HiAndTight

Granted Shoppach is better, I see no reason why we would be interested when Maldonado will be just as serviceable. eeeehhhhhhhh i disagree. shoppach may be a little better of a hitter today but isnt nearly as good a defender as maldy. maldy is also like what- 6-7 years younger. martin will end up twice the catcher kelly is. Hmmm...Shoppack is a VERY good defensive catcher. I Maldy is 7 years younger, but right now I don't think he's as good. But again, it's about so much more than that. 6 years vs a rental for a team that's only in a race for a top 5 pick this season.

Ding ding! The whole "rumor" seems like pure speculation, and nothing more. Granted Shoppach is better, I see no reason why we would be interested when Maldonado will be just as serviceable. "Better is a relative term." Ben Sheets is "better," than Wily Peralta right now, but I wouldn't make that trade. Shoppach is better than Maldy and is also a very good defensive catcher, but why give up the absolute ideal back up catcher when you control him for 6 years and could probably offer him a 6 year 9 million dollar deal, he'd likely jump at it. And I think Maldy is going to continue to improve offensively and become a consistent .260/.330/.425 type hitter, and if I'm right, with his D, that's starter quality. In fact, I'd equate him to a backup QB. He won't get much PT, and he will be able to start for a number of other teams and eventually the Brewers will trade him for something of value in 2-3 years...if he's the player I believe he is. Though to be honest, I'd rather see Lucroy become a 3rd basemen and move him over there in 2 years when Aram is gone if he proves to be a .300/.360 hitter who can hit 12-16 HR's a year. I'd like to see him save the pounding he's going to inevitably take behind the plate. I think his bat is too good to play 120 game behind the dish, and Maldy is too good to "only," play 42 games a year. And Lucroy appears to be a good enough athlete to play elsewhere. Kinda like Pat Boarders who played 3rd base after starting out as a catcher, or to a much lesser degree(most likely) Craig Biggio...though 2nd base appears to be just loaded.

Well, I think you hit on a BIG point when you mention a lot will depend on how guys pitch down the stretch. I'd love to see someone claim Wolf, but he just hasn't pitched well enough to be claimed. Perhaps a injury to a contender will open that door up and allow Peralta to get a string of starts with Fiers, Rogers, and Estrada. But mainly, I'd simply like to see a proven, solid 2/3 type starter who's a dependable 200 Inning, 33 start a year type guy simply to take pressure off the young guys. Then you get into a position where you start to really build up a very good AA and AAA rotation with Jungman/Bradley/Hall in AA, the two Angels, and then Nelson, Thornburg, and Burgos in AAA. If the big league staff is going well, I'd like to see some of those guys thrown into the pen next July/August to get their feet wet and then let their production sort 'em out the following year. But I'd like to see that base. Obviously Greinke/Gallardo would be the great Pyramid of Giza type base for us with all our youngesters, and I'm not ready to give up on that, but Jackson and Gallardo, Haren and Gallardo...whomever just so those guys can kinda ease into it. Fiers as the 3, Rogers #4, Estrada, #5 or whoever. Like you said, the last couple months will give us a much better idea. But even that, it's just an idea. At least you're not going into 2013 blind with Mike Fiers, but you're also not really sure what you're getting. Will he continue to be a 2.90-3.30 type pitcher? I HONESTLY believe he CAN. But more realistically, 3.90-4.30 is more likely his ceiling. Anyway, I think the only way the Brewers contend for a WS in the next 3-4 years(the Gallardo years) is if we get a proven pitcher who we either just spend a ton for(Greinke/Haren/Beckett) two of whom are even more unlikely than Greinke, or if we develop 5 2's and 3's. Meaning we get 4 guys who can develop like Gallardo did and do so soon. Which is possible if you look at each individual pitchers potential, but the chances of hitting on just 2 is about 20 pct, hitting on 4 is about 1 in 50. But hey, there are teams that manage to do it. And maybe all that history, all the JM Gold, Nick Neugebauer, Ben Sheets(more the time of his injury, not his overall success), the Juan Nieves, the Teddy Higura(again, timing), Mike Jones, and so on and on...and on....simply means we're due for a great string of success.

That was why it was so crucial to extend Greinke. Now that he's gone, he's not coming back. The Brewers are never going to sign the number one rated free agent. There's really nothing out there to improve the team in free agency outside of some arms for the bullpen. I believe that Peavy has a huge option, but if he keeps dealing I'm sure the White Sox will pick it up. Combine that with the fact that they don't really have the ammo to swing any deals for veterans, and the short term prognosis looks pretty bleak. I've stated my reasons for why I don't think it's the least bit unrealistic for the Brewers to bring Greinke back next year, so I won't go in depth again, but if you look at the teams who are making decision based upon the luxury tax, many of them are the traditional big spenders and are actually trying to move pieces, or are simply not bringing back key pieces because of the luxury tax. I don't see the big boys jacking up the price for Greinke and after his time here, and Attanasio's desire to keep him, I think after testing the FA waters, we see where he's at, and I think it's actually very possible he's brought back. But lets assume he's not. There are a couple pitchers on that list that would be good signings. Dan Haren-There's a decent chance he isn't brought back because of the money the Angels have invested in other players, and in fact, that could end up being the team(them or the Dodgers) among the big market teams that do in fact stop us from getting Greinke back. If the LAA sign Greinke, I think they decline Haren's 15.5 million dollar option, or at least look to move him without asking for the world in return. I think both Dan Haren and Edwin Jackson would be two ideal options. Jackson is a lock for 200 innings a year and a ERA the right side of 4.00 just about every year. Haren is a guy who could go out and win a Cy Young, but again, has struggled, and with Weaver locked up, Wilson also locked up, if they did sign Greinke, he could be had. And then there is Jake Peavy. The White Sox MAY pick up his 22 million dollar option, but it's also entirely possible that they do not, in which case, he'd be the type of guy that I'd be very weary of. 3 years 45 million for him would be about as high as I'd go. I'd be nice to add another veteran starting pitcher, and a guy like Edwin Jackson, despite having pitched for several years in the big leagues, still has the feel of a guy who could STILL have that breakout year. The type of year where everything goes right and puts together a 2.85 ERA and becomes a Cy Young candidate. I'm still not sure why teams have moved him so regularly and why he only got one year last year. So my list would be 1-Jackson 3/33 at most 2-Haren-If in a long shot his option is declined and we can get him for 3/45, 4/60 after a down year. Not likely. 3-Peavy for a similar deal. Though his injury history is rather troubling. My Next tier would be 1-Annibal Sanchez-He still has the stuff to pitch much better than he has for the most part. 3 years 24 million? 2-Brandon McCarthy-After looking at his medicals. He's pitched very well this year, but he has been on the DL with a sore shoulder. He went on the DL, came off it, pitched 7 shutout innings and went back on it. Incentive type contract. 1 year 5 million 5 million for 200 IP, 3 for 175...etc..etc...etc... 3-Dice-K Just to take a flier. Obviously on a cheap deal. 1 year 3 million. I've always liked him. We've had some recent success with Japanese pitchers. There are obviously others, but you have to look at two things to me. Top end starters who you can get cheaper because of circumstance such as the three I listed(and the circumstance I suggested may not even be close to the reality of the situation) and the following three who are either underachievers or who are pitchers trying to make a comeback. The later is usually reserved for the like of the Yankees and the Red Sox. Ben Sheets is also a guy I'd be interested in...though I dno't think that interest would be returned. One guy who's not a FA, but available that I'd LOVE to get is Josh Beckett. I believe he could return to his dominant ways, and on a two year deal, I think he'd be more than worth it. All of this of course is under the premise that we do NOT get Greinke back. I would like to throw out another veteran with Gallardo to go with Estrada and then likely Fiers who HAS to have earned a spot and as it stands now Rogers, but beyond him TT, Peralta, Nelson, Burgos. One pitcher I wouldn't touch with Bill Gates bank account is Kyle Lohse. Let the Cards overpay to bring him back....

My final thought on this subject. First of all, the players the Brewers have developed in the past, or their history of is absolutely zero consequence here. Using that logic, we should have traded Gallardo a part of a deal a few years ago because Nick Neugebauer a potential Cy Young Caliber pitcher got injured as did Jones, Gold and whomever else. You're talking about totally different era's of baseball. Tell me what JM Gold has to do with Jimmy Nelson in anyway at ALL and then we can discuss why the history in this case is the last bit relevant? Second, how can you ask, "how can you be satisfied with the 2013-2014 rotation," when we haven't got a clue who's going to be in it? It could very well be that Grienke, Gallardo, Fiers, Rogers and Nelson are in it. It's possible that there are about 30 different combinations that are in it. It's possible both the Angels we got back for Greinke who throw 98-99 MPH get their command under control and become frontline starters. It's entirely possible that Jungman and Bradley(especially Bradley as Lefties tend to take longer to develop) thrive in their second professional seasons as both have shown glimpses of greatness(despite the erroneous nonsense that they were drafted to be #4/5 pitchers just so they could get up to the big leagues early). But you know what? ALL the pitchers you look around baseball and want to trade for? Guess what they all have in common? They where PROSPECTS at one point. And I think it's just absolutely foolish to summarily dismiss an outstanding group of about 15+ pitchers scattered from all levels and about 8-9 from A+ and above, many of whom throw in the mid to upper 90's because of what players who happened to pitch for the same organization the last 40 years ended up doing. It'd have been akin to saying, "with our success in developing SS's, are you really confident in going into the next couple years with JJ Hardy? Or substitute that with 1st basemen, Ryan Braun....etc..etc... History is just that. History. It has nothing to do with how much success future players will have, ESPECIALLY when you've got an entire new organization developing these pitchers. The pitchers you're talking about might as well have pitched for the Ornix Blue Wave as they and their coaches have about as much in common with the Brewers coaches and front office from 2000 and before. And finally(I mean it on this subject for now) isn't it time for the love of GOD to let Suppan go? he was a guy we signed for a deal at market value who'd throw 200 innings the prior 4 years and averaged about a 4.00 ERA and had great success in the post-season. He was a bust with us. Looper was a late addition for low risk just before spring training. Randy Wolf by in large has turned out to be a great addition. NEITHER was overpaid at the time we signed them. Both got what they deserved based on their history. Looper not very much, Suppan a lot more. They didn't end up earning it(unless you go by 1953 type thinking and look solely at wins as many of those who write into the MJS readers comment section do and value wins in which case Looper was a huge success). Randy Wolf was a good signing. Perhaps Edwin Jackson for 3 years and 33 million will be our next good signing. Perhaps we go after Dan Haren who's been one of the best pitchers in baseball next year and who the Angels may not want to pick up at 15.5 million and we sign him to a 4 year 55 million dollar deal and he regains his dominant ways. Who knows. But obviously the Brewers history since 1982 is of little consequence of we wouldn't have won 90+ games twice in the last 4 years, draw 3 million a year and have come 2 games away from the WS last year. I don't know. But this old way of thinking, ie, we're a small market team so we can't sign this guy despite not having "small market," payrolls, or that because of our history of developing pitchers the current group won't do anything, or any number of things that the Brewers have changed while changing the entire culture of this organization. Which despite it's overwhelming success for some reason comes under constant scrutiny.

This is how I feel. A lot of people get all hot and bothered over Shields, but he really doesn't do it for me. He's definitely a solid MLB starting pitcher, but not an ace type guy. I certainly wouldn't pillage the farm system for him. Well, I don't agree with this whatsoever. Shields has thrown 1283 IP since 2007 and is throwing his fastball at 92 MPH this year. Marcum has thrown 798 since 2007 and his average fastball is under 87 MPH this year. Shields has also gotten votes for the Cy Young(finishing 3rd last year behind two elite pitchers) while Marcum has yet to finish in the top 25. Oh yeah, and Shields is YOUNGER than Marcum. Only by about a week, but given that he's accomplished so much more, you'd think he'd be a few years older. So I don't think any comparison between Big Game James(who has been up and down in the post-season, but earned the nickname in pennant races) and Marcum who's a guy you're just waiting to put on the DL is extremely unfair. Again, not saying I would give up a great deal to get him meaning I probably wouldn't be in favor of trading for him, but I think the premise of the argument is extremely flawed.

You ever realize you're constantly starting a thread saying, "I don't mean to insult you/put you down/ and or no offense, but," and then you continue to say something insulting, condescending, arrogant and you misrepresent what was actually said. A-I must borrow your crystal ball regarding if he would or wouldn't put us over the top. Coming into this year, he's thrown 1136 IP the last 5 years with an ERA of 3.86 and has been pitching in the AL East during that time. Last year he was one of the best pitchers in baseball. B-We don't HAVE a depleted farm system. We HAD a depleted farm system. Right now we've got a very solid farm system that IMO would rank among the top 10-12 in the game and one that has a plethora of young power arms. We may be depleted when it comes to position players at the upper level. Not to mention suggesting both we don't have ENOUGH to trade for him is just ridiculous. Would it be worth it? Probably not. But I highly doubt they'd turn down Thornburg, Peralta, Nelson and Maldonado for him(which would clearly be an overpay, just dispelling the ridiculous notion that we couldn't possibly trade for him). C-Your explanation of why Jungman and Bradley where drafted is frankly just laughable. They where drafted to be middle of the rotation guys and probably back of the rotation guys? REALLY? So that Jed Bradley that was being talked about as a top 5 pick and Jungman who was also rated as a top 10 prospect in a very deep draft where drafted to be #4/5 type starters simply because they where close to being ready, and your evidence of this is what they've done at HiA(which is totally irrelevant to what they thought of him when they drafted him) and...absolutely nothing else. Both are potential legit #2 starters as virtually every scouting report said, with some saying that if they made a couple slight adjustments, they could both be potential aces. So where you get that the Brewers drafted them simply to get up to the big leagues quickly and that they didn't have high ceilings is simply revisionist history, a strategy you seem to often employ. D-When did he say we HAVE to go out and trade for him? What's more, isn't the "transaction/proposal" section specifically meant to PROPOSE different transactions? Finally, E-Who are ALL these players the Rays have traded off at their "peak values," and then used them to rebuild their farm system? Actually, what's helped them to continue to maintain a great farm system has been because they've received so much compensation for Type A and or Type B free agents such as the..what was it, 9 picks they had in something like the first round/supplemental 1st round recently? Garza was obviously traded when his value was high And Garza was traded when they had a LOADED pitching staff with Price, Hellickson, Neiman, Cobb, Shileds, and arguably the top prospect in the game at the time, and at least the top pitching prospect in Matt Moore as well as the likes of Wade Davis, McGee and others. So I don't see this as a "trend," I see this as a single move. Did they trade away Kazmir at his peak value? Balfour? Soriano? Upton? Who's been traded away at their "peak," value? For the record, everyone wants to "build like the Rays." Everyone wants to be able to put out a couple aces and then several #2/3 pitchers to round out their rotation and the luxury of having a couple other potential front line starting pitchers in their pen. So...no offense, but other than agreeing that I don't think it's worth trading for Shields, not much else in your post is accurate. But I don't mean any offense

or the budget to take on the rest of his contract and still put out a team that can compete. Sure we do. There isn't any question whatsoever that we do. You're freeing up a lot of money, you've got a lot of new revenue coming in next year, and the money you'd be spending for Lee+a Fiers, Thornburg, Peralta, Narveson or whoever would be cheaper than Greinke and Wolf, forgetting about Marcum. Our rotation with Lee could easily be better next year and cheaper next year than it was this year. There is this mentality out there that we're still a 90 million dollar payroll type team when in fact where much closer to 110-115...especially next season. Moving forward it depends in part on how we draw, but if you add an ace pitcher, we should be a competitive team and should draw very well. I didn't even mention Mark Rogers who in ONE start, so I'm not getting too excited, but looked like he had an exploding fastball and nasty secondary stuff. Fiers, Rogers and Thornburg with guys like Axford, Henderson, Hellweg, Pena, and even a Grant Balfour type signing for 2 years and 9 million would still have us spending less on our rotation than last year by a significant margin.

I sincerely do not believe that 3 years and 72 million of Lee is better than 5 years and 110(and It would likely have been about 115) for Greinke. I would rather take Greinke. At the end of those 5 years Greinke would be about the age of Lee right now. But when you NOW throw in the 12.5 million dollar option year, then it just becomes too much and just simply not worth it. You're talking 3 years and almost 86 million guaranteed to Lee..Which is why paying what it'd take to get Greinke would be even more worth it. Or hell, James Shields. I think if Zack Greinke came back to Milwaukee(which I am NOT ruling out as he is a sophisticated player and you can already write off a LOT of the big market teams(NYY, NYM, Philly, CHW) and I don't see the Cubs spending the money they'd need to on Greinke when they're so far away, I'm curious if the Red Sox would shy away given his history of anxiety issues(which I personally dismiss, but others don't seem to). So at the end of the day, when you go through the divisions; AL East-I think the only teams that MIGHT go after him(meaning it'd make sense and COULD afford it are; Toronto-great-great young lineup and great farm system and Baltimore, very talented team PO contender in the NLC IMO and if they finish with 85 or so wins this year and with Machado and Bundy on their way up, they may look at Greinke as the player to get them into the playoff now that you can fnish 3rd in that division and make it). Both are teams we could spend with though. Angelos sporadically spends..or rather TRIES to spend big money. Don't know what AA's thoughts would be in Toronto. NLC-Detroit They're a darkhorse team that can't afford it given their bottom line and long term commitments, but they probably couldn't have afforded Prince. They want to win NOW with their older owner. Kansas City is a team that's been rumored with him in free agency. I think we could match them, and I believe someone as astute as him would look at the two teams and see us as being a better team with him. No other teams. AL West- Likely none. Seattle has pitching, they need hitting and aren't likely to spend big. Texas has Josh Hamilton who's likely to get 200 million and likely from Texas as I think they'll overspend for him. LAA-They don't want to pay the luxury tax just like the Yankees, Phillies and Red Sox don't want to...which is the genius of Bud Selig. He set the bar a long time ago and had a progressive penalty so teams could prepare for it and now teams can't just spend limitless amounts of money. Now if a team like the Angels want to sign him, they may pay him 6/140, and it might cost them 6/200 or whatever the case may be. NLC- Milwaukee-We're in a much stronger financial situation than people who are intent on and get stuck on market size IMO. We've done very well the last couple years, we're likely to do BETTER this year, and we're getting a significant influx in revenue next year from a new tv deal, radio deal(though how significant the radio deal is, the TV deal will add more than 20 million in additional revenue to a team that was at 106 and talking about being buyers if they were contending. Now we're losing 40/50 million and I think of the three scenario's, the sign Greinke long term and he stays healthy, I actually think that's the only one that's going to keep us in a position to win the next 4-5 years and be a perennial contender. And I believe Greinke will look at this team, a team that obviously underachieved a great deal, a city he honestly enjoyed playing in, the close relationship with Melvin, and the fact that we'll have a slew of talented young pitchers coming up, Segura at SS and that our BP can't possibly be as bad as it was and he'll see the potential to contend. And when you break it down, if you throw in a Rogers/Peralta/Thornburg/Fiers, two of those guys into the rotation, you save a significant amount of money from what this years rotation cost. Greinke 13.5/Wolf 10/Marcum 8.5 to Greinke 23 lets say+Fiers 450K+Rogers or whoever 450K. Gallardo will get a bump and I didn't bother to look at it, but it's not 8.5 million. The pen you're in the same situation, Henderson looks like a legit middle reliever, Axford should bounce back, K-Rod may well be back on a one year inventive laden deal and you've got a lot of power arms in AAA/AA and HiA who could figure in shortly. And offensively, Greinke knows this team. Weeks will almost certainly be the playler he's been for the last two months, Gomez is showing signs of becoming a pretty significant player with the upside to be a monster(though nobody should or would count on it). And between Corey, Aram, Braun you know you should get 100 HR's, .300 RBI's and close to a .300 BA in the middle of the order. Lucroy is one of the best hitting catchers in the NL and Maldy is one of the best backup's. And you throw in Segura over Izturis and the other crap and a guy like Mr. Greinke could big very big for us. ---I don't see another team signing him in this division. The Cubs are trying to dump Garza. Why not just re-sign him. Houston is so far away, the Brook Central HS team is closer to competing than the Astro's. STL simply doesn't need to with Miller and Martinez to go with Garcia/Carp who'll be back/Waino/Lohse, Kelly and whatever average minor leaguer pitches like Mike Fiers has(we get one, they get one of him a year it seems like). NL East- Wash-Rotation in locked and loaded ATL-Never spend and they've got young arms. Philly-Looking to ship Lee to stay under luxury tax. Miami-Already blew their wad and are cutting costs again. NYM-MAYBE...MAYBE they look at their team and figure Santana/Dickey/Greinke/Harvey/Niese and or Wheeler are enough to contend. Not sure where they're at fiscally though. They also had to address Wright soon. NL West- The ONLY team out here that has a chance to me and is a strong contender is LA. Management will spend money, but they have Ethier they have to pony up for as well as a few extensions, but with that lineup, Kershaw/Greinke/Billingsley they'd be very good. So I really think it'll come down to the Dodgers-Who would be putting themselves up against the luxury tax likely if they choose to re-sign Ethier which is likely. And then teams I believe we'll be able to compete with UNLESS the Rangers lose the WS again and decide just to go for it with all their new revenue. But you're talking about spending potentially the 250 Hamilton has been rumored to get and if you add in Greinke, that's nearly 400 million for two players, one a pitcher(always risk involved) and another a guy with drug issues and serious health concerns in terms of being a durable every day player). Then Baltimore, Seattle, Toronto, KC.... Someone tell me if they think I'm crazy, but I honestly don't see the 6 year 144 million dollar market for Greinke when you look at the traditional power houses having either spent a ton last year, or being worried about getting dinged for the luxury tax and a significant hit if they signed someone like Greinke. I think he goes on the market, and I think if the Brewers are willing to go 5 years 115 with a 6th year vesting option...say 500 innings the last 3 years or 850 innings the life of the deal or a mutual option with a 6 million dollar buyout..whatever with the 6th year being for 25 million and you're looking at 6 years 140 potentially with 5 years and 120 guaranteed...and I think in the end just given the landscape, unless a team like Toronto throws out crazy money(and he's smart enough to know about the huge tax difference) or a team that thinks they need that vet to lead their young guys who are on the cusp like KC...I honestly think we're a realistic contender, UNLIKE when we knew that the Yankees where ABSOLUTELY going to get CC and would pay whatever it took to get him. Thoughts....

Might now be a good idea...I'd hate to think you caused yourself to stroke out. I think it better to go with what comes natural for you.

No, there is no problem with hitting Gomez 2nd. He should be playing every day right now IMO to see if he can continue to perform well. He was hitting similarily well before his injury, and I think his overall stat line suffer dramatically from having to go on the DL when he was hitting .280 and then coming off the DL and still not running at full speed. I can't put a number on it, but he lost several base hits because he was only running at 80 pct(or whatever, who can really put a number on it) when he came back off for the next 3-4 weeks. I think he's putting together a .800 OPS season. But as it is, a .775 OPS from one of the games best, if not thee best defensive CF'er is something that you can easily win with. The problem is, he's been playing for how many years, so people are frankly just sick of watching him and convinced he's a bust..yet he's 26 years old and has shown things this season he hasn't shown recently.

[sarcasm]I don't know, Weeks was just a terrible leadoff hitter when he hit .239 or whatever. Sure, he was a leadoff hitter, and how a leadoff hitter makes an out is almost totally irrelevant, it supports my biased argument, so I'm going to ignore the fact that he had a .374 OBP and was one of the best leadoff hitters in the game. I'll also aimlessly call him inconsistent despite posting wOBA of .365, .334, .365,.368,.358 the previous 5 years. Clearly he isn't consistent. Sure, he put up 4 very good seasons within 7 points of each other, but he DID have one .334 season. He's also put up 15.7 WAR despite missing a great deal of time with injury during those previous 7 years. But hey...he had a bad batting average and that's old school...and everyone knows old school is just beyond questioning or re-evaluating.[/sarcasm]

I am. Because 14 months ago he was being argued as potentially the first lefty taken and a top 5 pick. Lefties take longer to develop, but he has plus stuff. No reason to not be optomistic on him AND Jungman and the reasons have already been laid out in the post following yours. He said it well enough, I don't need to even add to it.

So is almost all conversation on a sports message board. Just because this board only 80 pct of the rumors we pull out of nowhere are pointless and the average board 95 pct just means we're a little bit less pointless than others. Seriously though, it's amazing how you can look at this team. WITH an ace...without one. Lee/Gallardo/Fiers(in a magic world he's really close to this good and posts a 3.00 ERA next year)/Rogers/Thornburg/Nelson,Who I think is going to end up being closer to Lee than Narveson in terms of production...just my opinion. Maybe the two fireballers from the Angels along with Axford, Henderson, Loe, and then two arms from the farm system or FA's give us a great pen. And we know our lineup is more than capable, but lets just continue to dream the dream. Gomez finally gets it. Even if he plays his normal D and plays like he is at the plate, he's a 3 WAR player in CF. If he doesn't, Aoki out there, Hart in RF and Gamel gets the nod at 1st, or Gamel learns RF. Luc, Aram, Segura, Weeks/Hart/Gamel/Aoki/Braun with a bench of Maldy, Schafer, Green And this team spends less than last year DESPITE having a boatload of money coming in and maybe we're a contender. Take Lee out, there's no hope at being a true contender anyway, and it's all about leaving those pitchers in the minors(I only mentioned a couple, obviously there where several other potential candidates..and I forgot Estrada, but Pena and Hellweg keep trying to start, and you have a 85 win team if everything breaks right and you get really lucky while Segura starts in AAA, Pena and Hellweg in AA, Peralta in AAA. Just one player can get you hoping that one of many will be an X-factor and actually develop into something they have yet to be like Gomez/Gamel-several pitchers, or a rookie will break out...too many to name. The other scenario has the white flag raised high to begin with. Still though, I'd prefer to just take our lumps for another year, maybe two, try and get the payroll down to where we can start building that Packer like reserve so the next time we have a guy like Zack Greinke, we can be realistic in ST'ing and we can be the ones to set the bar and watch everyone else jump over it.

People don't seem to be getting this. The "BIG MARKET," teams will always be able to spend more than us, but they are at a point where that spending is slowing down significantly. Selig's revenue sharing and his luxury tax was always almost a progressive thing that became more and more of an issue year after year. Now you have the Yankees, Red Sox and friggin Philies looking to cut payroll. It'll NEVER be the NFL, but it may well end up being closer to basketball. The problem with a salary cap was ALWAYS how to implement it. Teams are so far over what it would likely be, you can't make it 95-100 million when the Yankee's are at 210. Well, fine. Don't. Set the luxury tax at 200 million for the next 12 years so you get to a point with inflation that the Brewers spending 150 million or wherever we shall be in 12 years, 185 or 135..I don't know, but the gap isn't nearly as large. And during which time the Yankees CAN spend 260 million, but it's really 320 because dollar for dollar goes into the rest of the league or the small market teams....same with the Sox, the Phillies...ie, the Lakers, the Mavs, the Knicks..... Anyway, I don't know exactly how it's set up to work, or how it WILL work, but I know what IS happening, and it's getting tougher and tougher to just throw out the, "some big market team," label because as of right now, there aren't a ton of teams that fit that bill. The Rangers may...but they may also give Hamilton 250 million. The Angels likely don't with last off-season. Boston, NYY, Philly? Hardly. Washington? They'll need to spend that to keep this group together. STL? Never been a "big," market even though they could spend if they wanted to? CHC-Definitely one of the teams. CHW-Please do because it never seems to work out....I mean, they end up being good, but Kenny seems to have to work extra hard so he doesn't get fired for the Adam Dunn, Rios, etc..etc...moves. SFG? Maybe when Zito's gone, but what, say goodbye to Timmy? LAD? They owe a LOT and way overpaid without parking rights and they added a big deal for Kemp, and now Hanley. Though they are still there. Rest of the teams. AL East Tor/Balt-Could surprise and spend TB-No way. ALC Minny/Cleveland/KC-Might dip in once in a blue moon, but not likely soon, especially the first two. AL West-Oakland? Never. Seattle could, and they've got the young guns that a Greinke move there would actually be genius if they could also add a bat to take pressure off the young superstars they have. NLE-Marlins/Nats-Not likely NYM-Still digging. NLC-Cincy they already spend their wad, Hou? No chance. NLW-AZ and Col? Neither are legit. So how many teams are you just going to dump a 20 million dollar pitcher on? People keep using "market size," when that's got nothing to do with our CURRENT spending ability. We're maximizing our revenue and with all the money off the books, the Brewers are likely in the top 10-12 of teams with money to spend this off-season.

Of COURSE we have MORE than enough to get him, mainly because they'd be trading him coming off a terribly down year for him, they want to stay below the luxury tax and they don't want to pick up much money. MEANING, they'd likely not ask a whole lot in return. By the way-Can we PLEASE stop with the standard, "we don't have enough to get him," answer? I would be fine with the, "it wouldn't make sense to get him." Alright then. But we have enough in our system to trade for him 3 or 4 times over at his contract level easily. Oh, and for the record, for those who are dismissing going after Lee, it's a 3 year commitment, which as a poster pointed out is RIGHT in that ARam, Gallardo, Weeks, window, we could afford in in the short term. AND Greinke and Lee have roughly the same K/BB ratio...except that Greinke walks MORE guys, THE ONLY real difference between the two is.......dundudaddadaaa....Lee plays in an absurdly small park and has given up a lot more HR's than he normally does. Between the two, Greinke and Lee, I'd take Greinke over 6 years any day of the week, over the next three years, it's a complete and utter toss up as to who may be better, and if we could get Lee for the right to pay him and perhaps Wily Peralta and Taylor Green, I'd do it in a second as it'd open up that window for us. However the idea to trade FOR Lee by trading AWAY Hart and Rarmirez for prospects against doesn't just bump into the absurd, it crosses well over that line. Why trade for a guy like Lee so you don't waste Gallardo's years and then all the sudden throw out your 2nd and 3rd offensive players and power hitters(and two guys who by MY eye test have been exceptionally good defensively this year. Someone needs to figure out a way to find a state for "errors saved."

I've read enough of your posts, so I can only assume that since you've demonstrated common sense, you don't mean Profar v Segura, so who was offered for Greinke? There are several hundred Greinke trade rumors. Which SS did the Rangers offer because they obviously have the best in the AL right now(or close to it), and as Sickels said, "If it wasn't for Bryce Harper taking all the air in the room, all the talk would be about this 18 year olds massive talent at an advanced level(Profar) and then they didn't have anyone who looked even close to big league ready for a long while. Just curious if you've got a basic idea of who was involved.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I could have SWORE you were one of those telling me I was overrating Profar and that I was undervaluing Profar by saying that I didn't think we could get Profar for Greinke straight up. Now you're thrilled they got a vastly, vastly inferior(though still very-very good player) player over 3 years older than Profar, but not as good at the same level? Or am I mistaken? If the later, I do apologize.

Well, when they talk about Segura, they talk about how he's quick, but he has a very strong arm and a thick lower level. But also has power projection left and can steal some bases. Long term, Segura, Arcia/Rivera/Gennett/Gamel/Lucroy-Maldy as your IF if they all pan out could be a pretty fun IF to watch play. Though I'm not writing Taylor Green off yet as a 3rd base prospect. Had WE traded Aram to the Dodgers, I'd have liked to have seen him be handed the position on a daily basis. I think you'd have at least gotten an idea of what you have over there. As it stands, knowing how quick RR seems to pull the plug on rookies, or young players, I doubt we see Gamel or Green get the PT they should next year. And hell, it's not like we're likely to be a .500 team next year, so maybe Aram has a nice first half and instead of 30 million for 2 years, it's only 20 million for a year and a 3rd and you could try out Green(or even Gamel) there. Hart's going to be around for one more year likely(and if I had my way, he'd be moved this off-season, especially if he's coming off a 30+ HR season and 100 RBI's as I don't like what his future looks like in my minds eye in 3-4 years.

1-As far as McFarland goes, didn't the "prototypcial build," kinda get thrown out the window on that roughly 35 years ago? He's 6'0 and 190. If that size prohibits playing at SS, then there are a lot of guys who'd play elsewhere. He's almost the exact same size as Escobar and Jurickson Profar, one of whom is probably the best position player in the game and the other may be the best SS in the AL right now defensively and offensively. And from what I read, he's got the athletic ability and the arm to play there. It just seems to me you move a guy with that talent off SS in A+ or AA ball and move them to 2nd when they've shown they can't play there. Now right out of the gates. Especially given our giant hole at SS prior to the trade. The same goes for Josh Prince who was thought to be a good defender at SS. As for Prince throwing sidearm, that's how a lot of If'ers throw the ball to get the ball out quicker. Hardy was kinda rare in how he'd throw over the top on just about every play. But I only got to see a little bit of Price, and I thought he'd stick at SS. And they still have both of these guys play SS on occasion which is even more perplexing.

Exactly, you can only get so much on scouting reports. Take Maldonado and Kottaras. I remember hearing how Boston didn't want to let Kottaras go and how good of a catcher he could turn into, and then after watching him play, he was obviously little more than a tire back there behind home plate as everything went by him. He had a passed ball on Parra that was strike that cost him a run. However after watching Maldonado a few times in the minors, just catching a couple games, I was pretty convinced he was going to be a pretty damn good catcher defensively and that he had a chance to be able to turn on that fastball and become a solid hitter. Which is why I had him on our 25 man roster coming into the season despite the fact that I knew he wasn't going to make it. So hearing people's opinion on guys like Schafer I think is fun and valuable to further discussion.

Lets say Fiers deceptive deliver and who can actually keep hitters off balance with his array of pitches, and fantastic command and can follow D'Amico's path as he has as a rookie, but perhaps is a tick better after his first time around, I think he could be a legit 3. Of all the other guys, guys like Nelson, Thornburg, Rogers(who looked VERY good tonight...just..baffled as to how good he can be), there's Jungman, Bradley...well, and 6-7 other legit pitching prospects..if we can get lucky enough to fine an ace in that group, it changes the Brewers entire future moving forward obviously, in an extreme way. Plus, I still honestly think that with all the money that'll be coming off our roster, and virtually no roster spots to replace except for maybe a few BP arms(though I like what we have with Axford, and you just never know where the rest of your BP will come from. I think Estrada returns to his swing spot, Henderson looks more than capable of filling a spot, Loe should be back, and then you really just need to try and find a Balfour type guy and simply hope that Veras and Parra have up years next year instead of struggling. But as always, you try and get as many pitchers in your system who have the upside of 1 or 2, you just hope that you get one out of every 10 to actually develop into the ace and maybe a couple can develop into solid inning eaters and a couple others hopefully develop into good relievers. You get 3-4 pitchers out of 10-12 who are reliable producers for us and I think you're lucky to have that. But who knows, maybe we'll get lucky and hit on Rogers, who again looked great, Fiers who has looked fantastic, Peralta, Hellweg ends up being power arm who can throw 190 or so innings as a #3/4 and so on. Again, we could sure use the luck.

Yeah, I just had a mess of my list and that was just a top 10. Do we just throw a couple pitchers into out top couple because they were the Angels 4 and 10 prospects before the season? TOTALLY forgot about Garfield....and Tyrone Taylor. Which by the way...I'm not even sure where to place the two and I'm too ignorant about the DSL players other than Rizzo..who I'm ignorant about, but when you're that dominant I'll go on faith. Bottom line, to make a legit list, you need to really sit back and spend time, move guys around, think about it, think about their position, ceiling....and of course there is the ceiling vs how close they are debate. Does Clint Coultier and Roache rank above Khris Davis? IMO they probably should just given their pure talent. And the BIGGEST problem with our system is we've got 6-8 guys that you KNOW are the top guys, and then the gap between 10-30 doesn't seem to be that big of a difference.

So you don't have Bradley, a big, physical lefty who has great stuff, but isn't as refined as college pitcher should be, and who was projected early last year as a top 5-8 pick....not inside your top 18 for Brewers prospects? I see a lot of reasons Bradley should be rated ahead of those two, though ultimately it comes down to opinion. But leaving him out all together I think is insane. Anyway, people may disagree with mine just as much; 1-Segura-Obviously....He's the guy, a SS who could hit .280/.320/.450 with 35 or so SB's and solid defense. Maybe he can improve his OBP and BA. 2-Nelson-98 MPH fastball, best slider, and a developing change for a GB pitcher, has TOR type potential. 3-Thornburg-Little case of dead arm isn't going to deter me. 4-Peralta-Revival is awesome. The last month has been great. 5-Rogers-Had a great outing tonight, and who knows if he will be able to continue it, but man...he looked like he could ACTUALLY be a good big league pitcher. LIke...a #1/2 type pitcher. I'll bet best years are a 2/3 ish, but still. He was locating, that slider set everything up and his curve? And like Peralta, he had a great second half. 6-Orlando Arcia-Laugh all you want, he's 17, out for the year, but I don't care. I think he could be the future SS while Segura moves over to SS. 7-Hellweg-Has great stuff, just needs to harness it. If he doesn't, should be a great closer. I think we got a star SS and at worst two dominant relievers, and possibly a 2/3 starter and a 3/4 starter, both of whom are power pitchers. 8-Junnman/Bradley-I'm just going to put both of these together in the same ranking until they distinguish themselves. 9-Hunter Morris-He finally has won me over. Is he really going to be a well above average big league 1st basemen? He just keeps on raking in AA. 10-Scooter Gennett-Love the kid, I've loved him from the get go, but I think it's time we try him at 3rd base and at SS like we did with Farris. I think maybe he's a utility guy in the future. Next in line -Yadiel Rivera-SS-Could have been there with Arcia, but I like Arcia's upside more. -Roache-30 Hr's as a soph in college with the new bats tells me he's got big time power. Until I see something though, the last I know of him is he's a potential RF'er who strikes out a lot and hits for a lot of power. -McFarland- I literally had him in the top 5 to begin with, but with so many pitchers who throw in the mid 90's with good stuff, even if they're raw, I couldn't justify it. -Gian Rizzo-Just don't know what to make of him, but he just DOMINATES. He's a stud... -Burgos...just because he having Fiers like success, doesn't mean he's quite Fiers yet. -Manzanillo When you throw 100 with a 92 MPH slider, you should get some mention. -Brooks Hall I still think he's going to be a Gallardo type pitcher, it'll just take him longer to develop. I don't know, there are a dozen more. Coultier, Hangier, Reed, Haydel(only one who's gonna mention him in their top 30-40 most likely). Wooten, Henderson, Schafer/Gamel/Green/Gindl...I put them in slightly different groupings...