paul253

Hardy isn't exactly tearing it up down in Nashville either. He needs to stop complaining and start performing. Had he even had an average year he wouldn't even be in this position. It's just kind of bad luck that the Brewers had a major league ready prospect available to replace him. I'm sure Hardy hasn't thought about the fact that he has hurt the Brewers through the lowering of his trade value as much as they have hurt him. Maybe if they felt they could still get fair value for him they wouldn't have needed to gain an extra year of him.

They should start him slow next spring. Hold him in Arizona an extra month, then send him to AAA around May 1st when he's ready to go 5-6 innings every 5th day. He should bypass AA. The AFL experience should be his AA level. He's dominating high A hitters (albeit in limited action) many of whom he'd see in AA next year. He doesn't need to prove he can get those guys out. He does need to prove that he can stay healthy though. After all this time of being patient with him, why rush him next year? I'd start him in AA, let him continue regaining his confidence. If he's successful there move him to Nashville at the all star break. With Jones, Butler, and Cody, plus whoever Melvin obtains in off season trades, I don't think depth will be as much of a problem next year as it was this year. Personally, I think Zach Braddock is the one who should be fast tracked a little more next year.

Rogers and Jones have both had very successful, apparently pain free seasons. I don't see any reason to have them possibly get shelled their last few starts and have them lose confidence, Rogers especially. Rogers could probably only go three innings anyway. I could maybe see giving Jones a start, but really, if we have the 5 healthy starters back, why? I'd maybe consider bringing him up when the Nashville season is over though to pitch out of the bullpen to get his feet wet and maybe convince him to resign with us next season.

How soon before he turns on the fans in Milwaukee though?

I actually wouldn't mind holding onto McGehee. I think having him and Adam Heether as the two backups would be the best options there, with an infield of Gamel, Escobar, Weeks, and Fielder. Very solid infield. Something will have to be done with the outfield, whether it be keeping it the same, trading Hart, or whatever. Either way we will need a few backups out there as well. The key is pitching. I would love to see Jones or Butler get that 5th spot, but that may be pushing it a bit. Is there any chance McGehee can play outfield? Maybe trade Hart and slide McGehee to the outfield.

Trading Prince will kill the lineup, and we have nobody to replace him. I don't think that's an option. I think trading Hardy is a given, but really, what do you expect to get for him? He's been just awful all season long, and he can't even get back on track in the minors. I don't think we could get anything more than a #4 pitcher or a couple of prospects for him. And we don't really need 2-3 pitchers. Whether we like it or not, Gallardo, Parra, Bush, and Suppan will be in the rotation, so we need to replace one starter. We do need depth though. I think its a given we have to try to resign Mike Jones and guarentee him a fair shot and the fifth spot. Maybe a Hardy trade can bring back a major league ready prospect we could also let shoot for that 5th spot. After that you're going to have to rely on guys like Josh Butler., Chris Cody and Chase Wright. As much as I hate to say this, I think the success of the pitching staff next year will depend mainly on how much better Parra can be and the health of everyone else.

I disagree. First off, you can't hold Morgan's relatively small sample size against him. You can say we'll see if he can maintain it, but you can only guess that he won't keep it up. Morgan's career OBP is something like 21 points higher than Cameron's even though its only been over about 200 games. Second, my point about OPS is this. Slugging percentage is almost always going to be significantly higher than on base percentage. Its just the way the statistics are set up. So if you are only using OPS to compare two players, the one with the higher slugging percentage is almost always going to seem like the "better" player. If Cameron has 9 more doubles and 15 more home runs than Morgan, but Morgan has 54 more singles and 4 more triples, you can again only assume that those type of hits Cameron has will lead to more runs than the hits that Morgan has. And it's not that I "love" stolen bases. Its that if he has 54 more singles, does he not only need to steal 9 of the 54 times to essentially be equal in doubles to Cameron? And as far caught stealings. A single and a caught stealing is in my mind the same thing as a ground out or a popout in that the result is one out and nobody on. So again, even if Morgan has 14 more caught stealings, you also have to consider the fact he has 34 more hits. 'Cameron is the better player' is just preference. It isn't. Except that in my opinion it is. They are two very different type of players, offensively, which is why I have a hard time just accepting the flat out "Cameron is better" argument, which I still believe is based largely on slugging percentage. Also, I'm not technically arguing Morgan is better, I'm saying I think he'd be a better fit in our lineup which relies heavily on the home run ball. I think Morgan is more likely to get on base the Cameron, which would lead to more oppurtunities for other hitters to drive in runs.

Because at worst for Cam their defense is equal, and his offense, as proven by those pesky facts, is superior. You're the only convinced that Morgan is more valuable. For one, you shouldn't use the term "valuable" because value I would think would include salary which would bring a whole new wrinkle to the argument. Also, despite the little cheap shot you had in there, you didn't answer the question, you simply repeated the statement. We can agree defense is a push which brings it strictly to offense. I repeat my argument that people are claiming he is a "superior" player because he hits more home runs and doubles. You can pretend you're using OPS if you want, but you're not, you're only going by slugging percentage because Morgan's OBP is a tad higher. For your argument you could add walks, and probably RBI, but for mine I can use hits, triples, strikeouts, stolen bases, batting average, total bases and on base percentage. Please don't try to undermine me by making it appear as though I don't know what I'm talking about. I said before its a matter of opinion. If you believe Cameron is better....fine. But don't act as though if someone disagrees with you they don't know what they're talking about. It seems to me that you are ignoring some of those "pesky facts" yourself.

We all could round and round on this but it has been shown Cameron is a supperior ball player, he gets on base at the same rate while hitting for more extra base hits. Now Morgan is ok and sure it would be great to just slide the savings over to pitching but it doesn't work that way. The 20x argument while factually correct, isn't comparably correct. That's like the Cubs questioning paying Lilly $12MM and saying they could have Gallardo instead for $500,000. How has it been proven he is a superior player? You're basing that entirely on slugging percentage, which is inaccurate because home runs are not Morgan's game. Morgan's career OBP is higher than Cameron's. In fact, this season is Cameron's highest for OBP since 2000, which could very well be from him drawing more walks due to the absolute crap (Hart, Kendall, Hall, Hardy) that's been hitting behind him all season. Morgan has a whopping 9 fewer doubles and triples than Cameron, but he makes up for it with something like 30 more stolen bases. He's hitting almost 50 points higher than Cameron, has a higher OBP, has more hits and has more total bases. I don't see how you just claim Cameron is superior offensively because he hits more home runs and a few more extra base hits.

Well we could go back and forth on this forever, its just a matter of opinion. You can't fairly use RBI numbers when one them is a leadoff hitter and one of them spent a good portion of the season as a #5 or #6 hitter, when runners are more likely to be on. Also walks. Cameron IS probably better at drawing walks. However, again, I think the fact that Morgan hits leadoff may work against him. When you walk a leadoff hitter, the next three or four hitters are usually the best ones on the team. If you walk the 5 or 6 hitter, then next three or four hittes tend to be not as good, especially in the national league when the pitcher hits. In other words, I think that teams would be more likely to walk Cameron with Kendall, Hardy, and the pitcher hitting next as opposed to Morgan, with Zimmerman and Dunn as the next hitters. Also, while it is true that triples may involve some luck, it also has a lot to do with speed. I'm guessing that Mike Rivera wouldn't have gotten 7 triples even if he had hit them in the exact same spot Morgan did. As far as extra base hits go, minue home runs, Cameron has 9 more doubles and triples and Morgan does. However Morgan has 34 more stolen bases. I think that those 34 extra bases Morgan got on stolen bases more than makes up for the nine fewer doubles/triples. Even if you add caught stealings in the equation, thats still 20 extra bases Morgan has got to make up for the 9 fewer doubles/triples. Finally, unless my math is wrong, which it sure could be, Morgan actually more total bases thay Cameron because he has 34 more hits, albeit in 44 more at bats. Plus, this is from someone who costs about 20 times less than Cameron does this season. Like I said, we could go on all day about who we each think would be better in the lineup. I guess its just a matter of personal preference.

What you are missing is how hard it is to get six hits in a row, or even 6 out of 12 for that matter. remember that this is a sport that you are considered good in when you fail 7 out of 10 times. plan and simple the homerun is the easiest way to score a run. Well obviously if you need ONE run then yes, hitting a home run is the quickest way to get it. But I think what you are missing is that even amazing home run hitter only averages one home run every 3.5/4 games. More likely its closer to a home run every 5-6 games. Over the past 3 years, Mike Cameron has averaged one home run every 23.6 (2009), 17.7 (2008), and 27.2 (2007) at bats. So that's at least one extra run every 4-7 games. I don't think its a stretch to say someone could match that by getting on base more and being able to steal more bases. Also, while hitting a home run may be easier to score one run, having guys hitting singles, doubles, and not striking out, as opposed to waiting for the home run ball, may make it easier to score multiple runs. It also increases pitch counts for opposing pitchers, makes them pitch out of the less comfortable stretch and lose a little bit of focus while paying attention to a base runner. Like I said though, ideally it would be nice to have a balance, where two or three guys have the ability to get on base at a high percentage, and two or three guys have the ability to hit the long ball.

If Jody Gerut is our opening day center fielder I will give up on this team right now. I was wondering if Mike Jones might be an option for the number 5 starter. He seems to have been treated fairly aggressively this season, making it all the way up to Nashville. He's pitching pretty darn well tonight. I would really be disappointed if, after all this time, he makes his major league debut somewhere other than in Milwaukee. Personally I would rather give him a shot with Chris Cody and Josh Butler as backup options then spending some ridiculous amount of money on a below average free agent pitcher.

You are correct. However, the fact that Cameron will likely have an OPS somewhat significantly higher than Morgan does suggest Cameron would produce more runs. I don't know. When looking at OPS, the player with the higher slugging % is 9 times out of 10 going to have a higher OPS. Looking at the Brewers, only Jason Kendall has a higher OBP than slugging %. So that is basically saying that whoever has more homeruns is a more valuable, which I don't believe it true in all cases. In the long run, it doesnt matter if you score 6 runs on 6 solo home runs or on a bunch of singles and doubles, but I think its more likely that you're going to score 6 runs with singles and doubles. Ideally, it'd be nice to have a balance, which I think is more likely than either to produce the runs.

I'd be fine with that but what are you going to do with Weeks? He has no trade value. I suppose you could try him in center but thats a big risk. Morgan will likely continue to have an inferior OPS to Cameron, which means he will cause us to score fewer runs. Morgan hits for a better average, gets on base more, and will likely steal close to three times as many bases as Cameron. Just because Cameron hits more home runs does not provide any evidence we will score more runs. Listen, I see your point for Cameron, I just disagree. The Brewers are dead last in stolen bases, 6th in all of baseball in strikeouts, and 15th in batting average. Adding Morgan and subtracting Cameron would improve all of those. Meanwhile, they are 10th in home runs (3rd in the NL) so I think they could spare a little of the all or nothing type offense they seem to have for someone who's going to be more likely to get on base. And we're also talking Cameron at, at least this year, almost 20 times the price of Morgan.

Your the one who proposed not spending, not me. What signs of regression is Cameron showing? His OPS has increased for the 3rd straigth year. I didn't propose not spending the money. I said " We don't have to go out and spend that money right away, but in a few seasons Gallardo is going to have to be re-signed". Then I said " Haha and I'm not saying don't spend the money. Spend it.....i don't care. Don't waste it on someone just to spend it though." There was never anything about NOT spending it. I also never said one negative thing about Cameron. I said that I think Morgan would be better for the lineup than Cameron. Beside, you made it sound as though Morgan turning 30 was some huge deal, all I did was point that Cameron was 7 years older. We can't keep trotting out the same players every season waiting for them all to put together good seasons at the same time. The offense is inconsistant and something needs to be changed. Getting a lead off hitter who will hit close to .300 and steal 40 bases is a good start, I think Why give up something in trade when we could just keep Cameron? Because he is 10 times more expensive, Morgan would bring a better balance to the lineup than Cameron does, and Morgan is someone who could play center field for us for another 4 or 5 years, which is something Cameron can not do.

Lastings Milledge is what he is. At this point he doesn't appear that he's going to get any better, IMO. I don't know anything about Hanrahan so I can't comment on him. Cody is someone they could maybe plug into their rotation next season. Frederickson is a high rish, high reward pitcher who could be a steal, or could be a bust. It depends on whether their GM wants to take that risk. Schafer is someone who could put similar numbers to Morgan in a few years, with less speed but probably a little more power. I'm not saying...hey lets trade Frederickson, Cody, and Schafer for Morgan. I'm just suggesting names that may be used to get him. Substitute some of your own names if you'd like. If we not going to spend the money we would needed to compete next year, why bother acquiring a guy that turns 30 next year? Instead you want to keep someone who's going to turn, what, 37? Haha and I'm not saying don't spend the money. Spend it.....i don't care. Don't waste it on someone just to spend it though. The other thing I don't understand is this. I'm not really referring to anyone in particular, just a feeling in general. I noticed this a bit on the Nyger Morgan thread too. People say, oh he's old, he's not as good on defense, he can't hit for power, he's on the way down....but then.....oh well Washington would never trade him. If he's as bad as some people imply, why wouldn't Washington trade him?

I didn't want to start another thread on this. Don't look now, but we have some pitching prospects! I was looking at how the rotations are going to line up next season. Nashville will be a little thin. Hopefully Mike Jones returns. Nashville: Mike Jones Chris Cody Josh Butler Huntsville: Evan Anundsen Mark Rogers Amaury Rivas Zach Braddock (ideally) Alex Periard Brevard County: Cody Scarpetta Wily Peralta Wisconsin: Eric Arnett Kyle Heckathorn Jacob Odorizzi Niccolas Bucci Invader is right...2011 could be a real good year for pitching with guys like Butler and Jones ready to compete for a starting spot and Anundsen, Rogers Rivas, and Braddock close to being ready to get a look. I never really thought about the pitching depth we had in the minors until i separate the prospects like that.

I think someone like Frederickson would be ideal. He has a lot of potential if he can throw strikes, but that appears to be a big if right now. But either way, Morgan is just a name I threw out there. I couldn't think of someone comparable, but I think that's the type of player we could use in the lineup.

If they can get two or three guys they think can help then they will. This team is not going anywhere any time soon. I'm not saying they're just going to give him away, but i think a few mid ceiling prospects could get him.

Washington is on pace to lose well over 100 games. I highly doubt they'd consider Morgan untouchable. I'm sure a few prospects, like maybe Frederickson and one or two more guys like maybe Logan Schafer and Chris Cody could get him. And why doesn't he make any sense for us? He's an ideal lead off hitter, something we haven't had since probably Podsednik. He gets on base at a good rate. He steals a ton of bases. He's also about 10x cheaper than Cameron is going to be. We don't have to go out and spend that money right away, but in a few seasons Gallardo is going to have to be re-signed. He's 8 years younger than Cameron and is someone who could play CF for a few more years for us. Also, having him would allow Rickie Weeks to finally move down in the order and drive in some more runs. I think he makes perfect sense for us next year, a lot more sense than Mike Cameron (and whatever his price would be) would make.

I haven't followed this thread too much lately, but looking at the title of it, I think the Brewers really need two things this off season. 1) The need a lead off hitter. I'm talking about someone who can get on base, can run, can work a count. The one person who comes to mind for me is Nyger Morgan. I've wanted him in our lineup all season. I'm sorry, but I just don't think Mike Cameron is what we need. I don't want people now arguing that he's exactly what we need and he's worth $18 million and he isnt the problem. I just don't think we need that type of player in our lineup next season, and considering he's a free agent, he would make sense to go. That would leave us with a lineup something like 1) Morgan 2) Weeks 3) Braun 4) Fielder 5) Hart 6) Gamel 7) Rivera/Salome 8) Escobar. I think that a nice balanced lineup. Morgan and Escobar can steal bases (if Macha actually lets them) Braun and Fielder can hit for power and average. Weeks and Hart are fair hitters who are capale of both power and speed. A bench that includes Heether and McGehee would provide good solid play in case of injury or another players struggles and they can both play multiple positions. Back up outfielders are going to be needed, but those are never super hard to find. A bullpen would include Coffey, Villanueva, Riske, Stetter, and Difelice for sure with two more spots available (hopefully one for Hoffman and then long relief assuming CV isn't long relief). Hardy then can be shopped for pitching, though I don't figure he'll get much, but at least maybe the depth we didn't have this year. Starting pitching is what it is. Parra, Bush, Gallardo and Suppan will all be back. I don't see the need for a major roster overhaul, but you need more balance in the lineup.

I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but isnt that a little closed minded? Sure, we need a left handed bat, but we also need pitching. We can survive the next two seasons without the extra lefty bat because we'll still have Fielder and Braun, but without a significant improvement on the pitching staff this team is going nowhere, left handed bat or not. Plus, its easier to find bats via free agency then arms. Bobby Abreu is a free agent i believe and he is still posting an OBP over .400. Why not give him a shot in right field? Carl Crawford maybe? Coco Crisp? Not ideal options but good enough for a year. Taylor Green is a lefty and he'll be up soon.

None of our other parts will bring us what we need. JJ Hardy cannot even hold a roster spot. Do you really think he is going to bring a #2 starter? Who else do we have? Corey Hart, and his career .325 obp?

Well i certainly don't want to make it sound like I am arguing with you. Mat Gamel is certainly a very very good prospect. I just see Bumgarner's numbers, added to the fact that he JUST turned 20 and is putting up a 2.11 era in AA. He'll probably be able to begin next year in AAA, so it's not like he's all that far behind Gamel. In general, pitching is a lot harder and more expensive to acquire, so I assume pitching is valued a little more than hitting. Plus, despite what we saw in Milwaukee, there are still questions about Gamel's defense and he may yet have to move. In general, though, if we could get Bumgarner for Gamel, I would think most of here would take it. This is exactly the type of move I would hope Melvin looks for in the offseason. Though he may not help immediately, Bumgarner would be a huge addition to this team.

I don't think the Giants would trade Bumgarner for Gamel. Bumgarner is a top 10 prospect overall, whereas Gamel is not. While its true the Giants need offense, they aren't going to give away a top 10 prospect. If we could get him for Gamel and Hart, though, I'd be all for it. We'd need a right fielder, but maybe Jermaine Dye would be a good fit. I would drool over the oppurtunity to get Madison Bumgarner.