paul253

Yes that is what I meant. You don't trade your stars if you are going to compete for a pennant. I had no problem with them hanging onto fielder for instance. I'm thinking more of guys who you keep just to win a few more games. We clearly weren't going to be a contender next season so hanging onto Gomez would have been foolish. Similarly I think hanging onto Lind would be foolish.

I think simply repeating "best player available" is overly simplistic. I think that not only should you look at other factors but that you'd be foolish not to. Again, I'm not suggesting you reach for a player. Im just saying if the players are comparable it wouldn't be the worst thing to take the player who plays a position of need. I'll put it this way. If come Brewers pick they have two players in mind. Both players are given the exact same grade by the Brewers. I have no idea how the team grades players but let's say they do it on a 1-100 scale. Both players are graded at 93. One plays corner outfield and one plays catcher. If you called the shots which player would you pick? I'm guessing probably the catcher. Why? Well for one it is a position of desperate need. But how about also because good catchers are much more difficult to find then good outfielders? Or because a player.....for instance Ryan Braun....who can't cut it in the infield can usually head off to the outfield and be at least adequate defensively. Very few, if any, players can do that at catcher. So go back to the draft. Instead of grading both players the same you have the outfielder as a 93 but the catcher as a 92. Do you automatically pick the outfielder because he's the "best available"? Or does the fact that it's so much harder to find a catcher, meaning this might be your last chance for awhile, AND the fact that your system is loaded with outfielders while being barren of catchers, outweigh the fact that you view the other player as slightly more talented? I'd argue that those facts do outweigh that and I'd pick the catcher still. What if the catcher is a 91 or a 90? Well that's when you have to decide if the perceived drop off in talent is worth taking a chance on a position of need that is much more difficult to fill. But again I don't think you automatically pick best player available if second or third best are just slightly behind him in talent and fill a huge position of need.

This is why you trade players while they still have value instead of holding onto them as long as possible. Too bad we couldn't have figured this out sooner.

I disagree. While in general I go along with BPA I think the Brewers are in a spot where position should at least be considered. When you are absolutely loaded from the top of the system down at a position (outfield) and absolutely barren from top down at others (third base and catcher) I think that if two players are equal or very close to equal you select the one who plays a position of need. Now don't get me wrong. I am NOT saying you simply select the top rated catcher or third basemen. I am saying if, for instance, the top rated player on your board is an outfielder and a close second or third is a catcher I don't think it would be a mistake to pick the catcher. If, however, you don't have catcher until number seven or eight on your list then of course you don't pick him. I don't think you automatically pick the outfielder because he's number one on your list. The talent level in that case is close that either one would be a acceptable pick. People always assume the problem of too many guys at one position will always work itself out but I don't think that's true. I think this offseason the Brewers are going to be forced to do something that they wouldn't have done if they weren't in the situation they are in. I think either they are going to trade Davis or play either Santana or Braun out of position (cf or 1B respectively). And even though I am fine with moving Braun to 1B that doesn't change the fact that it is being done out of necessity because you have two guys for one position. And this doesn't even get into what's going to happen if/when Phillips Taylor Reed, who will all be in AAA, and Coulter are ready. So anyway, getting back to next draft I think if the talent level between your options is close enough you avoid picking the outfielder. That's just my opinion. Personally I think the opportunity to obtain a potential ace is so rare that you can't pass it up (this of course is assuming there still is a potential ace available). That's what my ideal scenario is. A potential ace (I'm rooting for Pint or Groom) to be our pick.

Awesome day today if you're looking to move up in the draft. Every team currently behind us in the standings won except for Philly. I don't see any realistic chance we catch philly or Atlanta (who says you can't tank in baseball). Hopefully things work out and we end up at 3 but I'm thinking we end up in the 5-7 range.

Would people really rather lose the opportunity to draft a potential ace like Groom or pint just to see the cardinals make the playoffs as a wildcard as opposed to making the playoffs as a division champ? I hate the cardinals, and Cubs for matter, but that seems a little shortsighted. It reminds me of the "we can't trade within our division because it might make the other team good" argument. If we are in no position to win any time soon does it really matter if we make the other team better for the rest of the season while we theoretically inprove for the future? I think I'd rather get the ace than to spite Cardinals. Like I said I hate St Louis as much as the next but if losing three games to them improves our chances to land a guy like Groom or Pint then I won't be overly disappointed if we lose. St Louis is going to the playoffs regardless. I just can't see myself next June, watching the draft and seeing those guys gone before we pick, muttering to myself "well at least the Cardinals didn't win the Division".

For the record the main reason I've been calling for Braun and Lucroy to sit three or four times a week is to minimize the chance of major injuries like a torn ACL or something. While a concussion certainly isn't the end of the world and it was pretty impossible to prevent it just irritates me to see an injury like that when we are playing for nothing. I said over and over again that catching is hard on the body and now possibly our best player gets a concussion while catching a meaningless game. And again while concussions certainly aren't the end of world they are something that you don't want to see happen multiple times. I'll be very disappointed if Lucroy catches again this year. Foul balls off the mask occur almost every game. No need to put him through that again.

Rogers is a career .290/.372/.488 hitter in the minors. If he was three years younger he'd be a top ten organizational prospect. The way I see it is that he's not flexible enough to be a bench guy. He's a first baseman. If he's not our starter I personally don't think he should on the roster. So let's see if he can cut it. As far as Lind goes he is precisely the type of player we need to move away from. We don't need to be paying him $11 million a year for the next four years, particularly since he can't hit lefties.

Davies doesn't have to get rocked in order for the Brewers to lose. It's not an "either the young guys all suck and don't develop or we win a bunch of games" scenario. Davies can still go out there and pitch great and we could still lose. Believe it or not I want the young guys to develop too. I just don't think we need to continue to throw out our veteran players every day. The catching position is hard on the body and Lucroy is approaching 30. Would it really be the end of the world to let Maldonado play a couple of times a week? Is that going to prevent Davies and Santana from developing? Would it kill us to let Jason Rogers play every day to see how he handles it and see if he could possibly be our first baseman next year? Adam Lind is, at most, is here one more year. And he probably should be traded this offseason if we really are going to commit to a rebuild. So shouldn't we maybe possibly see if we have a decent replacement? Braun has had plenty of nagging injuries over his career. Would sitting him two or three times a week somehow ruin the season? Would letting Jeffress or smith try to close out a game destroy the franchise? Does KRod have to close games because he's our "closer"? He should be another guy that is traded in the offseason so wouldn't it be cool to get one of them at least a little experience closing games so we don't have to spend millions of dollars on a free agent with closing experience? There are plenty of things this team could do to build toward the future that they aren't doing because they are still playing for the present. I am not cheering for Davies to get shelled so we lose. It's awesome to see one run in seven innings. But when I look at the box score and see Braun Lucroy and Lind all in the lineup I just kind of wonder why.

"Great win by Davies. Another nice outing by Thornburg. Santana gets on base 3 times again. Segura stays hot. All of this must be horrible news to some of you guys." Can you at least try to understand the argument?

Anyone can argue "it's not about where you pick its about who you pick". And while true I could counter by saying "well it doesn't matter if you pick first overall or sign a bunch of FAs and don't pick til the fourth round. You can still get a good player in the fourth round". Again that's true but we are talking about liklihood. The liklihood of getting a better player is higher if you pick sooner. As far as tanking goes. I don't think you necessarily have to try to lose. But maybe don't continue to throw Braun Lind and Lucroy out there every single day while younger guys like Rogers sit on the bench. I don't think Linds trade value is going to suddenly sky rocket if he finishes with 20 home runs vs 18. I just don't see the need to play for wins the same way now that you would in April or May. In April or May we still had a chance of turning this into a successful season. Now not so much.

I think his point was that draft spots do make a difference because if you pick later the chance increases that the guy you want isn't going to be available. Like I said in the "we're #1" thread no matter how you slice it it's better to have an earlier pick. You have more options and you have more money to spend. That doesn't mean you can't get good players lower or that all top picks pan out. But it's always better to have more options when picking. To me this meaningless win streak is more likely to do more harm than good. I'm not anti-Brewers. But from what I've seen over years and years of watching them it seems that having good pitching and a legit #1 is necessary to go from a below average or average team to a championship caliber team. The fact is while we still may get a legit ace picking 7 or 8 the likelihood of getting one at 3 or 4 is probably better. That's why people like me want a higher pick, even if it means losing a few more games this month. Winning games in September when the season has been lost for darn near two months now doesn't lessen the frustration of this season to me. And forgive me if I don't believe that this is going to be some spring board into next season. It is what it is. Wins when wins aren't going to get us anywhere.

The draft is different now because of the slotting system. On top of earlier drafting teams having the advantage of having more players to choose from they also have the advantage of having more money to spend. So theoretically the Brewers could end up with the same guy at 7 as they would get at 4 but if they pick him at 4 and sign him for under slot they'll have more money to spend on later picks. Look you can slice it any way you want but it's better to pick higher. Obviously you still have to do your homework and draft the right guy but in general the right guy is easier to find when you have more options. We could very well up with an ace at #7 but the liklihood of ending up with an ace at #3 is greater because at 7 four potential options are gone. Things may very well change between now and June but from what I've read there are four pitchers who have a chance of going first overall. With a top four pick you get one of those guys. Picking 7 or 8 you probably don't Again you could still wind up with the best player picking at 7 or 8 but it's not as likely. You are more likely to get a guy whom scouts aren't quite as high on.

What could we realistically expect in return for Davis and Peralta? I really, really wish the Brewers give up on 2016 and build for 2017 because they'll likely have a ton of guys ready by then. Arcia Phillips Taylor Reed Lopez, Wagner, Hader. Coulter should be close. Clark could be relatively close. Medeiros and Williams should be in AA by then. I'm telling you if they don't fool themselves into thinking they are contenders next year and trade their tradable assets for more young talent we could FINALLY see a consistently good team starting in 2017.

I don't buy that all at. I don't buy that an MLB team wouldn't limit innings on young pitchers (Jungmann has already pitched more innings than last year, Nelson would still pass his inning total from last year even if he was limited to five inning starts are Peralta is probably past the point where we need to concern ourselves with building up his innings), let young guys like Jason Rogers (who tore up AAA) play, or allow their starting catcher, who plays darn near every game behind the plate, to get a little extra rest at the end of a disappointing season. And why would letting Jeffress and his 97mph fastball and 2.63 ERA, or Smith, a hard throwing lefty with a 2.79 ERA, actually try to close games, look bad? I'm guessing one of them is our future closer anyway (and should be next year). What harm does getting them experience, however little it may be, do?

Every team tries to win but after a certain point for some teams they realize playing for the future is more important. And while Brewers are playing for the future in some respects they are still playing for the present in others, which I think is dumb. Things I would like to see done: - limit Jungmann Nelson Peralta and any other young starter to five innings. With expanded rosters and AAA team also going nowhere they should have plenty of bullpen arms to cover the innings. - play Jason Rogers every day. I think it would be wise to get him experience to see if he can cut it because he's the closest thing to and in house option we have at first base. I believe Lind should be traded in the offseason and Rogers could be your every day first basemen. - sit Lucroy and Braun at least three days a week each. why even risk serious injury with absolutely nothing to play for? What harm does letting Makdonado and Pederson/Schafer play do? You might lose a game? Oh no. It's not like We haven't been seeing that happen all year long. -let Jeffress and/or Smith close games. KRod is another guy who I think should be moved in the offseason. So let someone else get a taste of closing just in case he's needed next season. All of these things, i think, would be more beneficial to the future. Who cares if they cost us a game or two this year?

And Craig counsel is managing for a job. He's not going to rest Lind Lucroy or Braun unless he's told to. I fully expect to see them in the lineup every day until maybe the last week of the season. Every win counts......apparently.

My prediction is the 7th pick. Not bad but still disappointing considering they've been in last place almost the entire year.

It seems like this happens every friggin year. It's so frustrating. We sit through a terrible terrible season with a high draft pick as our only solace only to see that disappear as well because the Brewers insist on playing their regulars everyday. I'd love to see Jason Rogers playing three out of four games from here on out, as well as Braun and Lucroy sitting out at least twice a week. I'd also like to see Knebel and/or Jeffress close games the rest of the year to see how they handle it.

I think closer is the most overrated position in baseball. I would have traded him for cash and then next year figure out between Smith Jeffress and Knebel who can close games. I don't see any need for a rebuilding team to have a "proven closer" on the roster.

We developed little if anything in the way of pitching under Jack Z. Considering we've begun to see a nice little turnaround I'll say thanks but no thanks to Jack Z.

Clancy the team can still be very bad in 2016 while guys like Peralta Nelson and Jungmann have good years. If we trade any combo of Lind Lucroy and Braun we could have a historically bad offense. So the pitchers could all finish with ERAs under 4 but just have bad win-loss records. We don't have to win 74 games in order for them to have good years

We realize what must happen to get that pick and I'd much much rather that happen then to have another 3-4 game under .500 team. At least it gives me something to look forward too. I don't look forward to a team that finishes with the 13th worst record. Additionally the reward for such a terrible season is much greater then the reward for a below average team. I'll be more excited about the franchise if Lind and Lucroy are traded in the offseason then if we sign a FA third baseman. We all want to win. But I want a team that wins consistently. While 2011 was a lot of fun to watch I get frustrated with having a good team no more than once or twice a decade. Getting atop five pick and a prospect like Groom Pint or Puk will go a long way in getting us there and getting us there quicker and more consistently.

Ok well I apologize. We'll agree to disagree. I think moving Braun to first base is the common sense move that would most benefit the franchise long term and I don't think his defense at third should prevent him from playing first. As I recall Corey hart was a butcher at third when he tried it and he did more than ok at first. Just because they are both infield positions doesn't mean that if you can't play one you can't play the other.

And maybe we should have a plan for when it becomes one because it's going to be soon. Michael Reed could very well be ready by opening day and Phillips isn't far behind. Why not make the move this offseason when Braun has all winter to prepare and all spring to practice? If none of the young guys wins the position then put someone else there for a few months while Reed Taylor and Phillips head to AAA. Honestly why are you so against moving Braun? I asked you who you thought would be a better option and you didn't answer. I get it. Braun has trouble with ground balls. But fielding ground balls isn't nearly as big an issue at first as it is at third. For one at first base you won't see as many ground balls. Also a bobble a third base usually allows someone to get on. A bobble at first and you usually still have time to get an out. I'm not claiming he's going to be a gold glover at first. But if Prince Fielder can handle the position I'm confident Braun can as well.