LouisEly

The Angels have needs for two players the Brewers are likely trying to move. The Angels used 15 different starting pitchers last year trying to replace Richards, Tropeano, and Heaney who all went down with elbow injuries. Richards is trying to rehab through it w/stem cell treatment instead of TJ, but Tropeano and Heaney both went the TJ route and will likely miss most or all of 2017. Weaver and Wilson are FAs almost guaranteed not to be back, Chacin is a FA, and the Lincecum and Olberholtzer experiments were disasters. They could use a SP on a short-term deal to hold them over until Tropeano and Heaney return in 2018. Matt Garza would make sense, and since Garza is from CA and lives there I think he would welcome being closer to his family and do well there. The Angels also had poor performance from 2B and are very RH dominant. They could see value in Gennett who is LH and fairly cheap, allowing them to spend a bit in FA if they choose and still be under the luxury tax threshold. I don't think they have the prospects to acquire Braun despite having a need in LF. I don't know about the return, it would likely be similar to the Lind deal in that it is a package of lower level guys such as Jaime Barria, Julio Garcia, Jose Suarez, Nonie Williams, etc., as the Angels have not much in the upper levels.

I've proposed going after Joyce in years past and would not be opposed at all, as good LH bats can be flipped at the deadline if Brinson et. al. are ready for a shot. It would likely mean Braun being traded and Puig not being a Brewer in 2017. Per homer's comments, I proposed Zach Walters on a minor league deal w/NRI. Walters is a switch-hitter but much stronger from the left side than right. He'll be 27 at the beginning of next season and, IMO, would make a great backup/utility guy as he can play both OF and IF.

I've hypothesized Gennett to the Angels in the TR forum before. Not only did the Angels get terrible production at 2B, they are also very RH-dominant and need some LH balance. There is another player I could easily see going to the Angels - not named Braun - but that is for a different thread as it will pull this one way off topic. Gennett's value is going to be for a team such as the Dodgers or Angels who need a decent cheap 2B and are trying to get under the luxury tax threshold.

That's why it was a crap shoot at that time. Some guys could handle it, some couldn't.

Technically is the Barrie Burger - Nueske's bacon, American cheese, and natural chunky pnut butter. A bacon peanut butter cheeseburger. If that's wrong, I don't want to be right.

Interesting topic. If you go back 15-20 years, it was a crap shoot because there was no such thing as innings/pitch limits. My friend who played in the Brewers system in the late 90's said the philosophy in the minors was that, other than very high draft picks, they put the HS pitchers in the starting rotation and the college arms in the bullpen because "the HS pitchers needed more work". Well, yes, and they got too much work too early and they burned out their arms. Gold, Neugebauer, and Jones were all legitimate pitching prospects who got burned out because they threw too many pitches too early in their pro careers. It wasn't until around 2005 that the link was discovered between workload jump and injuries. Gallardo didn't have as heavy innings as the others because he didn't walk as many. Odorizzi was brought along more slowly, and didn't develop arm trouble. Getting into the time period around 2010-2011, I recall Melvin making two comments regarding pitching: 1) realizing Miller Park was home run prone and subsequently they needed to focus on ground ball pitchers, and 2) bigger-bodied pitchers seemed to be less injury-prone. That was the impetus for drafting Jungmann and especially Bradley. It had nothing to do with "quick to the majors"/"high floor"; if it was about that, they would not have drafted Covey #1 in 2010, would not have drafted Lopez in the 2nd in 2011, and would not have drafted Coulter #1 in 2012. Jungmann and Bradley were drafted because they were bigger bodied pitchers willing to sign for close to slot value and because they didn't give up a lot of HRs in college. They loved Bradley because he was a ground ball pitcher - in 2011 at GA Tech he only gave up one HR in 400 PAs. In the end those things probably hurt more than they helped. You can only make decisions with the information you have at the time. But the Royals and others have shown that you don't need a staff ace to win a World Series. Despite having Kershaw, Grienke, and others, the Dodgers haven't won a WS recently.

It's not going to happen anytime soon because that's not how cable/satellite providers are allowed to buy channels. Content providers/studios own multiple networks and sell them as a package to the cable companies. For example, Disney owns the ESPN networks, the Disney networks, the ABC networks, etc., and sells them as a package and charge based on the number of subscribers the cable/satellite providers have. ESPN is by far the most expensive (last I saw they charge well over $5/subscriber); I'd imagine that some of the low-rated networks (We, The Hallmark Channel, etc.) may go for $0.25/subscriber. They can literally get 20-25 other channels for the same price they pay for ESPN. Some of the lower-rated networks can be fairly profitable if they have a well-defined or high value audience. Millennials are all the rage for advertisers, so a network that has low ratings but lots of Millennials (Fuse? Axis? I don't know what Millennials watch besides Game of Thrones.) will draw strong ad revenue. The home improvement/real estate based networks have a high value audience because they can stimulate big purchases (remodeling, appliances, real estate purchasing, etc.), and most of that business is done with local businesses. Same with financial channels. Food channels don't stimulate big purchases, but do stimulate many purchases and have lots of potential advertisers. Looking at what I watch, if you were able to subscribe to individual channels, once you combine ESPN/2/News, BTN, CNBC, FSN, FS1/2, TBS/TNT/TRU (for NCAA tourney), it wouldn't be much cheaper than the packages they sell.

You are not allowed to make that statement unless you have had the pnut butter burger. Speaking of AJ Bombers and the pnut butter burger, that reminded me of Summerfest. I went with a few friends this year for the first time since the early 2000's. One of the guys commented about how he couldn't believe the quality and "big names" of the bands we were seeing "for free". I held up one of the many $8.50 16oz cans of Leinies that we had been drinking and said, "we're not seeing them for free". Part of the reason that beer is expensive is to reduce excessive consumption, DUIs, and unruly fan behavior. It won't stop it, but you don't see ads for the Two Fisted Slopper between innings anymore either.

In 2012 I moved back to WI after spending 6.5 years in LA and 1.5 years in NYC. When I was looking for a place to live I met my sister and brother in law for happy hour at a bar/restaurant in the McFarland area. I ordered three 22oz beers - a Stella, a Leinies, and a Miller Lite. I gave the waitress a $20 and asked if that was enough. I was not expecting her to give me $12 change.

The revenue creation part of this is 33% more points of sale. Faster throughput = more revenue per hour for the team, less waiting in line for the fans. The question isn't whether YOU buy food/drink at the game, it's how long the concessions lines are and how many people choose not to buy because the lines are too long or because the quality of food is poor. I can almost guarantee that market research has teased this out. I don't go to a lot of games, but when I do the line at each concession stand is almost always 6-7 people deep unless it is a small beer-only stand. 33% more POS = shorter lines. And think of weekday games, people coming from work may have to choose between ballpark food (poor quality) or arriving late/parking further out because they stopped to eat somewhere along the way. With higher quality food more people may choose to go straight to the park. One of the best ideas I've seen is a walk-through beer cooler at the Iowa Cubs stadium. All 16-23 oz cans from High Life to regional and national craft. Walk through, grab something off the shelf, check out when you walk out. Low labor cost - they don't have to pour, don't have to change kegs when they are empty, just have to stock the shelves pre-game and ring you up.

Yeah, my TV watching desires are the Badgers (ESPN/2, BTN primarily), Brewers (FSN), CNBC (cable), Packers (Fox/CBS primarily), Marquette (FS1/FS2/ESPN/2), NCAA BB tourney (TBS/TNT/TRU/etc.), and maybe Bucks (FSN) and some reruns of CSI (various cable networks). Not a whole lot of over-the-air network programming.

Kang is the only one with more than one year of ML experience, and he improved from year one to year two. The other difference is that all of them are Korean whereas Thames is American. Thames knows the language, the culture, etc., none of that will be foreign to him. It's not unrealistic to expect the first year to have some struggles with living in a foreign country.

Wow, even going to 35 I had to leave out T. Williams, McLanahan, Supak, Webb, Suter, Wren, Reed, M. Feliciano, G. Garcia, Gideon, Burkhalter, QTC (Torres-Costa), A. Meyers, M. McDowell, Neuhaus, all guys who either have made or I think have a chance to make the majors. The system is deep. The 2nd 5 out: 35) J. Yamamoto 34) C. Harber 33) Z. Brown 32) D. Magnifico 31) C. Burnes The first five out: 30) J. Barrios 29) M. Harrison 28) J. Gatewood 27) J. Perrin 26) R. Liriano The top 25: 25) A. Houser 24) K. Medeiros 23) N. Kirby 22) D. Williams 21) J. Barnes 20) G. Lara 19) M. Diaz 18) J. Nottingham 17) C. Coulter 16) R. Cordell 15) J. Lopez 14) W-C Wang 13) C. Ponce 12) L. Erceg 11) F. Peralta 10) M. Diplan 9) B. Phillips 8) T. Clark 7) C. Ray 6) P. Bickford 5) L. Brinson 4) I. Diaz 3) L. Ortiz 2) B. Woodruff 1) J. Hader

Edit: redundant with reillymcshane's post

Thames is not a CF so he will not take any innings/PAs away from Broxton. Brinson's AAA performance, while impressive, was over 93 PAs in which he walked twice and for the entire season his walk rate was <5%. I'd need to see a bigger sample and better walk rate before saying he should be up by midseason. As much as the "small sample" argument is brought up around here, whenever someone brings that up regarding Brinson it gets quickly shut down with the "he was hurt" argument. (But the "he was hurt" argument gets shut down quickly when brought up regarding Garza and Peralta.) I do forget about Liriano; he could be something, but his AAA numbers were put up in the PCL Pacific league, a notorious hitters league. In the three years that El Paso has been in the PCL they have never been lower than fourth in the PCL in runs scored. Thames isn't about winning a few more games, it's about adding talent to the organization without having to give up talent in a trade. LHH with power can be traded for young talent; IF he can translate his Korean performance into something similar to what Kang has he will have trade value. Jay Bruce was able to bring back a recent top-100 prospect who was in the majors by the age of 20 (Herrera, who posted a .899 OPS as a 21-year-old in AAA last year) and a 19-year-old pitcher who was a 3rd round pick. Ben Zobrist was traded for Sean Manaea. Those could be nice pieces to add to the organization, and all they would cost is the salary for Thames.

n=1, but Jung Ho Kang hit a similar .356/.459/.739 in Korea and posted >.800 OPS each of his two seasons here, .816 his first season and .867 this season. I'd take that in a heartbeat from Thames as a LH bat.

I've said before that there are two ways to increase the talent level of an organization - the draft, and free agency (key word: organization). With trades, you have to give up value to get value, and in the long run probably aren't going to win that many more than lose. With trading major leaguers for prospects, you are just shifting where in the organization the talent resides, not increasing it. If the Brewers move Braun then I think they should take a shot at Thames. If Puig comes back in a Braun trade they won't be pressed to keep Puig. The Brewers will have virtually nothing for salary obligations the next two years, and only Reed and Wren will be ready to compete for an OF job next year. They can then seek to trade Puig or other OF prospects for corner IF prospects, and if Thames pans out they can move him next offseason if Brinson/Phillips/Cordell/etc. develop and demonstrate they should be given a ML roster spot.

You can't argue that this was not a great trade for the Cubs. If young pitching is over-valued and young corner IF under-valued, you take advantage of the inefficiency of the market and make the trade. And so far the Cubs have bought one TOR-type starting pitcher, Jon Lester. Hendricks and Arrietta were traded for.

How do you get to the 40-man roster page without that link? I can't find it.

Under the "hopes", I hope that the Brewers seriously explore a trade similar to the Cashner-for-Rizzo trade, where they move some starting pitching for a young big LH bat at 1B or 3B (or both). I don't think the Cubs regret that deal and trading away young pitching one bit. If that can involve Guerra, Anderson, or Peralta (or better yet, Braun), great. But looking at minor league depth, the Brewers have Hader, Woodruff, Ortiz, Bickford, Diplan, Ponce, Lopez, Peralta, D. Williams, etc., from which to draw upon (on top of Burnes, Diaz, Wang, Webb, etc.). The first two are untouchable IMO, but the rest are open game. I think Bickford profiles fairly similarly to Cashner, if that's what it takes. The organizational hole is at corner IF. It's Erceg, who I love but is a ways off, and no one. Whether it's one pitcher, two B/C pitchers, or a pitcher plus an OF, this is the #1 thing that will make me jump for joy this offseason.

They do have seven starters: Guerra, Peralta, Anderson, Garza, Davies, Nelson, Jungmann. (Before you roast the last item on this list, he was pretty good in 2015 with a sample size 4x larger than 2016, and he pitched really well in Biloxi this year.) That being said, I think it easily sorts itself out. Based on the way they finished I think Nelson gets sent down (IIC he has two options left) to see if he can right the ship like it did for Peralta. That leaves six, and only one of Anderson/Davies/Jungmann to be sent down or go to the pen, likely Jungmann, assuming the other five are healthy. If they are pitching well then I think both Guerra and Garza are gone by July 31 with Hader and Woodruff ready for a shot; the Brewers then have the freedom to move Anderson, Nelson or Peralta if the return is adequate. It's good to have options. I believe only two teams used fewer starting pitchers than the Brewers did this season (9). The odds of all nine being healthy come July is probably slim. And spending some time in the major league bullpen did not hurt the development of Carlos Martinez, Lance Lynn, and others, even if the rotation is full.

Yeah, Sedar needs to be "reassigned within the organization"

THE best internet article, ever

While the Brewers do have a glut of OF, only Reed and Wren will likely be ready to compete for a roster spot to begin the 2017 season; if the Brewers trade Braun and don't end up with Puig there will be a spot available. I really think that Brinson starts the year in AAA. Brinson had a nice run in AAA, but it was over 93 PAs and he walked only twice. Injured or not, his walk rate was less than 5% for the season, and I'd want to see a bigger sample and a higher walk rate before giving him a major league roster spot. The Brewers picked up Perez for free, and he's only a year older than Rivera but a big upgrade offensively. The Brewers don't need a backup SS - they have Villar and Perez - and Rivera just doesn't hit enough for a backup 2B/3B. I think the Brewers can pick up a backup IF off the waiver wire or FA pool who is 26 or younger and is an upgrade over Rivera.

Not a solid track record there. Heaney is talented but not TOR quality, and he's hurt. Whitson is a cautionary tale of why you don't pass up the money as a Top 10 pick. Turner has never been able to put it together; heck, he's almost completely fallen apart the last two years. Crow is an OK reliever, and has been hurt the last two years. Parker was looking like a #2 (but with pretty low K numbers), but has been completely derailed by multiple TJ surgeries. Hoffman might amount to something but it's too early to tell, and he's a big injury risk too. I'm not as high on Meadows as others; I think he's a bit overrated. Since 2000 only one player drafted at #9 overall has a career bWAR > 10 - John Danks. Four never made the majors, and an additional two have a negative career bWAR. The last - and only other time - the Brewers drafted #9 overall was one of arguably the five best #9 picks of all-time... ... Geoff Jenkins. The best #9 pick of all-time? Kevin Appier, career bWAR of 54.9. Barry Zito is a distant 2nd, career bWAR of 32.6.