GenoSeligPrieb

Yeah, but I'm a cynic, remember? It's what I do! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif As I noted before, I just can't shake the fact that the always-free spending owners of the Astros and Cardinals, at the very least, will refuse to accept also-ran status for another year. The Cubs very well may be sold to a conglomerate that could lower their exorbitant payroll, as the Braves new owners have, which would suit me just fine. But St. Louis and Houston? We don't have their market size, nor their comparatively unlimited funds. And the Reds aren't always this bad. So far, I agree, Mark's been so much better than the Seligs in terms of giving Doug the funding he needs so far. So, to me at least, Mark has proven he'll try to field a competitive team, a watchable product. But given no cap, and our division of free spenders, will that be enough?

Good angle, Tim. I also suspect Rodriguez will opt out of New York. My money says he becomes an Angel, given their need for a SS, his own desire to return to short, his respect for their organization and Scoscia, his desire to still be in a huge media market, the fact that Arty Moreno is Hispanic (doesn't hurt), and that Arty has trillions to hand him. Hell, Rodriguez could wind up getting even more than $25.2 mil a year. If not there, then it's the Cubs, although they may not have the same Angels or Yankees cash they do now, with the sale and all. Maybe the Cubs will be sold, like the Braves were. To a group with LESS resources. Other than that, the Dodgers and White Sox are possible, especially the White Sox, who will have lots of freed up cash around with some expiring contracts. Betemit? Meh. He's another TBS-hyped nugget who never panned out to be what they breathlessly told us about. And if Betemit is playing 1B for the Yankees, that's still kinda weak, don't ya think?

"While I agree with this I don't believe there has to be one magical year. This team was built to be competetive over a period of several years." Backup: I'll concede you this point. But I see the NL Central this way: The way the Brewers are playing, it's entirely possible they could finish with a "competitive" record, and that could translate out to 86-76. Is that improvement? Is that satisfying, given where we've been? Of course. And in 2007, it may only take 86 wins to be crowned division champ. But when you write that Mark, Doug, Gord, Reid and Ned have set us up for a competitive run, for longer term improvement, that could mean in 2008, Milwaukee could finish 89-73, which would mean even further improvement, and would be great, believe me. But I'm saying that, in 2008, the always well-funded Cubs and Astros could both buy more stars and improve to 90-72. And the Cardinals? For whatever reasons, players just seem to love getting traded/signing there. They have this invisible advantage, whether it's 40,000 red-clad dopes rising and saluting the Budweiser jingle, or the humidity, or whatever, name free agents usually tend to go there. And I suspect the hangover from winning last year's World Series will wear off by December, and Jocketty will start waving cash and the amenities of St. Louis around, and then sit back and watch the conga line of stars become Cardinals. Amd if that happens, they can jump easily to 91 wins. Hell, the Reds could even improve, and start chipping away at us. Thankfully, McClatchy is still involved with the Pirates or else they'd at least try to win, too. As long as there's no cap, and we still have all these richer teams in our division, we'd better assemble 95-win-caliber talent, or else, it may not come easy....

"Drew is a .400/.500 guy, so he's an outstanding player." Not anymore, Al. Boras got him his infamous "out-clause" megadeal, and he's set for life. I can't see him as a .900 OPS guy ever again, do you? Honestly?

Different direction to the same thread... Some here have expressed the notion that, really, 2008 should be OUR year, given the maturation of YoGa, Braun, etc. But I don't think we can afford that luxury. This is an ultra-rare season. It comes when the Cardinals built that new stadium and are still experiencing the effects of it, on their bottom line; i.e. a new stadium is wonderful and all, but it often comes at the expense of adding payroll/retaining free agents for a few years. Houston, for whatever reasons, couldn't keep Clemens and Pettitte, and guys like Ensberg, Scott, BGO and Jennings declined at the same time, knocking them under .500. Finally! The Pirates and Reds haven't contended in years, and are stuck in the second division. This leaves only the woeful, perennially-cursed Cubs to keep us from the Promised Land. Perhaps career underachievers like Lilly, Fontenot and Marquis will come back to earth, Lee and/or Aramis can get conveniently hurt again, and the Cubs will fade a bit, which is entirely possible. THIS is the year when the NL Central is wide open for us to grab. NOT next year. Next year, Drayton McLane may VERY possibly find an extra $150,000,000 in one of his tuxedos, and use it to buy 2 ace pitchers and a star #3 hitter for Caballo to drive in 140 times. Next year, the Cardinals will awaken from their 2007 naps, and start buying free agents to bolster their rotation and outfield. Next year, the Cubs can build on the advances they've made this season, and start to become really nasty. Nope. THIS is the year we have our best chance, while the big money NL Central teams are distracted. Like a sleeping cat outside our mouse-hole, we need to snatch that cheese now. "this team doesnt seem to have the "dagger thru the heart" mentality Posts like this drive me crazy... What are you basing this on? And better yet, would you say this if Cordero converts his last 2 saves? I'm sure you wouldn't." I saw this, and want to defend MadisonBB, nikegolf. There seems to be a shrug of resignation to the Brewers during these harrowing, gut-wrenching losses. They should be mad. They should be stealing bases, bunting, being more aggressive, playing small-ball?...doing ANYTHING to scratch out that one extra run, as St. Louis, Cincinnati and the Cubs have been doing when faced with adversity lately...anything instead of sitting on their dead carcasses whenever they run out to an early lead. Prince hasn't homered in years. Cordero is suddenly as weak-stomached as an Amish great-grandma. SoupCan is not pitching with the same determination that he did for the Cardinals. Weeks doesn't even resemble a major leaguer anymore. JJs nowehere near as "present" as he was in April and May. I don't care if we're still in first place for the next few hours. Watching this great lead evaporate is NOT fun.

""It's unbelievable, the mentality here. When I was in Atlanta, they won 14 straight championships. We could lose eight straight and you'd get the same response: 'No big deal,'" says Estrada. "When you're used to winning, it's a different attitude. A different feeling. A different mentality. Here, it's like a panic zone.This is a different team. I guess, every year, when things go bad, it's like, 'Here we go again. " Johnny, I've defended you all year. And I still think you're the best all-around catcher we've had here since Ted Simmons. While that's akin to calling you valedictorian of your summer school class, it's still a compliment. But when I read this, my first thought was: And how in hell do YOU know what it's like to be part of an organization that's been a laughingstock, a punching bag, one what's NEVER won a championship? Even the Phillies were champs in 1980 and have won 2 pennants since then. The Diamondbacks fans were spoiled right away by a quick title. And the Braves are buoyed by Ted Turner's billions and won an easy division every damned year. Try suffering for a quarter century cheering for rummies like Jeffrey Hammonds, Keith Osik, Wes Obermueller and the flying Mouton brothers, Johnny. It's painful, and we have every right to feel the rug's being pulled out from under us again. It's like we're married to a compulsive gambler who kept emptying our bank account, and promised it'll never happen again. And then we start noticing a bounced check or 2... Can you blame us for getting uptight? At least we still care. Or would you rather we don;t let anything bother us and sit there, yawning (or asleep in some cases) during playoff games in 2/3rd's full home games, half-assedly forming the tomahawk chop, as you lose another playoff round every year? Johnny, until you Brewers start to play like professionals again, and close out your opponents (weak ones, at that), we have every right to expect heartbreak. And if you choke this year, will you come back and admit we were right to worry?

Nice reply, The Crew...especially this: "Hendrickson was the only one who dominated most of his minor league career, but Melvin didn't sell high with him, they let him fail in Milwaukee before shipping him out." Can't argue with that one. Classic case of waiting too long and being forced to sell low. I still believe we could have dumped a few other nuggets before they went sour, as it was with Brad Nelson and Dave Krynzel, and got perhaps a better return for them when their hype was still high. "Nelson Cruz was pretty old for his leagues when he started to succceed, granted he was up there when he was traded, but he wasn't hyped by anyone I remember other than the people here at Brewerfan." That last qualifier is key here: "...other than the people here at Brewerfan." Sure, there are many here who are tearing their hair out with the departure of Inman, as a "top 3 prospect, if not our #1 overall." But is the rest of MLB, its fans, sportwriters, scouts...ya know, the baseball community laughing at the Brewers for trading away a Wil Inman? Not that I've seen. As I've noted before, by default, EVERY franchise has a #1 minor league prospect, some of whom could only rank, like 13th if they were traded to a very rich farm system. I looked at the Inman trade, and shrugged my shoulders, because a) he was still far away from helping the parent club, if ever, b) Doug and his staff tend to know what they're doing, and c) I saw Braun as our #1 this year, Gallardo as our #2, and Villanueva as our #3 prosepct, and thankfully so far, they HAVE panned out. Not all nuggets do, and the dice were still being rolled on Inman. That's why it didn't bother me. That, and the fact that I have confidence in Linebrink...which is a lot more than I have for CoCoCo these days.

Perhaps, but significant factors were built into Atlanta's success over those 15 years, such as: a) A superstation to broadcast positive stories about playing in Atlanta, being able all these years to have your dad follow you just by getting basic cable, and overhype for Atlanta's nuggets. b) The financial resources of Ted Turner's billions. Throughout their run, the Braves were pretty much always in the top 5 or 10 in payroll, which helped them retain potential free agents, and to lure in gaudy upgrades like an in-his-prime Andres Galarraga for a still-very-solid Fred McGriff, and the ability to pay top dollar to Sheffield to replace Brian Jordan. c) Incompetent and/or underfunded division rivals. Any team with the Expos/Nationals in it for the last 10 years has more than a dozen gimmes built into their schedule....that is, unless they're the 2007 Brewers. The Marlins showed flashes of lucidity, however those years were immediately followed by ridiculous fire sales. The Mets, only until recently, hadn't spent wisely, peeing money away on guys who didn't deserve it anymore. And the Phillies are always cursed with key injuries and/or a GM who's not on the ball, and/or ownership which occasionally dictates to throw in the towel early on a season, a la the White Sox A's have. I guess I was just saying that I'm glad other teams covet our nuggets, and we've been tending to keep the better ones. Think of when was the last time the Brewers traded away a nugget, and he turned into an All-Star? That tells me Doug & Co. are trading the right guys when they do dig into the farm system, right?

Hijacking a very long thread to morph a new direction to the discussion... Peavey said last night: "...(We gave up) our #2 position prospect in Nelson Cruz, and we all know how well that ended up working for the Brewers. Not that Inman is going to stink for sure, but the fact that the Brewers were willing to give him up speaks volumes, IMO." It does. I worked this angle around in my cabeza the last few days. Are we becoming the new Braves lately? Think of it: The Brewers farm system has begun to develop a terrific reputation. Reid Nichols is obviously feeding MLB-caliber talent, All Stars in some cases, to the parent club. After a very bare cupboard for years, other GMs are now asking for Milwaukee's nuggets in trades. They may be forming the opinion that (all?!...OK, most?) Brewers minor leaguers = quality. So I say we let them. Throughout the 90's, anytime a Braves nugget was tossed into a deal, the Peter Gammonses and Paul Whites, instead of actually doing some in-depth homework on the guys, just labeled them as future stars, on reputation alone. Melvin Nieves, David Nied, George Lombard, John Foster, Bruce Chen, Jose Capellan, Micah Bowie, Terrell Wade, yes, even Ruben Quevedo, and Wes Helms! ... none matched the hype they were accorded by media creatures who breathlessly predicted stardom. And which nuggets did John Schuerholz refuse to part with as readily? Ones who contributed to successful Atlanta playoff teams throughout their 20's and beyond in some cases, like Chipper, Andruw, Rafael Furcal, Mark DeRosa, Marcus Giles...ya know, legit MLB contributors. And how often have we been told that the Brewers have admired the Atlanta organization? To me, this all means perhaps we shouldn't have as much to fear from sending away the likes of Inman, Thatcher and Garrison. Over the past few years, Doug DID keep the right ones, like JJ, Braun, Prince, etc., right? Moreover, lately it seems that when a well-heraled Brewer youngster is traded by Doug, Gord, Reid, etc. their performances at their new career stops haven't been coming back to nip us on the tookis: Nelson Cruz, JDLR, Enrique Cruz, Dave Krynzel, Dana Eveland, Jose Capellan, Ben Hendricksen... I guess this is along-winded way of illustrating that our scouting/minor league development guys have been pretty accurately guiding Doug to either keep a nugget at all costs, or to deem his as expendable. They're established an impressive track record over the past few years, and the odds are showing that they'll probably be right, when it comes to Inman, Thatcher and Garrison, too.

Fair enough, Chris. As you probably already know, I don't enjoy access to as comprehensive a level of stats as everyone else does, as I'm here at work, so game logs weren't available for me. But again, looking at those overall numbers, you could see why anyone could have felt he was getting torched, right? And by the way, if Inman is going to get a mulligan for those bad games due to the mono, then shouldn't Scott get that same latitude as his wife is about to deliver a baby? Hell, I was a mess...with my THIRD kid! Couldn't focus as readily as I was accustomed to, made mistakes. It happens! In 1998, following a year where he posted a 1.067 OPS and a .347 BA, Frank Thomas was only good for a .265 BA as his OPS dropped by over 200 points. He was healthy enough to play all but 2 games in '98, so what was wrong? He was going through a nasty divorce, and was profoundly distracted. Someone else noted, up-thread, that Scott's game logs this year show he posted a shutout appearance most of the time, only 1 earnie a few other times, and perhaps 2 very recent torchings. And now that his kid will (hopefully) enter the world without incident, a relaxed, focused and healthy Scott Linebrink, who's not so old that he's a candidate for a career free-fall all of a sudden, could VERY possible revert to his terrific piching habits, don't ya think? And again, 30 appearances (every other game or so) of a Scott Linebrink, replacing on the roster an on-the-job trainee like a Balfour has GOT to influence our chances at a postseason berth...

but he's getting torched in AA this year "Sorry Geno, but you're continuing a long line of posters spouting untruths about Inman's performance at AA." Well, TC, here are his numbers in AA this year: 8 games 1-5 record 39 2/3 IP 24 earned runs 7 HRs 5.44 ERA Can you blame me for not lacking confidence in those stats? To quote Jasper, from the Simpsons: "Yep. That's a paddlin'!" ___________ By the way, I LOVED this: "Between you and Geno, I thought for sure there was going to be enough angst and cynicism about how we're "mortgaging the future" to fill up several Cure albums." September 29th! The 8th time I'll see my favorite band. How did you know, Don?

"Well there goes the PCL, Southern League, and FSL championships. Im just so very angry right now. " Even if Linebrink plays a major role, pitching 40% of our games the rest of the way, as we nose out a division title over the Cubs? Not to single you out, but minor league championships are NOT what the 30 MLB franchises are all about. You either use your farm system to depth to play for the parent club, or you use it to trade for help for the major league club. I could care less whether these potential championships in the bush leagues are won or not. All we should care, is that these A, AA & AAA clubs are feeding us the proper talent. "put me down for Balfour being the closer next season notice how that wasn't in Blue " http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif .... Oh, wait. You're NOT kidding? OK, maybe if Balfour's the closer at Nashville, but even then... "Will Inman didn't have the greatest stuff, but it's better than Villanueva's, who we love; and he has the same understanding of how to pitch and maybe even more moxy." To quote the obsolete robot Cartridge Unit, from Futurama: "What?!" "I have nothing against trading away prospects for talent. We are talking about trading prospects away for 25 innings and a couple draft picks. Melvin better be pretty darn sure that Inman will never be a starter in the majors. " Correct me if you've ever expressed feelings to the contrary, Russ, but you really seem to consistently be a pro-nugget guy. And while you view Linebrink as just 25 innings, how about this?: - Reports say Doug's looking to extend Linebrink's deal, so it's very possible his acquisition will entail more than 25 innings.. - Scott is a workhorse. Over the last 4 seasons, he averaged a little over 79 innings per year. And he had around half that in 2007 now. With Boosh, Goosio and SoupCan giving us 5, maybe 6 innings every time out, Linebrink could very easily provide us with another 35 innings, maybe more. He once pitched 92+ in 2003! - And even if SL is only good for 25 more innings, those are 25 innings where we WON'T endure the performance art of a Grant Balfour. - Finally, since Scott tends to average 1 full inning per outing, those 25 innings could translate out to 25 appearances, which is a lot. But again, I expect more like 30 outings, and with 61 games left to go, he'll be a crucial part of our pen. "Most scouts seemed to think Inman would hit a wall before he made it to the majors and so far that appears to be the case this season. I'm not all that upset about the loss personally." I agree with Ennder 100%. Of course Inman's only 20, but he's getting torched in AA this year, and there's no guarantee he'll make it to the majors anyway. Thatcher has terrific numbers this year, but he's only been promoted to AAA a few months ago, and he's 26. And if we don't retain Menchkins in LF, that frees us $13,000,000 to a) add a LF for, say, $8-9 million a year, and double the salary of Linebrink to lure him to stay. Scott's 30 now, and he can either sign a multi-year deal to stay in Milwaukee, or we get comp picks, and still have money to maneuver with. It's funny, that I was just saying yesterday that I wouldn't like a deal of an Inman-type for a guy who pitched once a week. But Linebrink is much more than that. Great deal! "Griping about the cost of relievers during a playoff race is like refusing to have fun on your trip to Disney World because the food is so expensive. " Anton again says it best! Nice analogy...

"One Idea I always had to give the #1 seeded team an advantage, is a best of 6 series. Best of 6? Yep, the top team needs 3 wins to move on, and the low team needs 4 wins in the first round only." Why can't I find anything wrong with this? Nicely played, UFA! I'd expand on this, by adding that the #1 seed gets to host 4 of those games. Hell, if you're the 6th-best playoff team, you probably just got finished clawing, scraping and of course, battling, to reach the postseason, and 2 potential home games (Games 3 & 4?) out of 6, is better than what it is now, which is zero. And if you're a #1 seed, you shouldn't have to expend so much energy proving your position, by having to win 4 times. If you lose 4 times to a #6 seed, then maybe your team either peaked too early, or you take your hat off to that scrappy #6 team. If you're the top seed, your franchise should have already proven you're worthy, earning the best record in your league, so winning 3 games is enough to convince me, even if the series winds up 3-to-3. Because then, to me at least, it would work like those tie-breakers in the NFL. In football, if you have 2 teams who are 9-7, with only 1 WildCard spot for them, they break it down to tie-breakers, so it's kind of not without precedent. Can someone else besides me, ptry to oke some holes in this plan? 'Cuz I'm having a tough time! Post of the month, Undrafted!

"Johnny Estrada plays catcher with the same tenacity and technique I would imagine the fat rich kid from Pee-Wee's big adventure would. " Don't be so hasty, FTJ. Remember that battle royal Pee-Wee and Francis Buxton had in the tub/indoor pool? Francis fought hard, but Pee-Wee had the eye of the tiger. PW really wanted his bike back!

"Sample size is a concept that goes against human perception, so it will be something that baseball fans will always struggle with. If a batter looks horrible for a week, how could he possibly be good? If a pitcher we are otherwise unfamiliar with comes up and stinks up the joint, he can't possibly be good." Russ, I can't speak for everyone, but I think by now, after over 13,000 posts illuminating this notion in varying shades, that we understand the concept of sample size. We just don't choose to embrace it as dogmatically as you do. You prefer bigger sample sizes to analyze before reacting, which is fine. Just don't expect everyone to follow your "teachings." It's like someone telling me it's Coke, not Pepsi, or it's Opra-bama, not Bill-ary... Not everyone is on the exact same wavelength, and that's OK. As Dave and Greg have testified, we've already experimented a few times with Balfour, and the room for error just isn't there as a first place team with a smaller and smaller lead. It's like we keep sticking our hands into dog doo, and we have a wedding to attend in half an hour. It's time to wash up, and fast, because Lindsay Lohan's out on bond and will be at the reception, and just between you amd me, I hear she drinks, so I may have a chance if I don't ask her to dance while reeking of dog waste.

"Please understand my skepticism towards your initial show of concern. You don't just get away with having "Chief Cynic" below your name on a message board."[/i[ Yeah, but doesn't that mean I should be the skeptical one, then? http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif _________________________________________________ But I've looked in his eyes, and Ozzie Guillen IS the devil, however. Just so you know... "Yeah, but he's won a World Series. That automatically makes him a managerial genius of the highest order. Rig I asked Bob Brenly (who'd know for sure) and he said if Ozzie ever had a soul, he probably pawned it for that 2005 season. It looked less like divine intervention, and more like a Joe Boyd deal with Mr. Appelgate when home plate umpire Doug Eddings unquestionably called AJ Pierzynski out once, and then a second time for emphasis, only to magically have a change of heart and allow the despicable catcher to take first base. The rest of that postseason went rapidly downhill from there, and you know the rest... "Geno I will give you this. We tend to be on the opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to optimism/Ned but you have always given fair consideration to the other side of the equation." Thanks!

"considering that wickman got us sexson, i'd rank it as one of the most important trades in brewers history. " Octagon, I guess we just don't look at that the same way, which is cool... To me, a trade (except in those rare instances when the player in question is flipped elsewhere within hours, and never even gets to wear your uniform) is a standalone, more isolated occurence. You may not agree, but when we got Richie, at that time, perhaps 8 contenders needed a closer like Wick. Maybe 10, whatever. How many, again, at that time, sustained major injuries to their starting first baseman? Which teams faced losing their top slugger to injury or free agency back then? Whcih teams were hemorraging money at the time and couldn't add payroll? Which teams had a nepotistic ownership in place, with incompetents in power, lining their pockets with profits under the guide of "retiring debt" and couldn't be counted on to try and field a competitive team? All these various factors, which occurred in a snapshot in time, shaped the market the day we made the deal for Richie. The next week, the market changed, and perhaps we couldn't have acquired Richie. And when we inevitably dumped his salary (regardless of what we acquired for him from Arizona), I think it's inaccurate to ignore so many outside influences and say we traded Graeme Lloyd and Pat Listach for Gabe Gross, Zach Jack and Dave Boosh.

Oh, I agree RU. You have to start with your own best-case trade scenario, and work your way downward toward the middle from there. That's common sense. But if you start out pitching to a fellow GM with something as assinine and downright insulting as Prince for a AAA player (even if it's a Triple-A hitter whose MLB-Equivalent formula points to a .900 OPS? http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif ), you'll be lucky if Doug doesn't just wet 'em on the spot, and hang up on you as he ducks into the men's room. I just look at which teams we DON'T ever trade with (aside from division rivals, whom I don't expect any friendly dealings to go on with), and try to unravel who the guilty party could be. Hmmm. The most recent Brewers/Yankee deal? I could be wrong, but Mike Hegan, anyone?

"I'm wavering between thinking this is sarcastic and thinking this is genuine" Oh, it's genuine, alright. You're the goods, Bruce. But I've looked in his eyes, and Ozzie Guillen IS the devil, however. Just so you know... "I've been sick for months and it got progressively worse the last 2 months to the point of a major crisis last week. Fortunately, I think we finally figured out the problem. " Hope you're OK now, Dave. Last year, it was me out for, like 5 months with medical issues, so I sympathize. Tomorrow, I have perhaps my final (!) appointment with my surgeon, so it's tough to type with my finger crossedjkcdsjcldljmxdijxk Maybe karma has a way of head-butting you if you're skeptical of the unquestioned 100% accuracy of OPS. Ya hear that, fellow skeptics? You could be next! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif

First of all, it's great to see the always-entertaining xisxisxisxisxis return to BF.net! Stick around more often this time, m'friend, we need you! As for Ned, it looks as if he buried this Estrada injury info a bit, but perhaps he was assured by JE, by the medical staff, his coaches, by trainers, whoever, that Estrada could play all this time. Or, maybe Ned knew JE was hurtin' and didn't feel like letting the Rockies, Diamondbacks, Reds, etc. know that. Either way, Ned is not responsible for disseminating that information, so it doesn't bother me. Big cover-up? Meh. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but the last time a Brewer manager lambasted his player in public was when the lunatic Jerry Royster was spitting fire and saliva on the mound with Mike DeJean. By the way, Bruce, normally you're much lower key than today. Everything OK?

On July 2nd or so, in an ESPN radio interview, Morgan said that CC Sabathia should start for the AL in the All-Star Game instead of Justin Verlander, despite the fact that Justin had better stats, had thrown a no-hitter, and a few days earlier, in a head-to-head matchup, had clearly outpitched CC. Morgan's rationale? "CC's just as good, and it would send the right message to inner city kids to play more baseball." Yeah, I'm sure kids of color in urban areas were holding a baseball in one hand, and a basketball or a football in the other, and thinking to themselves "If Sabathia starts the All-Star Game, then baseball it is!!" http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Sure, publicly Mark laughs at these offers, as he should. As a Brewer fan, perhaps I'm a bit sensitive about this, but Doug Melvin has been a successful General Manager for years now. He brought a winner to Texas, which hadn't happened before him nor after. He's got a perennially-moribund small market franchise like the Brewers in first place, on a comparatively modest budget. He's legit, and so are the Brewers. But apparently there are still some misguided GMs out there, who aren't paying attention to the fact that the Seligs' Mickey Mouse operation is no longer around here, and we're serious about winning. Hell, odds are, whoever the GM was, he's running a team that's we're ahead of, in the standings. It was probably someone from a team we haven't faced this year. But I can surmise who it could have been. A general manager from an AL team, who hasn't faced us and who perhaps still perceives Milwaukee as a backwater place. An uninformed, (possibly unqualified?) GM, who would tend to look down on us. Did at least one of those phone calls come from area code 212?

"If they feel they need to make a trade, by all means go for it, but I'm not a fan of giving up anything of substance for a guy that pitches so little. They really have a solid bullpen, just not a good 7th " I partially agree, here, Brett. If we'd look to trade an Inman or someone valuable, for a guy who'll come in once a week, then no, of course that's not worth it. But the guy we'll trade for, at least the one I'd like to see us get, could/should step into either YoGa's or Charlie NewHouse's role, as one of them heads to the rotation. That is to say, with Wise so largely unavailable on back to back days, Turnbow iffy at times, if we make a trade, it should be for a middle guy who can go 1-2 innings perhaps 10 times a month. But a 7th reliever type? Nah. "Throw the next one at the wall and see if he sticks. I'm a proponent of just going through as many bullpen guys as possible until they catch lightning in a bottle. Heck, they even got semi-effectiveness out of Chris Spurling for a while there." This is where we part ways on this matter. Look at these luminaries the White Sox have been sending out there to relieve this year, hoping one sticks to the wall: - Ehren Wasserman - Dewon Day - Mike MacGougall - Matt Thornton - Ryan Bukvich - Nick Masset - Gavin Floyd *shudder!* These hacks have pretty much knocked an otherwise-promising White Sox team out of the race in 2007, with the worst bullpen in the league. We put in just ONE of these AAAA hacks for 2 key situations, and he blows them both. With Prince, JJ, Rickie, Jenkins, Hart and Mench all slumping to varying degrees since the break, the offense isn't there latelty, and our lead is down to 3 games. We can't just start throwing a series of nobodies out there, and hope to win.

"I realize he's been about as bad as you could imagine but judging a guy solely by 3 IP isn't exactly fair. He did great in AAA and I'd guess the scouts like his stuff as well. If Melvin can trade for a better guy, great. Otherwise, I can't see giving up on him already. " I'm with Russ....kind of. As a 2007 Brewer, I do give up on him. Maybe not as a 2007 Ranger (Doug's due for a Texas trade!) or a Red. It's because we don't enjoy the luxury of seeing whether he can get 20 more innings of on-the-job training in the majors. Trade him, and let him learn how to pitch in the majors on someone else's time. The White Sox desperately need bullpen help, and Grant's sparkling AAA stats could interest them. Tampa's pen? Awful, too. I'm not saying we can simply push a button or 2, and send him to a good team, in exchange for an effective reliever, like a Scott Linebrink, but he can't pitch up here for us this season anymore. Even though it's been only 3 innings, it suggests that the jump from AAA to the majors is like climbing into a Canyonero, when Marge had to use that step ladder to step in when she drove Bart, Lisa and Maggie to the grocery store. The thing I also can't get past is, that Balfour's 30 this year, and has had some significant injury history. Right now, in a pennant race, he's gone out there and did his part to cost us 2 games. Migod, I wish we had those 2 back already!

Oh. I thought you had a specific example. Oh well...