a hard time stealing another team's GM, but (as nate82 showcased in his post), they could offer some of the key guys from successful programs a better position and more money than they have in their current organization. Rip the Cardinals all you want, but they have continually produced winning teams. It doesn't always mean having a top-ranked farm system, as there are various ways to succeed, often changing with the times. I don't follow them closely enough to know if this is fact, but I don't believe they've instituted a strategy of ignoring the future in order to win in a short-term "window," leaving them with a small group of older, expensive players, and not enough young, inexpensive talent to fill in around them. Playing the "window" strategy leads to a short period of contention, followed by a couple years of feigned contention (fans still believe the team is better than it actually is), followed by years of mediocrity. It's probably the worst way to run any business, and it seems to have been Melvin's strategy for the past 5 or 6 years. Looking at our system, it appears my fears are playing out. Whether it's implemented by Melvin or someone else, we need to get a new strategy implemented, and the sooner it's put in place, the better. I hoped this past offseason, we had "seen the light," and was impressed that we were going to hold off on spending. But, whether it was Melvin or Attanasio's call, we couldn't do it. We had to sign a mid-30's, so-so pitcher to a multi-year deal for eight figures per year to pretend we were still in our "window." The thing is, if the problem is Melvin, that can easily be remedied by stealing someone who will implement a different strategy. My bigger worry is that the problem is Attanasio, and his belief that we can be run like the New York Yankees. If that's the case, we just have to hope that he learns.

I think WTP was doing a "what if" scenario, as he's said he wants an extension. He wasn't saying that Segura was being unrealistic, he was saying that there is a chance that he could be. Really, in negotiating, there isn't an "unreasonable," there are simply goals and expectations. I hope this isn't the case, but if Segura decides he wants to go year-to-year so that he can reach free agency as soon as possible, then his agent could throw something like 8 years/$125MM out there, because they really don't want to sign. He's not being "unreasonable" with that offer, he's just saying "our plan is to go year-to-year. It'll take a lot to get us to change our mind." The going trend is for good players to accept the extensions early in their career, because most of them understand the risk under the current pre-arby/arby system. I hope Segura and his agent are in this group. There is a good chance that they are. I just mentioned that the Cub announcers said that he turned the Brewers down, but I think the Cub announcers may have been reading too much into the MLBtraderumors article.

The heck does Aoki have to do with developing pitching? The thread asks why we can't develop pitching, but makes the assumption that we've been good at developing position prospects. Aoki was a snippet of a post I made illustrating that other than the drafts made under Jack Z, the Brewers haven't been able to draft pitching or position players well. Gord Ash was interviewed a month or so ago, and he admitted that they went after hitters early on, and then realized they were lacking in pitching, so they sort of went overboard on drafting pitching, so they spent last year's draft focusing on hitting. To me, that sounding like a really clueless way to draft, but it notes that the strategy early on was to draft hitters. So, whether Jack Z could've drafted pitching or not we'll never know, but during the one period in which we seemed to have a person who knew what he was doing, we went all-out drafting bats. Since Jack went to Seattle, our focus has been on pitching, but either (A) the guys in charge don't know how to judge talent, (B) the guys in charge don't know how to develop talent and/or © instead of drafting high upside guys, we went for "high floor/low ceiling guys who had a good shot of getting to the majors quickly, even if they may not be all that good when they get there. It's probably a mix of the three, but what we've now got are guys who could probably be in the majors soon, but as back-of-the-rotation starters... guys of the talent level around which we have found ways to block in the recent past (think the pitching version of Taylor Green). We'll have pitchers who we've developed who will be on our MLB team for the foreseeable future, so the problem of our never having any home-grown pitchers is coming to an end. They may be middle-to-back-of-the-rotation guys and middle relievers, but they'll be there. The thing is, we won't have any position players coming up to play with those pitchers. We can look at each individual case and disect them, or we can say that the reason we don't have good talent in the system is due to failure at the top. Failure in planning, failure in evaluating and failure of executing. If we could find management with a history of developing from within, I think we'd find out that the Brewers aren't jinxed.

I cannot even fathom how that is possible. How can a scouting department not even put in 15-20 minutes of watching film of one of the best Japanese hitters? Crazy It's not true. Craig Counsell did video scouting on Aoki & signed off on his swing translating to MLB. It's not really all that important, but IIRC, he did the video scouting, and Aoki was flown to Arizona for the team to see him after the $2.5MM bid won. I think they scouted him prior to signing him to a contract, but not prior to placing the winning bid. I remember reading about them scrambling looking for video (apparently for Counsell to watch) and that they were flying him to Arizona. All I can find in a quick internet search is that the Brewers didn't scout Japan... nothing about whether or not anyone had seen video prior to the posting. Regardless, they didn't see much, if any, of him, and were surprised by winning the bid. Aoki was the top-ranked hitter in Japan and we lucked into him. I'm glad we did, but it wasn't due to skillful scouting. I did find this, which I didn't realize: New Brewers outfielder Norichika Aoki will make at least $2.25 million over two years under his contract and would earn up to $8,187,500 if his 2014 option is exercised and he has at least 140 starts and 150 games played per season. In 2012, it looks like he appeared in 151 games, but only started 119. From Cot's: Norichika Aoki of 2 years/$2.5M (2012-13), plus 2014 option 2 years/$2.5M (2012-13), plus 2014 club option signed by Milwaukee 1/17/12 12:$1M, 13:$1.25M, 14:$1.5M club option ($0.25M buyout) performance bonuses based on games (75-150) and starts (100-140): $1.675M in 2012, $0.8375M in 2013, $1.0875M in 2014 2013 salary increases by one half of 2012 bonuses earned Milwaukee won negotiating rights with $2.5M bid after Aoki was posted by Japan’s Yakult Swallows 1/12 agent: Nez Balelo ML service: 1.000 So, with 151 games, and 119 starts, he should've recieved at least a portion of the $1.675MM in bonuses, which would mean this year's base would be somewhere around $2MM, with a good likelihood of reaching the $0.8375 in bonuses. Still a bargain, but just something I wasn't aware of. Sorry to get off track.

The Cub announcers were probably just talking out of their behinds, but... I think most players (and agents) see the benefit of potentially giving up some money in order to gain certainty. There are, however, some players (and agents) that will forego the certainty, take on the risk, and shoot for top dollar. Fielder was one of these players, as are most Boras clients. I hope Segura is in the former category, as I would love for him to be extended. If he is in the latter category, we can't consider him one of our "core" players to build around. He'll still be here for a number of years, but we'd have to assume that he's going to walk at the end of his arby years, so we treat him differently (don't do him any "favors" - like signing him to a guaranteed deal during his arby years - in hopes of changing his mind), and we'd need to get some young SS's in the system and then look to trade Segura when a young SS is ready.

For how good Melvin is at judging hitting, he seems to struggle at judging pitching. Since Jack Z left, how many position players have we drafted that became good major leaguers? The lineup is a mix of Jack Z's draft picks and veteran free agent signings. Aoki was a good find, but Melvin admitted no one in the organization had ever watched him (live or on film) prior to Melvin submitting a low-ball bid he never assumed would win for the top Japanese hitter on the market that year. A big difference between our lineup and our pitching staff is that we had position player talent in the system when Melvin came on board, and many of them accepted the extensions that the short-term pitchers we acquired turned down. I don't think Melvin has some super-sense of judging hitters.

Green is probably every bit as good as guys like Descalso, Shumacher, Eckstein, Kozma, etc that always seem to find their way onto the Cardinals (and most winning teams' rosters). Since they went into "go for it" mode, the Brewers haven't wanted anyone playing unless they were either "proven" (whether their past MLB history is good or bad) or an elite prospect. Not every player on the roster has to be a "proven guy" making an eight figure salary, but we decided to "play for a window," and therefore blocked any guys of Green's caliber from stepping on an MLB field. The whole "window" strategy is the main reason we are where we are (in both the majors and minor), which is now forcing our hand to play less-than-desireable options at multiple positions, and will probably get worse unless we do some major housecleaning soon.

I'm just saying you can't assume some prospect is going to be a great player for years to come just because they are highly rated. Many flame out, or become pedestrian major leaguers, not perennial All Stars or even one time All Stars. So do vets... see the return we got out of Marcum, the return we've gotten from extending Weeks, the return we got from signing Suppan, Looper, Gagne, etc. There's always a risk. I just wish we'd find more ways to bring in some top quality, inexpensive, young talent instead of always looking for older, more expensive, short-term "solutions." Making a mistake on a guy making $500k/year during the non-guaranteed pre-arby years is far less harmful than making a mistake signing or extending someone to a multi-year contract for eight figures per year. Drives me crazy when people lament not signing FA's or not trading for guys and then having no plausible deal they passed up or could have made Personally, I'm tired of re-hashing things on the micro level. Look at the results of the aggregate decisions the Brewers have made. Jack Z drafted two probable future Hall of Famers and several mutiple-term All Stars. These guys were coming up through the ranks early in Melvin's tenure. With these potential Hall of Famers and All Stars all making league minimum and under team control for six seasons, we managed two playoffs. That's not really something to cheer about. Now we've got a team laden with large, guaranteed contracts that will be lucky to crack .500, and as the older, expensive players leave, we have one of the worst farm systems in baseball from which to try to replace them. We're in a downward spiral, and it didn't have to come to this. I'm not going to get into each and every trade that was or wasn't made. We did what we did, and we are where we are. While it's nice to break a generation-long playoff draught, a fan being happy about two playoffs (one series win) is pretty sad. Especially since using the "window" strategy you admittedly like seems to have left us in a bad spot. Some people believe that we still have a playoff team, and that next year, with the same group (minus Hart) all a year older, we'll still be a playoff team. I don't see it, and I don't see how we're going to get better with most of our payroll tied up in a few players and without much talent on the farm. As time passes, I think we're going to look back on the time period after we had those high draft picks, and see it as a failed experiment. I had such high hopes for the future when I watched guys like Fielder and Weeks play in Beloit. I'm very disappointed that all we ended up with was two good years leading to a mess of a franchise.

They really need to put a "Like" button on this site. The sad part is that Milwaukee's whole system is filled with mid-tier / slightly above average talent, and those are the type of guys Melvin has consistantly blocked and/or left in the minors until their late-20's. We have kind of a "chicken or egg thing" with prospects. Unless they're elite guys, we don't trust prospects because they aren't "proven," but they can't get "proven" until they are allowed to play in the majors, because apparently the baseball played in the minors does not "prove" that a player is good or bad at baseball. All that matters is that a player has been in the majors, no matter how good or bad they have been.

Well, since the Reds, Cardinals and Pirates have better MLB teams and better farms, and the Cubs have a better farm, I think the 5-year plan will be bolstered with a number of top 10 draft picks. Therefore, I'd spend some as much money as it takes to lure away the best scouting director I could find. Next year is going to be the "hump" where we're really burdened with most of our payroll going to a few aging players. We'll have a little breathing room after that, even though some of this "breathing room" was taken away with the Lohse signing. Therefore, I'd start my "plan" this season by trying to trade off some of these eight-figure salaries. I'd see if someone like the Dodgers (to whom money means nothing) would give us something for Ramirez, and I'd shop Gallardo to try to get a Shields-type return. Even though I don't think we'd get much for Lohse, I'd shop him too. That could infuse some young, inexpensive talent into the system and free us from some guaranteed obligations. I'd be willing to eat salary if it meant bringing back better talent. We're stuck with Weeks' salary next year, but I'd probably not offer arby to Axford, which would free us of probably $7-8MM that we'd otherwise have to pay him. I think we'll probably be below .500 next year anyways, so at least with these few moves, we wouldn't have to pay $100MM+ in salary to be below .500, and we'd have some more young talent to build around. It sounds like the Brewers are trying to extend Segura, which is good, and hopefully they're successful. If we could get some top propects back in trades (Gallardo, Ramierez, Lohse, etc), I'd look to extend them as well. We'd then have a strong, young, inexpensive core to build around, and depending on how much salary we'd have to eat, we should have money to fill in holes around this core with some talent, or to spend in places like international free agency. This is a pivital year for our minor leagues, as the pitching is getting near MLB-ready, so we can get a pretty good idea who is going to help out the rotation and who is going to fill out the bullpen. We also have young hitters who hopefully will grow into good prospects. If we trade away Gallardo, Lohse, and Ramirez, we'd probably get a high pick next year, and possibly in 2015 which (along with the guys from trades) should get our farm system into the top tier. Unfortunately, although we'd still have talent on the roster, what I'm describing is in large part a rebuild. I think our chance for a "reload" has passed, but if we use the few remaining valueable "chips" we have now, the rebuild could be a little less painful than it will likely be if we wait another year.