HiAndTight

As my gag reflex kicks in(I'm kidding....kinda) I agree with you, and I've actually always agreed on Villanueva. It's never made ANY sense to me why we where SO damn quick with the hook when it came to Villanueva, but not with anyone else. Literally, with anyone-else. I always thought he was a Fiers type pitcher. His velocity impressive, but it seems to appear faster to hitters, he had stretches when his change, curve and slider where working in which he had hitters totally, utterly baffled. Just clueless. Very interesting as to why he hasn't gotten more play.

I don't know about that. Sheets had a couple minor little things before he developed anything serious. Those inner ear things that cost him the better part of a couple years. Marcum's got terrible mechanics, has had Tommy John surgery, and has had recurring shoulder soreness. He's pitched two complete and relatively healthy big league seasons whereas at the same age Sheets had thrown over 600 more innings and made over 100 more starts. And Ben Sheets was a different and much better pitcher than Marcum when healthy, AND I think that was an aberration. Chris Carpenter may get 10 million after missing a full year this year from the Cards next year..if he wasn't already signed. But those are rare cases and rare caliber of pitchers under which I do not believe Marcum falls. It's already the end of August before he's ready to go, so that gives him one month. This is a guy mind you who throws 86-88, had TJ, missed a big chunk of this season and blew up something awful in the post-season. Those are just reasons why I think people saying we're "underestimating him," are overestimating him and his value. You need more upside IMO to justify taking that type of risk and Marcum simply doesn't offer it on a multi year big deal. Again, 1 year, even at the qualifying level, I'd take him back there, perhaps he stays healthy and pitches well enough to earn us a couple of prospects for our risk if we aren't in contention.

How was last year not a health season? I don't recall him missing any starts and he made 33 starts with 200 innings pitched the year following 31 starts with 195 innings pitched. Now I have concerns about his health and you're not alone in that, but to say he hasn't had one healthy year simply isn't accurate. He had TJ surgery, two healthy years, one in which he didn't miss a start, and the prior year I would guess they limited him a little bit after coming back, though I'm not sure. And this year he's been hurt. I think 4 years and 40 million is ridiculous for a pitch I have very little faith in when it comes to big games and I'd much rather put that money toward an Edwin Jackson type pitcher, or Dan Haren if the Angels decide to try and sign Greinke and decline his option. Though Haren isn't a real power pitcher either. But 2 years 18 million sounds about right. I would guess you'd get 320 innings out of him and they should all be around a 3.50-3.70 ERA.

This isn't fire sale, I'm not sure why you keep spinning it as such. The idea here is to try to get back better value than you would get out of draft picks. It's sound business considering the Brewer's future needs, they don't have the money to resign all these guys even if they wanted to so the question becomes to how to get the most value possible out of each guy. Why would the Brewers even offer someone like K-Rod a qualifying arbitration contract to hopefully get draft picks when no one is going to pay him that much money and he'd just accept again? Instead why not flip him and see if you can some kind of return on your investment? How did riding out Sheets into FA work out? What kind of draft picks did we get for Sabathia? Hart is being tossed around because he's the most valuable trading chip the Brewers have outside of Braun and Gallardo considering he's not a rental. If you don't have enough pitching to compete why does it matter if you have Hart in RF or 1B for 1 more season? Ramirez is being tossed around by Monty because that last year + buyout carries significant risk of being an albatross. We aren't talking about Ramirez in 2012, we're talking about him in 2014 when he's 36 years old with a $16 million contract and a $4 million buyout. Just in case what exactly? The entire central division collapses and the Brewers make the playoffs? To what end? Currently Milwaukee would have to jump 3 teams to win the division and 6 teams to get a Wild Card. Is that a realistic target? Once again I'm personally not content just getting to the playoffs, the only thing I care about is being able to compete for a World Series. Yes you can't reach the World Series without getting into the playoffs, but there's also the question of being able to adequately compete in the playoffs. We don't have starting pitching that regularly will get you deep into a game nor do we have a bullpen that will lock down the game. Of the teams below .500 we do have the best run differential at -11 but as team we have the 13th best ERA in the NL even though we've scored the 6th most runs in the NL. To put this a different way, the Brewers have allowed the 5th most runs in the NL at 355, the next closest tean we're chasing in the division is STL at 328, CIN and PIT are the 2nd and 4th best teams in the NL at 298 and 291 respectively. I've always felt the post season was about impact pitching and defense, because just about every team that gets there is going to be able to score runs. I think we have a pretty decent defensive club outside of 3B, but our pitching doesn't stack up with any of the top teams in the NL or AL. If Yo and Greinke don't pitch a complete game then what happens? What are the odds that everyone in the pen gets hot at the same time at the end of the season? Furthermore, once we decide that we only have 1 solution to the problem, we eliminate every other alternative and back ourselves into a corner, which is what Melvin seems to do, we always seem to end up with limited options. Losing Greinke doesn't have to be the death blow to 2013 and 2014 that is being predicted, there are many different ways the Brewers could acquire enough impact pitching and/or talent to remain competitive. Making Greinke the focal point is a self fulfilling prophecy because then you don't try to do anything else and if you can't resign him then you're left with nothing but middling FAs because you haven't made any other moves. We have more options than that but I found the following quote from Shortstop key for Brewers if Greinke’s dealt pretty infuriating: Not yet!?!?! Queue the, "that's just GM speak" responses... I know. However, what has Melvin said on the air during the telecasts or in print that leads anyone to believe he's capable of being a good seller at the deadline? His one deadline deal as a seller in the past wasn't exactly awe inspiring (Carlos Lee). Last time I saw him in the booth he was talking about just needing a hot streak of "8 or 9 out of 10 games" to get back in the race, TH obviously took the "not yet" directly from someone in the front office for his story. The problem here is timing, every deal that gets made reduces Melvin's options and every day that passes makes the players with expiring contracts less valuable. First of all, what type of prospects did we get back for Sabathia? Well, we WOULD have gotten Trout back for Sabathia most likely if not for a very rare situation in which the Yankees signed the #1 and #2 type A FA's that year, especially when they weren't even in the Texiera running until Boston...or so it seemed. . Though I fail to see any similarity. You don't trade for a guy in a playoff race to get back prospects. We also drafted Odorizzi the following year. I don't recall if he was the CC pick or not. But that seems totally besides the point as does the Sabathia reference. What did we get back for Sheets? AGAIN, you're-in-a-playoff-race. Why would the thought of trading Sheets even cross your mind at the time we'd have traded him(July/August during our first playoff appearance in over 25 years while Sheets was pitching lights out? He ALSO was a fluke scenario as he was very close to signing a contract with the Rangers, in fact, HAD a contract worked out only to have it not go through because of the physical. So I see absolutely no correlation between those scenario's and trading Corey Hart OTHER than to try and once again yell fire regarding Doug Melvin when there isn't even the whiff of smoke. Second, does the trade for an elite Shortstop, Hellweg and Pena do enough for you to stop declaring that Doug Melvin is terrible when it comes to in-season trades, something that's been pretty clearly proven to be false? Just curious. Are you still "infuriated," because he wasn't ready when you wanted him to be? Do you think we could have gotten more for him in the new era of FA compensation? Or are we just simply on to the next thing that Melvin did or didn't do? And yes, trading a majority of your best players IS in fact what people are referring to when they say "fire-sale." You want to trade Hart, Ramirez, Greinke(who was rightfully traded) and you DON'T think that's a fire sale? You've also mentioned trading Weeks if a team would have him. So that's 3/4ths of your IF you've advocated trading, K-Rod and, as you've put it, anyone else of value(excluding a small number of players). Pretty much fits the term "fire sale," to a T.

I both mis-read and then mis-spoke. I misread that they'd give up two of their pitching prospects AND Justin Upton, mis-spoke by suggesting we'd get all 4. I'm just surprised they'd make all 4 of those guys available, especially Bauer. And I'd take either deal in a heartbeat. Not as much Bauer and Upton, but I still think that's a terrible move for the D-backs, makes absolutely no sense for them. You could have the core of an elite starting staff in a couple short years, plus Wade Miley is having a helluva rookie season. Throw in the #9 and #13 overall prospects to start the season who are both ready as Bauer is already up and Skaggs is dominating at the upper levels despite playing in big time pitchers parks with the #25 prospect coming in a few years time, never mind they're 21, 21 and 19 and all strikeout, power arms, two of whom are lefties. What would possess you to trade pitchers like that? I'd much rather move Upton to the highest bidder this off-season and see what position prospects I can bring back after making a go at re-signing Stephen Drew to a 4 year 28 million dollar deal now that he's struggled with injury and his value has gone down. Lot "safer," route than giving up what could be two aces. Legit aces for 3 years in which you're not very likely to win anyway for Gallardo. If we went into next year with a lineup of Weeks-2B/Lucroy-C/Braun-LF/Upton-RF/Aram-3B/Hart-1B/Segura-SS that's one helluva lineup. I think you could plug Bauer in there next season. If you really wanted to go for it, and if Greinke's struggles continued in LA, sign him to the deal you offered and perhaps bring in a guy who nobody seems to want long term despite being a great value like Edwin Jackson to a 3 year 33 million dollar deal, you could throw out Greinke/Jackson/Bauer/Fiers and then whoever of about 5-6 options makes the rotation. Rogers, Peralta, Thornburg, Narveson, Estrada. You'd be pretty close to maxed out there financially IMO, but you could work on the BP from in house. I think AX bounces back next year. K-Rod is worth about 3-4 million on name right now alone. I'd let him walk unless it was for maybe 2.5 as I think his lack of success was also largely just luck and sample size. Maybe use a couple guys out of the pen, maybe Hellweg or Pena get off to good starts, whoever doesn't make the rotation, the waiver wire...lots of ways to build a BP. All far fetched....of course so is the D-backs giving up either 2 top 20 pitching prospects or 1 top 20 pitching prospect(or top 5-10 pitching prospect) and Justin Upton for Gallardo.

Is there anything Keith Law ISN'T bullish on? Now on some prospects, Trout, Harper, Profar, Moore, Machado, Bundy...guys like that everyone is bullish.(though I think it'll be a long time before you have a group of impact players that comes up together like many of these current guys this year or who where/are in the top 15-20 of the prospect rankings)

Yeah, agreed. Lets at least give Bianchi a fair look. I mean, it won't really be a "fair," look because we're rock solid around the IF, but if you're going to squeeze in back to back starts for Ransom, why not for Taylor Green or Bianchi? Over the next 6 weeks of the season I'd like to see 5 or so starts from Peralta 5 or so starts from Thornburg Jesus Sanchez in relief Schafer and Gindl getting some playing time. And if there is anyone else they think has a good arm, throw 'em out there also. Kintzler, see if he's got anything. I'd like to have seen a little Nelson, but aside from not having enough room with Rogers, Peralta, Thornburg and Fiers needing looks, but his little injury and then his ensuing mediocre performances put an end to any thought of that.

The problem Crew07 is it's YOU who seems to assign a players ceiling or lack thereof. You've had Nelson labeled as nothing more than an innings eater and bemoaned that pick since it was made because SOMEONE mentioned Suppan...though of course I don't recall him throwing 98 with a nasty slider. You've had Jungman's ceiling as nothing more than a back end innings eater(though where a bit higher on Bradley). And you loved Lopez, and we drafted Rondon in one year. So in reality, that's at least 4 extremely high ceiling arms right there.

My favorite line of the night....1 for 1 4 R 1 RBI's 4 BB's Coultier has just had an outstanding start to his professional career.

Weeks's bad half season turned his contract from great to good, going forward: Preseason ZiPS projection: .260/.350/.460/.810 Current Projection: .241/.342/.425/.767 League Ave 2B: .260/.320/.390/.710 I am presuming Weeks is an average defender (even if that might not be true this year). Many fans have been predicting the demise of Hart and Weeks for years. Unfortunately, a few of them are still searching for an "I told you so" on the matter. It's OK to be wrong about a player; we all are often enough. Hell, I've been wrong about both of them. I've expected Hart to fall off for a few years and Weeks to breakout(to superstar level, not just very good level) for the last few years. I'm happy with Hart, though not convinced he's going to age well...though obviously better if he stays at 1st. I just don't want to see a 4/60 type deal this off-season. And I'm still convinced Weeks will have that MVP-caliber season left in him.

I believe that alien ghosts created the universe. I guess it would be safe to assume you are not a Dave Cameron fan from fangraphs then. He recently wrote an article arguing the merits of Miguel Cabrera for MVP based almost solely on his performance in the....clutch. http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8277193/mlb-case-miguel-cabrera-al-mvp MVP talk must include Cabrera Tigers slugger has been terrific in the clutch So...I don't know where you fall with Cameron. But I've seen him quoted several times by people, a couple individuals in particular who think extremely highly of Cameron and have cited him and used him in arguments before. Hard to keep track of who is and who isn't.

No, I don't think that's worth noting in the least bit. Since when does a players athletic ability decline at age 27? You do realize that's generally considered the age a player peaks, correct? Hmm...If a player's athletic ability peaks at 27, wouldn't that mean is defense would likely decline from there? I think we are just splitting hairs here saying he is 26. The point is that if you signed him for a long term contract based on his defense it is likely to get worse as the deal goes on. Obvious, but probably worth noting due to the position he plays and how important his defense is to his overall game. Not sure if you're serious here or not. Perhaps I worded it wrong. A players peak years usually START at age 27(something you-yourself have stated repeatedly). Perhaps it's your dislike of Gomez that has you nitpicking such a ridiculous topic, but no, I don't think that you can assume that his defense will decline next year when he's 27 years old. And by the way, how on Earth are we splitting hairs that he's 26? He's 26. That is his age. It's the day you were both, a measurement of time. Splitting hairs is arguing that he's peaked defensively and that he's "only going to get worse," from here on out. No, I don't think it's a given that he will be any worse when he's 27 years old, 28 years old, 29 years old, 30 years old, 31 years old.... In fact, you've gone into some depth to argue what years where players peak years starting they where generally 27-32. So...again, I don't think it's worth bringing up that his defense is going to start to decline at the age of 27. In fact it's just as likely that he'll peak at age 27 and continue to perform at that level for the next 5 years. Still scratching my head as to how we're splitting hairs that he's 26. 12/54/85 is his birthday. Makes him 26. He'll be 27 next year the entire year. What hair's being split? The only thing that "hairs are being split over," is if you like Gomez you're going to argue that he's going to start to decline at age 27 despite arguing that is just the beginning of a players peak years-for several years.

I would mostly ignore all of those stats except OBP, SLG and OPS. I would only use BA if comparing it to OBP or SLG to give me some idea about how a player gets his value. The problem Gomez' OPS is that it is a SLG heavy OPS. One point of OBP is worth about 1.7-2 points of SLG depending on what you read. I don't like Range Factor at all. Playing behind flyball or ground ball pitchers will influence it. I prefer wOBA for offense as the quickest stat. I use multiple years of DRS, UZR and watching a player to get a feel for their defense. Again, the only real objection to Gomez starting is batting him in the top of the order. I agree. I would especially like to see the 12 guys who's Range Factor is better than Gomez. Without seeing the list, I'm guessing there are several I don't think would honestly compare to Gomez.

Seriously? I'd consider half that. I think that's an outrageous amount...I don't see him getting nearly 8 million per, and I certainly don't think he'd turn it down if it wasn't for Scott Boras. I doubt even Boras could pull that Rabbit out of his hat.

Considering he has an OPS of .861 the second half of the year I am fairly happy he is with us going forward. BUT HE'S HITTING .219! I'll be more curious to see how Gomez finishes 2012. It appears he's been given the chance to win the job outright for 2013. Yeah, as will I. I think with Gomez, it's a huge mental battle as much as anything(although in truth, he's always seemed supremely confident). Weeks just doesn't let anything bother him, so I think going into next year a strong finish will give Weeks more confidence and he won't be pressing as much, but I don't think it'd change too much. If Gomez can finish this year, go into next year as THE starting CF'er and be coming off a .785 OPS or so, I think that could be just a stepping stone. And again, he's hit RH'ers well this year, so I'm not so sure that a platoon is even necessary.

No, I don't think that's worth noting in the least bit. Since when does a players athletic ability decline at age 27? You do realize that's generally considered the age a player peaks, correct? He's 26 right now, is honestly IMO the best defensive CF'er in the NL(I'd have to watch more of Trout and some others in the AL on a regular basis). But if he can play great defense and slug .780 which I think is about where he'll be for the next 4-5 years. I'd throw out a 4 year 16 million dollar deal right now...and if he takes it, great, if he passes, we're not at that point where we're going to lose him next year anyway, and I don't see many teams giving him a whole lot when he does eventually come a FA which isn't for two years anyway. Again, it's just amazing the turnaround I've personally had on him. I thought when he got here, maybe a change would benefit him, then I watched him and just didn't think very highly of his baseball intellect, or plate discipline, and now I see a guy who makes mistakes, but usually aggressive mistakes, runs down balls in the OF that Morgan can't come close to, and is hitting for some power and a good ENOUGH BA that it drives his OBP high enough that I think you can plug him into the 7th spot and you'll be just fine. And when you look at next years likely lineup...which much to my dismay likely won't include Gamel, will have a very good 1-6 with Aoki, Weeks, Braun, Aram, Hart and Lucroy, you'll have enough OBP guys ahead of him that his power will help. The only problem with that, is you're taking a young SS in Segura who's much more important to our development and who has some similar issues as Gomez and sliding him into the 8 hole which I don't think is good for HIS development. But again, just watching him, not looking at his advanced metrics, I see a guy working the count better and becoming a better pure hitter. And this part is a broken record, but I think his BABIP would be closer to .310 or so than .295(which is what it was last time I looked) if he hadn't hurt his hamstring. I think that cost him not only during a period in which he was very hot, but when he came back, I think there where several times he could have beating one out but had to pull up to play it safe. Though the same could be said for Braun...of course I don't think anyone is questioning if Braun should be the Brewers long term LF'er. Although.....[sarcasm]I bet we could get Profar for him!![/sarcasm] The Rangers offense would probably pretty good in that scenario....Braun, Hammilton, Cruz, Beltre, Andrus, Kinsler, Olt, Young and Napoli..... Side note, I do think that'd be an interesting discussion on what it'd take to trade Braun, but since it'd never happen, and it'd just be an interesting discussion, I think the vitriol that'd come my way wouldn't be worth it.

Yeah, this is a very smart deal. Pretty basic deal for Theo. Seems to me he made a lot of deals like this in Boston with a lot of his guys. There are obviously always exceptions(if Scott Boras is your agent). Hell, this is just a pretty basic deal for any GM around baseball. If you have an elite SS, and I think despite some of Castro's issues, ie, his lack of concentration, his lack of elite defensive skills, Castro is still clearly among the elite group of Shortstops(I'd still rather have Profar over him Crew07), I think most teams would be happy with this type of deal, and most what...22(?) year old kids would love this type of certainty. With a modicum of common sense(which is sadly lacking in professional athlete when it comes to their finances) he should be set up for life, and in 20-30 years be worth 100 million dollars easily even if he splurges and spends on cars and a couple nice houses even without a second contract. But...we all know how that goes. Anyway, good move for the Cubs, I wish they'd have held off for another couple years so they'd have to pay a lot more, but that was always unlikely. It's one of the things I love above how the Brewers go about business. They've done this time and time again. And I'd rather sign every guy who is a top prospect, or has a couple great years and has 4 years left, to sign them to that 5-6 year deal. If you look at it, if you sign guys like Lucroy, Braun, Gallardo(I thought they should have signed Weeks earlier) then the Hall type deals, if we'd have signed McGehee(whom I admit I never liked, just using him as an example) and Axford, then you may have a couple who are overpaid, but in the long run, you're saving a lot of money instead of trying to sign them when they go to free agency).

except where he has been batting in the order. Yep, it's a joke that he's not in the 2 hole. Sadly, I don't see him moving up either because I'm sure RRR is in love with Gomez in that spot right now. I swear, no matter how inconsequential, there is always something to complain about. By the way, RR should have been in love with Gomez in the #2 spot and Weeks is now hitting in the #2 spot. You're BA makes Rickie's first half look like Teddy Ballgame... Yes, and if Phelps was a former top prospect who's producing extremely well right now and you wanted to get a sense of how he was going to do next year, your completely illogical point...may have some logic. But he's not, and Gomez, who's younger than Fiers, our rookie pitching sensation, is still just 26 years old and performing extremely well. The comment about his pure physical skills was meant(at least as I took it) to mean it's worth getting an extended look at him, PARTICULARLY when he's hitting and playing exceptionally well and if he can turn into the player many previously thought he could, he could be a AS caliber player.

I believe it's quite literally the opposite. I think the average person would define clutch as performing WELL under pressure, not simply "not," choking. I think that's a little ridiculous. If you walked up to someone and asked them if they thought Jeter was tough and they answered yes, as I think most average fans would, I highly doubt they'd say it's because he DOESN'T choke, I think they'd say it's because he comes up with the big hit, or the big play. I also truly believe that some have the mental ability to zone in a little big more when there is more on the line regardless of what any stat says. I'm a big sabr guy, but I think sometimes it can go too far. The closers argument to me is a good one. Clearly there elite closers have something in my opinion that allows them to perform better with the game on the line. Not that it's enough of a sample size or anything, but Axford this year...excelled for long stretches in middle relief, went back to the closers job after losing and blew it again. I think the ability to calm your nerves, relax and not allow the situation to become too big for you. The same is applicable to hitters, though again, I think it's nearly impossible to quantify. If you're talking about coming up late in the game and getting a big hit, you're also talking about facing the best relievers. I just have a strong disdain for those who summarily throw it out and claim it does not exist because they can't quantify it. And while I hate trying to compare athletics to real life, I actually do agree with the comment about a big presentation. I give several dozen presentations each month, and the more at stake their is, the easier it is to trip over your own words, get flusttered, to speed up, etc..etc...despite the fact it's the same exact presentation that I've given every other time. But having 100K on the line vs 10 K(just throwing numbers out) changes the scenario just as being in a close game in the 3rd inning vs the 8th or 9th changes the scenario.

I really liked the way Gomez LOOKED early in the season, stats aside, he looked like a guy who figured it out a little bit, and had come to the realization that he needed to take more pitches, layoff the slider, and get into better hitters counts. That was not even counting the stats. Ender I believe or Endaround, not sure, but came on and supported that by saying he was swinging a fewer balls out of the zone and taking more pitches. I didn't look it up then, and I don't want to now because I just want to watch how he's performing rather than go by stats as they can always be mis-leading. THAT SAID, at the time he was hitting about .280/.330 and had a SLG around .450 or so, and his OPS was near .800. Then after he came back from injury, he had a awful June posting a line of .188/.254/.359 with a .613 OPS....but within that, he was severely limited. He lost a lot of IF singles which he's always going to have to get in order to hit for any type of power, and he lost a great deal of range defensively. Fangraphs actually had him as a negative defender. But, the last couple months, he's been back hitting the way he did earlier in the year. He's put up a OPS of over .800 vs RH'ed pitchers this year suggesting he MAY not need to be a platoon player. In 2008 when he was 22 years old, he had a 2.6 WAR season playing 153 games. That year he had a .335 BABIP which I think when healthy may be a touch high, but is close to what he should be able to maintain. This year he has a .295 BABIP, we know he's a great defender, he's STILL just 26 years old(which for all the Fiers fans out there, he's younger than Fiers) and even with that injury riddled June when his Hammy was in rough shape, he still came back and has put together a very good season line in just 91 games. Again, .810 or so OPS vs RH'ers .800 OPS in the last full year(365 days) .781 OPS this year with 11 HR's and 21 SB's. If he plays a full season, I think he's very capable of putting together a .800+ season with 15-20 HR's, 40 SB's and great defense in CF. He may hit just .270/.315, but that's still MORE than serviceable.

Forgive me for my ignorance, but is this YOUR site, a friends, or someone you know personally? Because if this is just an article you found, it sounds a little ridiculous. If this is someone you KNOW....it's obviously interesting as it has merit.

Quite literally, all it takes to get me modestly excited. If you touch 91 as a 16 year old, you might blow out your arm and never touch it again, but chances are you'll add to that, and what's more, you get a young guy in who already throws a slider, curve and we'll drill a change into his head... Good deal.

Well, I think it's significantly more than just fixing the "once in a generation player." I think it's meant to help teams so the Red Sox and Yankees can't sign a guy like Middlebrooks in the 5th round for 1st round money(I don't remember if they did or if I'm thinking of someone else, but just for exampld) to a 1st round contract and just go up and buy up all the guys who slide because of singability concerns and corner the marketon them. The Farmer's, the Gennetts that sign once a year, the Red Sox and Yankees where signing almost exclusively those types of players and the cost for draft picks keep going up. I think the Harper and Strausburg signings had significantly less to do with this than the Porcello, Brackman and other type signings.

First, Chad25, please look into something called paragraphs. Not trying to be a jerk, just really hard to read. No you don't dump a .850 OPS guy if he's 24 and you control him for 4 more years- as an example. You do dump a guy before he's going to make $16MM, and it would be a real surprise if he's over .800 by then. I wouldn't be opposed to going into 2013 with Ramirez, and you can look to trade him at the deadline if we're out of the race. Even if that means paying part of his salary. How much would depend on the quality of prospect(s) we get back. Same goes for Hart, really. Only he would be much easier to move as a rental, since it's the last year of his contract. I would be willing to discuss any deals for them during the off-season- you never know if there's a team out there that really covets one of those guys. Aram's OPS the last 9 seasons have AVERAGED .890. He's at .874 and rising this year. No, it would not be a "real surprise," if his OPS is over .800 in two years. It's be a REAL surprise if people keep questioning him...

So wait you just said that the way we can compete is that you dont sign big time free agents, but you build your franchise from within. Then in the next paragraph you said in 2014 we should add a "key free agent signing or two" and this is a succesful franchise. So your arguing against what your saying a successful franchise like us should be. maybe i dont understand what your saying as it pertains to free agent signing. IMO next years team is a competitive team already. Our lineup is on pace to score more runs than last years team, and thats even with Weeks throwing in a dud. If our lineup stays the same next year and we produce like this year (very possible), we'll be fine. Now look at pitching: The odds that our bullpen next year is as bad as THIS years bullpen are very slim. But our starting pitching will be a tad worse than this years. Gallardo will give you the ups and the downs but still give you a mid 3 ERA. Marcum (if they bring him back) the same, maybe a little higher. Narveson, Fiers, and Peralta are all questions. But at worst case scenarios they have an average ERA of 4-4.2 . So just say our team ERA is (at worst) 4 or a little lower. about NL average. Yes those are all "if's" and possibilities that will happen next year but so are the ideas people announce on here. You dont know that the player/players the brewers would get back in return for trading Hart and/or Ramirez will become anything in the bigs. Gamel is a question too and im a huge mat gamel fan. I just like knowing what we have, minimizing the risk, which is why Id want to keep hart and then let him go. Take the Comp pick. Gamel is cheaper but money really isnt an issue right now for us with Greinke, K-Rod, Marcum, and Wolf becoming FA's. Being a small market team means you have to take risks, but I like minimizing my risks I take. You know in all honesty the brewers will probably trade Hart and/or Ramirez this offseason. Wouldn't surprise me. But its taking a risk on young talent at the corners, hoping they produce at MLB average levels. I don't like going into a season knowing/thinking its a rebuild year when I've seen what this team can do. I'm bouncing my head off my desk right now. Did you seriously NOT see what he wrote vs what YOU wrote? Some KEY Free Agents, ie, perhaps a pitcher LIKE a Grant Balfour and a Eric Hinske type player. A couple key, not BIG TIME Free Agents, some KEY Free Agents. Second, I LOVE how the "worst case," scenario's for Fiers, Narveson and Peralta are 4.00-4.20 ERA's when Peralta's TRIPLE A ERA IS HIGHER!!! Sorry for the all caps, but I can't believe someone would write that. Another of those two pitchers is coming back from Tommy John surgery. And the third looks great, but not quite as good IMO as Cal Eldred did in 1992 and Eldred didn't turn into Maddux. Wow. I'm still in awe thatyou have that as worst case scenario. Third, please for the LOVE OF GOD(Chris Farley voice) please STOP babbling, everyone, every single person, stop babbling about how the players you get back for a veteran might not turn out to be good. And a lot of them will. And guess what? Even all-star this year was a minor leaguer at some point? They where ALL unproven until they were proven. That's why you have a SCOUTING STAFF!!!