MJLiverock

Did anyone notice the commercial for the commemorative Favre football during the game? One side of it listed his passing records, his Super Bowl championship, his NFL MVP's and Pro Bowls, a big Viking logo and the other side had a painting of him in his Vikings uniform. Of course not one of those accomplishments occured in a Vikings uniform. It just struck me as completely lame and tacky. Are there San Diego Charger's memorabilia held dearly by fans citing all of Johnny Unitas' career accomplishments on display anywhere?

Remember all the way back to opening day when Macha wanted to and did use Suppan vs. Gallardo because he felt starting opening day put too much pressure on Gallardo or somesuch nonsense.

In order of preference Twins/Tigers - - basically the underdogs Dodgers - - I think Torre is way over rated but I like a lot of their players, Kemp, Ethier, Kershaw, Billingsley, Broxton, and yes Manny. Angels - - I like Scioscia and the team always seems fun to watch Phillies -- not a big fan of the team but starting to get into the lesser of evils area for me. I don't mind their offense other than never liking Victorino or Werth (they seem to kill the Brewers). Rockies - - sort of like the Phillies, don't really care but never really liked the team. Red Sox - - hey, they ain't the Yankees Cardinals - - insufferable fans, Buck and McCarver fawning would be too much Yankees- - seriously? A quarter billion in contracts in one offseason?

Was it a problem all year or just recently? I only ask because I don't buy into the constant excuse train that comes out to cover every bad outing by Bush, Suppan, and Parra.

Or the more pesimisstic predictions were grounded in more reality that the pitchting staff wasnt' that good. Bush and Suppan aren't superstar pitchers. Suppan made 29 starts, only 2 less than last year and about about 18 innings less. Was he coming off an injury sometimes yes, is he good no. Over in the grading thread the arugment is made no one should be disappointed that Gallardo had a 3.73 ERA and 200K with 185 innings. I would agree, but some of the offseason predictions has Gallardo sliding in and duplicating the Sheets Sabathia production. I was never on board with that kind of expectation let alone the total 300 innings of elite production vs. 170-180 predicted out of Gallardo. Again, I think expectations were too high. The Brewers were picked to finish by many experts to be right about where they are, mainly because the staff just isn't good. I am a fan, I want to believe my team has a shot but I think the result was more a reflection of the talent assembled than any exucses about injuries to poor pitchers. Lopez's numbers were so good as a Brewer I don't think the Weeks loss had much impact. Hardy was terrible but McGhee came out of nowhere and put up numbers that rivaled anything expected out of Hardy. Fielder and Braun exceeded expectations and Cameron was pretty much as expected. Hart missed some time but plent of people aren't sold that he is anything but an average to below average RF who put up about what was expected. Kendall was about as expected as well. Counsell was well above as well.

I kinda thought the free swinging Crew might be the cause. I noticed Cook only had about 65 pitches at that point. I didn't notice the BB to the pitchers with the bases loaded, thankfully I wasn't watching since that infuriates me. How many free passes have the Brewer's pitcher issued this year with the bases loaded? It seems to be a recurring problem for them especially with the opposing pitcher in there. It may be one of those stats that stand out in memory more than actuallly being a problem but the fact that ML pitcher can't throw 3 strikes before 4 balls to a pitcher is frustrating.

Not to be a smart aleck but since I can't see the game right now--> if it just the crazy strike zone why do the Brewers have 7 walks and the Rockies zero? Is the ump really calling the borderline ones that one sided or are Parra and Mcclung up to their usual antics of strike zone avoidance? Parra had less than 50% of his pitches for strikes, while Cooks raw numbers are over 60% for strikes.

I'm not saying they will get a good differencing making pitcher for $5MM but that the $5MM can be put towards the $12MM/year a pitcher may cost. The Brewers have a budget to live within and that $5MM may make a difference next year when they are still paying Suppan and Hall. I just don't want to hear the excuse that they didn't want pitcher xyz because they couldn't afford to pay him the $12MM he was due in 2010 because they have Looper and someone like Kendall eating up $7MM to $9MM of payroll. Knowing full well that in 2011 Suppan's $12MM drops off. It's all about opportunity cost and looking at the alternatives for similar production with lower costs. Wasting money on mediocre players and then not having money to spend on truly above average players is a losing scenario. Think back to the rumors of the Peavy trade or Halladay there was plenty of mention of how could the Brewers afford to take on more big salaries. Well the only way they can is to cut salary elsewhere and I'd start with guys like Looper and Kendall. Neither produces anything above average or irreplaceable and yet take up $9MM of payroll.

Exactly trwi7, I see no reason to spend the extra $5MM+ for Looper when the team may well get the same 5+ ERA production from those young cheap guys. Looper may well be worth $5MM to some team but not a team stuck with 3 or 4 bottom of the rotation guys already. The Brewer will be much better off putting that money toward a much better pitcher or sitting on it in the bank because I don't think the incremental gain on Looper is worth it. I don't mind paying up for talented players but paying up for mediocrity just doesn't work on a limited budget. Paying $5MM for prodution that can be matched by $1MM guys burns me more than paying $12MM for an $8MM guy because that $8MM guy is still pretty good and not likely to be matched by call ups and replacement level guys. The team needs that $5MM to help pay for a good player so we don't hear they can't trade for so and so because his salary is too high.

The defense of the Bush Suppan and Looper triumvant of them each not being the worst pitcher in baseball or not quite below replacement level is one of my problems with the rotation. Sure each isn't the worst pitcher in the league but having 3 guys of that caliber in the rotation is not good. I don't want a team built of "well he's not the worst guy at his position". That is not a recipe for success that is a recipe for mediocrity or worse. That's how teams like the Royals and Pirates flounder around paying money for veterans so they can look like they are doing something but in reality being really inefficent with their payroll. I think the Brewers would be better off using the 5th spot in the rotation for someone like Narveson, Butler, or whomever comes out of spring training. The likely description of said player will be the same, and the step down in actual results will be negligible if any. The team is stuck with Suppan for another year, Bush is cheap and of the three the only one who may be better than actual results this year, leaving Looper as the odd man out. Take his $5MM and add it to the money pile to pay for someone who is traded for or signed that may cost some money but may actually be better than average not just a guy who "isn't the worst pitcher in the league".

Gottcha Joe. I took your last line of the earlier post to mean you didn't see a reason to trade either of them. At this point I don't really care which they trade, it depends on the offer. I can see where McGehee alone may not fetch much but coupled with another player (a la Hardy, Hart, etc.) maybe he can net much better pitcher than just a Hardy alone or a Gamel alone can bring. It may be the difference in getting another #4 ceiling pitcher vs. getting a guy with a higher ceiling or more years, etc. I just don't want to draw a line in the sand at this point and say one guy or the other will stay or go without seeing what deals or packages are available.

The problem is they can't keep hording position players and running a deficit in starting pitching. At some point the stockpile of position players has to traded from to improve the pitching.

Watching Kendall throw the ball in CF on the stolen base attempt last night and then throw it away on wild pitch allowing the run from second to score made me laugh in a sick twisted way. I may have become so cynical that I root against a Brewer player so see just how bad can someone play and still get the start everyday in a position where 2-3 days off a week is fairly common.

I unfortunately attending this game and it painful to watch Bush out there. He was missing the zone by feet not inches or getting squeezed. He couldn't come near the zone when Wells tried to sacrifice bunt. His big slow 68mph curve ball looked like a high school pitch. The whole play with the throw to the backstop, Kendall throwing it when he had no shot, and then either Bush missing it or Kendall's throw being off the mark allowing the runner from second to score was the masterpiece stroke. I don't know what happend to Bush he went from a control pitcher in 2006 to a guy who has declined each year and now looks completely beaten out there. That game was an embarassment.

He was in the .335 area before this season too so it isn't like he went from Gallardo range of .285 up to .362 (I incorrectly typed .367 earlier). Parra was in the .310-.315 range in the minors so being at .347 career in the majors isn't a huge shock especially given his inability to command the strike zone. Gallardo ranged from .265-.300 BABIP in the minors so .285 may be a little low for him but he hasn't seen his K rate fall off a cliff so maybe he has better movement allowing him to keep the hits down.

Gallardo has been able to offset some of his walk issues with a much higher K rate and better BABIP. Gallardo's BABIP against is around the .285 mark this year and last. Parra K's over 2, nearly 3 less per 9 and has a BABIP of around .367 this year, .347 career. Their HR rates are pretty similar at about 1 per 9. Both could use more command but Yovanni has been able to overcome the walks with K's and seemingly easier to field balls thus far in their short ML careers but both are walking to many hitters.

I don't know that it is luck so much as lack of control. Parra has walked 71 guys in 130 innings and has a WHIP of 1.84. Allowing nearly 2 baserunners per inning isn't going to result in a good ERA unless you have a lot of good luck. His lack of control has also limited him from pitching deeper into games so when he gives up 3 runs in 5 innings and gets pulled because his pitch count is over 100 already he gets a 5.40 ERA. If could just last that extra inning (without more runs) then your scenario of a 4.50 ERA is acheivable. I think he needs to work on his command which is more to blame than bad luck.

That's what I don't get BCF5575. Why didn't Melvin order Macha to play Rivera more this month so he could at least have a few more AB's to evaluate him. There is no reason Kendall should start 15/20 games in September when his production has not been noticeably better than Rivera and the team is out of the playoff hunt. No one can seem to figure out why Kendall has the 10th most AB's of all catchers this year yet having the worst OPS by a looong shot - - Russell Martin is the only guy really within a 100 points of him with that many AB's and this is Russell Martin's worst year.

Weeks hasn't been near the disappointment of Parra in my view. Weeks has at least had some decent years even if injury shortened. He put up a .374 OBP and an over .800 OPS in 2007. His career line of .351/.415/.767 isn't too bad for a second baseman. Putting up that very line this year would make him around the 10th best offensive second baseman in the majors, certainly not replacement level or worthy of benching. Parra has a 5.16 ERA and a 1.65 WHIP, 1.75 K:BB. His 322 innings are a brief sample but not very good at all. No where near a #2 starter or #3 as was hoped. More like borderline replacement level. A team can stick with a struggling young hitter in the lineup longer because an 0-4 night doesn't guarantee you a loss but a bad pitcher raises the odds of that loss a lot higher. The Brewers pretty much have to score 5-6 runs on average anytime Parra starts if they want to win.

Bush as a starter in 2009 averages 5.2 innings with a 5.85 ERA, Brewers are 10-9 in his starts, 5.26 run support Burns as a starter in 2009 averages 5.0 innings with a 6.86 ERA, Brewers are 4-4 in his starts, 5.48 run support Suppan as a starter in 2009 averages 5.4 innings with a 4.87 ERA, Brewers are 11-15 in his starts, 3.8 run support Villanueva as a starter in 2009 averages 5.0 innings with a 4.95 ERA, Brewers are 1-4 in his starts, 4.4 run support I matched em up head to head since their number of starts as replacements basically matched up for the games missed by Bush and Suppan. Narveson's one start was on 09/13, well after Bush and Suppan were back. McClung's two starts I'll just assume as a necessary 6th starter role or in replacement of Parra. They both occured at the end June. In either case the step down from Bush/Suppan to Burns/Villanueva wasn't that big of a difference. Similar team records and similar run support in their slotted games. I'll concede a couple wins at most but having Suppan and Bush probably wouldn't have done any more than that, this team would still be well out of contention and have a burned up bullpen. Even last year Suppan averaged about 5 2/3 innings per start. Bush has averaged 6.2 and 5.9 innings per start during the previous two years. I'll leave it at this; Is Bush a better pitcher than Burns? Yes. Is Suppan better than Villanueva? eh maybe maybe not. Is the reason the Brewers weren't contenders due to the difference in Bush/Suppan vs. Burns/Villanueva? I don't believe it is, the Brewers won those games at about the same rate, maybe down a couple but not 8 or more needed to be contenders. The bullpen would wear down anyway because neither are 7 inning plus pitchers. I believe the reason the Brewers aren't contenders and won't be next year without changes is due to not having enough good pitchers. A healthy Bush and Suppan aren't enough to qualify. The 5+ innings per start from Suppan and even a healthy Bush putting up 6 1/3 won't stop the pen from getting worn down again. Parra and Gallardo would need to step their efficiency greatly and start throwing more than 5 or 6 innings themselves or the same thing will happen all over again. A bullpen can't be expected to throw 3+ inniings every game day in and day out. Sure they had a nice start to the season but having a good start doesn't mean they would have kept up that level all year. They were due to have some mean reversion given their skill set. Plenty of teams have a hot month or two but it doesn't mean they were contenders for the whole year. If the season were reversed and they played terrible in April and May versus July and August people wouldn't focus so much on being in 1st place early in the season.

The Brewers are 11.5 games out of the wild card, to really be "in contention" they would have to be 8 games better than they are to be tied with the Giants at 3.5 games out of the wildcard. In the 16 games started by Villanueva (1-4), Burns (4-4), Mcclung (1-1) and Narveson (1-0), the Brewers are 7-9. I don't see how replacing their starts with more Bush and Suppan would have resulted in an eight game improvement over the actual results. You could argue the bullpen would have been better off but Suppan and Bush wouldn't have saved many innings either. A team is always going to have to rely on a 6th starter somewhere in the season and when these guys were called on the results really weren't any different than what was produced by Bush and Suppan. This pitching staff just isn't that good to being with even if Bush and Suppan pitch all year which was why most non Brewer fan pre season picks had them around .500 and picked for third or worse. Despite the hope of fans some here had them below .500 and were ridiculed by those predicting 87+ wins. I think it is Brewer goggles that produces these 87-90 wins and playoff contender ideas with this staff as constructed. Overly optimistic expectations for Parra and Gallardo coupled with 3 mediocre pitchers in Bush, Suppan, and Looper was too much for me to buy into this contender idea.

I agree joepepsi that they both have samples where they do fine, but they also have samples where they are horrible. I just can't pick and choose the good months and ignore the bad ones so I used the whole season. Even Mike Burns had good starts. Bush has been over 5 with his ERA 2 out of the last 3 years. He gives up HR's and his walk totals have been climbing since his one year early (2006) in his Brewer career that gave everyone hope he was going to blossom into a much better pitcher. He isn't the worst pitcher in baseball by any means but the results haven't been that great if the bad months or starts aren't cherry picked out. There always seems to be a litany of excuses about Bush's actual on the field results. Over his career his ERA+ is 97, a slightly below averge pitcher who has been trending in the wrong direction since 2006 with his K rate, BB rate, and HR rate.

Bush has pitched like a replacement level pitcher or worse this season so it isn't like losing him and replacing him with Burns or Narveson produced much different results. I just don't buy into the injuries derailed the pitching staff argument. The Brewers staff just wasn't very good. Bush and Suppan are not aces or even #3 pitchers, a team shouldn't have this much trouble because they lost a guy with a 5.88 ERA and a guy with a 4.87 ERA. Neither of whom pitch deep into games. Say what you want about ERA but it does measure how many runs they gave up this year which is all that really matters when trying to win games and they gave up a lot of runs. Both guys give up a lot of HR's, don't K many, and allow a lot of hits. Suppan adds in a lot of walks as well. Having these two all season wouldn't have made much difference in the final results and if the rotation is the same next year there is no reason to believe the team will be much different. Fans can hope Gallardo and Parra improve, but with Bush, Suppan, and Looper they are what they are, average when things go right, below average quite often.

Kendall is in the line up again tonight. It just baffles me, to the point of irritation. Why does he need to start 12/15 games thus far in September?

I can see McGehee getting AB's, he deserves it and they may be trying to get him some ROY votes. I do wonder why he can't play a few games at 2B again to get Gamel in at 3rd and sit Lopes who is always mentioned as having hurt legs. I think the team knows by now what Lopez briings and seeing some more McGehee at second may add something. I can't understand the Rivera situation at all. There is zero reason to play Kendall this much right now. Would it really tear Macha or Melvin's heart out to see Rivera play 4 or 5 times a week for a couple weeks?