JohnBriggs12

Agree with MrTPlush (that's twice now).. Not ready to drink the Kool Aid on Cecchini coming off a season like he had at AAA. Heck he's never really done anything above A ball other than take a bunch of walks one year at AA. He could hit .600 this spring and I'd say fine, go prove you can hit at Colorado Springs and we'll get back to you. They used a decent prospect to get Villar. He's not a long term answer at SS, but he's going to get a chance to play a lot there until Arcia the Great arrives. I'd like to see a SS platoon of Villar vs. RHP and Perez vs LHP, and make it a competition to see who moves and takes over 3B (Hill's fine there in the mean time). Maybe having a switch hitter like Villar bat mostly from left side might make him a better hitter. If neither of them is productive and Cecchini's putting up monster numbers at AAA, then go to him.

"A chance to compete" is all I ever ask of teams I follow. Some times things don't work out and you have bad seasons, after which you get higher draft picks and that's where you need to make smart choices. Minor league depth is just that, minor league depth. Any dunce can trade off productive major league talent and get any number of young minor league players who have upside and leave you with minor league depth. But a lot of guys who had upside in the minors never make it past AA. The trick is fielding a major league team every year that has a chance to compete without decimating the product for several years.

If I've given the best case scenario, you've just given the worst. Jake Arrietta could get hurt and the Cubs could go into a tailspin too. The difference between last year and this is if Jungmann is getting crushed, he'll be optioned out 6-7 starts in and replaced by Lopez or Pena, or Burgos or somebody (yes even Suter Clancy) who's likely showing something in the minors. Sooner or later they'll likely land on somebody who does the job. Last year when Lohse and Garza struggled, their contracts kept them in the rotation for almost the entire season. I didn't give each pitchers best case scenario either, just a relatively positive spin. Nelson's best case is he's a true ace. Peralta already has a 17 win season under his belt, his best could be as good or better. He's in his prime right now. All I'm saying is the rotation is capable of preventing a historically bad season and making the team fairly competitive, if 73 or 74 wins can be considered competitive. Saying they are capable is not the same as saying they will either.

If you took Garza out of the equation, and they should, their rotation looks like Nelson, Peralta, Jungmann, Anderson and Davies. Jungmann and Davies both have options so if they struggle they can turn to Lopez, Pena or any of a number of young arms who'll be in AAA or AA. Nelson has ace-type stuff and has dominated both the Cubs (2.61 ERA in 20 IP) and the Pirates (2.48 ERA in 36 IP). He can be a 1 or at worst a 2 starter with a bit more consistency. Peralta's shown he can be a very solid #3 starter. He did it in 2014. Last year he struggles with little run support and injuries and some battles with his own inconsistencies, but again the stuff is there. Jungmann's numbers as a rookie were really quite good. He tailed off some as can be expected, but there's every reason to expect him to be a solid starting pitcher in 2016. Anderson's put together two solid, if unspectacular seasons in Arizona. With 48 major league starts under his belt, he's a pretty known commodity at this point as a 4th or at worst top of the line 5th starter. Davies showed in his starts in September that he can get big league hitters out and that he's fearless. He goes into 2016 on a 13 inning scoreless streak which includes handcuffing a Cub lineup that was rolling on 2 hits over 6 innings. Who knows what his ceiling is? Sure that's not an established top of the line rotation. But it could be quite decent without any of them doing anything special and there's promising arms behind them. If they perform as I think they can, this team should not lose 95-100 games. If they trot Garza out there to start the season, all bets are off though. I'd love to still have Lind around to solidify their lineup more, and wished they'd addressed the hole in CF with a true major league stop gap (Austin Jackson's still out there), but it is what it is. I see around a 72-74 win team that will lose 100 only if they trade off another established player or two and their young pitching crumbles. Every baseball season has value, or should have value, and even if contending is not in the cards, winning as much as possible is the goal of players, managers and hopefully, the front office. It will be a lot more fun to see them exceed expectations and play reasonably well than it will be for them to did a huge hole like last year and take the focus of fans off the field an on to the trade market by May 1st.

Lara is too far away to even assume he will make the majors, nonetheless be the starter at 3B for a playoff contender type team. I agree we need to be searching out 3B options in trades, but not if it costs us too much in value. In a few years, if it comes down to it, we can always sign a free agent if that is one of the pieces that would get us over the hump. Why not wait and see how Villar/H. Perez do filling in at SS? Once Arcia is up, if either or both have swung the bat well, just move them over to 3B. Both are in their mid 20's for gosh sakes.

I'd argue that Attanasio who now is preaching patience, reacted with utter impatience last year when the team got off to it's awful start on top of it's awful finish to 2016. Roenicke should never have been brought back after 2014. Hangover affects are real. A fresh start was needed but not a complete roster overhaul. Once Counsell took over the team played pretty decent baseball for a couple of months but were held back by the terrible performance of its two highest priced pitchers. That in itself should have been enough to end Melvin's tenure. So by July there was no hope, making the dealing of Gomez and Parra inevitable. But with the return the got for those players being close to major league ready, and Arcia being close to majors, the focus should have been on a quick 1-2 year retooling, not a gutting of every player of major league caliber. The Lind deal for 3 teenage arms is the one that I found so discouraging. I get that Lind was entering his final contract year but at a reasonable cost and considering offers of him made sense. But if all you could get were 3 guys who at best are question marks that might be of some value 5 years down the road, then I'd have rather held on to Lind at least until this year's deadline as he was the lone LH bat who was any threat in the lineup. That all they could come up with to replace him was Houston reject Carter made it worse in my opinion. That told me Stearns focus is on 2022, the year I turn 70. Not sure I'll live that long and there's a lot of Brewer fans my age or older that feel the same.

The thing that keeps coming back to me is that no matter how much energy and patience is put into a rebuild, the best that can ever be expected for this franchise that can't go after big money FA or hold on to it's stars beyond 6 years is to field a "a playoff plausible roster". Stearns has acquired talent that projects to be around in 4-5 years, at which point many on here will be contemplating what 2025 prospects they can get back for Arcia. Nelson will be gone by then as well and they'll be counting on young untested arms. I'm fine with a "playoff plausible roster" every year. That's reality for a franchise like the Brewers. Duplicating what the Cubs did is fantasyland. They could have fielded one in 2016 but deliberately chose not to. Sorry but that irritates me. Now .500 gives Counsel a shot at manager of the year.

The Rockies are also actively trying to sign Gallardo so upgrading their rotation is a priority for them. Rockies can't get FA pitchers to give them a look and Peralta has the power sinker that fits pretty well in Coors. Rockies possess enough offense to compete, they just need arms. I'm not that sold on McMahon though. The leagues he's hit in are notorious offensive leagues. Now if you expanded the deal to include a prospect at a more loaded position in the Brewer system and got Charlie Blackmon who's at the same control level as Peralta, along with McMahon, that could help Brewers be competitive in the nearer term (2017-2018) and the longer term as well.

I'm I the only one that would like to see Michael Reed given a shot at the CF job (barring another deal for an established CF)? Seems to me he fits best as a possible leadoff hitter and at 23 has the most upside of this group.

There's a path to .500 this year (or at least as far as the deadline) if they found an actual major league CF among the many flawed candidates or still went out an acquired one. They would need some things to go right but the acquisition of Hill and Anderson enhances that possibility somewhat. Hill would need to bounce back closer to his career averages. If he does, that solves the 3B question. It mostly depends on if Nelson can take another step forward, Peralta returns to 2014 form and they get better production from the 4th and 5th rotations spots than they did in 2015. Cardinals figure to take a big step back. Reds are a worse mess than Brewers. Last year's horrible record is mostly on Lohse and Garza being the two worst starters in the NL. Lohse is gone and hopefully the young arms will allow them to eat Garza's deal.

Opening Day: Broxton CF Lucroy C Braun RF Davis LF Carter 1B Hill 3B Perez SS Walsh 2B Regular lineup vs. RHP Gennett 2B Lucroy C Braun RF Davis LF Carter 1B Villar SS Hill 3B Nieuwenhuis CF

"Gennett is losing shine"? Where's the evidence of that? Against RHP, he's a career .307/.339/.458 hitter. He had a bad start in 2015 but was the same hitter he was the prior two years after a stint in the minors. Walsh is no sure thing. Need a backup to Villar at SS? You stick Hill at 3B, and have Perez and Walsh as IF backups. Perez has value as a guy who can play all over the IF. There's absolutely no reason either Middlebrooks or Cecchini have to make the team.

I like the deal a lot Finally a deal that actually makes the 2016 team slightly better and still adds a very viable prospect. I see opening day infield of Hill at 3B, Villar at SS, Gennett at 2B, and Carter at 1B, with 2 of Perez, Walsh or Rivera as backups. Anderson makes releasing Garza a no-brainer. They'd be replacing Garza with a somewhat established starter who as a guy not arby eligible for 2 more seasons, essentially becomes the return on the $25 million remaining investment in Garza without having to deal with a disgruntled guy in your clubhouse. Very, very shrewd. Hill has a history of bounce back seasons. He's not likely to post anything near his peak seasons, but something around his career averages is still possible at age 34 and if he does that, he could have some trade value with Arizona roughly 40% of his salary. I'm a bit concerned about Villar's defense SS, but if he hits, he'll likely end up at 3B anyway. Will be interesting to see if either Perez or Rivera push him and take that SS job. Wagner was in a tough spot with all the other youngish arms. Can't keep em all. See him for Diaz as sort of one deal and Segura for Anderson and Hill as the other.

I'd rather give Hernan Perez a shot over paying Guerrero. Now if they'd take Garza for him, sure.

You're forgetting Nieuwenhuis, who as the sole lefty hitter among the rostered OF, is a favorite to be in CF on opening day. I don't see both Broxton and Liriano on the opening day roster barring a trade. I see them in direct competition for one available spot.

Liriano is an out of options player who still has developing to do. That's why he was available so cheap. I'm not a big fan of this strategy. Guys who are overmatched at the major league level may eventually develop, but it's usually after they are outrighted off a roster or dealt for marginal return. With all the other OF in camp, is he going to make enough of an impact to win a roster spot, or will he be given one because he's out of options?

He wasn't good in his major league trial last year. 1 HR and 39 K's and a .555 OPS in 109 ABs? That after more than 3,000 minor league ABs? Figuring SD might feel he's hit a wall in his development. Dealing Davis to make room for that would be rather foolish. He's far from a finished product, doesn't have the power to project as a regular corner OF and is questionable defensively in CF. Lots of red flags here.

Though it's not always indicative but he makes a lot of errors and the Pads used him exclusively in RF. Even there he made 4 errors in 34 games. That's not good. In the minors he made 20 errors in 213 games in CF. He's said to have a very strong arm, so I'm guessing many of the errors were on throws that got away. 6 foot and 230 is not exactly the body shape of a typical CF. I still think Nieuwenhuis is the odds on for opening day CF because of the lack of LH bats and his experience. Is Santana a guy they'll deal? This move makes that more likely. Caution everyone, he fanned 39 times in 109 major league AB's with 1 homer. With that K rate, you need to be able to put up 25-30 HR. Not sure he is. But virtually every OF Stearns has a acquired has serious contact issues too. That to me is a disturbing trend. I can somewhat live with Carter fanning a lot because he's got proven power but these guys?

With the DH, it makes it much easier to carry extra and often cheaper bullpen arms up to 8 or 9, which is where the game is going anyway. It saves starters, who are making the big money and can extend careers on those guys who are signed to long term deals and making those back end years less painful. The less "dead money" on a team's books the more it can spend on productive players.

So you think a left handed Mike Fiers is the best this system has to offer? I think Lopez, Davies, and Hader will graduate from rookie status (and a prospect list). I see the Brewers cutting bait on Garza and eventually trading Peralta at the deadline. I'm not sold on Medeiros, while Ponce has too small a sample for me to judge where 2016 might go. That said, Mike Fiers is not a bad outcome to have, and Suter's performance last year was VERY good, both at Biloxi and especially at Colorado Springs (where pitchers go to be clubbed like baby seals). A 3.31 ERA at Colorado Springs and a sub-2 ERA at Biloxi? Those speak pretty loudly to me. If this team is in the tank early, I would suspect we'll see them go through a number of arms at the major league level and it's entirely possible they'll give Suter a shot ahead of some of the more heralded arms if only to see if what he's done in the minors translates to the majors and to save those guys control years. You are right that they should cut bait on Garza, but if Peralta's having a rebound type year, they can wait until next offseason for the best deal. Suter's leash won't be long though and if and when he does make it up, he'll have to perform from the get go.

Ceciliani is far superior defensively. Besides they already have Broxton who's somewhat comparable to Liriano with the bat and a better defender also.

Ok, he put up Logan Schafer type numbers for the Mets in a small sample last year, but he also posted a .978 OPS in hitter friendly Las Vegas. He's a lefthanded hitter (a plus) and a very good defensive CF. Given the Brewers have a rather unimposing collection of candidates for CF, what's wrong with picking up this 25 year old to add to the competition?

TB has been trying to unload Loney, who's entering the final year of his contract so I'm not sure Shaffer is totally out of the picture there. That being said, he's no lock to project as everyday first baseman either and they may make him available. His minor league numbers are good, maybe even very good but not great. Worth a prospect in the Brewers 15-20 range? Sure. He's likely below average defensively at 3B but Brewers could live with a year to see for themselves and if he really hit, 1B becomes a viable option.

Please go back and see what Cecchini hit at those levels at a similar age. .322/.443/.471/.915. 47 extra base hits 23 SB's 94 BB to 86 K. Also Cecchini can field both 1B & 3B. Moreover, he is not a liability in in the field. Is he going to win ton of Gold Gloves, no. But, he is not going to hurt you or be a liability either. So please explain to me how he can't hit or field when clearly at the same levels and age, the major difference is Cecchini walks a ton more, Mancini hits for more HR power. http://www.overthemonster.com/2014/3/5/5473208/garin-cecchini-and-the-importance-of-the-hit-tool Boston was in love with his bat until he had his struggles in 2015. His hit tool and ability to walk were considered top of the line. Cecchini had great numbers 3 years ago, but Mancini did it last year and his numbers got better after going from advanced A to AA while Cecchini's regressed after he was promoted to AA that year and regressed further the next two seasons. Cecchini's walk rate was incredibly good up until 2014 and 2015 when they were simply decent. But he's never had the power you need at corner IF spots.

"Cecchini to Mancini is a great combo name" Yes, but unfortunately Cecchini can't hit or field. Mancini on the other hand is coming off a monster season between Hi A and AA: .341/.375/.563 with 21 HR and just 93 K's in 533 AB's. He might be one of the best all around bats in all the minor leagues and a guy who'd be ready to assume first base job in Milwaukee by 2017.