TheCrew07

An ex-MLB pitcher who's a family friend always spoke very highly of Cleveland, as such I've always liked them as an organization. I hope Ax does well, he was one of my favorite players on the MiLB side as he was coming through the system. In case you're wondering the pitcher had nothing good to say about the Brewers other than it was nice playing in front of family and friends on a regular basis. He chose his comments very carefully when talking about Milwaukee. He bounced around a bit towards the end so he got to see how a variety of teams operated and I've always been high on the teams that treated him well, even if I don't necessarily agree with their FO moves.

I certainly concur, I would have given up more if necessary to get him. However why would Melvin trade for a young MLB ready 3B when he has Ramirez? That's way outside his MO... I've been posting for a handful of years about "proven veteraness" pushing us farther away from our goals in the long term and I hate that Melvin is not proving me wrong in any way, he's been completely predictable. I'm sure there's a heavy dose of MA in there as well... but regardless, yuck. At some point if we don't recycle the impact talent on the roster a complete rebuild is going to become necessary, not to mention we still lack young impact pitching to build a rotation around.

Perhaps I should have been more clear, he was scouting the NE, not exactly a hotbed of talent, it's like having the upper midwest, how many everyday MLB players are you going to get out of MN, WI, MI, IA, and IL in a given year? As a scout all you can really truly gauge is talent, the rest is a gut feeling. Ford made the majors as an 18th round pick... after the first couple of rounds you are basically latching onto 1 thing... power, speed, arm strength, pitchability, whatever, and then hoping the guy develops the rest. Rogers did have a big arm and has very solid character, I'm not sure how you predict future injury other than mechanics, but there is no consensus on good throwing mechanics around baseball. He wasn't the best pick in that draft, but I didn't have a problem with the pick and then still don't now. You have to take shot at legitimate talent if you want impact players, and with drafting players that young you're always going to have some big misses. I lament picking Jungmann and Bradley when there was better talent on the board because they were "fast trackable" college guys. When we don't have any impact pitching talent can we really afford to spend picks in the upper half of the first round on guys who profile as 3s? At any rate he did really well as a scout in that area, it's not like he can create legitimate talent out of thin air. I'm not thrilled about him turning on and spilling the beans regarding Jack Z, but that is what it is at this point. I will say that if this is 100% true and not just a matter of differing perspectives it's pretty damning.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement. I disagree, that's a pretty high upside bunch, most of which who made the big leagues. Rogers had the best arm in the system before and after Jeffress but couldn't stay healthy enough or throw enough strikes. Made the big leagues though. Salome quit for mental issues, I don't remember the specifics, extremely disappointing at the time. Braddock also had mental problems, I want to say he was bi-polar, but don't recall for sure. Made the bigs, pitched well, then fell apart. Garrison was a pretty awesome 10th round pick, he made the bigs without great stuff, maybe he'll get back some day. Ford was the fastest player in the minor leagues for years but just couldn't hit enough, he also made the big leagues. That's a far cry from the majority of players who never even get a cup of coffee.

If you can get back Walker in any deal then the answer is a resounding, "Yes!". We need young impact pitching to build a rotation around, and since we don't have it and we need to start someplace, and I'd move Gomez for him straight up. And before someone says it, you can't build a rotation around a bunch of players regardless of skill level who profile best as 3s or worse like Jungmann, Burgos, Fiers, and so on. We need to build around legitimate talent. On the flip side if Seattle dumps their prospects to go all in, I'd be pissed as a Mariner fan. They'd have a 2 year window and then have to start over again? Is a World Series appearance even realistic? What's the sense in that? As good as a talent evaluator as Jack Z is, he's essentially a Melvin clone as a GM, maybe a poor man's version, which isn't all that surprising. I've always thought of Melvin as a poor man's Walt Jocketty... which should tell you all you need to know about how I view Z's tenure at the helm in Seattle.

You really want me to defend the importance of having stuff and especially an out pitch for guys with average velocity? Aren't we all educated enough as fans to not be having this conversation anymore? Can Smith be a legit #3? Sure, every player has a chance to overperform and make the sum greater than the individual parts, but how many players actually do? The Brewers have an incredibly long list of average to below average talent players whom people were counting to maintain their success, here's a few off the top of my head: Clark, Helms, Suppan, Looper, Bush, Davis, Wolf, and now Lohse. In the end of course all that matters is how the player actually performs, but how many of those guys were able to maintain? The guys do that are the outliers... the exceptions to the rule, and I don't understand posters whom always run to the comparison of some Hall of Fame or even All-Star worthy player. Every soft tossing RHP dosn't have the ability to be Marcum, certainly a couple of guys around baseball will be, but all of the rest are going to be back of the rotation or bullpen guys. Furthermore how long are soft tossers able to keep their careers going? As for the players you chose, Capellan never had stuff even his FB velocity proved to be a mirage, I'm on record as being extremely disappointed in Parra, Neugebauer had stuff but was pushed too far too fast by the Brewers who prematurely ended his career, and what does Bennett have to do with anything? He was a reliever long before the Brewers acquired him, at least Capellan had Atlanta's pitching reputation behind him. Regardless I'm not hating on Smith, I'm just not looking or hoping for him to be anything more than a decent bullpen guy. If Smith turns into our #3 that will say a heck of lot more about the Brewers rotation than it does about him.

Well the obvious answer there is he needs 6 full years to qualify for FA, as it has always been in the modern era. Teams get 3 cheap full seasons and 3 full seasons of arbitration. Which is why many teams wait until July to bring up prospects as they don't have to pay the player the extra year of arbitration (super 2) and get to retain the player's rights another full season vs calling them up in April.

This has been mentioned a couple of times by different posters so I just wanted to point out 1 more time that Smith does not have a big arm. I already posted his pitch f/x numbers and scouting report which pretty much line up exactly with each other in another post. Every pitcher throws harder out of the pen in 1 inning appearances than they do as a starting pitcher. He's decent MLB value for Aoki, but let's not overstate what he has the potential to be. As for those asking if any poster would give up a top prospect for Aoki? That's not the really the issue, no one was thinking the Brewers could get a top 50 prospect for 1 year of Aoki, he's nothing special. The point is why do the Brewers need more arms which profile as back of the rotation starters? We'll have a AAA rotation loaded with those guys for the most part. I'd go all the way down to the DSL if I had to find a guy who I thought had some upside but all that highly rated yet. Getting a prospect with upside is not the same as getting a "top prospect"... those 2 ideas can and often merge, but in this case they don't. An upside guy from the Brewers system would be a guy like Tyler Cravy who has a big arm but has always had a problem with the strike zone but had nice year as reliever this season. He's not on any prospect radars anymore, nor is he an Archie Bradley. He's just a guy with some intrigue that might turn into a steal. This deal is fine if Smith a good reliever, 5 years of a cheap bullpen guy for 1 year of an aging 4th OF, that's decent value.

This. From BA after 2011 when he was the Royals #22 prospect: Unless the Royals found some mechanical flaw which accounted for his average FB velocity jumping up 92 mph last year I'm going to assume without watching that he just benefited from the typical switch to the bullpen where every pitcher's stuff can play up. He's got no standout tool, he should not be the type of player Milwaukee is looking to acquire for the rotation, he's average at best as starter, which means he's likely far below average. I don't have a problem with him as a BP guy.

I'm still trying to figure why they think he could be a 3B to begin with? Having watched him play extensively, and as a fan of his, I just don't see it. I understand the need for some kind of legitimate 3B prospect as I do the need for a legitimate LHP, but to continually place square pegs (guys who profile as 1B) as 3B just to fill an organizational need doesn't really make any sense. I get that Ramirez will hopefully be done as a Brewer after this season, unless of course they pick up the option, but that's why a couple of trades for young pitching and both 3B and SS prospects would have made sense. We have a 1000 outfielders and 1B but not much else, we got the SS and maybe a bullpen arm for Greinke, but as I proposed multiple times over the last 2 years it would have been nice to go after a prospect like Corey Seager from the Dodgers as well and a young pitcher in a separate deal. I don't mean to suggest that Seager was available in 2012 as he was drafted and couldn't have been acquired until this last deadline, I just mean to target a power hitting SS who profiles best as 3B, or a true 3B prospect. I realize the Brewers eventually kind of did that with Nick Delmonico, but that was very light version of what I had in mind initially. The Rangers wouldn't deal Olt so then you fill the need as best as you can. Oddly the situation turned out the worst possible way for Mike as he got hit in the head playing winter ball (what an incredible waste of time) with a pitch and developed a vision problem which started him off on a horrible year. I hope for his sake he gets his career back on track, but it will suck if he turns into something good for the Cubs. I still think is pretty simple... If we don't have the player in house, and we aren't going to be able to sign him in FA to fill that hole, then we need to trade for him. End. Of. Story. I have a very hard time with Melvin's veteran obsession given the financial realities and limitations of a fielding a MLB team in Milwaukee. edited to further clarify some thoughts.

I don't think you quite understand the point I'm making, I'm not talking old relative to the average person, I'm talking old relative to peak performance/production, which encompasses all of the issues from talent to injury risk. When a player hits 30 they already on the downside of their career, it's been statistically proven time and time again. They aren't old by human standards, I was still figuring myself out well into my early 30s, but by professional sports standards they are old... players in their mid to late 30s are ancient. Those are not players a team like Milwaukee can afford to build around, there isn't enough money nor enough options to cover extended injury absences. I'm not going hedge my bets based on any outlier... as in a gut feeling that a particular player is going to buck a historically proven injury/production decline trend. That argument has been made for every 30 something pitcher we've signed by one poster or another, but how many of those guys have remained productive through the end of their contract? How many position players? I can think of one off the top of my head, Cameron, but many people disliked him for all the things that he wasn't at the plate, I actually liked him for all the things he was including great value as a FA signing. Just because many teams operate in "win now" fashion around MLB doesn't make it a sound strategy. It pays off here and there for certain teams, but most teams buying are just spinning their wheels. Look at a team like Arizona who's traded more young impact pitching than any other team... had they just kept their own guys they'd have a monster rotation with more talent coming. For example trading Scherzer for Jackson, then flipping Jackson for Hudson? They would have been much better off just sticking with Scherzer the entire time. First, I don't think you've really understood my point. The team's average age should be right between 26-27 if constructed properly. Ideally we'd have a couple of players in their early 30s about to exit and we'd be adding a couple of very young rookies to the roster every year, with everyone else in between. When the bulk of your team is through the arbitration process and on FA contracts, that's an "old" team... again not in terms of age, but in terms of professional sports and cost relative to production. I'm fine cutting bait with every single player at 30 or 31, sooner if the right trade comes along. As to KC... I liked what the Royals were doing until they bought proven veterans to shore up the rotation and finish in 3rd place. I understand the perception value from casual fans in actually getting over the top and posting a winning season for the first time in 10 years, but if this was a KC forum I'd be posting the same stuff about them as I have about the Brewers. Why on earth would you give up 6+ years of Myers and Odorizzi for Shields and Davis just to finish in 3rd place? That's not taking a shot, that's blowing your wad for nothing, kind of like the Brewers signing Lohse to lose a 1st round pick and finish in 4th place. The Royals do have a couple of young pitchers worth keeping an eye on in Kyle Zimmer and Yordano Ventura. That being said, I don't really spend a whole lot of time posting about teams that I don't want to emulate, I'm not big on "what not to do", I'd rather focus on how to keep the talent train rolling... then winning will take care of itself. I'm not into chasing 2-3 extra wins for a fundamentally flawed roster from the start. For me it's World Series or bust, that's my idea of being competitive, and I'm not looking to rise up to that level for 1 season in every 30, or even 1 season in every 10, I want to sustain a high level of success for a long period of time, I'd like to be in the NLCS 4 out of 10 years. However there is simply no way to do that without the pitching, and the Brewers haven't proven they can draft and develop pitching, which brings me back around full circle to where I started all those years ago when the talk was about trying to acquire Sabathia or Peavy on this forum; our focus should be trading for young impact starting pitching when those deals become available. The opportunity isn't going to be there on a yearly basis but the Brewers must be willing to jump when it comes knocking, that's the only way to permanently get on top of the pitching situation. Hitting on 1 pitcher every 6 or 7 drafts isn't going to get it done... Sheets to Gallardo to Odorizzi (if he performs for TB) to whom? Jake was drafted in 2008, Jack Z's last draft, who's a legit #2 or better anywhere in our farm system above A ball? There's just too much space between impact pitchers for the Brewers. I'm not talking about developing an Ace, those guys don't come around very often, I'd be happy with a rotation full of 2s with a 3 or two on the back end. So yes, the Brewers are old and expensive relative to production with flawed roster construction, it's not a biased opinion, it's the reality of the situation. We have too little pre arby talent, we're top heavy, we've been top heavy for years, and from an impact talent standpoint we're a wasteland. I'm still hoping Peralta ascends, I still like Thornburg, but neither one of those guys have proven to be exceedingly efficient as pitchers (the same problem I had with Gallardo coming up), we need guys who can somewhat routinely get through the 7th inning, but we don't have them in the organization, and haven't had a guy like that since Sabathia's half a season. The rotation leaves too many innings for the bullpen, who for the most part are all pitchers who weren't good enough to be starters in the first place, so they aren't as talented and give up more runs pitching to a greater workload. Balance the payroll distribution and fix the pitching with long-term solutions and my outlook on the big league Brewers will change positively. Until then I'll spend the majority of my time on the minor league/draft side where there is a new story every day, there's just not much of anything compelling to discuss regarding the MLB side of the Brewers. It's been the same cycle of conversations for years...

That's a convenient assumption to make but basically untrue as the Brewers didn't over spend the cap on international FAs. All of that information was all covered in great detail in the international signings/draft forum. As to the contention that this team has plenty of talent I would qualify that as an extremely biased opinion. We're old, the team's average age has been creeping upwards for years now. Look how quickly the Cubs went from competitive to a joke as their old players fell off production wise, got injured, or both. We are clearly the 4th best team in our own division... the Brewers would need extreme good fortune and to have the other teams in the division suffer extreme misfortune for the Brewers to contend for anything. There's no magic formula for long-term success, but foolishly hanging onto veterans who are past their prime physically is the surest recipe for disaster, especially in a small market with limited payroll flexibility to start with. I've posted on organization building literally hundreds of times, but I'm done, it's proven to be a waste time with the same mantras being repeated on both sides over an over. I understand the need to hang onto the past, or players that you may have formed some emotional bond to, but none of that really has anything to do with what is best for tomorrow. No organization in any sport can afford to have their eyes firmly fixed on today, though many do (and it never seems to work out well with the exception of the Marlins in the 90s) there should always be a balance between today and tomorrow, but in Milwaukee there hasn't been. I've never been in favor of blowing it all up, I've argued vehemently against the organization's moves which I believe are bringing us closer to that scenario, but at some point if we don't get some young impact talent coming back into the upper part of the organization that is exactly what is going to happen. I'm not a believer in Gomez now nor was I ever high on him, I was never a believer in Ramirez' ability to stay healthy, and we should move on from Hart and Aoki. The Brewers need to cycle talent appropriately which does not include continually buying MLB veterans with prospects, especially considering the lack of impact talent coming through the draft. The Brewers need to get younger and more dynamic athletically... bigger arms, better range from the position players, more speed, etc. We aren't just behind those other teams in the standings, we're miles behind from a physical talent standpoint. Impact pitching... hell the Cards are using guys that would start for us in their bullpen. We have 1 pitcher in our rotation with an above FB.... 1, Peralta, every other pitcher has an average or below average arm. The rotation is a joke from a playoff perspective. Young impact position talent? We have none, we have guys who have a chance to be relatively productive, but I'm not sure there is even someone of Hart's caliber anywhere near Milwaukee, certainly no one like Braun or Fielder. 3B is may or may not be a hole in 2014 depending on Ramirez' health, he's not a good defender regardless, and what about 2015? Gennett will not be a long-term answer at 2B, he's a guy who's okay when you don't have anything better but is replaceable. I think Segura will continue to grow at SS. 1B... what a joke last year, will it be better in '14 or beyond? Braun will be Braun in LF or hopefully RF. I think Gomez regresses at the plate, and I think Kris Davis could be league average in LF. I couldn't care less about the bullpen at this point, with a rotation that profiles to be average at best and line-up which is pretty much the same playing in an extremely tough division... I'm sorry but i just don't see "competitive" in that unless we're framing the argument around being .500, which is pretty meaningless to me.

You clearly don't understand the other side of this argument if you are making blanket statements. Assuming perfect health with some good breaks in close games this team is maybe a mid 80s winner... Is that what the eternally optimistic are hoping for? Repeating the excellent best case scenario that was the 2011? A couple of key players were on the DL in April and that was it, smooth sailing the rest of the year. I'll appeal one more time for people to take a macro view of the division. Who has ascending youth? Which teams are already better? For example on the MLB forum someone brought up that Beltran is leaving STL, but so what? They can replace him with Oscar Taveras who's one of the best pure hitters in the minor leagues. Obviously yes I know 2013 was a lost season with family issues and injuries for him, but he has the potential to be a stud. The Cardinals may not win 97 games, but they aren't falling off all that far and are getting more youthful. They are what posters like me were hoping the Brewers would become... mostly perennial contenders with the occasional down year. They have more WS wins since DM took over the Brewers than the Brewers have WS appearances in the history of the franchise. Pittsburgh will be able to insert a legit impact pitcher into the rotation (excluding Cole who's already up) each year for the next 2-3 seasons. There will likely be some growing pains with their youngsters, but I would expect them to compete for the division every year in the near term. Cincinnati will maintain over the next 2-3 years until they hit the stage the Brewers are at now with a bunch of aging veterans and a thin farm system. Cingrani will be up to stay for the Reds, they still have Stephenson coming, and I think Hamilton will be a very productive player at least until he loses a step. After those 3 I'm not so high on the rest of their prospects. Corcino falling off horribly really hurt them, and on the plus side Ervin is intriguing though not toolsy. Finally Chicago is on the verge of having a super line-up, they have more legit hitting prospects than any team I can remember since I started following the minors; Soler, Baez, Almora, Vogelbach, Olt (still a believer), and Bryant. Not to mention Alcantara and Candelario who I've also been impressed with. The Cubs are horribly thin on pitching, right there with the Brewers in comparison with the rest of the division, but the difference is the Cubs can buy pitching in FA to go with the bats when they mature. The NL central has become one of if not the best division in baseball, many of us have been saying for years that there is very strong management around the division, it's been a steady climb for the Central for years. The Brewers are clearly the 4th best team in the division, and have a much tougher road to that wild card than the 2nd place team in any other NL division. When the division was "down" we were 3rd place team as often as not, and now that Jack Z's scouting department who drafted Braun, Fielder, Hardy, Gallardo, and so on are gone, there are no more impact potential prospects to trade for a short term pitching. Melvin's "best" moves have been bought with prospects... unfortunately for him he's been out of that currency for some time, now his true "creative" colors will show. If Lohse is the best the Brewers can do, we're hopelessly out manned now and in the near future. Kyle pitched great, but we gave up a 1st round pick the team desperately needed to finish 4th in the division and under .500. The move made no sense from any kind of macro view, it's the kind of move than can only be justified by framing the argument around the rotation for a single season... any larger perspective and the logic just doesn't hold up. Simply put the Brewers were still horrible in 2013 with Lohse and had no chance to add an impact player than might have helped in the future.

I believe in sports there really isn't a "status quo". Either your organization is moving forward, or it's moving backwards. The tricky part is that many times "moving backwards" is happening in the background like with the Brewers where the drafting is poor and the minor leagues are further thinned to bring in "win now" short term solutions. It's like any other bubble that bursts... tech stocks, housing, whatever you wish to choose. Things can look fine on the surface, maybe even great such as they did for the Brewers in 2011, and it becomes very easy to look past future issues for the present. However when it all comes crashing down the same people that were championing legislation or trades that enabled that bubble to grow are now flipping sides and bemoaning the collapse and how unfair it is. The Brewers quit building towards anything meaningful when Braun came up and started playing the patching game with the roster. Defense stinks, get better defenders, the starting pitching stinks, trade for proven pitching, the bullpen stinks, sign different BP guys... it's just simply whack-a-mole with roster spots. There's no brilliance in what DM has done, he gets the best players he can afford, some years it works, most years it doesn't. Gomez may be young be relative to many of us, but he's not "young" in a sports sense, he's in his peak years, now is the time to sell high if you're going to sell him. He'll be 28 next year. Segura is "young", he'll only be 24 next season. Young players are <=25 year old range, if a player isn't established by the time he's 25 then chances are he's not going to be much of a player. Of course there are exceptions where a player is blocked, get's injured, or steps away from the game for any number of reasons and will come back, but generally speaking most impact 25-26 year olds are already arbitration eligible as they have 3 full seasons of MLB experience. (college vs HS draft status matters as impact college players tend to be a tad older and in the past didn't sign until the deadline so didn't play professionaly until the following season). 28 is middle aged from a professional sports standpoint... The goal as a franchise should be to extend players early into their very early 30s and then let them walk. Take their best years, thank them for their service, and then let someone else pay them for what they've done while they decline statistically and spend more time on the DL. On a $90 million payroll the Brewers simply aren't able to afford a couple of $10 million players on the DL for significant chunks of the season, that's just too much dead money. Players are going to injured, there is nothing fair about the lopsided revenues in MLB, but by playing in FA and trading prospects for short term solutions Melvin has played right into the hands of the system. Every dead dollar hurts the Brewers vastly more than the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Angels... etc. It's not fair, so why play the system in a way that minimizes the value per dollar like the Brewers have done? To beat such a lopsided system we have to exploit the holes, be out in front of trends, maximize talent on the dollar... pretty much exactly the opposite of Melvin. He'd be great in a large market, but his conservative style (yes conservative, there's no risk in trading for CY pitching) will only get the Brewers so far. If the last 7 years haven't proven that to people, I'm not sure what else can. 1 appearnce in the NLCS shouldn't be good enough for anyone simply because it's so much better than the 30 years which came before it. Success should be measured relative to the ultimate goal, not relative to the past. There's certainly some value in comparing the ascension, but in the terms of being a truly competitive franchise the Brewers are pretenders: we've only finished better than 3rd a total of 3 times since 2007, and the 83-79 finish in 2007 wasn't really competitive as the division was downright awful. That's not the cyclical nature of professional sports, that's a reflection of Melvin's management style. Yes it could always be worse with a different GM, but that's not a reason for inaction:

I really wish the Brewers would take this approach and lock in good minor league franchises, for example the T-Rats... what other Midwest League choice would be better? Great facility, above average fan support, location close to Milwaukee. If you can get new stadiums in Nashville and Huntsville (Mobile), why not consider buying into the franchises as well? The Braves own many of their affiliates and I just think it makes good business sense.

impact starting pitching > every other position on the field. SP > position players > RP. Trade up in value every chance you get, I'd take the deal and hope that one of the young SS in the system develops. This is organization is going no where with a bunch of 3-5 type pitching prospects. We can build a good enough rotation to win games in the regular season but in the post season when facing the best pitching and best line-ups in baseball we'd better be able to match-up pitcher for pitcher. Trade relievers for impact starting pitching, trade position players for impact starting pitching... fix the rotation first, then worry about the rest. Young impact starting pitching is the most valuable commodity in baseball, once you have it then it becomes easy to fill holes elsewhere or replace it. Simply put, it's nearly impossible to lose a series if you out pitch the other team, and I'm not talking ERA, I'm talking about giving up less runs than the opposition. There may be a way for extreme run distribution to work out where the team who pitched worse can actually win a series, but 4-5 years ago I researched something like 35 years worth of post season series and didn't see a single instance of it. Again it may be mathematically possible, but when building a team I'm looking to hit targets in the middle, not hope for outcomes on either extreme. 2006-2013 should have proven to people that it doesn't matter how good your offense is if your pitching is bad. How many back to back winning seasons did we have with all that talent assembled? 2.. finishing 2nd in the division in '07 (83) and '08 (90) and then finishing 1st in '11 (96) and dropping to a 3rd place finish in '12 (83). The organization will not sustain itself without young pitching because the Brewers aren't able to afford impact pitching in FA, haven't been able to draft and develop it, and ran the well dry trading for it earlier. There is no such thing as "good enough" pitching... people want to argue endlessly about position players and who bats where in the line-up, to me none of that matters until we have a pitching similar to TB. A young staff that is affordable and we can cycle back on itslef to keep bringing back more impact pitching talent, because the Brewers simply haven't proven at any point that they can permanently get on top of the pitching situation and sustain success in the rotation. When 4 out of 5 pitchers in rotation have replaceable talent, you have a problem. It doesn't matter if the guy somehow out pitches his talent and sports a nice ERA during the season, how does he fair against the better teams in the game? Yes having a bunch of Marcum's who can pitch to a 3.5 ERA will win you regular season games, but can you win a WS without at least 1 legitimately talented pitcher? I'd argue that you really need 3, that's the core issue in my mind... are we just trying to win games or accomplish something special? There is a wide gulf in strategy between those 2 ideas. Teams that truly remain competitive for long stretches have done it with pitching, in the modern era the Braves did it through the 90s and now the Rays have been doing it since 2008. The major difference is that the Rays continue to cycle fresh talent into the rotation while the Braves rode out aging players through their entire career and it eventually came crashing down. Pitching. Pitching. Pitching. That is all.

I still have a Coca-Cola Red Bat from the late 70's. I used it all through little league without breaking it. In large part because its weight and balance were really good for not making contact, except for the occasional weak grounder to second. Loved that share!

I think you missed the point... They tried to be objective by assigning point values to players in each leagues top 20 prospects, then the league with AAA weighting more heavily than A ball, then turn those numerical numbers into a list of near term MLB impact by total points. A list like this is going to be more about production than projection, as to be a top 20 prospect in any league you have to be productive first. It's not that Gennett and Davis were irreplaceable prospects, it's that they were regularly placing on top 20 league prospect lists and were in triple AAA, this list was about potential near term major league impact and nothing else. Jimmy Nelson is the only player who made a list in full season ball, all of the rest of the players were in Rookie ball... where's the near term MLB impact from those 5 players? We have many position players who are very intriguing from a projection standpoint, guys like Arcia, Taylor, Coulter, Roache, and Haniger who were in full season ball last year, but none of those guys hammered out a great season. They all had their moments, but they need to be more much consistent from a production standpoint as they progress. Our pitching as an organization is simply awful, and I've been beating this drum for longer than I care to mention. If you have no top tier talent, you aren't going to get pitchers ranked very high on any prospect list, so your organization will have a pathetic ranking via this methodology. I don't see any market bias in the methodology of this list, it was just a different way to rank the farm systems than what they have traditionally done, by potential near term MLB impact. I actually found it somewhat informative and intriguing. I would argue that the only bias is coming from posters on this site who refuse to believe the system is as bad as it really is. Again there are many players I like and/or am intrigued by, but for example I'm not going to argue that at this point Tyrone Taylor compares to Albert Almora or even Billy Hamilton. That could very well change in the future, but based on 2013 he just doesn't stack up to the better CF prospects in baseball. I do have high hopes that as he progresses offensively and defensively those will be more apt comparisons moving forward. Do the Pirates have the 14th best farm system in baseball? Absolutely not, but on near term MLB impact the only guy who sticks out to me is Jameson Taillon though I also like Gregory Polanco, that's a pretty fair ranking considering most of their best talent completed the seasons in A+ or A and Gerrit Cole finished the season at MLB. Are the Brewers the worst farm system in baseball? Clearly not, but what impact talent do we have anywhere near MLB? In this case the context (or framing) of the argument dictated where the Brewers ended up, I don't know how they could have done a list like this anymore objectively than they did.

I already answered that above, he's above average. No Yuni B wasn't even average and that's ridiculous comparison to make. Since you apparently don't like the definition, here's the explanation as laid out by wikipedia. Certainly someone such as yourself would have been capable of finding that on your own. Yes you are correct, I obviously haven't put any time or thought into baseball and I just run around repeating what I read elsewhere... Then again, maybe I'm talking about building something special and you're talking about trying to win as many games as possible in any given year. 2 completely different concepts, yet you somehow think that I don't understand the razor thin margins between success and failure in baseball? Even when I constantly post about it from a pitching perspective? Seriously, this coversation is exactly why it's largely pointless to discuss these issues... It doesn't matter how many times it is written, or from how many different angles, people still tell me what I see or don't see and in both cases are completely off the mark nearly every time. I don't think I'm the one who needs to take a "wider view" when I'm looking at the state of the entire organization vs the rest of the division, league, and MLB. Say what you want, (and you will), but the Brewers were never in the race and I have a huge problem spending money and giving up draft picks on aging retreads to not accomplish anything. Says whom? Where is it written in stone? I say again that somehow the Rays whom have 1/3 of our payroll manage to contend every single year. This isn't about what the Brewers have or haven't done historically, why would I want to revisit that past for anything other than a "what not to do?". This is about moving the organization forward in completely different era, where payroll potential is completely unbalanced across MLB, and how to remain truly competitive on a yearly basis. None of that other fluff matters... it may matter to you on a personal level, but it has nothing to do with operating a baseball franchise in 2014. You're only doomed to repeat history if you haven't learned from it... which should tell you everything you need to know about DM and MA right there. As for your lesser talent analogies.... well the football comments are completely off the mark, because there's nothing similar between developing football players whom you can red shirt if they aren't ready, coach 6 out of the 7 days per week, give daily individual instruction on the field, weight room, and in film review. Baseball doesn't operate in that manner at all, it's still largely trial by fire. I firmly believe that strong character trumps talent, but what happens when players of similar character have dissimilar talent? Casey McGehee was never going to be a career 800+ OPS player, nor will the players I previously mentioned. Prospects can and will fail for many reasons, but so do established MLB players. Kyle Lohse is a fine pitcher, but in the post season who are you going to bet on the better line-ups in the league getting to first... someone like him or someone like Verlander? My end game isn't winning games in the regular season, it's about winning the World Series. You can win games with an average rotation but you aren't winning anything in the post season with average pitching. In truth this is actually very simple, the Brewers cannot afford to buy significant talent in FA, as such the organization must operate in a manner that regularly supplies impact talent to the MLB club through other means. As we've seen, there are only so many trades you can make for CY pitching before the cupboard is completely barren, so a better strategy would seem to be one that focuses on locking up key players early and focuses on cycling as much impact talent back onto itself as possible. 1st division players, impact talent, which ever phrase you choose, the Brewers have it in short supply. A system full of depth (role players) isn't a good system, it's not being underrated, every system has that kind of talent, the farm systems that stand are the ones who have potential talent to make a significant impact at MLB. You talked earlier about history... well historically what leads you to believe that Brewers can turn system of role players into a team that can win 90 games? Where's that magic formula been hiding all these years? The Brewers system has turned out offensively talented and defensively deficient players for years, had 2 players with hall of fame potential in the line-up together, and couldn't get it done. Now you want to replace those kind of players with players whom are 2 or 3 steps down and expect a resurgance in the win column? You can give away wins at 1 position if you pick them up another, but how is that going to happen? How is the pitching going to get better? What prospect at any position can we pencil in for a .900+ OPS? Finally none of that has anything to do with the rest of the division ascending talent wise while we regress? That's your wider view right there... 1982 is ancient history, I enjoyed that run, but I'm sick of hearing about it, I'm sick of people talking about it, and what happened in the 80s and even in the 90s has nothing to do with the realities of the modern game.

Well apparently my high regard of Sanchez wasn't warranted, I was always intrigued by him. Hopefully he doesn't land in the division someplace, I'd like him to do well if he gets a chance.

Originally I let this go but it's been sticking in my craw all day. Players like Sean Halton and Jason Rogers are nice quality depth, but are not the type of players who we would want anchoring down any particular position for 6-7 years. They have value, but they aren't 1st division starters, and that fact is the single biggest problem with the Brewers farm system. Who profiles to be above average as a pitcher or position player in the next few years? How many players can we realistically project to be 1st division (above average) type players? I posted this early in the T-Rats season but I might have been wrong about Haniger, I really liked him when I saw him play, he might be able to match the production of a Corey Hart for example... he might make a good everyday type player. I know he didn't set the world on fire at BC, but that doesn't really change my opinion of him. Beyond him look around... I'd make an argument for Hunter Morris but he didn't even get a sniff and a ton of posters on this site are overvaluing pitching prospects like Hellweg and Jungmann. People will make arguments for Taylor and Roache which is fine, but I'd like to see continued growth from those guys before I get too excited. I'm sorry but I just don't see it with the MLB team or the farm system... we have nothing to hang our hats on. Melvin and Mark A. will keep chasing that 81st win so the fans keep showing up to Miller Park, but from where I'm sitting we're extremely mediocre as an organization, and several key facets are well below average. If we aren't building towards anything we're losing ground, and we haven't been building since 2007, we've been maintaining and/or patching the MLB roster, and that's it. As such we arrived at this point: 2 incredibly disappointing seasons in a row and a bottom third farm system. The Cards are better today and project to be better in the future, I would expect the Pirates to continue to ascend, the Reds have some interesting pitching on the way, and finally the Cubs have the best collection of position prospects I can recall since I started following the minors in 2003. We're a 4th place team without the impact to project for the future, it shouldn't take any "expert" to tell us anything, all it should take is a realistic and somewhat unbiased look at the state of the organization and the division to see the truth.

The Cubs won't have a hole at 3B for all that long, Kris Bryant appears to be everything he was advertised as pre-draft from BA: Bryant may not stick at 3B, but his early returns weren't Braunesque over there either. Ryan Braun: [pre]Year Age Tm Lg Lev Aff G CG Ch PO A E DP Fld% RF/G lgCS% PO Rctch Rtz 2005 21 2 Teams 2 Lgs A-Rk MIL 3B 39 119 24 82 13 6 .891 2.72 0[/pre] Kris Bryant: [pre]Year Age Tm Lg Lev Aff G CG Ch PO A E DP Fld% RF/G lgCS% PO Rctch Rtz 2013 21 3 Teams 3 Lgs A--A+-Rk CHC 3B 31 92 21 65 6 5 .935 2.77[/pre] If Gamel ever comes close to reaching his ceiling as a hitter I'll be pissed they waived him. I do understand that good organizations at the top of their talent cycle can't really afford to wait around on guys with talent to develop, but the Brewers aren't a "good" organization, nor are we at the top of our talent cycle.

I haven't read the thread and figure I'll be in the minority here but Gomez was the instigator, not anyone from ATL. He pulled a similar stunt in a MiLB game last season when he was on his rehab stint and got a T-Rat plunked, in addition to getting into it with the opposing coaching staff after the game. I understand why people will take up for one of our own but if the shoe was on the other foot would we have felt our players in the field instigated anything or the player who cadillaced his HR like he hit the deciding HR in the World Series? Many of Gomez most ardent supporters around here speak of him in a very similar manner to how people spoke in support of Nyjer Morgan, and those "look at me" players just aren't my kind of guys, and I'll leave it at that. I'm not suprised by this incident at all.

Exactly.

I'm not going to last the entire game but I enjoyed listening to Steve even though the Brewers are currently on the wrong end of a 4-0 score. I'll miss minor league baseball.