Gopher74

I agree that they're not going to make the playoffs, but they likely think they COULD. They've got some great young arms, and that in and of itself could give them some confidence that they could make a run. Every year there are teams that nobody thought could win. This Blue Jay team isn't really that far off from being a contender...and they would be were it not for the Yanks and Sawx.

You mention Choate and Stetter. That's an awful lot of confidence to give two guys who've done very little. Not to mention that you'd then have 3 loogy's on your roster. Doesn't really seem feasible. So right there you're down to 14 and just two away from what I believe we're going to keep. Gallardo is out right now. 13. Then you have Parra who could start the year in AAA. 12. The Brewers could easily go with a 12 man staff to start the season with Cameron out. The point is, you've been clamoring for the Brewers to move a pitcher because this was a problem for the last several months. We've already lost a starter and we're a week into camp. At some point you have to realize that maybe it's not a good idea to move a guy for the sake of moving him. (pared back long nested quote --1992)

Why would they trade a good young starter when they're in need of a starter. That wouldn't seem to help them out at all. Santana's a good young pitcher. I don't see the reason you'd move him for Capuano, a worse pitcher. From our perspective, hell yea. I'd trade Capuano+a guy like Escobar for Santana in a heartbeat.

I'll admit my comments come mainly from the numbers, but I was kinda looking forward to seeing Crabbe up next year as a cheap utility player for the Brewers. I've said as others have said, that one of the things our farm system now appears set to provide is an abundance of role player types. Guys like Crabbe who may not be starts, but can save you that 3 million you're paying Counsell, or Pena who may or may not be(I'm hoping he will) a closer, but at least could/should be a viable pen arm for very cheap for a couple years(much to the dismay of our resident agenthttp://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif). But I'm just not sure why you'd let this kid go when you have about 5 other guys not likely to contribute as much in the near future or the long term future?

Yea, I'm pretty sure that Sheets is going to hit 9th when he does hit. But this move makes very good sense almost across the board. I like that Cameron's going to get good pitches to hit. Look at everyone who hit in front of Prince last year. Braun, Hardy, Gross when he got white hot. Cameron's the exact type of hitter who's going to explode in that type of scenario. He's a straight fastball hitter. Braun has the type of speed that you don't want to hide in front of a 50 HR type hitter. Braun's got 30/30 potential(would say 40/40, but I don't think he gets 40 SB's unless he's just trying to reach that mark). And it splits up the L/R earlier in the lineup. That's not a big deal, but it's nice. If you want to bring in a left hander to face Prince, you're going to have to take him right back out for Braun.

I really wish the Brewers had signed him for 2 years and 16 million dollars. Heck, when you're going one year at 10, all the sudden a second at 6 million sounds a lot better. I guess the thought could be he's less likely to have two good years, and if he does have a great one this year, then you can possibly get those two top picks for him. If you keep him for two years, then the chances for injury drastically increase and you don't get those two picks. Still, I don't like the thought of him saving 40 and then getting that big deal elswhere, and I certainly don't like the idea of us giving it to him.

Ok, I'm not sure exactly what your point is with the "unbridled optimism" comment was about, I was simply questioning why he almost always has to take a situation, even a extremely harmless, vanilla statement and turn it into yet another Brewer-bashing, Yost-bashing thread. So I don't know if that unbridled optimism was directed at me or not, but I don't see what your comment has to do with anything. It' as though you're suggesting that because there are some overly optimistic posters, that you somehow NEED those negative posters. And finally, I guess I have to disagree with you. I don't see what was interesting about his observation, or noteworthy about it. I don't know what's interesting about a manager saying what probably 29 other manager in the game would say in the same situation, or what's noteworthy about him saying that Sheets has run into some back luck. But again, that's not really my point. My point was and is the need to quickly pounce on anything that anyone in the Brewers FO says.

So let me get this straight. You acknowledge that the Milwaukee Brewers are never going to come out and bad mouth Ben Sheets, yet when they make a fairly vanilla statement, you take that to mean they're sticking their head in the sand? I guess the 13 starting pitchers the Brewers have for insurance reasons would lead me to believe they've "come to terms" with the fact that Sheets, after being very reliable and a workhorse has had a couple injuries since then. Honestly though, I have to say, I almost never read anything in the least bit positive about the Brewers from you. I don't understand this incessant pessimism, jumping on any comment, and just generally not giving the Brewers the benefit of the doubt in almost any situation. I mean, this very thread is about Yost saying that he thinks Sheets has had a "pattern of bad luck" and he thinks he'll be healthy rather than saying "he feels fine and he looks good right now". It just doesn't seem like it takes a whole lot to get you fired up and firing shots at the Brewers.

Unfortunately when it comes to Sheets and or Yost, fans are all too eager to jump on any little comment they make and pick it apart. The fact is every manager makes stupid cliché type statements and most just take it for what it is. Without having read the rest of the thread, I would like to hear how a torn finger tendon could be caused by poor conditioning.

I don't think this is true. He's a high BB, low K guy with better gap power than HR power. A guy whose power ceiling is around 30 HR isn't a 'true power 1B' imo. Fair enough. I really meant to articulate that I thought he was a very good young player and young hitter. I also think he's got the powerto hit 30-35 HR's while playing very good defense and carrying a very good OBP. As for Hudson, yea, he may regess(though he is just 30 years old), but he's at about the age where he should maintain at the very least for a couple years, and he's a GG'er at 2nd. I'd expect about .285/.365 with 10-13 HR's and very few SO's. I just don't see their W-L being any better than in 2007, which was clearly above their talent level. Well, I think saying "clearly" is overstating it. Great Defense, and a good bullpen can help a team win more games with a poor run differential. They also had a great manager. Bottom line, they won 90 games last year, and you can debate that they weren't that good, but they added a pitcher who in the NL may well be an ace, they're getting back a HOF left hander who is a number 2 if he can come back to the form that he showed the year before his injury, an a guy in Johnson who clearly still has the pure stuff. And on top of all that, this is a team that had the best farm system two years ago in all of baseball and now those players are not only up, but they're up and they've got playoff experiance. Oh, and I think one of the biggest benefits of the young players developing is that they can use Byrnes as a leadoff hitter and use Young down in the order some. 1-Byrnes-LF 2-Hudson-2B 3-Drew-SS 4-Jackson-1B 5-Upton-RF 6-Young-CF 7-Reynolds-3B 8-Montero/Snyder-C And they've got a very good and very deep bench. Traci- I've already mentioned his numbers, but even if he's not totally healthy, he's still a very good bat off the bench. Snyder/Montero- Two good hitting catchers. Carlos Gonzalez-A great prospect who has a cannon for an arm, and can play all 3 OF spots. Could push Byrnes and Young for PT. Chris Burke-The guy everyone thought would take over for Biggio in Houston until the Astro's, who aren't ready to contend decided to dump him and pay Kaz Matsui about 10 times more money(more actually) to do about what Burke could likely do with a starting job. Anyway, the connsumate utility man. Can play just about anywhere on the diamond. Great pickup for the D-backs. And play all 3 OF spots, 2nd, 3rd and Short if needed. My point is that while this team didn't have very good offense last year, they've got VERY talented players who were all very highly touted and who are very young and very ready to break out. And again with Webb-True ace, one of the best in the game. Harren-3.07 ERA in the AL West last year. Should translate to about a 3.00-3.25 ERA in the NL West this year. RJ-He's still a very good pitcher with very good stuff who is ultra competitive. I see a bounce back year this year. Davis-He's been solid for a while now. Owings-Again, he had a very good rookie year, a year in which he was their number 3. That it's his second year and he's now their 5 bodes very well. Other SP'ers Petit, Nippert, both guys who were high rated prospects, and Nippert who's a guy that has front of the rotation type stuff. Max Scherzer's a guy who could very well be up this year as he's been fast tracked since he was drafted. Another potential frontline guy. Then you have CL-Cruz SU-Lyons SU-Pena 7th-Qualls MR-Wickman Loogy-Slaten Medders, Nippert, Scherzer, Pettit, Gonzalez, Buckner, Gutierrez, Fruto and about 5 others could fill out the pen. So fine, maybe last years team did over succeed, but you really have to forget about that and look at all the talent they've got either developing into their own, coming up from the minors, or guys they picked up. This team looks loaded to me. Though, if they do win just 80 games, I'm sure this will be bumpedhttp://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

We aren't talking about what happened last year though, we are talking about predicting the talent level of this year and for that I'd want to use both of them. I still don't see how there could be any debate that run differential is more important than how many wins a team gets. So I take issue with the statement that "it's up for debate" which is more important. Wins always trump a mathmatical equation that tries to predict how many wins a team SHOULD have. I like Upton, I don't think Drew is ever going to be a great SS and I think Young is going to take some time to really bust out as he learns plate patience. Well, Young was a pretty good rookie last year mis-cast as a leadoff hitter, but he's always done a good job of drawing walks, so he may not "bust out" for a couple years, but he should be a good player this year. I'm not sure what you don't like about Drew, or I guess even if you don't like him(saying you don't think he'll be great is pretty vague), but I think an absolute worst case scenario is he'll be like Greene. A guy who hits 20-25 HR's a year, but doesn't carry a great BA, and who can pick it with the best of them at Short. That's worst case. I think he's going to end up as a better SS than Tulo. We'll have to see though. And it looks like we agree on Upton. He'll be a 5 tool star IMO. A Bo Jackson with a better BA in the near future. Jackson has reached the point that I don't expect him to be above average in his career, his upside is Lyle Overbay. Why on Earth would his "upside" be that of Lyle Overbay? He's 25 years old. Overbay I believe wasn't even a regular until he was about 27. But either way, at 25 years old, he's coming off two straight very good seasons. Not to mention the guy was a top prospect. I guess I just don't understand what makes you think that at age 25 he's topped out. I mean, career numbers so far of .282/.368 and 17/77 over 162 games. I'm not a believer in Reynolds at all and it sounds like Tracy is going to have problems getting healthy for the season. Again, I really don't understand where this comes from. He's 23 years old, and if you project last years numbers over 162, he'd of hit 25 HR's, 90 RBI's and .279/.349 for an .844 OPS. As for Traci, we're talking about a guy who's been very productive for the last 4 years. 20 and 27 HR's in 05 and 06 and about .290/.350 with an OPS well over .800. So even if he's not healthy enough to play fulltime,which he won't be able to either way because he doesn't have a spot, but he will be a very valuable PH'er. Webb/Haren are a nice top of the rotation but I think Davis will tank They're more than a "nice" top of the rotation, they're at least one of the 3 best in the NL, and very possibly THEE best. As for Davis, again, this "feeling" just doesn't jive with his past performance. He's been a steady, reliable pitcher for the last 5 years posting ERA's of; 4.03, 3.39,3.84, 4.91, 4.25 throwing about 200 innings he last 4 years(in fact, he averaged well over). Because a guy walks players doesn't mean for a fact that he's going to bomb the next season. Davis is a guy who walks a guy rather than give in to them, and he has a lot of success doing it. At what point do you say that his peripherals mean less than his actual performance? And we're talking about the number 4/5 starter. Owings will take some time to grow and RJ is done. How much "time" does he need to grow? He had a 4.30 ERA last year. He's also their number 5 starter, so even if he does fall off a touch, they'll still be fine. As for Randy Johnson, c'mon Ender. I just said in another thread how objective you are, and here you are pretty much pulling this statement without any factual background. I mean, that's it? Just..."he's done"? The fact that every report says that he's feeling better and should be ready for ST doesn't matter? Or that he was very good last year when he WAS healthy? 72 K's against 13 BB's. In the last 3 healthy seasons he's played, he's thrown about 675 Innings and won 17,17,16 games with ERA's of 2.60, 3.79 and 5.00, the last 2 in the AL East. I don't understand for the life of me why you think it impossible that he'd come back and at least be good number 3 for that team? Hell, he doesn't need to carry the load, just be solid. The fact is, I could see him having a great comeback year as he's at least rested his arm for a year now. The bullpen should be solid but it won't be as good as last year. Again, it's almost like you've made your opinion on the D-backs overall record and now you're trying to fit things around it and you're not really using any facts. Their pen could well be just as good this year. They've got a very good group at the back of it with Cruz, Lyon, Pena and Slaten, and then a slew of talented young arms who likely won't make the rotation(Gonzlez, Petit, ect..ect..). Sayin that they won't be as good as last year essentially "just because" doesn't make a very compelling argument. Again, I respect your opinions, I just don't see where you're coming from here. (By the way, sorry for the long post)

You know Ender, just because you pick a guy on a fantasy team doesn't mean you have to defend him to death. Just admit you've got a special spot for Bush....c'mon, we all do. Just admit it! Yea, I recall that conversation. I'll say this, I don't share the conviction that you do when it comes to defensive metrics, nor am I as staunch a sabr guy as you, and I think that some on here put too much stock in it(they'd say I don't put enough, but rest assured, I do think they're very important, I just think that there are times where they can liel to you), but I can say without any doubt that whatever you say, you say it with absolute objectivity....which is why that argument was a bit humerous. Anyway, as for Bush, I was a HUGE Bush fan last year. I truly thought he was going to step up and be a viable number 2 last year. I thought that his peripheral's would preceede a big breakout season for Bush. Something to the tune of 3.35-3.55 with 15-17 wins and a 1.10 Whip. I saw he and Sheets being a very formidable 1-2 punch with Cappy, Suppan and Vargas rounding out the rotation until Gallardo came up. Of course, none of this occured, but it seems that so often a guy shows signs of having that breakout season, then the following season he regresses, and people lose faith in him to a degree, and then finally they break out, so hopefully this season, we'll see that good middle of the rotation type starter that we've all hoped he'd be. The only problem is, does he even get that chance? Do the Brewers go with Cappy and Bush over Villy? I guess a best case scenario would be to go with Sheets/Gallardo/Suppan/Bush/Cappy and then keep Villy in the pen, and either go with a 13 man staff to start the season out, or deal Vargas for whatever you can get. Hope that Villy can have the same success the first half of this season that he had the first half last season, and hope that Bush or Cappy start out and have a great first half. If Cappy could have the type of 1st half he had in 06, 10-4 with an ERA of ~3.20 you could really get a GREAT haul in return for him to a team that thinks they may be in a race. Maybe a team like the Dodgers if they lose a starter again, a guy like Penny who took a beating last year, Schmidt who's a huge question mark, or if anyone really goes down and you can somehow put together a package and pry Broxton away from them. Or just whoever. There are so many ways this could play out, and all of them good if Cappy has a good 1st half.

Gamel's either a bad fielding 3B prospect, which doesn't help his value, or he moves to 1B, which doesn't help his value. Well and again, whatever you may think he'll end up as, calling him a 1B prospect simply isn't true. My point wasn't so much with his value, but your misrepresentation of him. Not to mention that his biggest problem is footwork, definitely fixable, or that he could well end up in LF/RF. Either way, he's a very good looking left handed prospect. Not sure how anyone can have any confidence in Mark Rogers anymore. Two or three months of health is not going to erase the previous years of surguries and restore him to prospect status. If he was in a different organization, would you want him? Again, your confidence in him aside, to discard him and say that he's got zero value, even assuming a healthy first half is a little ridiculous IMO. He's most definitely still a prospect. One injury and you discount a 21 year old kid who can be dominant? Drastically overstating the case IMO. He's got a long way to go, but to say he's not even a prospect any longer? "Plus other prospects" means fodder. No, it means other prospects. This is exactly my point. You're coming up you're own definitions and skewing the initial suggestion in order to chastise the initial trade. Factor in the potential, subtract for multiple substance abuse infractions and a suspension, I don't think you're talking too much more trade value than what Garrison might of had. We'll have to agree to disagree. I'm quite certain Jeffress has FAR more value. To win a guy like Sabathia off the trade block, its going to take someone better than Gamel, plus Gamel. Then possibly "plus other prospects". Show me some examples of similar trades and prove me wrong. Well, I believe the last poster did, but I never said it was. I said you mis-represented the suggested trade significantly. Gamel+Jeffress+Rogers+Other Prospects turned into a "B" 1B prospect and a suspended Low A pitcher which really serves little point when trying to discuss the idea. In fact I thought it was a bit snide and sarcastic.

I'm not sure how you get 6 more season's unless his rookie contract was a unique one. I show 5 additional years.

Well I guess it's good that nobody suggested we'd get CC for a B 1B prospect and a low A-ball suspended SP'er. Since the only trade that was suggested was Gamel, Jeffress, Rogers PLUS a couple other prospects, I guess I'm not certain what you think is the "B" 1B prospect. Not to mention that Jeffress obviously wouldn't be suspended by the time we'd trade him. And who are Inman, Thatcher and Garrison? A SP'er who struggle in AA with average stuff, a loogy and a throw in in Garrison. At least at the time. I guess I don't get the point of trying to intentionally make this trade look worse by skewing the reality of it. Gamel's not a 1B prospect, regardless of what you think he may become, Jeffress is a Low A prospect, but he's also a guy with great talent and a top 100 prospect despite being suspended, Rogers has half a season to show he's healthy, and he was a top 40 prospect, and he said other prospects, so in fact your post doesn't really represent anything even CLOSE to what was actually suggested.

No, it's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact. It is more relevant. A pythagorean W/L doesn't get you into the payoffs. Further more, the D-back did have a poor run differential, however, that offense is ripe with talented young players with VERY high ceilings. Upton, Drew, and Young are three guys that are going to break out and won't hit in the mid .200's next year, Jackson is a true power 1st basemen, Hudson's a all star, Reynolds/Traci at 3rd is very solid, Byrnes is like a cartoon character that I really can't stand, but he's solid, and should hit about 6th/7th on next years team. And they've got fantastic rotation with Webb, Harren, the Big Unit coming back, and Davis/Owings rounding out the back end, and then the back end of that pen is very good as well. The fact that they learned how to win last year in close games should not be counte against them. That said, my ranking. It's going to be much different and people will no doubt call me crazy, but so be it. 1-D-backs. As I said, I believe that offense will be very good and very imporved this year. High Ceiling talent at most positions. 2-Mets Seems obvious to some, but I don't think that Maine or Perez are going to be very good this year, and while Satana's a great pitcher, they lost Glavine who was very good last year, so it's not like he's replacing a nobody. Honestly, I expect a 20 win season and a 2.50-3.00 ERA out of him, but I just don't think the rest of that staff is very good. 3-Brewers Weeks is the key. And since I think he's going to be a .280/.400/.500 30/30 guy this year, it's no surprise I think they're a top 3 team. 4-Braves This team has all kinds off offense. In fact, they're the best offensive team in the NL IMO. Pitching is solid in the front, which is what counts come playoff time, but will leave them south of 95 wins. 5-Phillies Having Lidge allows Meyers to move back to the rotation, Hamels is going to be the second best lefty in the league this year IMO, and that offense will mash. 6-Rockies Last year was a bit of a fluke, but they're still very good. Not sure about their staff. 7-Cubs They're solid everywhere, but great nowhere, and if Marmol does post a 4.00-esque ERA that's going to hurt them very badly. 8-Dodgers They'd be 4-5 if they played their young guns. Alas, they do not, and thank you on behalf of the NL for that. 9-Padres-Meh. That's about it for them. Meh. Peavy's nice, as is Young. No offense. 10-Astro's-They've got that middle of the order that's as good as anyone. Pence-Berkman-Lee-Tejada. That is scary. 11-Cards They'll get Carp and Mulder back and they always find a way to at least be respectable. 12-Marins Getting Johnson back will help, but the young guys aren't quite there. 13-Giants They actually would have been my surprise team this year if they could have landed anything on offense with that rotation of Cain, Lincecum, Lowry, Zito and Sanchez. That's a exceptional rotation. 14-Reds Not a real big fan. Yea, they've added people, but Dunn will be gone by July, Griffey about a week after 600 if he doesn't blow out a hammy, and they'll go with the total youth movement. 15-Pirates Two years ago they were one of my picks to surprise and they haven't done anything to even pretend like they're trying to get better. 16-Nats Sorry Mr Zimmerman, you guy ssssuck.

Right, and when a guy stinks it up in AA, and is the dreaded "control" pitcher in the minors, that's usually a very good sign that you deal him while he's still got value. I was leading the "deal Inman" charge, and I generally don't like trading prospects. And to clarify the control comment, obviously I'm not suggesting that control is bad whatsoever, just that generally when a pitcher gets labeled as a control guy early in his minor league career, he's got average stuff, as was the case with Inman.

Yea, I think the fact that the comment that the players they got all had much higher numbers than their talent is a testament to the Brewers staff which is no real surprise. As for the Bruce over Braun comment, that's just a "wow" comment to me. Callis says something that'll make people go "wow", this Bruce must be really good. It's stupid. He very well may be, but a rookie coming off a 1.000 OPS is pretty special and before you say you're going to take Bruce over him, he outta prove something. I have to think the Reds would be willing to trade Bruce for Braun at this point, even with one less year of control.

The two aren't related? I wonder what the Red Sox record would be without their huge payroll?

I'm not sure where you heard this, but this is definitely not the "talk" that I've heard out of chicago, or what any of my friends who are Cubs fans believe to be the case. In fact, I'm not sure where this comes from. They may think they're going to win, just like we do up here, but they damn sure don't think they're not going to have competition for it.

First of all, I don't find any defensive metric very useful. They're all incredibly flawed. Second, I understand the stats I used aren't considered by many on here as the more "useful" stats. Then again, as I said, I don't think any are. All you can divine from DP totals is that the Marlins allowed more baserunners than NYM. These numbers alone tell you nothing about ability. Exactly how does that stat tell you how many runners the Marlins allowed? It doesn't tell you how many base runners either team allowed at all.

Using Sickel's grades it is. Sickel's grades have been significantly different from other grades or scouting rankings I've seen. Tony Butler did not have a good year, and was badly overrated as a prospect last year. Even with his struggles, Jeffress absolutely blows him away as a prospect in my opinion. Jones is a better value and a better prospect than LaPorta in my opinion, but again, with Parra and Tillman, you're talking about a guy in Tillman who is about as far as Rogers away from the big leagues and Parra a guy with the ceiling of a frontline starter. That right there, those three prospects you listed favor the Brewers heavily, even with Jones edge of LaPorta. I think if we had Will Inman back, we could come up with a closer value with what the M's would give up in this particular deal. Maybe Matt LaPorta, Zach Jackson and Jeremy Jeffress would be a closer deal, but throwing Parra into it changes the trade a great deal obviously. Of course, the M's are also giving up a good major league reliever, so it's not an even deal, just even in terms of the prospects.

I guess I don't understand why people think that Ramirez is SOOO awful at Shortstop that there's just no way he's going to stay there. He's really not that bad there. I mean, he's struggled, but he's 23 years old, and last year he had 24 errors and a .963 FP. I guess it seems as though people place him in the Braun category when it comes to defense. I don't think he's as bad as people think, and I think he could very easily become a above average defender. And he can turn 2 a lot better than Reyes. In the last two years for Reyes, he's turned 72 and 88 DP's in 309 games for a total of 160 DP's. That's a huge edge. Hanley Ramirez has turned 111 and 98 in the last two years, spanning 305 games for a total of 209 DP's. Their RF's the last two years are; Reyes 2006-3.86 2007-4.08 Hanley 2006-4.55 2007-4.27 Now before someone comes on and says, "yea, but look at these stats", sure, there is no question that Reyes right now is a better defensive shortstop. Rather, my point is the difference isn't AS BIG as people seem to think, and that at 23 years old, this kid should and in my opinion will improve. Maybe to the point of being a very good short stop, but at the very least to the point of being a solid one. So, bottom line, given the fact that Hanley Ramirez has a HUGE edge offensively in my opinion, and that I think Reyes has the defensive edge, but not by nearly as much as people think, all things considered, I think Hanley Ramirez is a much better player. We're talking about a leadoff hitter with an OBP of .354, and one of the best pure hitters in the game. I think by the end of this season, Hanley Ramirez is going to be considered to be in the class of Pujols, Cabrera, and Arod, and that type of offensive player who can play at least a passable SS is going to be one of the most valuable players in the game. More so than Miggy in the near future. All that said, I do think that Reyes is going to get better, and he's the type of guy you can build a team around. He's hell on the base paths. He can almost manufacture a run all on his own. Walk/hit, get to first base, steal second, steal 3rd, sac fly. So yea, you're absolutely right, you can't go wrong with either player, I just happen to think that Hanley's on another level.

That's the reason that I hope the Cubbies move Marmol to the closers role. Playing against, or rooting against the Cubs, it was always so painful to watch them in the middle to later part of the games they were leading because you just knew anytime they got up on a team and that team started to get a rally going they would bring in Marmol and that was likely the end of it. Meanwhile, they'd add another run, and then Dempster would get to start a fresh inning, and his outings were far easier. Howry and Wood are still a formidable duo if Marmol is the closer, but Howry's hittable, and Wood's a giant question mark. The team defense was a major problem last year, his acquisition obviously makes the CF position better in that regard, but it also gave Hall and Braun the ability to play where they can do the most good defensively as well. Yea, that's one way to look at it. To look where other players are moving as a result of his signing, but I took at as who was going to have the biggest impact themselves.

Turnbow will and should continue to pitch in high "leverage" situations. I don't get why people are so down on Turnbow. The fact is, he was great the vast majority of the time he came on last year he was great. It's again, just the few times that he wasn't good that he was terrible and he really blew up. But that doesn't change the fact that he got the job done far, far more often than he did not. Howry gave up a run in 18 of the 78 games he appeared in last year.Turnbow gave up a run in 15 of his 77 games he appeared in last year. Yet Turnbow's ERA was 4.63 whereas Howry's was 3.22. Obviously that's just one tiny little aspect of the equation, but the point remains that Turnbow's good a very high pct of the time. You say that Howry's consistent, and I would say that Turnbow appears to be in his own way consistent. He's consistently very good. He's also consistently very bad WHEN he's bad. And that right there is what I think Torres, Riske, Mota, and Gange can rectify. As I've said, you can see very quickly when one Turnbow doesn't have it. He comes out and his fastball is straight, his slider hangs and goes right down the middle, and that's if he can get it over the plate. But when he's on, he's every bit as good as Carlos Marmol. Bottom line if Turnbow's a guy that we absolutely need this year to play a pivotal role if we're going to have a good Bullpen. As for the lineup being "too" right handed, I don't see how it's possible for him to off-set the defensive upgrade by making the lineup "too" right handed. First of all, it assumes that without Cameron, we'd of had another left handed bat in the lineup. That's not really the case. It was going to be Hall at CF, Braun at 3rd, and then MAYBE a platoon in LF of Dillon and Gross. So the question is, would Cameron's production be bad enough as compared to those two, that it'd even come close to negating the defensive upgrade? I cannot envision a scenario in which he could even come close to offsetting the huge defensive upgrade.