JohnBriggs12

Wait START with Prince? So in your opinion to get Curis Granderson we would have to trade Prince, +? No, they'd probably take a straight up deal. The relative market value of a top flight CF in his prime albeit one coming off an off year under control over 4 years at a reasonable cost vs one of the games best run producing 1B under control for 2 years is pretty close. My point is Hardy and a bunch of prospects wouldn't come close to nabbing Granderson with all the other teams out there that would be bidding.

I'll defend Macha to a point. Ahead of Gamel, he's playing a 26 year old rookie. Now many say that because McGehee wasn't a high level prospect and Gamel has been, that Gamel should get the call ahead of McGehee. That would have been true back in May, but given what McGehee's done in the major leagues, he's upped his status considerably and now the only real difference is the 3 years in age and that one bats left and the other right. They are both "prospects" now. That's not to say though that he shouldn't play Gamel ahead of Counsell on the days McGehee sits. It's not like Counsell doesn't understand the situation and it's why he should have been dealt to a contender last month regardless of any return. It would have been a favor to him and freed Macha of the temptation to use him over a younger player. I think a case also can be made because Gamel struggled so badly in Nashville that he needs a fresh start in spring training to work on his problems and that starting him everyday now might hurt his confidence more. As for Escobar, I don't think Macha deserves much blame. He didn't create the situation. I think it's fine that he's putting Escobar based on matchups and also giving Hardy some starts for scouts from other organizations to see. My guess is even with Escobar at number one on the chart next year, that whoever is managing will have a veteran backup to play a couple times a week. In an ideal world, I think they'd like bringing back the versatile Lopez to play 2 games per week at each of the 3 If positions next year to take pressure off of Escobar, allow Weeks to work his way back and hit down in the order, and give either McGehee or Gamel days off against tough matchups. There's no defense for Macha playing Kendall so much though. If Rivera's going to have any role or chance to compete for a bigger role next year, he should be playing 4 times a week now.

He's got a Braun-like contract so I don't see the Tigers dealing him after a slightly off year. If he were put on the market, a lot of teams would get real interested real quick and he'd have enormous trade value. As for the Brewers, they'd have to start not with Hardy, but with Prince. Now that would be worth discussing considering the Fielder legacy in Detroit.

My bad, you're right on Alderson. I was looking at an outdated prospect list. I've edited it.

I disagree with Olney. Boston is no better than 3rd choice of where Fielder will play in 2010. I'd break it down by percentages: Milwaukee: 80% Brewers have marketing issues after this season and trading Fielder now is a really tough sell. They'd have to be blown away with an offer and nothing we've heard is going to get it done. San Francisco: 15% Giants have the combination of incentive (next to last in NL in runs scored) and the pitching including a top of the line prospect in Bumgarner and several just below that to blow away Melvin if they chose to. They also could be prime candidates for an expanded deal. They are the team to watch. White Sox: 2% You can never leave Ken Williams out of big name discussions. Thome is gone. Konerko is on his last legs. They have some arms they could deal, but not the depth the Giants have. Plus it now looks like Rios could end up being a big salary burden. Boston: 2% I'd leave Boston out of it entirely if they weren't always trying to out do the Yankees. They are 3rd in runs scored in AL this year so another big bat isn't a big enough incentive in my opinion for them to overpay and that's what Melvin wants. In my opinion Red Sox would be much more in need of Fielder in 2011 and would give up at least as much then as they would now. Everyone else: 1% Such teams as Detroit, Seattle, Angels could kick the tires.

No, it's idiotic not to reward performance over potential.

He started the year in AA where he spent most of the season. He wasn't really a "beast" there. His WHIP was 1.513. He was actually better in the majors. I can understand him not being a lock to be in their rotation next year if they get Marcum and McGowan back. But I wouldn't overpay for a guy based on 11 starts. The Brewers figure to have 4-5 actual prospects in the Huntsville rotation at the start of 2010. It's not unreasonable for one or two of them to move through Huntsville quickly, and be pitching in Milwaukee by the end of next year.

You might consider it too big a gamble, but I'm certain the Brewers don't and neither do I. McGehee has the inside track on the 3B job for next season because he got an opportunity and he seized it. To a lot of people in baseball, that goes a lot farther than gaudy minor league numbers. If the Brewers can get value back like Jurjens for Gamel and Hart, they'd be nuts not to grab it. If Gamel were to repeat his AAA numbers next year: .278/.367/.473, with 89 K's in 320 AB's, his value will drop like a rock. For me, that's the bigger gamble.

nate82, In Michael Hunt's column yesterday, Melvin regretted not being aggressive enough in addressing starting pitching. It was hinted that he would forsake spending anywhere else to upgrade the rotation. To me that means they won't bring back Cameron, Kendall, Hoffman and/or Weathers or Looper and they will have lot more to spend than you suggest. The crux of the article was that everything is based on starting pitching and he'll fill in a lineup around Braun and Fielder the best he can. Pineiro has to be a top priority because his signing does more to close the huge gap between the Brewers and the Cardinals than any other pitcher. You are taking away one of the Cardinals Big 3 and adding him to the Brewers. Yes, he's had a career year and you are going to have to maybe overpay him. But it's not like he hasn't had really good years before this one or that he's gotten by with marginal stuff like a Suppan or a Looper. His year this year surpassed anything either of those guys did. I now expect the Brewers to try to add 3 starting pitchers. One will be a fairly high priced FA like a Pineiro or a Washburn who's coming off a good year and would clearly go into 2010 as the number 2 guy. The second will be the type you mentioned nate, though I think Hudson will be in pretty high demand and might fill the bill of the first category. The 3rd is a young pitcher that they get in a deal involving Hardy. That guy is probably not going to be the high ceiling guy, but a guy who's capable of competing with Bush for a rotation spot. If they can accomplish this, then I see them moving Suppan to the pen. Suppan's best opportunity of extending his career is to become a reliever. It might help him gain a little zip on his fastball which makes his other pitches better. As for Parra, I think a big problem for him was the completely unrealistic expectation that he could be a number 2 starter this year. I think if he's clearly the 4th or 5th starter gong into 2010, it will relieve a lot of self induced pressure he seemed to put on himself at the start of this year.

You selectively point to his ERA which isn't remarkable to back up your argument, but in fact his 37 K's and just 23 Hits allowed in 33 innings show he handled AAA hitters pretty well. He's got a chance to be a decent big league reliever if he gets that opportunity. Brewers have several guys in that category on the roster right now. Chris Smith and Chris Narveson haven't been all that bad. All those guys need to get some looks now. They will be some of the guys fighting over the 11th and 12th pitcher spots next spring. Let's not forget that Doug Henry came up to the big leagues for the first time at age 27 and ended up being a pretty effective closer for a year and a half.

If they trade McGehee this offseason, they aren't "selling high". Teams are going to discount the stats of a 26 year old rookie in 300 AB's. Now if McGehee puts up solid stats again in 2010, his value goes up exponentially because he will have validated his 09 season but even if he doesn't and say hits .260/.320/.400, he'll still retain most of his current value. He would have to fall off into Hall territory to significantly reduce his value from where it currently is. As an example, think Ryan Ludwick. He showed the first signs of being a solid player in 2007 after hitting .267/.339/.479 with 14 HR. But he still could have been had cheaply in a deal because he still wasn't viewed as an everyday corner OF. When he had an outstanding 08, he became a very marketable valuable piece but there remained plenty of skepticism. Even though his 09 numbers have slipped some, his trade value is just as high because his numbers are solid enough to validate him as a productive everyday player, something there was some uncertainty even after 2009. There's still plenty of uncertainty that McGehee is a productive everyday player so teams aren't going to give back the value of a productive everyday player.

Make him the player/manager and give him incentives in his contract for not playing himself. Better yet, name him manager of Nashville.

Corey Patterson is a proven manager killer. Just ask Don Baylor, Dusty Baker, Sam Perlozzo, and Manny Acta. He's also knocked out some GM's. Look out Doug and Ken.

Piniero doesn't just look good. He is good. Just look at his first 3 years in Seattle. What separates the Cardinals is they figure out why a guy like Piniero struggled after his first few outstanding years, and they fix it. Other teams take guys and hope they regain past form, Cardinals understand why they've lost form. It's that simple. I also agree with the statement that LaRussa knows more than one way to win. He wins using the strengths of the guys he has. What should bother Brewer fans is not that the Cardinals have been so good so long, but that they've jumped light years ahead of the Brewers who now have a huge gap to make up.

Anyone more in the know may correct me, but it seemed as if the Brewers were determined to keep the Brevard core together for a full season and into the playoffs rather than gradually be promoting the many deserving guys to Huntsville which for a few exceptions (Lucroy, Braddock), was a roster full of veterans with not much future. I would expect the bulk of the core that got it done in Brevard to be together to start 2010 in Huntsville after all get some major league camp experience next spring. By end of 2010, it would not shock me in the least for a guy like Rivas or one of the other pitchers to have found his way to Milwaukee.

The trouble with paying Hardy, even $10 million over 2 years, is that it locks him in as your SS much the way they were forced to open this year with Hall at 3B. That's fine if he's the guy we saw in 07 and 08, but not if he's the 09 version. With what happened with Hall, I don't see them doing that. Trading Hardy and starting Escobar at SS next season, leaves you with more flexibility. They aren't going to deal Hardy, and leave Escobar alone completely to sink or swim. That's one of the reasons why bringing back Lopez makes sense. You could try Weeks in the OF and Lopez at 2B, then if Escobar struggled, just move Lopez to SS and Weeks back to 2B. There's also still a decent possibility that Counsell returns for another year to offer protection at the position.

I think the pitcher of the year should be Axford. 89 K's in 69 IP and a .185 BAA and advanced through 3 levels to the big leagues? Even though he's a reliever that's more impressive to me than what the starters did. My co-runners up would be Rivas and Butler.

I'd argue that both Schafer and Farrris contributed more to Brevard than did Gindl. Both Schafer and Farris did outstanding in their roles as top of the order hitters (Schafer .313 BA, .369 OBP 1 Error: Farris .298 BA, 70 Steals, 9 errors), both offensively and defensively. Gindl's numbers, while good, aren't all that special for a corner OF.. I think the award is more POY for position player than it is purely a hitting award.

With some of the comments here, you would think McGehee did nothing in the minors. In fact, he went right to A ball as a 20 year old (he never played in Rookie ball) and wasn't overmatched. He hit .297 at AA at age 22. If the Brewers had a 22 year old 3B hit .297 with 72 RBI at Huntsville this year, he'd be considered a prospect. Last year he drove in 92 runs in 133 games. That was an indicator that he was a tough out with men on base. His power wasn't all that evident, but some guys take time to learn to pull the ball and when they do their HR totals increase. It's not like he's doing this at 30.

I agree that neither has proved a thing, but I don't think they'll keep Cain at AA for the simple reason that they have Schafer ready to move up to AA and they won't have both sharing CF. Sure they could have Schafer skip AA, but that's not their normal method. I think they'll look at it as sink or swim for Cain in AAA.

2008 wasn't his only good year. He had a terrific rookie season in 2003: .279/.336/.494, 22 HR, 75 RBI, 4th in ROY voting.

I believe he's the odds on to be the Brewer starting 3B on opening day 2010. Gamel's year has to be considered a disappointment. He really hasn't hit since May and his strikeout rate at AAA is alarming. I don't think the Brewers will see him as ready to take over on a daily basis especially with the very productive McGehee around. Some have suggested the Brewers would benefit by trading him. But he's not as zzmanwitz says "at his peak value". He's got a lot more value than he had to start the year, but one good season from a guy who was available on waivers a year ago isn't going to make teams willing to give up a ton of talent for him. Now were he to put together a full season with numbers close to what he's doing this year, and not only does his trade value skyrocket, but you're looking at a guy who as Invader3K suggests, could be Fielder's replacement at 1B in 2011. What's impressive about McGehee is that he hits good pitching, rarely fishes for stuff that's off the plate and has handled his success with tons of maturity. He's clearly the biggest bright spot in an otherwise forgettable season.

What year was that? He made is major league debut in 2007 and he had not pitched in A+ ball that year. This perception that he has an extensive history of injury is way overblown too. He's got 891 2/3 innings of pro ball experience so he's got experience. Since he pro debut season of 2002, he's pitched at least 73 innings every year. True, he missed the 2nd half of 2004 and the first half of 2005, and parts of 06 and the end of 07 (broken bone in hand batting) but his injury history is not all that different from a lot of pitchers his age.

I thinks it's down to: Hitters: Casey McGehee, Brewers Geraldo Parra, D-Backs Colby Rasmus, Cards Chris Coghlan, Marlins Dexter Fowler, Rockies Andrew McCutcheon, Pirates Pitchers: Tommy Hanson, Braves Randy Wells, Cubs If they go with a pitcher, I think it has to be Wells. He has more starts, and a lower ERA than Hanson. If they go with a hitter, McGehee has a good shot as long if he can lead in HR, RBI and hit .300.

I think his poor offensive season is due in part to his concentrating more on his defense which prior to this year, when he was often known as "no-mitt Doumit", was lousy (14 PB combined in 134 games in 07 and 08, just 2 this year in 52 games. The big question with him is if he can hit and play defense at the same time. He hasn't so far.