LambeauLeap1250 WSSP


  
Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next  [ 162 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply

2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT [Brewers win, 7-5, 10 innings]

Author Message
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 01, 2017, 10:41 PM Post
Posts: 9017
superfly said:
trwi7 said:
Jesus, of course you can find talent everywhere but the higher you pick, the more talent is available to you. You still have to pick it.

Hey, that 81-81 team in 2006 was feel good (I guess) story but looking back, wouldn't you rather be a little worse and draft between 7 and 11 where Kershaw, Lincecum and Scherzer went instead of 16th where we took Jeffress?


Don't forget Hochevar was 1st overall and he amounted to a BP arm, and not even an elite one. I have no idea who Greg Reynolds is (#2), I wouldn't say Brad Lincoln or Brandon Morrow (#4/#5) were world beaters either. 8, 9, 12, 13, 14 were mediocre to total busts too.

I don't even trust that Brewer management would have picked Kershaw, Timmy, or Scherzer anyway.


And it's not even certain that our system would have developed them into the players they became.

In 2007 we took Matt Laporta. Madison Bumgarner went 3 picks later. We picked Jungmann right before Jose Hernandez in 2011. Still gotta make the right picks.

Look, if it's July 30th and you're 20 games under .500, then by all means tank away and sell, sell, sell. But why would you want to tank your entire 162 game season every year right when it begins before you even know what you have? It's not a good way to build relationships with your players, coaches, and fans, that's for sure.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 01, 2017, 10:44 PM Post
Posts: 795
Todd Fraizer was a more highly rated prospect, but he didn't see playing time in the bigs until he was 26, and he's had a pretty good career. Not saying that shaw will turn out the same, but I think it's a mistake to assume every good player we get has to be up with the big club before they turn 25.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 01, 2017, 10:44 PM Post
Posts: 1763
My first live game of the year, and a fine one it was!

Of course you get better talent picking third than picking 20th. People have looked at draft position talent yields. It isn't hard or mysterious.

At the same time, the notion that getting Travis Shaw as the second player in a middling trade discredits the rebuild mystifies me. Travis Shaw is close to free talent. Somebody has to play the games. "Building," re- or otherwise, happens gradually. It's very hard to go right from losing 100 games to contending. When you're starting to find young guys who can play, it helps to surround them with competent talent so they don't (a) despair, (b) learn from crappy players how to play like crap, (c) put too much pressure on themselves, and/or (d) start counting the days til they can leave town. I don't want the worst 3b in baseball (assuming I can even identify him) next to 22 year-old Orlando Arcia. Plus, average regulars have trade value.

To put the point another way, planning to be transcendently awful at all costs isn't a proven or particularly logical strategy for success in MLB. Draft leverage isn't nearly what it is in the NBA. Now, if the Brewers actually started using valuable assets to get guys like Shaw before the frontline talent compelled it, I'd be unhappy too. But for half of Tyler Thornburg? IMHO that's sound gradual building.

Then again, I reeeeeally like seeing The Most Self-impressed Fans in Baseball get very very sad, so maybe I'm not being rational. Oh well.


Last edited by gregmag on May 01, 2017, 10:46 PM, edited 1 time in total.

 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 01, 2017, 10:45 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 16707
adambr2 said:
No rebuild is created equal, but the goal here is not to lose as many games as possible to get the highest possible draft picks until we can pinpoint when we're ready to contend again. There's a lot more at play. If you're perennially losing 100+ games, you're likely to see fan interest falling, and sometimes it's hard to get it back. That's obviously going to affect revenue, and potentially, free agent interest when we're ready to contend again.


Fan interest sucks already. Going bottom of the barrel on payroll will help mitigate any revenue losses and no free agent is going to say "well, they lost 100 games 4 years ago and didn't even try to win, so they're definitely off my list." For the most part, we shouldn't be going after free agents anyways. The only guys we can afford are the older mid tier guys and they all end up sucking either throughout the entire contract or at the end of it. That should have absolutely no bearing on what we're doing now.

They are not afraid to lose 100 games. They went out and sold their all-star centerfielder, their all-star catcher, their top 3 bullpen arms, a good left fielder, their starting shortstop, and they attempted to sell Braun, all in the course of the last two years.


Trading Gomez and Lucroy was absolutely the right thing to do. Trading the bullpen arms was absolutely the right thing to do. Once again, the problem I have (with Thornburg) is what we got in return. Why are we looking to get Shaw? Why are we not looking for another prospect? An average 3rd baseman? We need that now? Absolutely have to go out and get it? Why? Explain it to me because I don't understand it at all. Use a reliever to get that extra prospect that a team doesn't want to give up but will help push it over the top. Use it to get a pitching prospect like Bickford. Don't use a reliever to get an average 3B who's already 27.

I also think you're putting too much stock into draft position. Corey Ray was mocked #1 in many mocks last year, and no one would have argued had he gone #1. He went 5. Kyle Lewis, despite the injury, might end up being the best player from that round and he went #11. Unless you have a no-brainer, can't miss #1 like a Bryce Harper, which most drafts don't, it's way too early in the evaluation process to worry about a few draft spots. Obviously, earlier is better, but not at the expense of everything else. There's long-term goals, obviously, but players and managers still have short-term goals to win games, even if championship aspirations aren't realistic. You really set a bad precedent if you're the FO who tosses all that out the window and ignores all short-term goals at the expense of frustrating your players, coaches and fans.


Draft position is huge in every sport but especially MLB. Not only because the higher you pick the more players you have to choose from but also because of the bonus money. If I can cut a deal with say the 3rd best prospect and give him a couple million less than slot, I can save that money for a guy that falls to my next pick and give him money helping my chances of landing impact talent.

Say you're picking 1st and 40th in the draft but save money on your first pick and a 1st round talent drops. Would you rather have the 1st and say 40th best prospects in a draft or the 3rd and say 24th best prospects in the draft? Bonus money is huge in the draft now and it would be foolish to not acknowledge how having more money in the draft helps you manipulate the kind of prospects you can get and it's a lot easier when you have top 5 bonus money (or better) instead of say the 11th most money to spend.

I also don't agree with your evaluation of Shaw. He's never going to be a star in this league, but he may be fully capable of being a 30 HR, 2.5-3 WAR player with good defense. That has value, very good value, actually, especially for a cost-controlled player. And if you determine you're further away than you thought, the roster is always fluid, and you can look to trade him later. He's 27. There's absolutely nothing set in stone that says he can't be part of a playoff Brewer team at age 30 in 3 years. He's part of the evaluation process right now. In any event, who is he blocking? Lucas Erceg is not exactly knocking the door down to the MLB club this year.


But once again, why is trading for Shaw necessary now? You say the roster is fluid but you need to explain to me why, with a trade chip like Thornburg, when relievers are going for high prices all around the major leagues Stearns just had to get that 27 year old 2.5 WAR 3B for a rebuilding team. It didn't make sense to me at the time and it sure as hell doesn't make any sense now. Shaw is the kind of guy you pick up after your prospects start to establish themselves and you're ready to take a step towards maybe competing for a playoff spot but don't have a player at whatever position you're looking to trade for.

I am stunned that anyone completely disagrees with the way Stearns is handling the rebuild. The rebuild appears to be going about as well as could be expected. This is a young team, 5th youngest before they cut Milone, probably younger now. It's not like they are doing this with a team of aging vets.


The vast majority of our batting WAR so far has come from Thames, Braun and Pina, all of whom are either 30 or above or will be 30 in about a month. Our top pitcher by far so far has been Anderson who will be 30 in 6 months and if he was healthy, Guerra would likely be one of our top pitchers at 32.

So no, this isn't a young team or at least, the guys contributing to the wins aren't young.

Maybe I'd feel differently if some of our young players were carrying the team or we had an amazing farm system or at least a farm system that would be the undisputed best in our division but we don't even have that.

Cards' fans wear jorts.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 01, 2017, 11:18 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 3820
trwi7 said:
Jesus, of course you can find talent everywhere but the higher you pick, the more talent is available to you. You still have to pick it.

Hey, that 81-81 team in 2006 was feel good (I guess) story but looking back, wouldn't you rather be a little worse and draft between 7 and 11 where Kershaw, Lincecum and Scherzer went instead of 16th where we took Jeffress?

In seasons where we actually don't care about wins and losses as a franchise, like this one and the one last year and maybe even next year. I'd much rather lose a ton than put out a middling team, which it seems like we're trying to do.

Hell, it's not even like you can say we're winning on the backs of our prospects and young players. We're winning on the backs of 30 year olds.

We're letting young talent get taken in the Rule V over crappy veterans and then getting rid of said veterans while losing the young talent anyways.

It's incredibly frustrating.


hindsight makes it all so obvious. Please just tell me which player in the next draft will win 3 Cy Youngs and I will cheer for the Brewers to lose as many as it takes to get to their projected slot.
Jefferess has more career WAR than all of the following picks ahead of him COMBINED from the 2006 draft: #1 pick, #2, #4, #9, #12, #13 and #15. He has 4 total career WAR and that is better than half of the players drafted ahead of him combined.
Also players need to see major league pitching to improve. There is a very short list of players who had their best ever seasons as a rookie. If you recall we made the playoffs by 1 game in 2008, so taking away the development our young players got from the 2005 season probably causes us to miss in 2008.
A player's prime is about ages 27-31 (I think I'm referencing Bill James) so Shaw is more than a "veteran filler", he is an attempt to find a solid starter ready to break out.
Also, no teams are willing to trade hot pitching prospects, at least not for bullpen arms like Thornburg. You act like Stearns had offers for every team's A level ace but instead chose Shaw.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 01, 2017, 11:33 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 16707
My point in bringing up Kershaw, Lincecum and Scherzer wasn't to say I knew they were going to be Cy Young winners or anything like that, it was to point out that there was no chance the Brewers could draft them because of where they picked to point out the absurdity of the argument that "you can get talent anywhere in the draft."

Cards' fans wear jorts.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 01, 2017, 11:42 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 16707
topper09er said:
Also, no teams are willing to trade hot pitching prospects, at least not for bullpen arms like Thornburg. You act like Stearns had offers for every team's A level ace but instead chose Shaw.


We literally traded Smith, who was injured earlier in the year and having a mediocre year for Bickford like 5 months earlier. You could make the argument that Jeffress got us Ortiz (or at minimum Cordell, who I'm not a huge fan of but is a decent enough prospect.)

I'm saying a prospect like Bickford or Ortiz (not necessarily a pitcher) but a prospect of that caliber would make more sense for us to acquire at this time for one of our trade pieces than acquiring Shaw would.

Cards' fans wear jorts.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 02, 2017, 3:17 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 4836
I'm baffled.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 02, 2017, 6:14 AM Post
Posts: 9017
trwi7 said:
topper09er said:
Also, no teams are willing to trade hot pitching prospects, at least not for bullpen arms like Thornburg. You act like Stearns had offers for every team's A level ace but instead chose Shaw.


We literally traded Smith, who was injured earlier in the year and having a mediocre year for Bickford like 5 months earlier. You could make the argument that Jeffress got us Ortiz (or at minimum Cordell, who I'm not a huge fan of but is a decent enough prospect.)

I'm saying a prospect like Bickford or Ortiz (not necessarily a pitcher) but a prospect of that caliber would make more sense for us to acquire at this time for one of our trade pieces than acquiring Shaw would.


We have no idea if an offer like that was even on the table. Smith was a lefty traded at the deadline. Thornburg was traded in the off-season after building up some value down the stretch as a closer. And we don't know yet what kind of value Dubon and Pennington will end up having. Dubon is arguably already a more highly rated prospect than Bickford.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 02, 2017, 7:13 AM Post
Posts: 1908
Yea, the obsession with Shaw is confusing. I thought Dubon was supposed to be the bees knees?


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT [Brewers win, 7-5, 10 innings]
Posted: May 02, 2017, 7:41 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 5866
The trade was about Dubon. Shaw was just a throw in that Boston had no need for. Just like the Segura trade was about Diaz but Dave Stewart wanted to give us Anderson too for some reason. Not sure how anyone can hate the way the rebuild has been done so far. Stearns has been trading veterans for young players of all levels and he's acquired like two not young MLB ready guys.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT [Brewers win, 7-5, 10 innings]
Posted: May 02, 2017, 7:45 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 4836
jerichoholicninja said:
The trade was about Dubon. Shaw was just a throw in that Boston had no need for. Just like the Segura trade was about Diaz but Dave Stewart wanted to give us Anderson too for some reason. Not sure how anyone can hate the way the rebuild has been done so far. Stearns has been trading veterans for young players of all levels and he's acquired like two not young MLB ready guys.


Because people either like to complain or they feel as though these GM's operate like video games. We got really good prospects in just about every trade so far, even including Adam Lind. On top of that, we have pieces on our MLB team that are performing really well that we received in those trades as well. Like I said before... baffled.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT [Brewers win, 7-5, 10 innings]
Posted: May 02, 2017, 8:19 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 9848
jerichoholicninja said:
The trade was about Dubon. Shaw was just a throw in that Boston had no need for. Just like the Segura trade was about Diaz but Dave Stewart wanted to give us Anderson too for some reason. Not sure how anyone can hate the way the rebuild has been done so far. Stearns has been trading veterans for young players of all levels and he's acquired like two not young MLB ready guys.



Almost nobody is just a throw in. People use this phrase all the time but there is almost never anything really backing it up. If they had removed Anderson from the Segura trade it probably wouldn't have happened. Same with Shaw since we had an obvious need at 3B. Nelson Cruz wasn't a throw in when he was traded either.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT [Brewers win, 7-5, 10 innings]
Posted: May 02, 2017, 8:28 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 2808
Location: Madison
We're 14-13, who do these guys think they are?! How about a series of fines for good play? Maybe we can take the team plane away -- make 'em take an old bus from city-to-city.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT [Brewers win, 7-5, 10 innings]
Posted: May 02, 2017, 8:44 AM Post
Posts: 3487
My thoughts to the Shaw hater

Im sorry you lost whatever hundreds you gambled for the Cardinals to win and lost due to Shaw, so you're venting to that loss.

Shaw has won us more games already than what an avg 3b would win for this team. His bat has improved the lineup so much bringing a lefty bat behind Braun.

Maybe Stearns acauired Shaw because Middlebrooks and Cecchini were so worthless to roster. A 3b was needed.

Tanking as the term goes is great except when 3-4 teams are tanking on the season as well to draft top 5. I want to say last season or the year before a cpl teams were losing 10+ in a row down the stretch.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 02, 2017, 8:47 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 3820
trwi7 said:
My point in bringing up Kershaw, Lincecum and Scherzer wasn't to say I knew they were going to be Cy Young winners or anything like that, it was to point out that there was no chance the Brewers could draft them because of where they picked to point out the absurdity of the argument that "you can get talent anywhere in the draft."


And my counter point was that if you had the #1 pick all of those players were available but were not drafted, so unless you have become the first person in history who can actually project high school pitchers the 5-10 position swing in draft slots is totally meaningless. The best player could easily be the best "prospect" or the 5th "prospect" or the 20th "prospect". The Dodgers were lucky to have the 7th pick instead of the first that year. So who is to say the Brewers wont be lucky to have the 15th pick rather than the 10th pick next year.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 02, 2017, 8:52 AM Post
Posts: 3487
Blood Runs Cold said:
There were a LOT of empty seats in the outfield - I'm kind of shocked; I would have thought the classiest fans in baseball would have made it a sea of red.


I seen somewhat from the 7th inning til end. I thought to myself, are there even 14,000 fans there? You mean the greatest fans on Earth dont come to Monday games? Or are they already seeing a reduction of fans because their team has no hope at winning the central the next dozen or so years?


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT [Brewers win, 7-5, 10 innings]
Posted: May 02, 2017, 10:18 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 5866
Ennder said:
jerichoholicninja said:
The trade was about Dubon. Shaw was just a throw in that Boston had no need for. Just like the Segura trade was about Diaz but Dave Stewart wanted to give us Anderson too for some reason. Not sure how anyone can hate the way the rebuild has been done so far. Stearns has been trading veterans for young players of all levels and he's acquired like two not young MLB ready guys.



Almost nobody is just a throw in. People use this phrase all the time but there is almost never anything really backing it up. If they had removed Anderson from the Segura trade it probably wouldn't have happened. Same with Shaw since we had an obvious need at 3B. Nelson Cruz wasn't a throw in when he was traded either.


Throw in is probably too haphazard a word but I doubt Stearns contacted Boston and specifically said I want Travis Shaw. I'm sure he wanted better prospects but Boston wasn't willing to give them up so he took Shaw to make up the value of the lesser prospect.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT [Brewers win, 7-5, 10 innings]
Posted: May 02, 2017, 10:21 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 4836
jerichoholicninja said:
Ennder said:
jerichoholicninja said:
The trade was about Dubon. Shaw was just a throw in that Boston had no need for. Just like the Segura trade was about Diaz but Dave Stewart wanted to give us Anderson too for some reason. Not sure how anyone can hate the way the rebuild has been done so far. Stearns has been trading veterans for young players of all levels and he's acquired like two not young MLB ready guys.



Almost nobody is just a throw in. People use this phrase all the time but there is almost never anything really backing it up. If they had removed Anderson from the Segura trade it probably wouldn't have happened. Same with Shaw since we had an obvious need at 3B. Nelson Cruz wasn't a throw in when he was traded either.


Throw in is probably too haphazard a word but I doubt Stearns contacted Boston and specifically said I want Travis Shaw. I'm sure he wanted better prospects but Boston wasn't willing to give them up so he took Shaw to make up the value of the lesser prospect.


It's proving to be a great way to do business. You take a shot on a guy like Shaw who obviously has the talent and just needs to put it together and you get a prospect of significance. It can turn out to being a win-win situation because it helps your team presently and can pay dividends in the long run. Not sure if that is the approach of Stearns but its been fun so far.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: 2017-05-01: Brewers (Davies) at Cardinals (Wacha) 7:15 PM CDT
Posted: May 02, 2017, 1:25 PM Post
Posts: 58
trwi7 said:

Trading Gomez and Lucroy was absolutely the right thing to do. Trading the bullpen arms was absolutely the right thing to do. Once again, the problem I have (with Thornburg) is what we got in return. Why are we looking to get Shaw? Why are we not looking for another prospect? An average 3rd baseman? We need that now? Absolutely have to go out and get it? Why? Explain it to me because I don't understand it at all. Use a reliever to get that extra prospect that a team doesn't want to give up but will help push it over the top. Use it to get a pitching prospect like Bickford. Don't use a reliever to get an average 3B who's already 27.



I would say because the Front Office is looking to compete for playoff spots in 2018. With Shaw, we now have identified average to above average starters for all 8 position players for 2018 (Pina or Bandy, Thames, Villar, Arcia, Shaw, Braun and two of Santana, Broxton, Brinson, Phillips, Cordell). We have a large slew of potentially starting pitchers to sort out for 2018 (Guerra, Davies, Anderson, Hader, Lopez, Woodruff, Ortiz, Wilkerson, Burgos and maybe even Perlta or Nelson turn it around). Use the scraps to make a bullpen (or buy one) and use Perez, one of Pina/Bandy, and the two outfielders who aren't starting to make a bench. That is the making of a team competing for a playoff spot in 2018 with Shaw a strong part of it. In my opinion, that's why we traded for Shaw (along with two very good prospects).


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next  [ 162 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply
  


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search this forum (phpBB search):
Jump to:  
Search entire board (Google search):
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Test