Gopher74

Well, your consecutive negative posting streak is still alive... This certainly isn't a "frank recognition" of anything, especially since their starting pitching has been pretty good so far without their number 2 starter pitching yet. Exactly where would you like to, or do you think it's realistic to improve our starting pitching? Realistic is the key here because obviously it'd be great if you could run out Santana, Smotlz, Peavy and Webb to team with Sheets, but that's not going to happen. Who are all these teams that have so much more talent than Sheets, Yo, Parra, Villy and Suppan?

Ok, I don't want this to sound like I think Beckett's even close to Santana, but you cannot compare what Beckett's done in the post-season to Suppan. Career's are made by throwing complete game shutouts in Yankee stadium to clinch the World Series for your team. Beckett gets bumped several notches for his ridiculous post-season success. A 1.16 ERA in 3 Starts in the World Series and with 28 K's in 23 IP? And a 1.73 ERA in 10 Post season games with 82 K's in 72 IP? That means a helluva lot more than "he had a couple of good starts". And as for the comment that Santana's teams haven't been "nearly as good" as Beckett's, a lot of that has to do with these two pitchers. Santana's team has made the playoffs from 02-06 with the exception of 05. Santana in 11 Post-season games has an ERA of 3.97. The difference between the Marlins team that won the World Series and the Twins team with Santana that did not was most likely the difference in these two pitchers. Again, Santana is clearly the better pitcher, but you can't just dismiss what pitchers do in their most important starts and pass them off as inconsequential. Beckett's establishing himself as the best big game pitcher of this generation.

We have plenty of IF depth. Beyond Counsell and Dillon, we've got Escobar and Chavez. Plus it's not like they can't move him back to 2nd base if someone goes down. I don't think he's going to forget how to play 2nd. We also have Abraham Nunez and Vinny Rottino if we need someone to play 2nd/3rd.

Actually, LaPorta's suppose to get playing time in both Left and Right Field to see how he can handle it so that he could possibly play with Braun in the OF without Braun having to move. I think in the end Braun'll be the RF'er as he's more suited for it athletically, but I do know they're going to try LaPorta over there a bit.

Well, first off agent, with all due respect, I don't see the "overwhelming sense of urgency" to move him. There have been very few posts on here actually suggesting that, must less urging it. I don't think there are a lot of people getting real worked up about his defensive play thus far because they know how raw he is and what type of talent he is, however, it would seem to me that he's got a much better chance to make it as a athletic Center Fielder who could potentially turn into a very good fielder out there in the Brewers organization rather than at SS with all the problems he's had defensively coupled with what the Brewers currently have there(Hardy, Escobar, Perez). And nobody's suggesting that they move him because the team's not winning. With respect, they're suggesting it because he's 56 errors in his last 137 games. From everything I've heard, he sounds almost like a BJ Upton type player, so it doesn't appear that his chances to make it depend on him being a shortstop. And when I say Upton, I mean with his physical ability and what he could become.

Even if he went another 20 games without an error to make it a "big sampling", it'd still look bad. Plus he had about 50 errors last year. And no, errors aren't always a true measure...but that can only work if you have very few errors, but you're not a good fielder. Having a lot of errors always means you're not a good fielder. The Brewers are taking the same approach many teams take with their talented young IF'ers who struggle defensively. They're working with them and hoping they figure it out as they're far more valuable playing in the IF than anywhere else, but Brent Brewers future position is almost certainly Center Field.

No, I don't imagine he will be. We solved it this year when Tbadder didn't think we would, and I'm confident we'll solve it next year. With Juan Cruz, Brandon Lyon and several other really good young relievers on the market who could be closers, I think that was part of Melvin's thought process when he basically locked up a Bullpen on one year deals. The only guy we're committed to for next year is the one guy I feel confident will be the same guy next year. My point is that if he was, it's not like we'd be throwing the closers role to McClung. What do you really think the difference would be from Riske to a above average closer? Not a whole lot.

Man, you are the most negative person on this board. It's April 14th and you're already talking about how bleak out starting pitching looks next year. That's amazing to me. First of all, the Brewers fan afford to re-sign Sheets. There's no much question about that. It's a matter of if they want to. There are some who believe that he'll take a hometown discount to come back. I don't know. What I do know is that the Brewers made 50 million dollars last year, they get 60 million dollars right off the bat from MLB from revenue sharing, a amount that will increase in the next couple years, and they're breaking records in attendance. And if they trade Suppan, they could definitely afford him. But, lets say they don't. WE have no idea what our rotation is going to look like in a year. Gallardo may prove he's an ace, Parra may have a big coming out party, Villy establish himself as a good middle of the rotation type, and then you could round out your rotation with Suppan and Bush. So to say that it looks bleak right now is not only premature based on what we've got locked up for next year, but premature in that we don't know WHO'S going to be here next year. Personally, I think the Brewers offer Sheets 3-4 years at 15-16 million. Maybe 3 years 48 to even 4 years and 65. And it may not even end up being that much. With CC Sabathia, AJ Burnett, John Smotlz, Brad Penny, Derek Lowe, Pedro Martinez, Oliver Perez, John Lackey and several, several more good Free Agents next year, it might really allow Sheets to sign much cheaper than he would have last year for instance(if he had a good season like we're assuming he'll have this year for the sake of argument). As for the closer spot, again, just insanely early to even think about it, but we've got a lot of different directions we could go. First, Riske's a good pitcher, so while he may not be the ideal closer, it's certainly not ridiculous. But with Brandon Lyon, Juan Cruz from AZ FA's next year, Fuentes...and about 6-7 other viable closing options, we should be able to find someone fairly easily.

He had the same type of season as Hart as a platoon player, and he followed that up last year, Hart's breakout year with .764 OPS and a .235/.329 year. Ned isn't "bent" on anything, Gabe Gross hasn't produced anywhere near Corey Hart's level, so the suggestion that it was just some arbitrary reason to play Hart and then not play Gross is totally untrue IMO.

Turnbow's not going to be used anything like Dessens. One week and he's now our mop up guy. That's quite obviously Seth McClung. Turnbow's still a very important part of this pen no matter how much people irrationally hate him.

The thing with McClung, I don't want to jump the gun or anything, but I was one of those who just didn't understand why we kept him over Claudio Vargas. I knew he threw 100 with relative ease, but I thought it was straight. Watching him pitch the other night, you can see. He's got that nasty, nasty slider, and while he may not be able to command it right now, you can at least understand why they kept him. The problem is, he's the type of guy who's not going to be worth a lot right now. What's he done since his disastrous time in Tampa to really elevate his status as a big leaguer, or to improve his trade value? Not much, so I think it'd be wise to hold onto him for the time being, which again is a complete 180 from about a month ago. As for Gwynn, I hope he plays in the next two weeks, and plays like he has, because he's going to have some value. I like Gwynn more than some, and I think he can be a poor mans Kenny Lofton. A guy who can potentially get on base, steal bags and play a near GG caliber CF. He's got to improve his BB rate in order to do so, but I'm not writing him off just yet, nor do I suspect are many GM's. The kid Neftali Feliz from Texas is a guy who I like. He's 19 years old, throws in the mid to upper 90's with a good curve. He could be groomed as a future closer, and maybe be up in just a few years. They just have a slew of guys who could be groomed for that closers role, the role that I think the Brewers need to think about trying to develop right now. They've not going to be able to spend 10 million on a closer like Gange when Prince, Bruan and those guys are in their arbitration years, much less their FA years.

Second -- and again, others have said this, but some people don't seem to be hearing it -- we Gwynn skeptics aren't focused on his lack of power because we think everybody needs to hit home runs. I agree that Gwynn could start and be an asset with a .400 OBP and a .400 SLG. The thing is, nobody puts up those numbers. If you have as little power as Gwynn does, the pitchers aren't going to walk you, so getting to that .400 OBP will require enough flares and bunts to put up a .350 BA. That just doesn't happen. Gwynn doesn't need big-time power, but he needs enough power to put up a big-time OBP, and he's nowhere near that right now. Ok, so now Gwynn has to post a .400 OBP in order to be a viable big league player? I can't disagree with that anymore. I think at .360 with his defense, and his speed, he could be a very solid player. A line of .300/.360/.400 would be just fine given the fact that he'll likely play a very, very good defensive CF. Second, I don't agree in the least bit that pitchers won't walk you if you don't have power. That's essentially saying that walks are all about the pitcher when in fact walks are as much about the hitter as they are about the pitcher. So I think there's a fundamental problem suggesting that he can't have a high OBP if he doesn't have good power. There's no reason that Tony Gwynn Jr can't become a Chone Figgins type player. Hit for a high average, walk a bit, steal some bases, and play a very good CF. As for the RickieWeeks Jr comments about one Mr. Bill Hall.....thank you. I'm giving you much of the credit on that one. Blasting him for seemingly no reason and without cause the day before he goes off for 6 RBI's on 2 bomb's. Nice. If he was lost up there....he sure as hell found himself! And yea Greg, I don't get why anyone would say that Hall's overpaid at this point. He's certainly not.

Explain it? How about the fact that BA is far and away the most overrated stat in all of sports? How about that for starters. The fact that this "journeymen"(I'm not going to even get into the problems with that statement) STILL had a better OBP than Gwynn did last year depsite hitting .243? That he can draw a walk meaning the only thing that Gwynn could even pray to have on Cameron, being able to get on base, he doesn't do that as well either?The fact that Cameron's played in big time pitcher parks his entire career and he's a safe bet for .250-.260/.350 with 20-25 HR's and 20-25 SB's? The fact that he's a 3 time GG'er and 3 time Runner Up? The fact that he's led baeball the last two years in going from 1st to 3rd? And you can't just make up a Batting Average for Gwynn, and then argue why he should stay in the lineup based on the number you pulled from thin air. It pains me to say this, but what has Rickie Weeks done to deserve his locked-in starting spot that Gwynn hasn't? Played better baseball for starters? How about being in the top 5 of all leadoff hitters last year in OBP, SLG, and OPS? And the fact that the Brewers don't have a all-star and GG'er waiting at 2nd base who they brought in as a FA this past off-season? There are several other reasons, but those should be sufficient.

Wow. You're really coming out of left field and just blasting Hall for almost no reason in most cases. he doesn't take care of his body Where does this come from? That's absolutely no true whatsoever. According to people who work with the Brewers, spend time in the weight room with the players and the locker room, Bill Hall is one of the hardest working guys on the team, and has taken care of his body as much as anyone. There just isn't any substance to this, and I don't get why you'd throw something so ridiculous out there. An overrated, overpaid bust who swings at everything and has lost every ounce of humility that once made him a decent player. I always love the "he's overrated" line. By who? What's he "rated"? Please substantiate this in any way, shape or form? Second, how is he overpaid? Because he had a bad season following two VERY good ones? And the Brewers bought out his arby years? He made 3.125 million dollars last year. I believe he makes about 6 million this year. I'd like to know in what world that's overpaid? Look around at baseball's salaries right now. He's not overpaid in the least. Third, how does his "humility" make him a better or worse player? That just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. He doesn't hustle like he used to Again, please substantiate this in any way? This is coming out of nowhere. and he let one good season get to his head (even though, to me, his 2005 was better than 2006). Oh come on. Where do you get this stuff from? I simply don't understand how someone can honestly sit behind a computer screen and make these types of statements as to a players state of mind. Honestly, you've alluded to this a couple times now, and I'd like to get some clue as to what you're talking about. Second, it absolutely was two good seasons. I don't know why you think his 05 season was better than his 06 season as it just wasn't, but either way. It was 2 good seasons. .270/.345/.553 with 35 HR's and 85 RBI's in 06 .291/.342/.495 with 17 HR's and 62 RBI's in 05 Explain how you can say objectively that his 05 season was better? Because he had a slightly higher BA despite a worse OBP, and much worse SLG? This is mind you while playing short stop, and leading the league in many of the offensive numbers at shortstop. So among other things, I'd love to hear how he was better in 05. If I could replace one player in the lineup it would be Hall. I cringed the very day he got that four-year deal, and I can't wait until it's up. Every year I hope he's traded at the deadline. This tells me all I need to know about your objectivity or lack thereof on Bill Hall. Last year when Bill Hall had that ridiculous quote, something along the lines of "Look at my stats, I'm not having that bad of a year, I haven't been that bad," that was the last thing I ever needed to hear about Bill Hall. And what was that? I suppose he could have said, "you know what, I am just terrible...I don't even belong playing major league baseball....". You do realize when he said this, his numbers WEREN'T that bad. It's real easy to take a quote, not get it right, take it out of context and make a guy look bad. That's really not tough, nor does it serve any purpose whatsoever.

The Yost hating began before the season even started. There were threads about how Yost was going to ruin this season because of Haudricourts blog suggesting that Villanueva or Parra wouldn't make the rotation and how Yost was lying to us because we're suppose to be in a win now mode. There have been complaints about Yost hitting the pitcher 8th. There have been threads about Prince and Braun's spot in the order, Hall and Hart, Gwynn, ect...ect...almost all riping into Yost for his moves. The vent thread was already up and going before the season-even-started. The statement was obviously a bit tongue in cheek, but there's a whole lot of truth behind it. If we had someone else managing our team right now, for instance if Simmons had gotten the job, nobody would even be thinking about the way he's handled the pen thus far. I just think you have to put those wins away and not leave any doubt vs the Cubs, and with a 4 run lead, it wasn't a given by any means.

This is the status of a guy that you believe is a potential future ace. This is anything but a non-issue. Your whole stance on him not getting over 175 innings is based on what YOU'D suggest they do, not what they've said they're going to do. You keep saying you want them to skip him, which they're not going to do. If he gets 30 starts, which would be skipping him a couple times, he'd be at 180 if he averaged 6 per outing obviously. I don't think it's hard to envision him going at least 6 per. And as was pointed out, most number 5's don't get close to 170 because they're not very good. Manny Parra's really not a number 5 in anything other than the simple fact he starts the 5th game of the season. They're not going to skip him, his performance likely won't force them to remove him. So I don't really see how you can see this as a non-issue. It's a huge issue for this team right now.

I absolutely agree. Last year coming into the season, I was leading the "Dave Bush could be a real number 2" charge, and he just didn't put it all together last year, leading to some questions as to what he really is going to be moving forward, but it's absolutely ridiculous to use this start and say, "see, I knew last year was the real Dave Bush and not the 06 season(which by the way, WAS very good) was the real Dave Bush. Bush got hurt by some poor defense today. In another month or two, Dave Bush gets out of that inning where Braun botched that play in LF without giving up a run most likely. So that puts the score at 4-3 and we've got a different approach, and Dave Bush looks a lot better. But even so, he just didn't have the control today that he normally does. He was missing over the plate, and that's where he really gets hurt. He doesn't have that Ben Sheets stuff to miss over the white and get away with it. The fact is, I see Dave Bush as a poor mans Ben Sheets. He works aggressive, and he works fast. He attacks hitters with his fastball that runs up there between about 89-92 whereas Sheets is 92-96, and he tries putting them away with his curve which when it's on can be very good, but more often is just a slightly above average pitch. And where I disagree with you is saying he needs to keep his BB rate down. Yea, he can't be walking hitters too much, BUT when he falls behind, he needs to either be perfect shooting the corner, or put him on base. What happens, and everyone knows this, he comes right down the middle becuase he's so worried about putting guys on base, and the send it into orbit. If he could just actually walk guys a LITTLE bit more often, I think he'd be better off. Overall, right now I think he's one of the top 3-4 number 5's in the game. I'm also still hoping he can be that 4.10-4.25 200 IP 175 K 1.20 Whip type guy, and I think he's going to have to be next year if/when Sheets bolts.

This isn't fair at all. You know that I tend to lean on the "Pro-Gwynn" side of things, but where do you get that Gabe Gross doesn't have any range? He's not Tony Gwynn Jr as a defensive player, but he can play a serviceable CF. He also brings an element that Gwynn does, and when Gross is at his best offensively, he's far superior to Tony Gwynn Jr. The thing is, Gwynn's more consistently playing well, and Gross tends to be very up and down, but this doesn't mean that Gross is this terrible CF'er. I don't get into all those crazy Range statistics so I can't prove Gross's range is bad, but I've seen him enough to know it's not much better than average. I do know that Gwynn has a ton more range than Gross. I don't think that needs to be proven. I'm sure somebody's going to bring back some crazy statistic to make me appear wrong so let's hear it. I think you know where I come out on the defensive metrics out there. Even Bill James, the person that most on this forum revere has said that Defensive Metrics are incredibly incomplete and unreliable. There are things you simply cannot accurately evaluate. How can you say that this player gets to more balls in his zone, or outside of his zone when there are so many variables. Hell, just a very basic one, how hard was the ball hit? Was it a line drive that was hit on a line and is slicing away, or was it a lazy pop-up that lands in the same place? I also agree that for some reason people argue that Tony Gwynn Jr isn't a top notch Defensive CF'er for whatever reason, citing again defensive metrics over the opinions of virtually any scouts who's ever seen him play, and the Brewers FO. That being said, you go from Gabe "No Range" Gross to how you've seen him play and he's average defensively. That's the point the Gross advocates argue. If the defensive end is close enough, Gross brings more value because of his offense, at least that's the argument for Gwynn. The fact is, I'm in favor of Gwynn starting, but it's simply not that obvious. One of the biggest reasons I like Gwynn starting, beyond the fact that I want to see what he can do, I would LOVE to be able to deal him to a team, once again, like the Rangers who have always liked him, and now see him as their starter after he posts a .330/.380 line with 10 SB's a couple weeks into the seasonhttp://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Not sure why this would be in Blue. OPS is absolutely, without question the "thing" that makes a hitter good. Being able to get on base, and what those produce is pretty much the very core of offense. It's this type of thing that gets me kinda spinning. I argue to the side that says Gwynn is what he is and he'll never get better because I see a player who got rushed, wasn't very good early, but just keeps improving each and every year, and some almost discredit him because his name is Gwynn. But then you've got the other side who takes 3 games, where frankly he was good, but it's not like he was Alex Rodriquez thus far. What he can potentially become, at his best, is a good solid serviceable CF'er. Possibly the type that you look to replace, but one that you can win with. Yet, again, you get a couple good games, and the "I told you so's" come flying. I think that every-single-fan hopes they do well, but man-o-man let's not get carried away. Nice job early Tony, but 4 hits does not a season make.

The thing is, they shouldn't be that desperate. They've got some pretty good options. Jay Bruce is going to be a superstar, or at least it looks as though he will. They've got Drew Stubbs on his way up, and in the meantime they can play Freel, or Keppinger out there. Heck, Norris Hopper's a better choice than Peterson. I just don't get why he'd be getting so much PT, especially leading off.

That is and always has been my issue as well. I've said that the Cubs rotation has fewer questions, but ours has more potential. I've never been a big fan of Hill, Lilly's a solid 3/4 type. Hell, SI, the mag that picked us 3rd said that the Cubs had an ace and then 4-4's after that. Yet everyone else seems to think it's Spahn and Sain without the rain.

He developed much more, but he didn't have much more early in his career. I think hoping him to become anything even remotely close to Kenny Lofton's probably about as likely as Will Inman becoming an ace. It's possible and not totally unrealistic, but highly unlikely. I guess I was kinda envisioning him as a Willy Taveras/Juan Pierre at his best potentially. He may just prove to be a .280/.320/.380 guy, and if so, he'll serve very little use to us, I just think it's possible that he's the type who becomes more than the sum of his parts so to speak. The type of player that can help a team win more than his win shares, OPS, or any other line would lead one to believe. but I have to believe that was for public consumption. With regard to the fans, anything that makes them like the players is OK by me. How many of the things the FO says do you think is just for that purpose? I got into an argument last year with one of my best friends about BABIP. He claimed it was some obscure, unknown stat that nobody else uses. He fancies himself a big fan of the sport, and thinks(key word thinks) he was this great player, yet he'd never heard of this. My guess is that the average fan is really quite clueless about what goes into scouting a player, or who they look to bring in which leads to the "Dave Bush sucks" segment of the population after one very good season and one poor season.

Apologies. It just came off a big smarmy to me, but I guess there's not much to that. I agree that those are very interesting numbers, and should and likely are taken into account.

C'mon....should this be in blue? Honestly, I've just gotten up on my high horse talking about how managers and such are generally in the position they're in because they know more than the casual fan...please tell me you made a mistake so that I don't look totally ridiculous. What an arbitrary decision. Yea, CF'ers are generally good leadoff hitters, but that's just so ridiculous. Brandon Phillips would be much better off leading off...and he's not a real good option. Fact is, I don't see who on that team really should be other than Keppinger. I do think he gets just a little bit too much crap on this board for some of the stupid things that he says that he doesn't articulate well. I think he has some points saying that the OBP thing may have gotten a little carried away in a few particular cases and that maybe your middle of the order should try and drive in runs rather than look for the walk. That said, ARod, Manny, Ortiz, Pujols, or any other real great middle of the order guy who has 100+ RBI's every season all have great OBP's. So I just think that there may be a fraction of a point in his "clogging up the bases" comments... Mainly, I just wish he was in Chicago. I'd feel pretty good about our post-season chances then.

Yea, when you consider that two of the players aren't contributing right now, sure, but I'll take Joe Dillon over Dave Roberts at this point for what we need. We've got Gwynn who I think can do almost the exact same thing that Roberts can do, and I really like Dillon's bat off the bench. I understand that he's a minor league free agent, and he's not going to get you much in terms of value, but he's a pretty solid guy to have on the bench. I mean, you could say that the Mets traded away Gomez++ for a rule five pickup, but obviously Santana has evolved beyond that label. So...I guess what I'm saying is Joe Dillon=Johan Santana. OR that he's got more value than a typical minor league FA.