monty57

A) Nobody but Gallardo has started 30 games in the majors in a season before or broken 165 IP. B) Yeah I should have said inexperienced. The same logic applies though. There was simply way too much risk in that rotation to rely on it. That doesn't mean we had to sign Lohse mind you, it just meant that it was a very obvious need for the team to sign some sort of FA starter to give the rotation a little more depth. I don't disagree as long as we're assuming that we're playing for today at the expense of tomorrow. We are almost certainly going to be better this year because of the Lohse signing. I will cheer this team on in hopes of a playoff. But, this is similar to Cubs' fans and management saying had to sign Soriano, because they couldn't rely on their other options. They were trying to win a World Series in hopes of boosting the team's value for the upcoming sale. They didn't win, and even though the sale price was still high, they are now going through a long, painful rebuild while they divest themselves of the contracts they "couldn't do without." When moves like this are made, they can help a team in the short-term, but can have negative effects on the future. I hope they don't blow up on us, but there is a good possibility that they will. I don't like the Gomez extension because I feel he's a risky player (he's been a bench/platoon player most of his career, and he may revert to his "old ways"), and we have other OF options who could take over for a fraction of the cost. However, at least Gomez is young and is now signed through his prime. Lohse is already old by baseball standards and is pretty likely to regress over this contract. Combined, the two contracts add $20MM/year over the next few years. That's a lot of extra money for a limited payroll that already has a lot of big, multi-year obligations, especially since neither of these guys are locks to put up All Star performances.

I wasn't defending the rotation. I was defending the comment "everyone is fearful of counting on a few unproven players this year" and refuting Ennder's claims that (A) only Yo had pitched a full season in the majors and (B) the guys in the rotation are young. Danzig and JJ, I agree with your assessments, both of which show fear of counting on a few unproven players. There is no doubt that this year's rotation will be better with Lohse in it. I do have doubts that the rotations of the next two years will be better with Lohse in them... that depends on how age effects Lohse and how our MiLB pitchers progress. I'm just saying that making moves like this, paying another player an eight figure salary for multiple years so that we don't have to rely on "unproven" players now, will necessitate greater reliance on "unproven" players in the future. We can only have so many eight figure salaries within our budget. The more we have, the more guys we need playing for league minimum.

We already have plenty (probably too many) guys making eight figures/year. The only two people on the roster I'd like extensions for are Segura and Peralta. If either or both of them look good this season, I'd look at offering a Lucroy-style extension next offseason, where we buy out a couple of FA years and never pay more than a few million a season. Lucroy's entire contract equals less than what Hart would get in one year. We need more of those deals, and they can only be handed out to our top young guys when they've still got pre-arby years left. We don't have many guys in the system worthy of these deals, so hopefully Segura and Peralta will prove worthy. I like Hart, but I'd let him and his gimpy knees move on.

Just saw the new Forbes baseball report. They estimate the Brewers had $201 Million in revs in 2012 and a $9 million profit with a $100 Million payroll. It seems the operating costs by most teams range in the $80 to $100MM range outside of payroll so if the Brewers can get a bump in TV money, keep the park full, they should be able to keep revs in the $200MM to $220MM range giving them room for the payroll you describe, pending how much they want for a "net income" in any given year. The caveat I have had is that what is that $100MM to $110MM payroll going to get in the baseball market of tomorrow? The bump in Brewers TV money pales in comparison to most teams. The Phillies had 2012 revs of $279MM and expect to double their TV money. The Brewers revs even at $210MM to $220MM will put them in the lowest third of baseball teams as the new money rolls in. Thanks for the info. I was just looking at next year's payroll, for which most of the obligations are pretty much set. Even without Hart, I'd have a hard time seeing us field a team for less than $100MM. From Cot's: https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tz1FL3X6KldYXIoGOHXpv6A&output=html

My goodness yes. We've had two playoff appearances in the last 5 seasons after having none in the previous 20 before he got here. You don't like the way he's built the team- that's well documented. But don't let your dislike of their methods cloud your judgement on the merits of what has been done here. I guess the question could be: "Could anyone with reasonable intelligence have taken over a team with Fielder, Weeks, Hart, Hardy, etc in the system, an escalating payroll with a new ambitious owner, and Jack Z & crew running the drafts, all at a time when the NL Central was considered the weakest in baseball, and still have made at least two playoff appearances?" Don't get me wrong, I lived through many years of bad Brewer baseball and am glad to have some playoff memories, but Taylor's the guy who inherited a bad system top-to-bottom and got us headed in the right direction. He got fired for one bad free agent signing (Hammonds), and Melvin took over a franchise on the rise. He could certainly have blown things up by trading away the prospects he inherited to try to win right away, but I think he gets more credit for turning things around then he should. I also worry that his big spending ways and inability to build a decent farm will at some point in the not-too-distant future lead us to a period not unlike the 1990's in Milwaukee (or at least present-day Houston because at least we won't have the Selig clan running things). I think Melvin planned his "window" to close right around when he was scheduled to retire. Then he got an extension offer and decided to stick it out, so he's now pulling out all the stops to win in the next two years. The next guy's probably going to inherit a mess.

A little over a year ago, people were wondering why we signed Aoki, now they don't know what we'd do without him. Actually, Melvin was surpirsed when his lowball bid netted him a star Japanese player. No one from the Brewers' organization had ever even seen film on him. They flew him to Arizona, where they scouted him for a few days, hinted at not even signing him, and finally inked a deal. He was sat on the bench, where he thankfully hit in the sporadic PAs they gave him, Gamel got hurt, and he got his chance. It certainly wasn't a thought out plan to have Aoki be our long-term starting RF. It was a lucky happenstance. But now that Aoki is "proven," that same kind of "luck" would have to happen if Schafer or Davis ever want to see regular time as a Brewer.

How close are we to rebuilding? We've opened a second window (or re-opened the first window a little). This one has less talent and more players in the "decline stage" of their career guaranteed eight figure salaries, without the star talent playing for league minimum that we had in the first window, but it's now opened up. I don't expect this window to be anywhere near as "successful" as the last one, as we just don't have the talent in the system that we had then. However, there is now a second Wild Card, so the chance of making the playoffs (or at least claiming we were almost in like last year) goes up substantially. Melvin seems to think in terms of two-year intervals, so the first hint of a rebuild would be no sooner than the offseason following 2014 - we've got too many big contracts locked into 2014 to think we'd do any kind of a rebuild prior to next season. At that point, we may out of necessity have to play a lot of "unproven" guys from our depleted farm. Mlbtr.com mentioned that Doug and Mark have planned on trying to resign Hart and that they still feel they have the money to make another substantial move if necessary If that's the case, then we would probably field a $110-120MM roster next year. If the new TV deal, etc is allowing for that, then many of my worries will be diminished. Regarding Hart, I do worry that his ability to be a "quick healer" (as he called it last year) suddenly disappeared when Braun's name was brought up in the Miami fiasco. I like Hart's ability to hit, but I would stay away mainly because he's a walking timebomb from an injury perspective, and also because he's exiting his prime, so any extension would be paying him as if he were in his prime while he's actually past his prime. I've said it before, but we can't have a $250MM roster, so we can't pay everyone $10MM per year. At some point, we will have to put some faith in a prospect. That faith wasn't put in Schafer, can't really be put in Davis (LF only), so why not put some faith in Morris?

So all that "weighing the present versus the future" Melvin and Attanasio were spouting in their comments about signing Lohse means that an extra handful of starts by 23-year old Peralta this year is worth more than an entire extra year of service from 29-year old Peralta down the road. Just ask JJ Hardy... Melvin certainly knows the rules regarding service time. It would make loads of sense to send Peralta down for a month or so, where he could work on a few things and keep his innings down, and then bring him up once they know they'll get another year out of him. All the articles are pointing to the 6th starter going to the bullpen. Several times this spring, Roenicke has noted how tough a decision it is whittling down the 'pen because they have so many good bullpen arms. Now they're going to stick a promising starter in the 'pen. If this is true, I really hope it's only for a week or so. It would be a real shame to waste Fiers as "long man" all year, and then have him not be stretched out when someone goes down.

Nobody is fearful of this though. They are fearful of counting on 4 rotational spots being filled by unproven players. When you have a rotation that only has 1 pitcher who has ever pitched a full season you are playing with fire. Young pitchers tend to get knocked out of games earlier more often and you run into long term innings issues since they aren't used to a 33 start season yet. I don't think anyone minds having Fiers, Estrada, Peralta or for some Rogers in the rotation, it is having all 4 penciled in that is a problem. This move adds some much needed depth and means one of those guys can struggle and be sent down and we aren't out of luck. That's not true. Estrada (who turns 30 this season) has been in the Brewers' rotation since 2011 with a fairly successful track record. Narveson (31) is coming off injury, but he's started 63 MLB games (appeared in 95) so he's a proven 4/5 starter. Along with Gallardo, that's three fairly "proven" pitchers. We were looking at two "unproven" guys in the rotation, only one of them being young-ish. Fiers turns 28 soon, so he's certainly not young, and while "unproven," he had 22 starts last year (almost a full season) with some success. Peralta is the top prospect in our entire system, and will be 24 in a month or so. Assuming Peralta starts the season in AAA, our youngest SP will be Gallardo, who is about 8 months younger than Fiers. We also have a 24-year-old 1B who was our minor league player of the year last year, who apparently isn't "proven" enough to start at 1B for a month or so, a 26-year-old CF in whom Melvin has so little faith that he extended a potential one-hit wonder for three years, and we now have two veteran backups for our young SS. I'd say Melvin, Roenicke, Attanasio or whoever makes decisions for the Brewers is very fearful of giving MLB time to any "unproven" players, but especially young, unproven players. It's much easier to just pay someone $10MM a year or so. Unfortunately, we can't have a $250MM payroll, so the more $10MM contracts you hand out, the more guys you need playing for league minimum. The one time in the recent past that it looked like we'd let some "young" guys play, Melvin/Attanasio/Roenicke just couldn't do it, so now we've added $20MM a year to the payroll for the next few years, and I don't think we'll be that much better next year than we would've been without signing either of those deals. In 2009 & '10 many blamed the "albatross" of a contract signed with Suppan for our not being able to add pieces to get us to the playoffs. Bill Hall's "albatross" was blamed for our not being able to sign needed pieces. At those times, we had guys like Fielder, Hardy, Hart, Braun and Yo playing for peanuts. Guaranteed contracts are dangerous things. To me, they can be more dangerous than "unproven." It takes a mix of both to build a winner. Big markets can lean more heavily on the guaranteed contracts, while small markets need to lean a little more heavily on "unproven." I've went on-and-on about the guarantees for next year, but what's even scarier is that as guys like Weeks, Hart, Ramirez and Gallardo leave in the next couple of years, if we don't trust some "unproven" players today, we won't have any proven players to insert onto the roster in the future. We won't have the funds to fill in all the holes necessary through free agency, which is why, in the post you quoted, I said that these moves made today will necessitate more dependance on "unproven" in the future. Add in that the "unproven" guys we're going to lean on are coming from one of the worst farms in baseball, and that's what gets me worried. As I said, I want to just focus on this season. Although we're less talented than we were 12 months ago, we still have a shot at the playoffs. Even though we'll be less talented 12 months from now (albeit with a $100MM+ payroll), we may still have a shot at the playoffs next year. I just don't want to think beyond that anymore. It gets me sad, and I want to be excited as a new season is about to begin.

My worry isn't so much that our good players will all suck or get suspended. I'm just worried that a higher and higher percentage of our payroll is going to a smaller number of players, which means that we will need more of our league minimum guys to be average-to-above-average. With a bad farm system, that is difficult to do. If our youngsters take a few big steps forward this season, I'll be less worried, but that's a big "if." None of the "prospect watchers" give them much credit, and Melvin's moves don't lead me to believe he has a lot of faith in our farm. On the liability side, Melvin has "laddered" contracts so that as soon as one guy falls off the books, some other guy(s) get big bumps in pay, making it difficult to add another piece. Prior to this offseason, we had a bit of payroll respite this season, with a bump next year, and then we were going to have some financial breathing room. I figured they were laying low with a smaller payroll this year to "get over the hump" giving them some financial freedom, lowering the possiblity that we'd eventually have to go through a major rebuild. With the extensions of Gomez and the signing of Lohse, we lost that breathing room. I don't have a lot of faith that Gomez will be consistantly good, and I fear that at Lohse's age, he will be a negative on the roster before his contract's up, so it's not at all like extending either Braun (young Hall of Fame guy worth the big money) or Lucroy (good player signed cheaply). We basically spent a large portion of our future payrolls on replaceable guys. Everyone is fearful of counting on a few "unproven" players this year, but adding a couple more big-money, multi-year, guaranteed contracts will make it more necessary to count on a greater number of "unproven" players soon. Even after losing Hart, we will still need around a $100MM payroll next year, and that's if we have 8-10 guys playing for league minimum. I understand that we'll have new TV money, which will probably allow for the owners to turn a profit with a $100MM payroll, but do we have 8-10 guys who will play for league minimum who we'll trust to be on the big league roster? Maybe they're getting a lot more money than we've been led to believe. Maybe all the "prospect watchers" are wrong. Maybe Milwaukee has something in the water that will continue to allow guys who are past their prime to continue to play as if they're in their prime. I dunno... just a lot of maybes. For now, I'm going to try to forget that money matters and future liabilities have to be paid. The Brewers should have a decent team this year, and with the addition of the 2nd Wild Card team, I would be surprised if they aren't in the playoff race. I'll try to forget what my brain's trained to think about, and instead focus on this season. Go Brewers!

You keep saying this but that doesn't make it true. It may have been true in the past with Weeks/Hardy but that's about it. Fielder was obviously going to be a stud. He was brought up to DH and get some PH appearances but I don't think he was rushed. Braun was a stud as well and obviously wasn't rushed. In the past five years, I can't really think of anyone who was aggressively promoted, except for Segura. But that was basically because the season was thought lost and Melvin wanted something to show the fans. I think the signing of Lohse shows that Melvin isn't aggressive with prospects since Peralta will probably be sent to AAA. You might argue that he's not ready but if someone is aggressive like you say, whether or not he's ready wouldn't matter. Agree. Most of the Brewers' prospects aren't on pace to reach the majors until their mid-20's (if at all). Contrary to other parts of Ennder's quote, I don't think the Brewers' system is considered bad by scouts is because our prospects are young, it's because they're old. Most guys on the top 100 lists are under 23. Stud prospects should hit the majors when they're 21 or 22. Most of our guys seem to be in AA at 23 and AAA from 24-30. Fiers will be 28 soon, Rogers is 27, and Thornburg (who started last year at AA) is 24. None of them were young when they arrived in the majors last year, and they were only brought on because of injuries, ineptitude and trade. Had Greinke, Marcum and Wolf pitched well, and the team done better, none of those guys would've seen the light of day. Of course, I really don't think it's so much that Melvin is aggressive or not with the prospects. I think it's just that they've done a really, really bad job of getting good prospects into the system. Most of our guys don't project to be good, everyday players, so it's probably not a bad thing that they sit in the minors until they're in their prime, where we can hopefully get something out of their best years. Peralta's the exception, in that he's 23 and could soon have a full-time job in the majors (although he'll probably be 24 before he gets called back up). That's probably because he's one of the few that could be an average-to-above-average MLB player. Hopefully some of the guys from last year's draft will follow suit, but it's too early to say. There are multiple reasons we have a bad farm, but I think Melvin's insistance on getting "signability" picks is certainly one of the big reasons we don't have any top prospects, and I think it's telling that the first year under the new CBA, was the first year we finally selected some high upside guys we can get excited about. Regarding Lohse, it's another case of signing an expensive vet who will "block" younger players. It's a common theme with Melvin. The merit of each case can be looked at individually and argued until everyone's blue in the face, but the bottom line is that Melvin will often sign expensive veterans (or extend guys who are almost free agents to market value deals) rather than letting prospects play. I don't think this is because he no longer trusts any prospects, it's just that he doesn't trust the prospects he has assembled. In just the recent past, he's signed a 3B because we didn't have any in the system, traded for a SS because we didn't have any in the system, extended our CF because we don't have any in the system, extended our 2B because we don't have any in the system and now brought in another SP (supposedly our farm's strong point) because we don't have any capable starters in the system and everyone was worried about going into the season with "four #4/5's." He also rebuilt our bullpen mainly from outside the organization because we didn't have enough arms in the system. Meanwhile, we're starting a backup SS at 1B because we don't trust out top hitting prospect and "minor league player of the year" to play for a month (he's 24). If somehow that screams "strong farm system" or "aggressive approach" to you, I don't know what to say. Melvin was aggressive when he first came on because he wanted to put fans in the seats and he inherited a strong farm system and good director. He hasn't been aggressive with prospects since Braun came up.

Major League deal per mlbtraderumors.com so, i assume this means Segura will be riding pine They'll let him play until he goes 0-for-4 one day or has an error at SS. Then, it's Yuni time. Honestly, the thought of Yuni getting any starts at SS with Segura and Gonzalez on the roster sickens me.

To be fair he will be 36 when he is done with the Brewers. Sorry, I was adding a year. I thought he was 35 now, which seems to be the age most pitchers collapse. I feel a little better, but I still don't expect much in year three... really anything better than a "here, we'll pay you not to play" would probably be good. I'm hoping for an ERA sub-4 this year (please!!), sub-5 next year and "don't bring the ship down with you" in the final year.

So, now "dead arm" is an actual injury? {insert Suppan joke here}

Well of course. By naming your backup SS as your starting 1B, you now need a backup SS, even if that player is not nearly as good a defender as the guy who's standing on first base. I couldn't imagine there could be any other options to solve this puzzle. On a completely unrelated topic, we need to figure out how to find playing time for the two first basemen in AAA, since both of them seem to be decent hitters and only play first base.

I think Estrada is going to pitch in a minor league game on Thursday (he was scheduled to pitch the MLB game that day). I'd guess that if Lohse looks ready, they'll start him in the second game of the season, with Estrada going on the third. If he needs another game, they could pitch him in "extended spring" and go: Apr 1 Gallardo Apr 2 Estrada Apr 3 Narveson Apr 4 off Apr 5 Fiers Apr 6 Gallardo Apr 7 Lohse Apr 8 Estrada My guess is that unless something looks really wrong on Thursday, he doesn't miss a start. They'll probably carry an extra bullpen arm in case someone (Lohse or otherwise) has a short outing.

I don't see a lot of people worried about his age. Loshe is 34 and turns 35 in October. There are usually only 10-15 MLB SP in any given year who are that age or older, and many of those either throw a knuckleball, are "crafty lefties," or already have Hall-of-Fame careers and are chasing milestones. Almost no one makes it to age 37 or 38, when we'll still owe him $18MM, so I disagree with those saying Lohse will be tradeable at that point. Forget about the ex-Cardinal stuff, him simply being human would seem to point to him being a 5+ ERA guy when he's at an age when almost every pitcher to ever play the game has been retired. I don't see how we won't have five better starting pitchers by then. Lohse should help us in our "win now" mode this season, but I sure wish we'd of found someone on a one-year deal. there so many financial managers on bfan. Mark A, doesnt appear to set an annual budget. I let him worry about the money. That's probably the only attitude that would allow someone to not worry about the team's future guaranteed liabilities. Anyone who looks at them would have to be somewhat frightened. Every time it looks like we might get a little breathing room, another 30-something is being signed to an eight-figure salary for multiple season.

I would say Mike Trout defies that logic. Mike Trout, or any single person that TLB listed, on a team of average ballplayers is not going to make that team a World Series contender. You need to have 3-4 All-Stars on the team along with a handful of other above-average players. It took the Giants three years to get Lincecum, Bumgarner, and Posey. It took the Brewers five years to get Fielder, Weeks, Gallardo, Braun, and the players traded for Sabathia. No, one player can't do it all himself. However, if we had a few top prospects in the system, it would allow for us to add them into our roster which is filled with high-priced, long-term guaranteed contracts. They would play for league minimum, making the big contracts more affordable. It could also mean that one/some of those contracts could be traded when the player still has value, as the top prospect made the expensive vet expendable. Unfortunately, for whatever reason (bad draft strategy, bad luck, trades, or whatever), we don't have much top talent on the farm. We've got a bunch of MLB role players. Melvin uses this as an excuse to sign more big-money, multi-year deals. Unfortunately, you need 25 men on your MLB roster, and we cannot afford 25 big-money contracts. Logic dictates that with a limited budget, any additional big-money deal signed means that you will need a greater number of inexpensive players. We do not have good, inexpensive players to fill those roles.

Going into this offseason, I lobbied for a veteran on a one-year deal. I really wanted to bring Marcum back, and he seemed to want to stay. Obviously, barring major injury, signing Lohse helps the Brewers this season. I don't think they're better than the Reds, but are probably going to fight with the Cardinals and the Pirates for 2nd/3rd/4th (eventually the Pirates aren't going to choke in the second half). With the advent of the 2nd Wild Card team, the Brewers are certainly a playoff-caliber team this year, as is any team that can claim to be "around a .500 team." This signing makes the playoffs in 2013 more realistic. That said, I didn't want to sign an aging vet to a big multi-year deal. My worry, and what I have been worried about for a while now is what happens after this year. We now have around $75.5MM tied up next year in nine players, and adding Axford (2nd year arby) we'll be around $83MM for ten players. The "young" pitching was supposed to be our saving grace for remaining within a budget, but now we'll have $22.5MM going to Gallardo and Lohse, with Estrada and Narveson both in their second year of arby, and if they have any kind of success this year, I don't have any faith that Melvin/Attanasio will actually move a vet to let a younger player play. Estrada & Narveson will combine for at least $5-6MM next year, pushing our payroll to $88MM for 12 players. Badenhop will be in his 4th year of arby, adding $2-3MM, putting us around $90MM for 13 players. Maldonado, Segura, Peralta/Fiers and Schafer will combine for around $2-3MM (which helps), putting 17 players at $92-93MM. We'll basically need our entire bench and most of our bullpen to play for league minimum, and need Hunter Morris to play a good 1B just for us (Gamel will hit arby, so he may be gone) to remain somewhere around $100MM payroll, which is probably Melvin/Attanasio's bogey with the new TV deal. It's feasible, but really leaves no margin for error, and any injuries will crush us. If Melvin had been able to add any top prospects to the farm in his tenure with the Brewers, I'd feel more comfortable. I just don't necessarily like the business model of always pushing long-term, big-money contracts (fixed costs) to the limit of the budget. It's kind of like getting your mortgage and car payments to 90% of your income. If the price of gas goes up, you can't afford to fill your tank. As it stands, we don't have good, inexpensive talent, which greatly adds to the risk of adding another eight figure salary to the books... especially for a guy who will be in his late 30's. Does anyone know of a site to find how MLB pitchers have fared when they're 35-38 years old? For those who wonder why I often say we have an aging, expensive team, as I illustrated above, we're almost certainly going to have a $100MM payroll next year, mostly in guaranteed, multi-year deals, and here's the age make-up. Remember, young players tend to get better, players in their late 20's are in their prime, and around 31 or so, they generally start to decline. Key players next year who will be 30 or above: Lohse (35/36), Ramirez (35/36), Narveson (32), Weeks (31/32), Axford (31), Estrada (30/31), Gorzelanny (31/32), Aoki (32), Braun (30), Badenhop (31), Henderson (31) Key players next year who will be 25 or younger: Segura (24), Peralta (25) Minor league rank: Somewhere around 29 out of 30. This is why I think we really need to cheer hard for the 2013 Brewers, because things could start to go downhill after that. Signing a 35-year-old to a 3 year/$33MM deal doesn't assuage my fears, it exacerbates them.

I would like almost anyone other than Gonzalez at first, but Carlos Lee was pathetic last year. Basically, he hit like Alex Gonzalez. Personally, since we're going to have two everyday 1B in AAA this season, who both had pretty good seasons last year, why not let one of them hold down the fort for a month. That or let Green finally get some everyday PT to let him sink or swim.

Yeah, I wish the Packers would become a successful franchise like the Brewers.

Yeah, I wouldn't worry so much about the order. I'd guess that Peralta's sent down to gain the extra year's service time. If not for Lohse needing some time to get up to speed, I'd guess the rotation would be Gallardo, Lohse, Estrada, Narveson, Fiers. Looking at Fangraphs, Gallardo and Estrada are similar pitchers in fastball velocity and the mix they throw, so splitting them up is probably a good thing.

I'll agree with Ennder that early on Melvin was too aggressive with prospects in an effort to put fans in the seats. In those days, the Brewers marketed their prospects to the fans, because there wasn't much to get excited about on the MLB roster. Maybe it's just because Melvin realizes that he has really done a poor job in building a farm system, but in the last several years, Melvin has done a 180. Most of our prospects don't project to be in the majors until their mid-to-late 20's (if at all), at which time they're not really even considered prospects anymore. The only younger rookies who have been given a shot since Ryan Braun are Lucroy and Segura. Lucroy was only brought up because the veteran FA Melvin signed suffered a career-ending injury, so they didn't have a choice. Thankfully Lucroy hit the ground running, and "proved himself" in a small sample, so they didn't sign someone to block him the next year. Segura was brought up too early in order to give the fans some immediate return from the Greinke trade, lest those fickle fans think we were "giving up." Of course, we had to bring some rookie pitchers up last year when Grienke was traded, Marcum was hurt and Wolf was kicked to the curb, but only Peralta was young, and now even though those rookies played quite well and we have a boatload of near MLB-ready starting pitchers in the minors, Melvin signs a guy who possibly as soon as next year won't be one of the five best starters in the system to a three year, eight figure salary. I had hopes that in a year or two we'd have such a surplus of SP that we'd be able to start trading from a position of strength as the younger, cheaper guys were pushing the older, more expensive guys out of the rotation. Unfortunately, I think more than anything, Melvin's moves over the past few seasons show that he has the same beliefs about our prospects as most of the "prospect watchers" out there who state that we have a bunch of utility players, back-of-the-rotation starters and middle relievers. Of course, he's the one who is ultimately responsible for our farm. The Cardinals, who win at the MLB level while building a good farm, will get a good draft pick and strengthen their farm while getting rid of a past-his-prime, expensive pitcher while going with younger starters. Even when they lost some pitchers this spring to injury and wouldn't have lost a draft pick, they still passed on Lohse. Meanwhile, the Brewers, with a pathetic farm, will lose the 17th overall pick in order to sign that pitcher. It's a continued procession of these types of moves that lead to teams like the Cardinals continually in a position to kick dirt on the Brewers.

Well, it looks like Melvin is trying to open a second window, only this time with less talent, less financial flexibility, and no prospects to trade for upgrades. Oh, and now no first rounder next year to help one of the league's worst farms. For those arguing that Melvin has realized that they don't do well with 1st round picks and player development, wouldn't it be easier and less expensive to simply fire the people in charge of making those picks and doing that development? For those saying we'll be able to trade Lohse for "greater than the first round pick," every team had the opportunity to sign Lohse this offseason, and none of them thought he was worth the first round pick. Why would they give us greater than that value in the future? Ok, but what I mean is does the money have to be used on the draft..period. If you don't sign any early round draft picks can you use the money in the FA market in the off season, or to offer and extension to a current player, or pay off debt, or pocket it, etc? MLB doesn't give the team money, they allow/disallow the team to use its own money. It's done to keep teams from telling potential draftees (and their agents) "tell the teams ahead of us that you won't sign with them, and we'll sign you for twice what they'd offer." You'd think this would be a benefit to the small market clubs, but actually teams like Pittsburgh were effective with this strategy. They knew their MLB team was not going to win, so they put a lot of their resources into signing top players in the draft. Melvin always complained about this, because they weren't going to do it (the Brewers were in their "window" and therefore not putting resources towards the future) and the Brewers were therefore stuck looking for "signability picks," which could explain a lot as to why their minor league system is in shambles and posters here complain about how "unlucky" the Brewers have been in recent drafts.

You and others here seem to be of the belief that Melvin is the owner or that you in your hypothetical GM dream world would also be the owner, not Attanasio. It doesn't matter who makes the decision. A decade or so ago, we had a bad MLB roster, but a load of talent in the minors, including two potential Hall-of-Famers and several multiple-time All Stars. We got two playoff appearances, and are now in a position where we have an aging MLB roster with most of the payroll going to a handful of players, that wouldn't really be in playoff talks at all if not for the addition of a second wildcard team which makes almost every team in the league "playoff potential", and one of the worst farms in baseball. Some people are happy for this, because we went 20-some years without a playoff berth, so making the playoffs was worth sacrificing the future. I'm not happy, because the playoffs aren't that big a deal. Most other teams in sports would laugh at a fanbase who was giddy about simply making the playoffs. I don't care to nitpick every move that was made or potentially could have been made. Looking at the whole picture, the Brewer brass did what they did and we are where we are. That's all I'm concerned with. We didn't really win anything, and I see us getting less talented into the future, not more. But again the Rays deals are nothing at like what the Brewers have. Since some people seem to think the Rays play on a different planet, let's forget them for now. Look at the Cardinals. They continue to put good MLB teams out there (including WS champs), and have one of the best farms in baseball. The Reds stole the Cards GM and now seem to be in a position to have a good MLB team for the foreseeable future, with talent locked up and a good farm to continue to supplement the roster. One of these years, the Pirates aren't going to collapse in the second half. Right now, they have a similarly talented MLB roster to the Brewers, but they have a lot of talent getting close to MLB-ready in the minors. Finally, the lowly Cubs are being run efficiently for the first time in 100 years or so. They still have a bit of time before the MLB team gels, but they will, and with the MiLB talent coming through the system and their fat wallet, they will be competitive for the long term. Basically, every team in the NL Central is set up for the future much better than the Brewers. Does it really matter which of the Brewer brass gets blamed, or whether we nitpick the details of each individual move? It's actually probably better if Melvin's the one "going all it," because he's probably retiring soon. If Attanasio is the one continually foregoing the future for the present, we could see the Brewers once again look like they did in the 1990's with a bad MLB team making token moves to look better for the fans, and no talent on the farm. Sure I want the Brewers to win now, but I also want them to win next year and beyond. I don't know when the next time will be that we get a bunch of high draft picks and they all turn into superstars, so I don't want to rely on that as a strategy. That's like a poor person playing the lottery. We "won the lottery" once, and the odds of it happening again are slim. I'd rather look into how teams like the Cardinals and Rays can put good MLB teams on the field, while continuing to maintain top-ranked farm systems. I think it has something to do with not always trying to impress the fans or looking like "a big market player," but instead just doing things that make the most "baseball sense," even if some fans might not like the decision when it's made.