paul253

Putting the Red Sox or Yankees in the central would make it so they are both division winners and open up the possibility for other AL teams to win the wild card. But it would lower the possibility of all the other teams in the Central making the playoffs winning the division. I think its a wash, either way.

I don't know about that. Look at how many innings he pitched last season. Also, you don't shut down your second best pitcher in the middle of a pennant race. He may have added a piece here or there but I don't think it would have risen to the level of trading your top prospect, plus another top 10 prospect. I still think at the very least Laporta would still be here, and very possibly Brantley.

This whole idea of fixing competitive balance is a joke. Selig and the owners couldn't care less about it, or they'd take a stand against the players (and this is the PERFECT time to do it too). This is about them making/saving money and if they win...all the better. If they truly cared about competitive balance, there are 2 easy fixes. First off you need to do one of these two: 1) Salary Cap on the 40-man roster OR 2) Luxury tax that is basically a for every $1 over the limit you pay a $2 fine. Each of these would be accompanied by a salary floor. Then you fix the draft by doing three things: 1) Institute a world wide draft where EVERY player eligible 2) A rookie salary cap 3) Eliminate comp picks...or at least change the system. It isn't working as it was supposed to. If you want to give a team a comp pick for losing a premium player, then make it at the end of the second or third round and no sooner, and limit it to one pick per player. Teams like the Angels should never be getting 4 or 5 picks before a team like the Pirates get their second pick. All that being said, I do like the plan. I would switch San Diego and Seattle though so all 5 California teams are in the same division. This assures that the best players going to the worst teams, like it is in EVERY other sport and not teams like the best prospects slip down to teams that are willing to pay their ridiculous demands. I'm sure this won't fix everything, but i think its a good start. As long as MLB allows the Yankees to have payrolls 5 times higher than other teams there will always be competitive balance issues.

Can you construct a scenario that makes sense for a team to give up 4 guys that can bring you 12 extra wins, just so they can have Fielder, and then pay him market value? This is like those trade scenarios where people talked about trading Hart for something good, and then signing some undervalued OF. Why would another team trade for Hart and give up pitching when they can just sign that undervalued OF? I think what he meant was players who would eventually bring more wins but aren't quite there yet. For instance, trading for Brett Lawrie now will not bring a team any additional wins in 2010 but will help tremendously in the future. So the obvious answer to your question is teams who are looking to win now and don't have to rely as heavily on their farm system as other teams do. As far as the other part of your post. Why would a team trade for Hart when they can sign someone just as good? Well in this case you most likely aren't going to get anyone just as good as Fielder. In other words, there is no equal replacement. I believe St. Louis will do anything and everything to resign Pujols. Adrian Gonzalez is going to get traded. There is no way San Diego will let him walk, so if you want him, you'll have to give up just as much as you would to get Fielder. Who else is there at first base that is as good as Fielder and available? Well neither Tampa nor Oakland can likely afford Fielder. The Rangers could but they could likely bring up Smoak at a much lower cost. They could afford him for the post season run and then trade him again after the season to recoup some of their loss, just like Brewerguy suggested. And yes, Texas could bring up Smoak for a much lower cost but what if he struggles? The guy was less than impressive in AAA last season (.244 with 4 hr's and 23 rbi in 197 at bats. Strikeout about once every four at bats). They won't rely on him down the stretch to get them into the playoffs. They'll want an established every day player and at this point in their careers Fielder is universes ahead of Justin Smoak.

I don't blame Mark A. as much as I blame some of the "fans" who have no idea what it takes to run a team. People will look at a trade of Fielder and whine "oh see here we go again. Rebuilding. We're just the Yankees minor league team". The don't look at the return. As far as they are concerned, a prospect is a prospect. To them, Eric Arnett is the same as Chris Cody...someone who isn't a major league player. Mark A. then feels the need to keep the popular guys who fans recognize and will show up to see. Don't get me wrong, I think having Fielder in the lineup will only make the team better, but if his price tag prevents the team from improving in 3 other areas, is it worth the cost?

I was thinking the other about how one injury in 2008 completely changed the direction of the franchise. When Gallardo went down against Chicago early on in the season, he was pretty much done for the season. The Brewers went on to play amazing ball the first half with Ben Sheets as the ace, then of course traded for Sabathia and made the playoffs. I was thinking though about what would have happened had Gallardo not gotten hurt. Obviously there are a lot of assumptions, but I think what was most likely to have occurred is this. The Brewers would have had basically two aces in Sheets and Gallardo and would have played at least at the same winning %, if not better. They would have really had no need to trade for Sabathia, therefore eliminating probably one of the most significant trades in franchise history. Even with Sheets getting hurt, it's unknown if Melvin would have given up so much since Sheets got hurt later on in the season and if he traded for Sabathia in response to Sheets getting hurt, Sabathia wouldn't have played Milwaukee as long as he did. Anyway, with no trade happening, LaPorta and Brantley would still be in Milwaukee, most likely. A spot would have had to be opened for LaPorta, so either Fielder would have been traded or more likely Hart would be gone and LaPorta would be in RF. Likewise for Brantley. I don't know if they would have given Brantley CF last season, but he probably would have gotten it this year since Melvin wasn't going to pick up Cameron's contract. That of course means we wouldn't have traded JJ Hardy for Carlos Gomez, instead getting pitching, meaning Doug Davis probably wouldn't have been signed. So to sum up, if Yovani Gallardo did not get injured in 2008, I believe this year's starting outfield would be Braun, Brantley, and LaPorta. No Sabathia. Hart would be gone. It's weird how one injury can have such a long lasting affect on an organization. Edit: Subject spelling

I know there was an article today in the paper about Mark A. willingness to make an offer, but does anyone think there's a chance that if some of the pitching prospects take major steps forward this year, especially at higher level, he'd be more willing to spend more knowing that he won't be as likely to have to overspend on pitching the next few seasons? If guys like Jones, Butler, Anundson, Rivas, Rogers, and Braddock post sub 4 ERA's with good secondary numbers, maybe he'll be much more confident that he can spend that much money on one player. Similarly, if a lot of the guys struggle maybe he'll say, "these players aren't as close as I thought so even if I sign Prince I'll still have to sign a bunch of guys to help in out". Just a theory of course. Does anyone agree?

Got the win last night and need to get another one tonight. No reason to lose to such a terrible team. Hopefully they finish strong and can get a #1 seed in one of the NCAA regionals. On a side note, I was wondering if anyone knew of any good, up to date websites that talk about college hockey recruiting. I can't find anything.

Just a thought but if it's a mistake you could sell or raffle the tickets and donate the money to a charity.

I'd love to see Mike Jones in the 2011 rotation. How sweet would that be after all these years seeing Mike Jones in the rotation?

Most teams have 1B covered. What about DH too? Didn't the Angels just sign Hideki Matsui for DH? Was that a multiyear deal? Surely Fielder is a step up from him. Who do the Rangers have at DH? As far as the Giants go, I cant see them turning down a good offer for Fielder. They are really hurting for offense and if they don't improve it soon they'll risk wasting all this stellar pitching they have now. I think a lot of people are underestimating Fielder. Yes a lot of teams have an internal option they can put at DH or at 1B, but Fielder is better than 90% of them and he's still young. It's a matter of price...if the team thinks they can resign him....or a matter or whether they think they can win that one year they have him for and are willing to go for it. Maybe if the Brewers are out of it at the trade deadline a team would be willing to give up a few more or some better prospects to get Fielder to put them over the top. I still think the chances of him resigning are slim to none and the longer Melvin waits to trade him the less he'll get in return.

Another thing to consider is this. Look at what teams give up at trade deadline for players. When they Brewers traded for CC Sabathia two seasons ago, they gave up arguably their #1 prospect (LaPorta), another top 10 prospect (Brantley) plus two mid level arms (Jackson and Bryson). And that was for half a season of a player the team knew more or less wouldn't be back. I still don't think its out of the question for the Brewers to get three of a teams top 12 or 13 prospects, including one very high one, in return. Are we going to get Smoak, Felez, and Perez...no, but Smoak and Perez? Possibly. Maybe we throw in an A-baller. If a team feels like Fielder will put them over the top, maybe they will take the chance and then settle for comp picks like Milwaukee did two seasons ago with Sabathia.

Prince would be a major upgrade over a lot of players who teams are relying on at 1B/DH. If a team feels as though they can afford to sign him, I don't see why they wouldn't want to acquire him. Again, we're talking about a top 6 or 7 player offensively, so it's not like teams will say "well we don't need him, we already have Hank Blalock". I'm sure there are plenty of teams, the Brewers included, that would absolutely love to have Prince Fielder in the middle of their lineup, and if they work out an extension ahead of time I'm sure they'd be willing to give up something good.

You're going to get a 20 year old AA arm with projectability and another nugget. Its hard to find a market for 1B. Keep in mind that Berkman may also be on the market for a one year deal. You're going to get more than that. You make it sound like we're going to get a potential #3 starter and a throw-in for Fielder. Fielder is an elite offensive player. MVP candidate for the past 2 or 3 years. He's young, has as much power potential as anyone in baseball. Great plate discipline, drives in runs, can even hit for a decent average. Offensively you probably couldn't name 5 or 6 better players overall in all of baseball. Yes he's somewhat limited defensively, but someone who trades for Fielder isn't going to be trading for him for his defense. I'd expect one very good and two good prospects wouldn't be too much to ask for. a lot of fans are going to be upset (besides the fact he's a fan favorite) but more because they will be thinking "that's all we got for him?". Whats the reaction going to be when he walks away for nothing?

How is that dumb? I should rephrase. Expecting a first round pick is dumb and expecting to get an impact player from the draft picks is dumb. You say you'll only trade him for MLB ready prospects but seem ok to let him walk and take draft picks which would turn into somebody at least three years away, probably more, and that's if they even make it. The players you'll receive in a trade will be better prospects then players you'll get in the draft. Also, if you don't trade him and he walks, which I believe he will, you have exactly one year extra to be a "contender". Then he's gone. The guys you trade him for will be closer and better than guys from the draft and even if you have to go into rebuilding mode, which I agree with MIIS you won't, you'll be rebuilding faster by obtaining players in a trade. Don't forget about how much money is coming off the books next year (Hall, Suppan, Riske, possibly Hoffman, Bush, Counsell). That'll be more than enough to sign a player or two to help the offense. Obviously you're not going to sign a 50 hr 140rbi guy, but you can improve in another position (RF?) while signing someone to replace Fielder. Or you could open up a spot for Gamel. You could also go for another pitcher. Either way, I view trading Fielder as a MUCH better option than having him play one more season then letting him go. The guy has shown zero interest in even discussing an extension and his agent is notorious for squeezing the absolute highest price for his clients. I think the Brewers would be fools to give one guy 20% of the payroll when they could trade him for two or three guys that could help for 4-5 years and they be even bigger fools for letting him walk away in free agency.

I agree that letting him go for draft picks is dumb. We've tried that and quite frankly we've been screwed over. Seriously, a second round pick for Sabathia? Not to mention those comp picks are such a toss up. For every Jake Odorizzi (who hasn't even hit A ball yet) there is a Cutter Dykstra. You need to get established prospects who are closer than 4 years away in return for Fielder. I agree Smoak and Felez would be ideal, but with Gamel and even Lawrie able to play first base getting a first basemen in return isn't absolutely necessary. Heck Corey Hart could even move back to first base for a year or two if we are that desperate for one. Or we could sign a one or two year replacement like Overbay. Pitching is the number one thing we need in return for Fielder if we trade him, and I hope the Brewers don't limit themselves to having to receive a first basemen in the trade. That being said, I wouldn't mind seeing them draft a first basemen in the first or second round this year just so there is someone in the minors who is playing that position with some upside.

So much for that idea. I was really rooting for Russia, mainly because I don't want the US to have to play Canada again for the gold medal. Now I'm rooting for Sweden.

I noticed while looking at the Baseball America top 100 prospects, Tampa has 4 pitchers in the top 100. Any chance they'd want Prince for maybe two of those pitchers plus a position player? I don't know if they'd be able to afford him, but having him in their lineup would certainly help their chances in the AL East. Also, still looks like Texas would be a good fit. Prince for Justin Smoke, Martin Perez and a low level pitcher? Too much to ask for? Not enough?

Great win for the US hockey team in what was probably a classic trap game. Playing a team they already beat. The #1 seed. Just came off a huge over Canada. Now they are assured of playing for a medal, which few people expected. That win over Canada was huge, not just for confidence, but look at how it affected the draw. Canada, Russia, and Sweden, arguably the 3 best teams, are all on the other side of the bracket. Speaking of which, that Canada-Russia game tonight is going to be something else. I think if Canada loses the country is going to shut down!

I would make centerpiece of the deal a pitcher. After that I'd probably go for another pitcher, then probably a position player. It wouldn't necessarily have to be a first basemen because I think Gamel could immediately move to first base and he would finally be able to be an every day player. I actually wouldn't mind three high ceiling pitchers because postion wise it's hard to find a position we have an immediate need for.

I don't think a Tex like haul is out of the question, but this goes way beyond that. If the Giants called and said "We want Prince and we'll give you Bumgarner, Cain and...." I'd say deal before they got the last name out.

I could see in 3-4 years that maybe he will feel as though he deserves more and wants to renegotiate, but the guy just signed an 8 year deal, what like a year ago? He obviously wants to stay in Milwaukee for awhile and feels as though he received a fair deal. It just irritates me that people like this letter write continue to have this piss poor attitude about the Brewers and act as though 1) that nobody wants to play here and 2) if we trade Prince Fielder we may as well just give up and go back into a full fledged rebuilding mode. He obviously knows nothing about the farm system or the fact that receiving 2 or 3 good prospects can turn a system around. Can you imagine a few years ago if we had made a trade for an all star and in turn gave away prospects Prince Fielder, Yovani Gallardo, and Corey Hart? Think about how those three players could have turned around another team for years to come for giving away a year of an all star. And yes it's true that prospects aren't always a given to produce, but I'd rather obtain 2 or 3 prospects who have already show what they can do in AA or AAA than take a chance on getting as good of a player with the 34th and 47th picks in the draft like we'll get when Fielder walks.

I didn't have a working PS3 for the '09 season, but one thing that has always, ALWAYS bothered me about playing a season or franchise mode was that you didn't get to pick which jersey your team wears. I have only played the show, and the last year I played was 08, but I remember doing the franchise mode and it seemed like every other game my Brewers team would be wearing some weird throwback jersey and never wore the blue alternate ones. Have they changed that yet?

Definitely excited for the hockey game tonight. I love watching the curling too, but its been awfully frustrating watching the US teams this olympics. I could personally watch the US women's team all day because I have a ridiculous crush on one of the curlers (I'll let you guys figure out which one) but it seems like their final curlers are missing a TON of shots. The US could have had a 2-0 lead vs Canada today but the girl missed the shot and it was all down hill from there. And the men lost their first 4 games on last shot misses. It reminds me of watching Marquette blow game after game because they couldn't make free throws.

There was another letter to the editor today in the JS that irritated me. It wasn't as bad as the "trade Fielder for Cain, Bumgarner, and Posey" guy, but he says "I also don't see teams lining up to trade their best player". Does he not follow the trade deadline? That's all teams do is try to trade their best player, especially when their contracts are set to expire. Someone needs to say to this guy......"Roy Halliday". Then he follows that up with "Are we going to dismiss Ryan Braun in two years when he wants a new contract? You know he will." Apparently he doesn't realize Braun is under contract for 6 more years. Finally "....for someone who one out of every four games and prospects (again with the prospects)". If I could tell him one thing, it would be this. Prince Fielder was a "prospect" once. So was Braun, Hart, Weeks, Hardy, Gallardo, Parra, and Escobar. He acts like if we trade for prospects we are just giving him away, but where does he expect all these future all stars to come from? Sorry I realize this has nothing to do with Madison Bumgarner, but these letters the JS print every Sunday makes all Brewer fans look like a bunch of morons.