Can the Brewers sign Cliff Lee?
by SRB on Jun 29, 2010 7:56 PM CDT
Email
PrintSomething to consider...
The biggest name at the trade deadline this season is most likely Cliff Lee, and since his contract is finished at the end of this season, he will probably be the biggest name in the free agent market this winter too. Although some are treating it as a foregone conclusion that Lee will end up with the Yankees (yawn...), I don't see why that necessarily has to be the case. In fact, I think the Brewers could be serious contenders for Lee if Doug and Mark A. were willing to make the effort.
For one, the recent news that extension talks with Fielder/Boras have broken down makes it seem increasingly probable that Fielder could be traded before the 2011 season. Whether that occurs this year or this winter doesn't really matter, what's important is that his salary will be coming off the books. I've estimated what the 25-man roster could look like over the next two seasons (2011/2012), though after that it becomes so speculative as to not be very useful. For arbitration estimates, I deliberately tried to go over what the player will probably get (e.g. does anyone expect Hart to get anywhere near $9 million?). In both cases signing Cliff Lee at a competitive salary seems more than feasible.
2011 Brewers Google Doc - Since signing Cliff Lee would surely indicate a continued desire to win, and would generate more than enough buzz to counteract the loss of Fielder, I think an $85 million payroll isn't unreasonable (we're at roughly $90 million right now this season). Using that number for the total payroll and slotting in the probable composition of the roster, a $24 million/year Cliff Lee contract fits fine.
2012 Brewers Google Doc - Similarly, a rough estimate of the 2012 25-man with $24 million for Lee included also comes in under $85 million. For 2012, both Weeks and Hart will become free agents and there will be holes at 2B/RF. I'm making the perhaps slightly optimistic assumption that Lawrie could be up by then; whether or not he sticks at 2B or is moved to RF doesn't really matter, as I budgeted $7 million for a free agent at whichever is left open (assuming no other internal options would be capable)
Someone might argue that I'm being unrealistic by slotting in both Gamel at 1B and Narveson as the fifth starter, but keep in mind that these two mock-ups do not include whatever the Brewers might get in return for Fielder. Hopefully, at the very least the Brewers can get one younger starter who could push Narveson back into being the sixth starter (though, with a rotation headed by Lee/Gallardo, is Narveson really that bad as a #5?). Also, since I'm hoping we'll get a young starter, Parra/Narveson wouldn't both have to be in the rotation and even with Lee the team could still avoid having four lefties in the rotation (which apparently leads to the Apocalypse or something).
So, Lee could conceivably fit in an $85 million payroll - in my opinion, at least - but does that mean the Brewers could sign him? Given that he's already over 30, I really don't see Lee getting a Sabathia contract in terms of money or length. Halladay signed for $20 million/year and Sabathia $24 million/year, is Lee going to be offered anything significantly more than both of them? Certainly not by a team that already has one of those monster contracts on payroll. I know the Yankees technically could reach into their pockets and outbid anybody, but if the Brewers made an offer in the $20-24 million range, I doubt the Yankees would top it yet again. Lee could probably be a fair amount less than that, which would of course loosen the payroll even further.
Is any of this a good idea? Maybe, maybe not. I'm sure someone will point out that giving that much money to one player on a payroll the size of the Brewers' is a bad idea, but why? If they can field a 25-man roster over the next few years that isn't really cutting the corners anywhere even with that one monster contract factored in, what's the problem? Gallardo and Braun are locked in for dirt cheap, especially considering Gallardo seems to have finally developed into one of the best starters in the majors, and the team still has a decent wave of pre-arbitration players coming up. The Brewers are going to have a fair amount of money to spend either way if Fielder leaves, and personally I wouldn't mind seeing it spent on an elite talent rather than split between a couple Wolf/Davis type deals.
What do other people think?
196 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Lee/Gallardo would be sick.
I honestly think Cliff Lee is the best pitcher in the league, but I’m not all that anxious to dedicate 30% of the payroll to one guy, no matter how good. Especially at his age.
Lee/Gallardo/Heckathorn in 3 years or so would be pretty bangarang
http://www.mlbsoup.com
by tcyoung on Jun 30, 2010 7:15 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Yes, it is convievably possible, in theory, that the Brewers could sign Lee.
But should they? No. That’s waaay too much money to spend on one player.
Also, would he even sign with a small market team like Milwaukee? Most likely, no.
My goodness.
24 million/yr is too much for anyone.
My goodness.
by BrewHaHeather on Jun 29, 2010 9:52 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe its not a big deal if we're the Yankees.
But we’re not.
My goodness.
by BrewHaHeather on Jun 29, 2010 9:53 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't see why though
Is the risk of Cliff Lee failing or getting injured much worse than spending that money on two or three $8-12 million players?
The only way the size of the Brewers payroll comes into play, in my mind, is if offering somebody such a large contract constrains the Brewers’ ability to field a well-rounded full roster. At the point that I don’t think it does, why not spend the available money on the best player out there?
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
Smallest television market in baseball
The 3M+ fans the past two years are just about the maximum that can ever be expected in the best of times. I know you’ll counter with ‘if the Brewers had Cliff Lee, it would go a long way towards bringing about the best of times’, and that may be true. But Milwaukee has proven itself to be a somewhat fickle and fairweather baseball market—signs of the team going into the tank, and people stop coming out. Couple that with this years mediocrity (and the second year in a row) and I think you can look for a decline in ticket sales in 2011. Small television revenues, (likely) declining ticket sales, increasing CODB all point to a $90MM payroll being at the absolute upper limit of the spectrum for the Brewers. I think a $75MM target is more reasonable, although still on the high side. $24MM of an $85MM payroll is over 28% of the team’s entire payroll.
Giving that amount of money, and tying up that percentage of payroll in one 30 year old pitcher is simply irresponsible. At 30, its reasonable to assume his skills may begin declining. If I remember right he was injured in 2007 and had Tommy John surgery (maybe not on the TJ, but injury nonetheless). While not an indictment of his health, it should factor into this decision. Its possible that Lee would give the Brewers that extra little bit they need to be contenders in 2011…but that’s what the Randy Wolf signing was supposed to do as well.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 29, 2010 11:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Whoops, forgot to make the point
With 28% of the team’s payroll committed to one guy, should he get injured or be ineffective, it will be crushing to the team’s ability to spend in the future.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 29, 2010 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions
And what happens when Lee is making $24 Mil, and Braun is making $12 Mil, and Gallardo is making $13 Mil
That’s half of your payroll to 3 players. Not to mention, some of the younger studs like Escobar and Lucroy will be in their later years of arbitration. We’d have to make sure the rest of the rotser was making scraps.
To be honest, I wouldn’t have a huge problem with the deal, but you’d have tomake sure to plan the rest of your future team around that 2015 payroll.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
I would be ok with 50% of the payroll given to 3 all stars
by LosinCatmansLove on Jun 30, 2010 7:33 AM CDT up reply actions
Except those three amounts add up to much more than 50% of the team payroll.
Anyway, it makes it pretty tough to round out the rest of the roster (22 players) when you only have 50% of the payroll left…. particularly when you don’t have a ton of depth in the minor league system.
If you want an example of how that looks today, check out the Astros (Lee, Berkman and Oswalt have over 50% of the team payroll).
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
I'd contend that Braun/Gallardo/Lee
are better than Berkman/Oswalt/Lee
That's not the point.
The point is that if you tie up that much payroll in three guys that you don’t have much money left to fill out the rest of the roster and are left with a team like the Astros this season.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
But there *is* money left
The Astros don’t have the pre-arbitration players that the Brewers do for the next 5-6 years at least.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jul 9, 2010 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions
What pre-arby players do the Brewers have...
that will be MLB-ready over the next 5-6 years to put together a competitive team?
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
2011/2012: See original post
2013: Only significant player leaving as a free agent is Randy Wolf (assuming his option is declined). Beginning of next wave of pitching prospects (Odorizzi, Heckathorn, Rivas, Scarpetta, etc.)
2014: Only significant players becoming free agents are Gomez/Inglett/Parra
2015: Only significant players becoming free agents are McGehee and Kottaras
Most of the team will be pre-arbitration/arbitration-eligible through 2015-2016. And that’s not counting whatever Hart/Fielder/Weeks? can bring in through trades, or what we draft in the interim, or what current low-level prospects emerge as major league talents.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jul 9, 2010 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Gotcha
I’m not sure if any of those pitching prospects will turn out, but you’re right that the Brewers will still have quite a few players under control… assuming of course that the Brewers decide to keep all of them (not sure if Narveson, Villy or even Stetter will be around even next year).
One thing to also consider is that a multi-year deal for Lee will also hinder the Brewers from being able to offer long-term contracts (like Braun and Gallardo) to other guys.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
Doesn't small-market theory suggest at that point everyone should be traded to start another rebuild?
Eagerly awaiting SBN Madison.
Of course
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes, it does get kind of foggy by 2014 and 2015
Most of the cheap players over the next couple years would be free agents or reaching their third years of arbitration. I personally wouldn’t mind (potentially) losing seasons then if it meant we had Cliff Lee in 2011-2013 though. We could of course also get lucky and have a new wave of prospects ready to fill in by 2015.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
Without something like a Lee signing, I could see the payroll dropping to the $75 million range. But, like I said, $85 million isn’t unreasonable if Mark A. decides to make an effort and maintain fan revenues by 1) putting together a team that would be a pre-season contender and 2) going for the biggest free agent signing in the team’s history. The chances of that happening may be slim, but I just wanted to point out that it’s at least feasible.
And, regarding your last point, the problem is that if the money doesn’t go toward someone like Cliff Lee, it’s going to players like Randy Wolf and Doug Davis (obviously it’s not such a strict binary, but you get my drift).
I’m just not convinced by the “too high of a percentage of team payroll” argument. If Cliff Lee gets injured, the Brewers chances of contending would basically be gone, sure. But isn’t it the same situation if the team spends that money on a handful of mid-rotation guys? Assuming the Brewers somehow put together a contending team within the next couple seasons without spending more than, say, $10 million on any one player, a single injury to Braun or Gallardo would still pretty much derail the team.
Every team is going to have to deal with the risk of injuries. I think the reward of having (arguably) the best pitcher in the majors is more than enough to overcome the risk of investing $20-24 million/year in one player who could potentially get injured.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jun 29, 2010 11:31 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm curious
Is there some sort of insurance clause that would take affect if a player would be injured for X amount of time? Sort of like the Michael Redd situation with the Bucks where his contract will be mostly covered by insurance as long as he’s been out for a full season, I believe.
I was disappointed with the lack of hookers but the pancakes were delightful
No, my contention is that small market teams like the Brewers
must develop pitching talent themselves. Its much easier and more affordable to fill in positional pieces than it is to buy pitching in a small market. Not to mention the fact that if you can draft and develop your own pitching talent, you’ll always have an upper hand in trades due to the premium that is placed on pitching.
I think tying the team’s hands with that kind of contract will restrict the potential to move from large market tactics (buy pitching, draft positions) to small market tactics. Doug did it in Texas, and its what’s been built here.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 12:59 AM CDT up reply actions
How does it restrict the team’s potential to draft and develop pitching (which of course is always preferable) or whatever you consider “small market tactics”?
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jun 30, 2010 1:10 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
“I think tying the team’s hands with that kind of contract will restrict the potential to move from large market tactics (buy pitching, draft positions) to small market tactics”
I’m not trying to be snarky, I’m just interested in other people’s opinions of why this would be a bad idea if the Brewers could pay Lee and still have a (not undermined) roster filled over the next few seasons.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
Change of philosophy
From buying pitching to buying hitting. If you always do what you always did, you always get what you always got.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions
I think its a misnomer to say we aren’t trying to develop pitching. Our first round pick this year is a power pitcher with high upside, we have 3 or 4 high upside pitchers in the low minors as well, and Braddock and Axford are already on the major league roster. What we’ve always done is buy mediocre players, and they happened to be pitchers. This changes that philosophy to develop as many players as possible (mediocre to great) for cheap and fill in with elite signings.
Well, ideally
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 8, 2010 9:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Also for clarification
I don’t think Cliff Lee is the best pitcher in the majors. I also don’t think there’s any way he should get more than $20MM a season from anyone.
If we were talking Roy Halladay, I might feel differently, or Felix Hernandez, but its unlikely. I don’t think spending that huge a chunk of the team’s payroll on one player is a smart move, and it could possibly leave the team out of contention for years to come if something goes wrong.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 1:02 AM CDT up reply actions
Out of contention?
We are/have been out of contention a LONG time
"LONG time"?
The Brewers were in the playoffs three years ago.
The point he’s trying to make is that if they lock up that much payroll in one player and if said player falls apart or has injury problems, then we’re screwed for the duration of his contract.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
He is a "young" 30.
He got a late start compared to many others. I think innings pitched is a better way to look at it. He has less innings pitched than a 28 year old Dan Haren and only 20% more than a 24 year old Felix Hernandez.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jun 30, 2010 7:41 AM CDT up reply actions
Stupid Facts
Top 3 players as % of payroll
Arizona 29%
LAA 30%
Milwaukee 36%
Pittsburgh 36%
Toronto 37%
Minnesota 39%
Tampa Bay 40%
Colorado 40%
CHW 40%
Wash 42%
SF 43%
Texas 43%
KC 43%
Atlanta 44%
LAD 44%
Seattle 44%
San Diego 44%
Baltimore 46%
Cincinatti 48%
St. Louis 51%
Houston 52%
Florida 53%
Cleveland 54%
Oakland 58%
I excluded teams with a payroll above $130 million because it isn’t a fair comp. Even 3 $20 million guys for some of those teams would only be 40%.
These numbers are even skewed at bit low for the teams that we would like to use as models based on payroll size and performance (Minn, TB, STL, SF), as these teams all see significant star player raises next year and bring their top 3 % totals to ~48-55%.
Without Prince next year the current top 3 would account for 26% of an $85 million payroll. Even if Prince or someone else makes $18 million, that is still only 37%. If the Brewers would add Cliff Lee and give him $20 million each year then the highest top 3 % would happen in 2014, when it would amount to 45%, still below the best small market teams mentioned above.
Lets stop pretending like we know what we are talking about by using arbitrary cut off points and numbers.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jun 30, 2010 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
You're making some big assumptions...
1. The Brewers payroll will be the same as this season.
2. Lee will sign for $20M/yr for at least four years with the Brewers.
BTW – If we all stopped “retending like we know what we are talking about by using arbitrary cut off points and numbers”, then this site would get awfully quiet.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
I don't know why you are getting snippy
1) Our payroll is at $90 million right now. Mark A. says it will be roughly the same in the near term, so I think $85 will be a pretty safe bet. Long term, I don’t think it is sensationalist to think the payroll will at least be the same as it is now in 5 years considering it has quadrupled in the last 5.
2) I didn’t specify a 4 year $80 million deal. I just estimated that Cliff Lee will probably fetch about $20 million and then used the figures from Cots to show the highest top 3% we could reach with those numbers. 2014 happened to be it (even though 2015 will be higher because we still have YoGa and Braun, but I didn’t have those numbers handy).
BTW – this 50% cut off point is completely different than most of the forward looking statements on this site, mainly because it doesn’t make any sense but is somehow accepted as relevant. We can sit here all day and say “If the Brewers win 88 games they should make the playoffs” or “I don’t think Fielder will sign for less than $100 million” and thats fine. These forward looking statements are at least backed by what see from what we know from being MLB/Brewer fans. On the other hand, 50% of a teams payroll being some sort of cutoff point is arbitrary and useless. Why 50%? Why not 45, or 55, or 51 or 30? This is from the same minds who decided 100 pitches is enough, not 95 or 130.
All I wanted to do was show that 50% of the payroll is not a good benchmark and we shouldn’t get hung up on it. Judging by the facts and the results of STL, SF, Minn, and TB, I think I have done that.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jun 30, 2010 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
Me either
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Pointing out two assumptions is being "snippy"?
If attendance continues to drop, payroll could easily fall to $75M in a few years.
I don’t think anyone is saying that 50% is a hard and fast number. I think the point is that if the Brewers tie up that much salary into three players, they will have a difficult time fill out the rest of the roster to quality players… particularly with the lack of depth in the minor league system.
Looking at your list above, five teams have allocated > 50% of their team payroll to three guys (only one of which has a winning record). This doesn’t include SF, MN and TB, so I’m not sure how they back up your argument.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
I know its long, but come on.
If you are going to rebut, at least read the whole thing.
“These numbers are even skewed at bit low for the teams that we would like to use as models based on payroll size and performance (Minn, TB, STL, SF), as these teams all see significant star player raises next year and bring their top 3 % totals to ~48-55%.”
My point is exactly the opposite of what you just said. Small market teams have to pay their big guys the big bucks and then fill in from there. There is a track record of showing that it works. We should do it.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jul 1, 2010 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions
You're using future payroll obligations along with current success to try to prove your point
I’m not arguing that small market teams have to over pay to some extent to attract FAs, but allocating so much money to one player limits the team’s ability to not only fill out the rest of the roster, but also to handle contingencies (picking up other FAs later in the season).
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
Thats a good point
The only reason I did so was because Cots doesn’t have too much information on past payrolls, but that would be interesting. I think it is safe to say that all of those teams will be good next year, and I was using 2011 payroll. I’m sort of under the assumption that the life cycle is all the same for these small markets. 1) Find lightning in a bottle by finding a Mauer, Pujols, Longoria and enjoy cheap labor. 2) Extend them for the big bucks (although Longoria doesn’t make much) and add talent around as needed. I think the Brewers are at the end of stage one and tip toeing around and debating whether or not they want to jump headfirst in to stage 2.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jul 1, 2010 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions
If you wanted to spend time looking at old payrolls
You could muck around here.
Eagerly awaiting SBN Madison.
how do I post a picture as a response?
by LosinCatmansLove on Jul 1, 2010 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions
If the pictures is on the internet, you can use the Image link feature. Otherwise, I don’t think you can upload any pics.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
If it's your own pic
Just upload it to an image hosting site like imagehost.org and hot link it.
TW-S's on BCB since 5/9/10: 102
Acceptable: 2
Not sure how safe it is to say that they will all be good next year.
Let’s take the Twins for example.
They already have over $72M allocated to next year’s payroll, which covers 11 guys. They have 3 arbitration-eligible guys who are already making over $1.5M.
They’re also going to have some big holes to fill… 2B as well as 4 pitchers (starter, middle reliever, setup and closer) who could be FAs.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
My original point was that the Brewers could still field a non-compromised roster while still having Lee’s contract on the books. To me, it’s clearly possible over the next few years, and by 2014/2015 the team has a new wave of pre-arbitration prospects coming up (e.g. Odorizzi/Heckathorn/Scarpetta/etc.)
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jul 1, 2010 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I can't access your 2012 doc
I’m curious what you have for 2B and RF since both Weeks and Hart will be FA-eligible.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
I put Lawrie in one of the two (since he could end up at either 2B or RF at this point) and allocated $7 million to fill the other spot.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jul 1, 2010 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, either him or Gomez starting in CF and the other one on the bench. Though conceivably it could be a Braun-Gomez-Cain outfield (there’s a lot of flexibility, which is one of the reasons I think taking on a Lee contract would be feasible)
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jul 8, 2010 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Would very much like to remind you that Lee spent the bulk of his career in Cleveland
by Donald Driver on Jul 3, 2010 3:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Not really relevant...
He broke into MLB with the Indians and signed a 4-year deal with them that bought out his arbitration years. The Indians traded him before he became a free agent because they knew that they wouldn’t be able to resign him.
It’s very possible that he’d be open to playing for a small-market team, but I don’t think the fact that he previously played in Cleveland is really relevant at this point.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
Cliff Lee isn't going to the Yankees
He’s going to the Twins, from all reports to this point in time.
Detroit Free Press
NBC Sports – Hardball Talk
SB Nation
etc…
On topic, the Brewers don’t have the pieces necessary to land Lee. The Twins, by all reports, do.
"The Milwaukee Brewers' line score is starting to resemble an international phone number" - Pittsburgh Pirates Radio during 20-0 shutout - 4-22-10
About the same as signing CC
OK – less than signing CC. And like others have said, I don’t want 30% of my payroll on a 32 year old.
by Saberilliterate on Jun 30, 2010 5:21 AM CDT reply actions
Unless it's Barry Bonds during his steroid years I don't think any player is worth 30% of any team's payroll
captainbok: What do you like the most about milwaukee
Jeff Suppan: Captain Bok, that is a great question. Does "Bok" mean Book of Knowledge? My favorite thing about Milwaukee are the Brewers.
Generally speaking, I'd like us to spend the big bucks on hitters
as they are much less of an injury risk.
All is vanity.
That works if you can develop the pitchers within the organization
Otherwise, you have to pay to get quality pitching in FA.
If you do neither, then you end up with the 2009 Brewers.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
I would disagree
Considering Prince, Braun, Hart, Weeks, Hardy were all developed within the organisation. I think the team spent more time drafting and developing position players in the Doug Melvin/Jack Zekdkdufjrkdeijcimcik era than they did pitchers (see also, Texas Rangers 1994-2001). That’s just a mistake in the smallest market.
I would say that you end up with something more along the lines of the Houston Astros if you can do neither.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions
I think you misunderstand what I was saying
My post was strictly in regards to pitching. If you can develop quality pitchers within the organization, then you don’t need to pay for it in FA (and vice-versa).
If you don’t develop pitchers in the organization and you don’t pay to get quality pitching in FA, then you end up with the 2009 Brewers.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
Yep I did misunderstand
I can think of Ben Sheets, Yovani Gallardo, Mitch Stetter, Manny Parra in recent memory as pitching examples. Sheets was great…but his conditioning program need a lot of work. Gallardo could be great, time will tell. Stetter has been a very good LOOGY, but seems to have fallen from grace, and Parra can’t seem to ever live up to his potential.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 1, 2010 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Stetter
had been a very good LOOGY. He wasn’t very good in his few outings this season before his second demotion.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
Yep
looks like a steadily declining effectiveness in his slider.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 1, 2010 10:54 PM CDT up reply actions
Stetter had an armslot change?
When did that happen? I know they changed Dillard’s, but I had heard nothing of Stetter.
Plus if you look back, Stetter’s been steadily declining since his very good 11+ K/9 year in 2008.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 2, 2010 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions
I think Stetter mentioned something about it after his first demotion this year
He said something like he used the time down in Nashville to work on changing his armslot. I think TH was the one who reported it.
Here’s the link.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
Huh, that seems stupid
Was that a Rick Peterson thing? Full disclosure: I only skimmed the first couple of paragraphs.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 2, 2010 9:44 PM CDT up reply actions
Using 2 arm slots, sure was.
Still not sure what Peterson was brought in to do. Even when he came in it sounded like we were already doing much of what he wanted to implement in the minors.
Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.
Let me complete my thought...
In the article, Stetter indicated that he was using two arm slots already last season, so it wasn’t Peterson’s idea.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
Lee/Trading for Pitching at the deadline
What often gets overlooked in these discussions is enviroment.
Enviroment is what has made the Wolf signing awful!
You see, pitching in Seattle (C Lee) or pitching in LA (R Wolf) is a hell of a lot different than pitching in Milwaukee!
A Beltre signs along with R Sexson to the Mariners figuring to boost their power numbers right? The exact opposite! Beltre looks like he is playing t ball……Sexson gets his confidence knocked around soooooo baad he was never right again?!?!?!?
Beltre goes to Boston, and boooooom shock a lock – hes hitting hrs and driving in runs again.
So, not only with R Wolf, or C Lee…..Look at Holiday with the Phillies? At the start he was getting projected to win 25-30 games……ridinkolous numbers no?!?!? That has been quickly dispatched, sure for other reasons, but Philly is a bandbox much like, Miller Park.
The other aspect of C Lee, at 30 is the every other season syndrome. They all haave experienced it (Fausta Carmona CC Lee) They are in the mix, or win a Cy Young and the next year fall off the map!
Maybe its just my skeptiscism but, fa pitching either by signing or trade has NEVER worked out for us. Finally, I agree with those saying that committing that much money not only to C Lee but, anyone is a train heading for a wreck!
I hear a lot about Miller Park being a "bandbox"
but I thought it was basically average.
by dickie_thon on Jun 30, 2010 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions
Cliff Lee has given up 4 walks this year..
…I don’t think that has anything to do with the park he plays in. And he has been great in 2008, 2009, and 2010. He is an elite pitcher.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jun 30, 2010 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions
No
But if you throw a lot of strikes and have a good defense behind you and a big park, the effects of that arent so bad.
Since turning the corner in 08 he has had the luxury of playing in front of some very good defenses. He pitches to contact and throws strikes. Hitters hit his pitches.
A guy like that in recent Brewer past would be Jeff Suppan. Of course Lee is a much better pitcher than that, but if he starts to lose some command or a few mph off of his fastball, and its a pretty quick downhill slide.
I dont care that you said "of course Lee is much better"
The fact that you used Jeff Suppan in the same point as Cliff Lee means that what little credibilty you have is gone. Completely, hopelessly, and forever gone. Why cant you just say “Holy shit, Cliff Lee is good.” He won the Cy Young. Teams are going to pay him $20+ million a year to put on their cap and jersey. He. is. good. You are not smarter than everyone else.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jun 30, 2010 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
I would absolutely not go that far
I think BTC has credibility. I won’t always agree with his opinions, but I’m usually interested in what he has to say.
That said, I disagree with using Suppan as a comp for Halladay.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Backtocali’s players evaluations>yours.
Whenever I scan through a thread here, I always slow down when I see Butters, because I know Backtocali will have something interesting to say. Even if I sometimes agree.
Sorry if that was rude.
by KittenMittons on Jun 30, 2010 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions
That's fine.
Everybody is entitled to their opinion. Mine just happens to be that Cliff Lee won’t turn into Jeff Suppan. Call me crazy.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jun 30, 2010 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Cliff Lee is the best left-handed pitcher in the majors, while Jeff Suppan is the worst right-handed pitcher in the majors. They have some kind of weird ying/yang connection, naturally.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jun 30, 2010 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I really wish there was another Brewers blog with this level of activity.
I’m not sure BTC’s player evaluations are even his, based on his history. If you think he’s interesting, that’s your business. But you’re kidding yourself if you think he’s 1) not cribbing from others; and 2) not suffering from emotional biases that make him flat out wrong pretty frequently.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jun 30, 2010 6:49 PM CDT up reply actions 6 recs
I know you get a ton of mileage
Out of disliking and trying to argue with me, its pandering at worst and I dont mind it, everyone has their own opinions.
But its pretty unfair to accuse me of “cribbing” or calling me flat out wrong without proof.
Truth of the matter is that when it comes to those valuations I do my homework and use multiple sources to get at them, so to belittle them by saying that it “isnt mine” or “cribbing” is your perogattive, but its pretty inflammatory.
I know it kills you that I stand by my opinions and that they are in stark contrast to yours, but you seem to go to great lengths to illustrate that belief, and to me it seems pretty petty that you would drag personalities into things, almost like baiting me.
Holy shit
Why is he even on a Brewers blog? I barely have enough time to creep one blog, let alone several contradictory ones.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jul 1, 2010 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions
A few more
Shoot
There isnt even any bias there. Those are factual based arguments made. Even Kyle thought the Braun vs Tulo one was, as well as the moderators of btb, so much so that they put it on their front page.
You've got to be kidding.
All of those posts are long winded attempts to prove your predetermined point of view with cherry picked stats and/or anecdotal observation.
Not only that
But one of ESPN’s writers cited the Jurrjens/Fielder piece.
If you dont like the piece or disagree with it post a rebuttal but dont come back a year later and say that it was biased to tack onto some rant by another poster.
Answer the question posed by the article: Is an expensive player with 1.5 years of production worth as much as a middle of the rotation player with average production but 4 years left before FA? I dont see the point of blasting me here for my POV without backing up your own POV with ammunition.
I don’t think most have a problem with those articles – its the fan posts on other teams blogs like the Braun one on the other BCB that make it hard to take your “objective realism” seriously.
Get a ife broseph
by Supertramp on Jul 1, 2010 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
My goal is not to prove that my POV is correct.
Sometimes when I check the stats I’m proven wrong. Does that ever happen to you?
" Is an expensive player with 1.5 years of production worth as much as a middle of the rotation player with average production but 4 years left before FA?"
It depends on the situation of the record, but YES, the expensive player with 1.5 years of production is WORTH MORE.
One of the moderators thought so much of it...
… he left and became a moderator for a different Brewers web site!
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions
I think it's specious to claim that BK left here simply because of btc
maybe the pride of being passed over by Jeff…or {gasp} a combination of factors, including other portions of the kyle-kow dynamic.
The timing is wrong anway, come to think of it.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions
You know what?
My poorly made point really was (or was intended to be) that if BTC is going to suggest that the moderators thought so much of his work they put him on the front page, then it’s fair to point out that one of the mods didn’t see the value in his contributions at all. Maybe more than one of them didn’t (and don’t) I don’t know. But I think B-kow made his feelings pretty clear before he left, and I’m not going to sit here and say nothing when he tries to hide behind the mods supposed approval when there’s reason to believe that approval isn’t quite universal.
But I’ll cede your point. You’re likely in a better position to know better than I do.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 7:01 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
no, I am not in any better position
I just post here a few* times a day
I have no idea of the inner workings
*few = roughly 200.
The "mods" comment
Wasnt related to BCB, but to BTB, where they posted the Tulowitzki-Braun article on their front page.
Is there bias here?
Or emotional arguments that have little or nothing to do with fact? Emotional arguments that reflect your frustration with your city of residence and reveal that you vent your frustration over your life circumstances in your attacks on the Brewers and the way they do business?
“He is quickly trying to embody the city he plays for…Big chip on its shoulder for being undervalued and underappreciated. He is a top notch player in a 2nd class city, maybe he feels like he needs to put the Brewers and the city of Milwaukee on the map. Maybe he feels that the more he complains and cries (like an 8 year old) the more respect/attention he will get.”
Or how about here?
“The city of Milwaukee likes to pride itself on being “blue collar”. It is quite odd that a place like that would fall in love with a player like Braun. (They had a player a heck of a lot like him about 20 years ago in Gary Sheffield, and we all know how that relationship turned out.)
The fact of the matter is that if he continues his antics, fans of the game, whether they be Brewer fans or not, will start to lose respect for him, pitchers will continue to throw at him, and that within 30 years, the Brewers will for most of their lifetime will be a losing franchise, and the city of Milwaukee will be swallowed up by Chicago within 30 years."
Or maybe here:
“Enjoy him while he lasts Brewer fans. He’s no Robin Yount, he’s no Paul Molitor, and when he’s gone the Brewers and the city (not that having Braun helps this at al.) will go back to being the biggest dump in the NL Central.
Oh yeah, and Ryan, I’ll bring some kleenex for you the next time you feel like you’re being disrespected, after brushing the dirt off of your uniform as teh result of a high and inside fastball. Get used to it, you’re going to need a boatload of Kleenex this year for all the crying you will do.”
Would you like to me find the thread where you attempted to refute those that disagreed with by calling them “fans”, like that’s an insult, while noting that you come from a “scouting background”? And that when pressed on that you indicated that you had been as “associate scout” for years, which turns out to be a volunteer, unpaid, and often unsolicited position occupied by people trying (and frequently failing) to break into the business?
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions 8 recs
Circa 2040:
I’m picturing a retirement-age backtocali standing on the outskirts of Milwaukee day and night, month after month, waiting for the Chicago sprawl to finally arrive. “Victory at last!”
by Zeyes on Jul 1, 2010 7:25 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Glad to see you are both still fans
Thanks for stopping by…
But neither one of those blog posts addresses what I was responding to TSSC about. It addresses the bias I might have, but nothing about whether or not I do my own work.
I'll let TSSC speak for himself
But you often set yourself up as a “professional scout” or whatever, then use scouting reports cribbed from BA, BP, Sickels, etc without ever citing or refering to where you got the information.
I had confusion when we were talking about Bryce Harper and had to ask you to cite because it was hard to tell if you had actually seen him or were using second hand information from other people (it was the latter).
Get a ife broseph
I have and have had in the past, access that fans dont have to certain things
In this game.
I have never set myself up in the manner you describe other than to say that I have in the past worked in that capacity.
And if I were to say something along the lines of “I wouldnt pick Bryce Harper in a million years because he has makeup issues that concern me”, thats not really a citing issue. Nor is it to say that I have read reports saying that he did have attitude or makeup issues. I’ll remember to keep my MLA handy when I am posting as not to offend your red pen.
I get that some people dont agree with what I have to say. But when you start tossing around words that arent true, theres not much I can do about it, but it pretty much goes against what this blog is here for, which is intelligent conversation about the Milwaukee Brewers.
I dont want to have an intelligent conversation about the Brewers
I just want to talk about how good they are and how much everyone else sucks.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jul 1, 2010 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions
This is still the most succinct response to your personal judgment of what constitutes intelligent conversation
“Heated debates and diametrically opposed opinions were virtually unknown around here before you decided to grace us with your presence and your valuable insights.” (link)
Eagerly awaiting SBN Madison.
by TheJay on Jul 1, 2010 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
I'm retiring from conversing with BTC
That post sums it up so perfectly there’s no need to say anything else.
if (when) this gets a green
That will be a green of a repost of a green. That is some serious staying power.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jul 1, 2010 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Thanks for linking to that post, instead of the one from around the same time...
in which I said I wasn’t expecting backtocali to last long on this blog.
by Zeyes on Jul 1, 2010 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I actually don't remember any parts other than that ill-fated prediction.
And I can’t decide if that’s good or bad…
And now you're just lying.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 6:11 PM CDT up reply actions
It's also true.
You’ve been caught passing the observations of subscriber periodicals as your own, and you’ve been forced to remove that writing from this very site. You’ve been repeatedly caught inflating your own professional history here as well. I’m not pandering. I’m reminding everyone of who you are.
I’m sorry if that makes you uncomfortable. No, wait, I’m not. You should be uncomfortable.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 6:10 PM CDT up reply actions 6 recs
Ted, if you were a woman, I'd marry you
Or more realistically, hire you as my lawyer
I was disappointed with the lack of hookers but the pancakes were delightful
You dont know me
Or what jobs I have held in this game, just as much as I dont know you.
Again, Mr. Lawyer, I’m glad that you don’t feel the same ethics you might use in your work dont apply here. You do not know me or who I am, nor do you know who I have worked for in the past in baseball, so for you to say “inflating your own professional history here….I’m reminding everyone of who you are” is very irresponsible.
All I know is what you've said here. And that's all I've recounted above.
And my ethics are fine, thanks. At least I’m criticizing you based on things you’ve actually said and done, instead of resorting to infantile generalizations like “Mr. Lawyer”, or “fan”, which you seem to think are insults.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 2, 2010 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
in case you hadn't noticed in life
Most people don’t like lawyers, so it could very well be an insult:P
Dammit.
That explains a lot. No wonder the neighbor dog always craps in my yard.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 3, 2010 8:09 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Furthermore...
The only “very good” defensive team he was on was Philly last year (79 IP total). Cleveland was very average, and this year Seattle is tied for 20th in fielding percentage.
The only pitcher’s park he ever pitched in was Seattle this year. That does nothing to explain the very average parks he pitched in during all of 2008 and 2009.
Your analysis seems incorrect.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jun 30, 2010 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions
I think I've developed ADHD
because I couldn’t concentrate enough to divine the meaning there
by PagsBrewCrew on Jun 30, 2010 7:54 PM CDT up reply actions
I dont think its such a great idea
Not only is he already 32 years old, but he has some of the things going for him right now, that Randy Wolf did last year before coming to a hitter friendly Miller Park. He has a pretty high Fly Ball Rate, hes been a bit lucky as far as BABIP goes, and gets a bit of line drives hit off of him. (i.e. hitters make a lot of contact off of him).
He gets a ton of defensive support right now from the Mariners and Safeco Field as well.
Id say a fair offer for him would be 5 years/$75 million, and as many have said already, thats a lot to lock up in one player, and why would he come here if the Yankees or some large market team may offer more years and more money?
I realize that the 08 playoff appearance has made the ownership and fans hungry for more, but the thing that got the Brewers to that spot (drafting well and player development) will be the thing that gets them there again, not big free agent spending using money that is better used, for a long term gain, by putting it back into the organization. The team should go all trailer park lottery winner with the way it spends its money.
I thought I was the only one to make those typos!
I believe you meant to say that the team should NOT go all trailer park lottery winner.
TWSS
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Id like to meet her
If I werent married.
I realized once I hit enter that that didnt sound very good.
ugh.
The things that got the Brewers to the 08 playoffs were drafting well and player development?
No. That is what got them to a 49-40 record on July 7th, 2008. What got them to the playoffs was the 130 IP, 7 CG, 3 SHO, 128 Ks, 1.65 ERA of Carsten Charles Sabathia. It is ironic that you say we should not try and sign a big FA pitcher like Lee because that is not what got us to the playoffs, when it is indeed exactly what got us to the playoffs. The drafting well and developing of players was not good enough that year, last year, or this year.
by LosinCatmansLove on Jun 30, 2010 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Rebuilds take time
Personally, I think that Jack Z had one strength in his drafts and that was power hitters. He didnt pay a lot of attention to pitching or defense. The new SD seems to put more emphasis on pitching. The pitching on this team is pretty bad, its probably going to take 5 to 6 years for this philsophy to prove right (or wrong) of the new SD.
And although i have been someone against the Sabathia trade, it happened because of the prospects that were involved in it, so drafting and player development played a major role in the 08 playoff appearance.
They were one player away that year and with a little help from the Mets made the playoffs thanks to Matt LaPorta and Michael Brantley. Add to it that they were still left with a pretty nice Farm System afterward and it worked out well for them.
Well, first of all, I refuse to believe that we are in a “rebuild” mode with Braun/Gallardo locked into team-friendly contracts for the next five years and the majority of our young core already in the majors.
Secondly, the team will still depend on the internally developed players. What gives us the option to even consider signing Lee given our relatively small payroll is the fact that there is a large core of pre-arbitration starters. Prospects form the backbone of any successful team without a $200 million payroll, very true, but that doesn’t mean we are incapable of signing free agents.
In fact, this free money is probably going to go toward free agents either way. Do you really want Wolf/Davis Part II instead of Lee?
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jun 30, 2010 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
I am not on board for Wolf/Davis Part II
But I would be ok with a couple of 70 or 75 win seasons if it meant putting the money that was slated for a big time FA that doesnt get you over the hump, and was instead reinvested back into the scouting and player development staff.
If done correctly, that money can turn into 4 or 5 straight years of success versus the couple you might get with a short term, FA signing.
I think Wolf is a great pitcher, but he’s kind of a like a football quarterback that only plays well in a certain system. He pitches to contact, throws a lot of strikes, and doesnt really have overpowering stuff. He needs a good defense behind him foremost, and a big park doesnt hurt.
I agree completely
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jun 30, 2010 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
$10-20 million/season invested into scouting and player development?
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jun 30, 2010 4:06 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Brewers could get some quality buses and charter planes with that kind of money
Get a ife broseph
by Supertramp on Jun 30, 2010 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Not ALL of the money saved on FA signings
But think of what you could do if they built an asian academy, or hired more scouts, or hired better coaches, etc? And then if all of the money isnt spent, ticket prices only raise every 4 or 5 years instead of every year. Its got to start from the bottom up.
Also
money saved on FA pitchers could be used to sign the guys who used to be “signability” risks in the past in the Draft, could be used on high profile latin players for the July 2 signing date, etc.
Do you have numbers in front of you which suggest that they have an insufficient number of scouts?
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jun 30, 2010 6:54 PM CDT up reply actions
yes, the number in the form of a lack of paycheck from the Milwaukee brewers org
clearly, if they had him, all would be well
by PagsBrewCrew on Jun 30, 2010 8:00 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
Yes, because they are saving that money for me!
Do scouts have a Scott Boras-like agent?
by Bush League All Star on Jul 1, 2010 12:46 AM CDT up reply actions
I guess I don't know why you think investing in scouting and development is a bad idea.
The team has shown it is not very good at identifying and developing pitching, with one or two exceptions.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Its not a bad idea
But it seems like that phrase gets thrown around a lot without details.
The Brewers have spent the 11th most in the draft the past 5 years (this year not included), so they aren’t cheap in that regard. They recently spent a lot of money to re-open the Dominican camp and have their own team in the DSL.
With very few Asian players, I don’t see the value in opening an academy where there isn’t talent.
Is it just paying for better coaches or paying big money for scouts? Are there really big name scouts they can woo with big money? Perhaps that happens and works out for teams, but I haven’t read anything about that.
If you want to revamp the scouting department/system/coaches — that is one issue, but I don’t think that has been held up because they Brewers have signed FAs.
Get a ife broseph
by Supertramp on Jun 30, 2010 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I wouldn't say that paying over slot in the draft is 'investing in scouting and development'
I don’t have the details. But I do know that it seems as if the team is not good and drafting and developing pitching. There has to be a way to invest in better scouts or systems to get there, one would think.
Additionally, I don’t think that maxing out spending every year is really a great idea…as BTC points out, eventually the cost is going to get pushed through to the fans.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions
I don’t have the details. But I do know that it seems as if the team is not good and drafting and developing pitching.
This seems more like a personal issue and would be Melvin’s or Seid’s responsibility — I don’t see this all that connected to the MLB payroll since they aren’t shy about paying for talent in the draft.
Additionally, I don’t think that maxing out spending every year is really a great idea…as BTC points out, eventually the cost is going to get pushed through to the fans.
Aren’t ticket prices a supply and demand issue? Team good = pay more. Team bad = pay less. How does payroll fit into this?
Get a ife broseph
This seems more like a personal issue and would be Melvin’s or Seid’s responsibility — I don’t see this all that connected to the MLB payroll since they aren’t shy about paying for talent in the draft.
So, If the payroll is maxed out every year, they’re going to be able to spend more on scouting and development? I guess I don’t see how that follows.
Aren’t ticket prices a supply and demand issue? Team good = pay more. Team bad = pay less. How does payroll fit into this?
Partially, but I think you know it isn’t that simple. If I’m a business owner, and my CODB goes up, I decide whether I want to absorb that or pass it on to my consumers. If it costs me $5 to put a burger on the table for a customer, but it COULD cost me $3, would I prefer to charge $7 for the $5 burger or $7 for the $3 burger?
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 5:31 PM CDT up reply actions
Most of the complaints seem to be that the scouts/leadership in place aren’t doing their job in finding players and developing them. This is a personal decision not a money decision. A maxed out payroll isn’t what preventing change — it is the status-quo in leadership that is preventing change (good or bad).
Re: ticket prices – I realize it isn’t that simple, just as you realize that more payroll = higher prices isn’t a simple formula either.
Get a ife broseph
Fair enough
Its hard to make sweeping generalizations without seeing some kind of P&L statement, cash flow, or balance sheet, and there isn’t a pro sports team that will release any of that data. Its a more difficult pill to swallow if it boils down to the management not doing their jobs to the fullest extent…but I guess the Royals know more about that than we do.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 11:30 PM CDT up reply actions
But if you spend the money anyway (on the nebulous ideas suggested here like scouting and player development)...
… then saving money on the payroll isn’t going to make that hamburger cost any less. If you want to spend the money differently, I can see the argument (assuming that a lack of money is actually the problem, which I seriously doubt), but suggesting that will save the fans cash and put more butts in the seats doesn’t seem likely to be the result of that strategy in my opinion.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jun 30, 2010 6:57 PM CDT up reply actions
True enough
It might make the perceived value of said burger go up in the consumers’ eyes. Not that the suggested signing of Cliff Lee wouldn’t, but I’m more interested in seeing a more continued pattern of success. My opinion is more that focusing on building from within to address your weaknesses rather than buying them on the open market is more conducive to that idea.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 11:32 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't think anyone disagrees with the notion that developing players from within is generally preferable to signing free agents.
I certainly haven’t seen anyone suggest otherwise in this thread. But I think you’re presenting a bit of a false choice. I doubt the Brewers have any chance of signing Lee in particular anyway, but I haven’t seen anything mentioned here (other than the idea of an academy based somewhere in Asia and “better coaches”, which I’m pretty sure isn’t a proper name) that actually suggests spending money on something the Brewers don’t already have.
Nor have I seen anything that indicates that a lack of funding in their scouting department is the reason they haven’t developed their own pitching. So I’ll ask again; do the Brewers spend less on scouting and player development than other teams? And if so, how do they compare to teams of similar revenue streams? If they spend markedly less than the half dozen economic power houses in the MLB, I’d hardly be surprised, but if they’re spending less than teams with whom they have economic but not on the field parity, then you’re making a legitimate criticism.
Unless I see the numbers indicating otherwise, I just don’t believe that money is the problem instead of the ability of the people making the decisions on draft day.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 8:34 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Like I said above
I haven’t seen the particulars, and I highly doubt anyone has, so who can really say what they’re spending money on? Also above, I said its an easier pill to swallow if the team were simply skimping on payroll or number of scouts, rather than the scouts being bad at their jobs and/or the management not doing its job to the fullest.
Due to the nature of sports franchises, any numbers aside from payroll will never be available for public consumption. While I understand your point, and do not disagree with it, I tend to feel that this:
Unless I see the numbers indicating otherwise, I just don’t believe that money is the problem instead of the ability of the people making the decisions on draft day.
becomes something of a default argument and/or cop-out, as there isn’t a soul present who could show you those numbers.
I think spending $24MM on Cliff Lee would be a waste considering I don’t think he by himself would push this team over into the playoffs again.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 1, 2010 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions
It's no more of a default or cop out than assuming they aren't spending enough in those areas without the numbers to show your right.
And that’s the basis of a lot of the argument against spending money on payroll in this thread.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
I wouldn't disagree with that, but it begs the question
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 1, 2010 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions
But I think you should also note
That I’ve never said “this team doesn’t spend enough on scouting and development”. I HAVE said that one might assume that there is a better system or scouts out there than what are currently employed by the team, particularly in the pitching department.
Then again, maybe they’ve got top notch scouts and are just getting stroked by the bad luck lady.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 1, 2010 4:32 PM CDT up reply actions
I think there has been a certain amount of bad luck...
… on the pitching prospect front, but I also think they don’t do a great job of drafting pitching talent. Is it possible that they’re scouting staff, which has been so adept at identifying major league quality bats, is equally inept at indentifying and projecting major league arms? It’s possible, I guess, but my belief is that it has far more to do with the preferences and identity of the persons making the ultimate decision on draft day than it does the amount of money they spend in that department.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 5:32 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
And actually, we'll probably find out if that's true here in the next couple of years.
Seid is showing different instincts than his predecessor, while relying on the reports of many of the same people Jack Z relied upon. If the bulk of his pitching draftees wash out (like Arnett appears to be doing so far), then the criticism of the scouting department looks a lot more valid. If not, then I think it’s fair to conclude that Jack Z just didn’t do a very good job of turning the scouting reports he had into the most efficient use of his picks spent on pitchers.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 5:39 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree the next
2 years will tell us quite a bit. That is why I am in favor of giving Melvin 2 more years. There has been a definite shift in drafting philosophy over the last few years. I think we are in the 2nd stage of rebuilding right now and we finished a little higher than expected in 2008. I think the focus was to draft guys that were more sure things(hitters in other words) to get the franchise looking better and raise the sell price while bringing in more fans. Obviously drafting pitchers is what we need to do to stay competitive long term but when Melvin took over we really had little in the way of players or prospects.
Our 2004 draft would make our SP look great if Rodgers had not been injured and the Rays hadn’t drafted Wade Davis one pick ahead of us.(Melvin said they intended to pick him with their pick one later)
Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.
One other aspect that's unfortunately impossible to quantify:
Maybe they’ve been trading away the wrong pitching prospects? There might be an alternate universe in which Steve Garrison has stayed healthy and turned into our 2010 #4 starter instead of missing most of 2009 with a shoulder injury for the Padres organization.
It just isn’t as easy as saying “the scouting department isn’t doing its job” or “the minor league coaches aren’t good enough”.
You did say "I agree completely" in response to backtocali's post above...
… which included the argument:
" I would be ok with a couple of 70 or 75 win seasons if it meant putting the money that was slated for a big time FA that doesnt get you over the hump, and was instead reinvested back into the scouting and player development staff.
If done correctly, that money can turn into 4 or 5 straight years of success versus the couple you might get with a short term, FA signing."
So no, you didn’t say it, but I since you said you agreed with BTC I thought you, you know, agreed. I don’t really quibble with those that argue signing Lee for the kind of money it will take is a bad idea, I just think the nebulous reinvestment argument is pretty feeble.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 5:36 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Fucking semantics
I know you hate him, but I can’t agree with his sentiment?
You’re not arguing with him here, its me.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 1, 2010 7:22 PM CDT up reply actions
And since you mention it
Yes, I completely agree:
I would be ok with a couple of 70 or 75 win seasons.
I would be ok putting more money into scouting and development.
I think if it was done correctly, it COULD breed a run of success.
If you want to now turn it into “you’re implying that you said that you fully agreed with him, and he said, or implied, that 100% of the $24MM SRB said should go to Lee should instead be put into the farm system, and so that’s what you think”, then I think we’re going to have to be at an impasse. I’m fairly certain I clarified MY stance on this whole thing over the past how many posts.
If it comes down to “well, you said you agreed 100%!!”, then I’ll be sure to watch using percentages in the future.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 1, 2010 7:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Dude....
… when you pointed out that you never said the 24 mil should be put into scouting, I scrolled up to look at what made me think that you had said that. And I discovered that you were right, you didn’t say it, but that (fortunately for me) I at least had a reasonable reason for misunderstanding him.
That’s all I meant.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 7:42 PM CDT up reply actions
And by "him" I meant "you"...
… as in I’m conceding the point that I originally misunderstood your position.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 7:43 PM CDT up reply actions
I was wondering
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 1, 2010 8:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Typos are my specialty.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Ease up.
It’s not semantics. It’s what I thought and it was reasonable to think as much. The more we talked, the more it became clear you were making a different argument. No need for an f-bomb. I wasn’t actually trying to be a smart ass. Sorry it came off that way.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Jul 1, 2010 7:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Its just that it started to feel like
if anyone agreed in any small part with anything that BTC said, there was a group of about 5 people who all started in on that person.
Apologies for the frustration, it just began to feel as if hairs were being split and split and split and split.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jul 1, 2010 8:11 PM CDT up reply actions
You are using false logic
You can’t use a half season rental as a reason to say the Brewers should invest a large chunk of the payroll in one guy for the long term. Nothing you stated changes the risk that is taken in giving that much payroll to one guy.
Well said
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions
New angle on this argument
Does the fact that Soup’s contract is gone (roughly 12mil) and that they now have an inexpensive closer (ie not 8-10 mil a year) going forward change how much money can be tied up in one player?
No, its been adressed in the spreadsheets SRB did
He’s assuming $24MM per anum to Lee on an $85MM payroll = $61MM (thus about $29MM off the books). Its simplified, of course, as I’m not positive buyouts have been included yet.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions
Yep, buyouts are included (probably a foregone conclusion at this point that Suppan/Davis/Hoffman/Riske/Zaun will all be bought out). I also tried to estimate high (e.g. $5 million for a bench IF/OF and pretty high arbitration figures) so although it’s simplified, if anything the Brewers will probably have more flexibility than it shows.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
Yeah, the arb estimates looked a little on the high side
but I do the same thing in order to err on the side of caution.
Then again, I thought there was no way Corey Hart would win his arb.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Jun 30, 2010 4:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Thanks
I admit I didn’t look at the spreadsheets.
on sportscenter this morning
buster olny said that was speculation that the brewers give the mariners brett lawrie, cliff lee goes to a third team, and the brewers get pitching from that 3rd team.
by wisconsinsportsfan on Jul 6, 2010 8:52 AM CDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Brew Crew Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cincinnati
|
25 | 20 | .555 | 0 | Lost 1 |
|
St. Louis
|
25 | 21 | .543 | 0.5 | Lost 2 |
|
Houston
|
22 | 23 | .488 | 3 | Won 4 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
21 | 24 | .466 | 4 | Won 1 |
|
Milwaukee
|
19 | 26 | .422 | 6 | Won 2 |
|
Chicago
|
15 | 30 | .333 | 10 | Lost 10 |
(updated 5.26.2012 at 11:59 AM CDT)
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
