Oldcity

Swisher has never had a season like 2007. Plus, your reference to "dead money playing horribly" doesn't even apply, because Swisher wasn't horrible last season. He certainly wasn't good, but not horrible. There have been multiple posts in this thread showing how unlucky he was last season. If the luck straightens out he'll be well worth 8.5 mil a year. And just because Cameron's deal is off the books doesn't mean the Brewers automatically gain 10 mil for 2010 to spend elsewhere. Sure they'll have the money, but they'll have to spend it on Cameron's replacement in all likelihood anyway (Edit: I see like three people made this point while I was typing my post). Finally, I'm not even sure the savings for 2009 are negated by Swisher's contract after '09. Five mil this season could go a long way when the Brewers are still in decent position to contend in 2009. Who knows how good the Brewers might be in 2010 or 2011?

I've always liked Swisher. I'd also bet that he rebounds this year. His offensive approach is something the Brewers really need. Also he's under contract until 2011 with a club option for 2012. I understand Cameron's defense makes him more valuable, but here's the way I see it. Cameron in 2009>Swisher in 2009 Swisher for 3-4 years plus an extra 5 mil in 2009>Cameron for one year

Nick Johnson hasn't been healthy in years, and Fielder is much better than everyone else you mentioned endaround. Half the teams in baseball can use Prince as a DH. Just because his defense is awful doesn't mean nobody will want him. The Angels have a ton of pitching and didn't score runs last year. They should be going after Dunn, but Sciosciaball hates Ks. They seem to be a perfect match for a Fielder trade IMO. I know you said they have many DH/1B types, but Fielder is better than any of them.

How is it giving up when you're replacing Fielder with Dunn? Dunn is likely to at least match Fielder's production over the next three seasons. Like endaround said, it would be paying maybe ten mil more over the next three years for Dunn as opposed to Fielder, but that extra ten mil (over three years) allows you to pick up a good pitcher with several years of team control.

The cost certainty part doesn't make sense, but I don't see anything wrong with the rest of it. You keep saying nobody wants Fielder, but I don't see how that could be true. Dunn is the last good power hitter available in free agency. If the Brewers sign him, Fielder would absolutely be attractive to many teams. Abreu is going to be a lot worse than Fielder over the course of the next three years, yet you cite him as the reason people wouldn't trade for Fielder? I just don't see it.

I like how the press release brags that the Brewers are the first professional sports team in Wisconsin history to have a "presented by" sponsor. Is that really something to be proud of?

If Nady and Cameron are a wash, which is probably reasonable, that would make Hall and Kennedy even as well. As far as I know, Kennedy projects to be a 3-4 type starter who would be cheap for many years. That's a lot more valuable than Hall.

The best scenario in my opinion would be to sign Dunn to play first and then trade Fielder. Dunn shouldn't be much worse than a wash, and actually is probably an upgrade from Fielder. Then you can trade Fielder for young pitcher and you don't need to worry about Dunn's bad outfield defense.

Why would the Yankees give up Kennedy and Nady, two good players, for Cameron and Hall? The Yankees wouldn't even include Kennedy for Cameron, and that was without Hall's contract coming their way as well.

Isn't it just as likely that about every hitter outside of Hardy overperformed previous to last year?Sure that's definitely possible. I should have clarified. Every starting hitter outside Hardy failed to meet pre-season projections (PECOTA, etc).

He was tearing up at the end of the season because he thought he wouldn't be back. He also had a quote along the lines of "This makes up for all the lows of the previous years." I don't think there's any evidence that he wasn't bothered, and I think there's evidence to the contrary.

Yeah exactly. People who are doom and gloom might be forgetting that just about every hitter outside of Hardy underperformed last year. Odds of that happening again are pretty low.

Yeah this is probably on the lower end of what I expected. In the trade rumors thread we were guessing the figured and I overshot this.

This should be a very solid move. Time to turn the attention to starting pitching.

My #1 lookalike was some dude named Brad Delson (wikipedia tells me he's in Linkin Park--not a fan), but my number two was Jimi Hendrix. Sweetness.

Wow razzzor. You're lucky I don't have a weak heart. Man alive heh.

That's exactly how I feel about it. He's good and I'll be pleased if they get him, but the starting pitching is the bigger need. Hoffman and Sheets would make for a very good off-season.

Fuentes this year is a good example. Melvin was interested, but Fuentes had his mind set on the west coast. Melvin even had a comment along the lines of 'well there's nothing we can do if he wants to be out west.'

Athletic ability isn't nearly as important as coordination when it comes to baseball. Many of the best baseball players in the world are bad athletes, actually.

Those are valid points, even though they shouldn't be. The obvious free agent that comes to mind is Paul Molitor, and while I'm sure there have been some since I'm not able to think of many off the top of my head who definitely did well.

Yeah, valid point about Cameron. I suppose that trade could be revisited and would free up salary.

Lyon is a type B free agent, so the Brewers would not need to give up a pick for him. Arizona gets a sandwich pick, but that doesn't come from the Brewers.

And That, you really think they could afford Hoffman, Lyon and a starter? I am under the impression that they wouldn't be able to afford that. I could see Hoffman and Sheets or Hoffman and Looper/Garland, but I doubt they could afford all three. I should add that I think the bullpen is in pretty good shape if they sign Hoffman. Not great, but I don't think it would be imperative to add another reliever. If they get Hoffman the focus should turn to a starter, as that would be a much bigger need.

I'd guess one year for eight or two for 14. I'd do either one.

Not trying to play checkers, as you put it. Sometimes it just isn't necessary to reinvent the wheel. They could sign Ben Sheets for two years and voila. There are other 2, 3 and 4-type pitchers available in free agency as well. Signing someone like Oliver Perez, Randy Wolf, John Smoltz, Derek Lowe (although admittedly too expensive) would probably do the trick. Braden Looper wouldn't be bad either, especially if the team also signs Trevor Hoffman. If you don't go the free agency route, trading is also quite feasible. I wouldn't advocate trading both Escobar and Gamel for a pitcher (and I wasn't suggesting they do that either) unless it was a clear-cut ace they'd control for multiple seasons, but what's the huge deal with trading one if it is part of a deal that gets them a good starting pitcher for multiple seasons? To me, Gamel is more replaceable than Escobar, even though I'd say he's more MLB ready of the two. Gamel doesn't play a premium position (particularly if he can't stick at third) while Escobar does. If the Brewers were to move Gamel, what's wrong with simply holding on to Prince Fielder until he walks? That would be a few years down the road and would be enough time to find a replacement. You mention quantity for quality and threw out an example of Gillespie and Salome. Sure, they won't get you a number one or two starter, but those two would likely net you a pretty nice pitcher. I think you underestimate what two B/B+ prospects close to the majors could bring in. It doesn't really take more to build a World Series contender than a wildcard contender. An above average team with a little luck can easily beat a great team in the playoffs. The primary goal should be to just get to the playoffs in any way possible, because once you get there anything can happen. For the Brewers that will involve the wildcard anyway, since the Cubs are more than likely taking the division no matter what moves the Brewers make before the season starts.