Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

igor67

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,712

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings

Milwaukee Brewers Videos

2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project

2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by igor67

  1. igor67
    I'd second Diplan being more interesting than Hellweg or Pena. I'd much rather take a chance on a high potential guy with less experience, than a high potential guy who has made it to AAA and still can't throw strikes. It just seems like those guys with big control issues who haven't made much progress by the late minors rarely do much. The young guys might never get there, but have more chances to have the year where it just clicks. Some have kind of addressed this, but certainly a huge advantage of this deal is that if it comes down to needing to sell off assets having 1 fewer starting pitchers to trade is a big advantage to helping get quality in return.
  2. igor67
    In terms of pure contention for this year, if there is no corresponding FA signing the move is probably lateral, in that we get the IF options and a potential bullpen option, both with actual options. So there is improved depth and some flexibility there. Definitely lose some rotation depth, but by having the bullpen depth you open up some options with Jungman and Thornburg as back-up starters. If we take that money and find one of these veteran hybrid pen/rotation options the deal might be both a net long term win and a net short term win.
  3. igor67
    Very exciting if you're a Nats fan, but it sure seems like after all those huge draft picks they are going to be reduced to just a couple of years with a really great team. The Bonilla deferral was small enough in annual terms that inflation really made it small potatoes by the end. No reasonable amount of inflation is going to make the 15million a year for another 7 years a small deal if they can't bring home a title.
  4. igor67
    The pitch clock might really take some time, but if they use it for 3-5 years in the minors a lot of the MLB pitchers at that time would be more comfortable.
  5. igor67
    How many consecutive offseasons has there been concern that it was all being mortgaged on the current year and in the future we'd be doomed?
  6. igor67
    Trading players before they get an official jersey is the new market inefficiency. Or maybe the GMs have started getting paid on commission for each transaction.
  7. igor67
    I'd imagine they were trying to evaluate him more as a bullpen lefty at this point. We have a lot more compelling options for the rotation.
  8. igor67
    I think this tends to show-up more with Brewer pitchers, but the manner in which they go about coaching them at the lowest level makes them look worse than they are. They tend to shelve pitches to focus on command of the fastball and bring back the strikeout pitches later on. So I don't think there is a lot of predictive value in using Rookie ball numbers to project how fast he will advance, the Brewers are definitely more conservative at moving guys up then sentiment on the board often hopes for, but they have certainly shown that they will move guys a couple levels a year when they think they are ready.
  9. igor67
    I have no doubt a large number of players evaded detection over the years. Potentially even some that might make it into the HOF. Similarly there are plenty of people who have some responsibility of how far out of hand things appear to have gotten. It is however an imperfect world and rather than giving everyone a pass for bad behavior and calling that justice, I'm content with known guilty parties being excluded. I'm also content to not continually try and dig up new evidence on players from that era. What has gotten really mixed up is that most people focus on the cheating part, but that is the least important aspect of how bad their behavior was. The much more relevant danger, which I have maintained for years is that the perception of use pushed more and more people to use including kids who truly never had a shot at the big pay day to begin with. Certainly the modern 'roids' were somewhat safer than the first generation, but we are only now entering the time frame where unexpected medium or long term side effects would actually show-up. Point blank any media type who has railed the NFL for ignoring concussions, but also says let the PED users in is being completely inconsistent about player safety. And I bet it wouldn't be that hard to convince anyone who has ever taken a hit without body armor from Clemens of that reality.
  10. igor67
    I'm OK with a 10 player ballot limit, but I also recognize the nature of the current situation so getting 4 players in this year is nice as it cuts down on the numbers game a little bit. That said I'm very much OK with known (not randomly accused) PED guys not making it in, so there is a lot less of a crunch in my mind.
  11. igor67
    1,3, and 5 make some sense at first glance. I don't remember who we got back for Cirillo and Karl, but my recollection was our nascent Brewerfan community wasn't thrilled from the get go. Burnitz I know we didn't care for, those are the one in my mind that qualify as the ones to take back, not trades were you took a shot, but it just didn't work out.
  12. igor67
    I haven't finished it yet, but as we enter the deadest part of the offseason I thought I'd recommend The Sports Gene by David Epstein. It is very illuminating when it comes to the importance of practice/coaching vs. atheleticism across multiple sports.
  13. igor67
    Kind of interesting that Harrison and Lara placed so high on potential and tools, but our other 2 first rounders this year didn't make the top 10.
  14. igor67
    Actually Maldonado had fewer ABs this season (by 40%) than his terrible year, so even if one placed a higher value on the affect of playing time than every other way of evaluating players, that theory does not explain his performance.
  15. igor67
    Both scouting and production wise there was nothing about Maldanado's profile prior to MLB that ever indicated he could hit more than a respectable back-up catcher can. He has a full season's worth of ABs that add up to a .651 OPS. The fact that 2 of his 3 seasons of ABs produced respectable (but not really anything you'd want at first base) numbers while the 3rd was horrible is exactly what one would expect for a bench guy with a weak bat. Given his prospect status and his production so far it is very hard to make a case that he'll post better numbers with more playing time. Quite the contrary Maldanado seems like an excellent bench candidate because he seems to have figured out how to handle the sparse ABs and produce as well as expected.
  16. igor67
    Having the higher standard might seem like a disadvantage, but it sure makes it a lot easier to avoid the kind of complete academic farces other colleges have gotten themselves into.
  17. igor67
    Arcia's played a lot of baseball, I'd think he may have reached the point where a break would be very healthy for him and his development.
  18. igor67
    Mark Canha looks like possibly an interesting guy to look at as a righty platoon option at first. It's a very different Rule 5 strategy than last year, were Wang was clearly a long term investment. He has played at AAA with a .889 OPS, so he has a reasonable chance of being ready to contribute, but he is very easy to move off of even in Spring Training if you have other better options.
  19. igor67
    A-rod feels disrespected.
  20. igor67
    That would pretty much floor everyone. You'd have to think we'd turn around and trade one of our starters afterward under that scenario. Which might be quite the coup, since by removing a top starter you drive up the value of your remaining starters. That said it is almost certainly a bad long term idea.
  21. igor67
    The short answer is he could use more time in the upper minors. But what about Yadiel Rivera as the back-up IF and right handed protection for Gennet? 2 of the last 3 years he has posted an OPS over .790 against lefties and has a great defensive reputation. The 1 year he didn't hit that much was spent entirely at Brevard. I wouldn't bet everything on that working out, but to me it seems like a decent option to take a look at in Spring training. Some guys struggle with the limited role at the start of their careers, so I'd be ready to move off that and given him regular time in AAA, but guys like Davis and Gennett have also done well working up from a very limited role to a larger one.
  22. igor67
    Great article at BP (and it's free) http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=25008 My initial thought is that this is the best new Sabermetric idea in the last couple of years.
  23. igor67
    In some theoretical sense a GM could easily be worth more than any player, but there are at least 3 really good reasons they are not. 1) It takes a long time to figure out who a really good GM is. Brian Sabean for example, I can still remember the articles savaging him for ignoring the draft seemingly and grabbing veterans even when the cost him picks. How many rings does he have now? Or the Royals, now they are an awesome organization, but they spent years some under the current GM getting ripped. In both a real and economic theory sense a rational owner must therefore discount his GMs pay according to such a huge uncertainties. 2) There are few GM spots and a lot of people who want the job. 3) A lot of the apparent GM skill is actually the organization. My case study here is Walt Jocketty. How many rings have the Reds accumulated since he left the Cards and vice versa? This is also consistent with why it can take so long to evaluate GMs.
  24. igor67
    I think Schafer starts the season in AAA, with Parra around Schafer's skill set is pretty redundant. I'd tend to think they'd do better to have a bat first back-up, since most of the playing time is going to be pinch hitting. I like the idea of doing a small deal for a better back-up infielder as well.
  25. igor67
    I actually prefer platoons at corner positions because done well it doesn't really cost you a bench spot (had to have a back up anyway) and it actually makes you more likely to carry guys on the bench who can hit so that you have some options in the late innings. The problem last year was that we had two guys who could only play 1 position in Weeks and Overbay. A right handed defense first middle infield guy who can protect Gennet and guys like Rogers, Jimenez, or even Lind being able to spot start in the OF gives the team plenty of roster flexibility.
×
×
  • Create New...