82brewcrew82

And Chase Williams

Huh, that is a curious move.

Adrian Houser sighting tonight for Arizona

So that's six in the top 100 with Hader barely off and Burnes just on the outside. Sure, some of these prospects have lost some of their shine, but not to the extent some would like to believe.

Is it enough to push you off the board and/or internet? Not even close...I will wait until next Monday..but if this is his only move, I guarantee you I'm out. What a joke. Can you just be out now?

IF this is the package, IF.

With teams like the Braves, Yankees and Astros in the bidding, they can all probably out bid the Brewers at any point. I also think this shows the shine isn't completely off of a guy like Ray.

No. Links? Preseason Link http://m.mlb.com/news/article/217383778/top-10-farm-systems-by-mlb-pipeline/ Midseason Link http://m.mlb.com/news/article/244152682/yoan-moncada-tops-2017-midseason-prospect-list/ Um, no. Check the mid season link again and you'll see that your not understanding the point of the article, but why let facts get in the way. Frankly, you are either at the point where you are willfully misleading and doing nothing but trolling or you just can't comprehend what you are reading which pretty much negates anything you have to say (either way).

This is a bit misleading in terms of what the article actually says. I think everyone on this board has been very open to the fact that this system is devoid of top shelf talent. The depth is what produced the high rankings. So yes, graduating a high ranking player like Hader is going to have an impact. We don't have top shelf talent, which is why I'm so perplexed as to why folks are disappointed that we are not getting top shelf results.

It seems to me to also be about an attempt to make fun of the people who diagree with his view, i.e the ones who want to stand pat. Create a strawman that anyone worried about overpaying is being ridiculous and that we think any trade at all "would ruin the rebuilding process". Using batting average and plain falsehoods to say that a 20 year old in A+ (2.5 years younger than the league average) producing 120 wRC+ is somehow a disaster. Not the first thread started for that purpose either. it's called trolling.

I am kind of torn on Lopez. Yes, he's been converted to a reliever but he has done well at it and it wouldn't surprise me if he ended up as a pretty good bullpen arm. I'm not sure I view him and Medeiros all that differently right now. Having said that, I think he has a better chance than a 16 year old international signing. I think Lopez probably belongs on the list and Rodriguez probably does not. There are a whole host of guys that fit with McClanahan and Demi. Among them are Peyton Henry, Zach Clark, Gabe Garcia, Lara, Coca, Egnatuk, and Ward. All are youngish and in the low minors and I'm not sure any are established enough to be ranked in the top 30 though any one has enough ceiling to get there.

I'd say Peralta, Burnes, Gatewood, Stokes and QTC have had very good years under the tutelage of the Carolina staff. I'd say Yamamoto, Diaz, Clark, Griep, Harrison, and Ponce have been very good Medeiros and Supak have been OK relative to expectations. Erceg and Ray are probably the only two I would truly say severely under performed among anyone you would attempt to call a prospect.

You can't have it both ways. Your initial post talks about how they're all hitting in the .230s and strike out a lot, now you say trade them when value is high. If they're so bad, how can their value be so high? Or maybe you think GMs look at BA prospect list when determining player value? With one or two of those guys, we're likely seeing their floor. One or two others, they may never improve much. Which ones are they? I'm sure the player development people have an idea, but simple answer is nobody knows for sure. So the risk is you trade away the guy that ends up being an All-Star. That's not to say you never trade top prospects, and I don't think anyone has said that. I think the point he makes is these guys still have value despite less than stellar results this season, but that value can disappear quickly as it did with the likes of Coulter when they don't produce in the minors over a couple of seasons. Even promising guys doing well at A ball are far from sure things. So is Brinson for that matter. If Brinson was a sure thing, he'd be in the big leagues right now patrolling CF for the Brewers. He's 23, an age where the top guys are big league contributors if not yet stars. See Arcia. Not to say Brinson won't be a huge contributor at the big league level fairly soon, but his value is undetermined at this point. Yeah, I'm not buying this line of thinking at all. The same group of folks that keeps down playing the value of our prospects is the same group that thinks we can just waltz in and trade that "bunch of garbage" for Sonny Gray. If these players have value it's because they have the talent to be valued for. You don't have some magic evaluation tool that tells you the whole entire industry is over valuing these players and ONLY YOU knows their true value.

April .754 May .795 June .450 July .831 So yeah, Diaz had a really, really bad June, it happens. He's been fine the rest of he way but that bad month really drags down the overall numbers. It happened but there is context here. Is it really all that different from what he did last year when no one had any complaints? Clark looks about the same except his bad month was May. Otherwise, his numbers are about the same as Diaz. Sure, Ray hasn't been what we hoped he would be but no reason to write him off either. Same with Erceg.

When they let the Cubs grab Quintana for no prospect above A ball during the break when the Brewers were 5.5 games up led to a self-fulfilling prophecy as it discouraged the current roster and gave a huge boost to the Cubs coming out of the break. So it's easy now to look back and say oh that first half was a mirage...blah, blah, blah. Fact is Stearns could have boosted the Brewer roster and discouraged the Cubs by getting Quintana. If you didn't think being 5.5 games up at the break was the time to part with any prospects, well I suggest it'll be a long time before the Brewers are 5.5 games up on the Cubs. To be clear, you have absolutely no idea what the effect of any decision has on the attitude of the team. You can state your opinion as fact all you want but it is nothing more than conjecture. I also believe that if you look back there were pelnty of folks saying this team was playing over it's head. I don't think anyone is looking back so much as the team is performing to expectations. I highly doubt the Cubs would have been discouraged if we had gotten Quintana. The Cubs would still have the more talented roster and would have just gone out and gotten a different pitcher. So if it will be a long time before the Brewers are 5.5 games up on the Cubs, is that an admission that the Cubs have been the better team all along and just not playing to their ability? If they were 5.5 up a week ago with this roster, why couldn't they be 5.5 up a week from now? Did you believe the Brewers were a division winner before the season started? If you believed they were back then, why so desperate to add talent now? If not, do you really believe Sonny Gray is the piece that puts them over the top? Does Sonny Gray make them more talented than the Cubs? What about the A's? Should they trade Gray just because we want them to? There have been more than enough teams linked to him to create a bidding war. Several of those teams can outbid us quite easily in terms of talent (just as the Cubs could and did for Quintana). Why would the A's not hold on to Gray for as long as possible as the deals will only get better as we get closer to the deadline? Should Stearns just waive his magic wand and make Bean comply with his wishes? If we were trading Gray, would we not want Stearns to hold out for the bet deal possible? And what of all these "reports"? How many of them had the Quintana deal before it happened? Are we to take every one of these reports as truth (even as most turn out to be false)? No one on this board has any idea what is going on behind closed doors. I'm not losing any sleep over Cahill or Garcia. Other than that, we simply don't know. Again, I admire your commitment to the "win now" philosophy but, in my opinion, you are dead wrong. I think Stearns has handled this beautifully. I'm just glad we have a GM that has the courage and patience to see this through and not a knee jerk reactionary GM as some of you would like.

Agree with all of this. Also, no Burnes in top 100? I also think Gatewood and Nottingham should be 15 & 16 at least.

Do we also have to give him credit for the .220/.311/.336 slash line in A ball this year? Not directing this at you specifically WVBrew but why do we go so far out of the way to laud a 30 year old who was failing miserably in A ball (but got promoted any way) as something to behold? No, Tebow is, and will remain, a self aggrandizing joke. If he wasnt getting attention for this, he wouldn't be doing it. Diaz, Clark, and Nottingham get labled as out right failures but Tebow gets credit? It just makes no sense to me.

The thing is, starting next week when Packers training camp opens..NO ONE in this state will give two craps about the Brewers anymore anyway. That being said, if they were to make a "big" trade, that would keep people at least somewhat interested. Is that a reason to make a trade?? of course not, but it is the reality of it. 2011 says differently.

I do think he is being outlandish to a point. He knows full well, even anticipates, the reaction he is going to get for ranking these players where he does. I don't think anyone bashed him for being high on a guy like Suter, just being THAT high on the guy. In the end this is a message board. If you are going to post something like that, you are going to have to deal with comes with it. Let's not forget, there have been many other players (I believe Jorge Ortega was one as well as a couple of low level catchers that might not even be in the system any more) were also favorites and those folks didn't pan out at all. He hit on one..........maybe.

He may "throw" more than two pitchers, but quality matters and I do believe you need a third pitch to be an effective starter. It's not just that though, that walk rate dances around a bit. Not sure if he found something at AA but it has been better there. I'm not saying he won't be a starter (and he should absolutely be given very chance to do that) but he does seem to trend reliever.

To be fair, Peralta is really just a two pitch pitcher and he is walking 5/9 IP. There is a lot to like be he is profiling as a reliever at this point.

Folks are high on Ortiz because he is capable of doing things like he did last night.

I disagree with this on almost every point. For years we have watched this team flounder around without any real plan. Now that they clearly have one and things appear to be pointing in the right direction you want to scrap the plan in favor of a win now approach which is what caused us to have to "rebuild" in the first place? I doubt anyone is looking to deal Shaw unless they just get bowled over. Is Stearns not the primary reason this group is "promising" in the first place? I think he has a done a great job of not only putting those pieces in place but also stocking a farms system with viable options for depth and additional acquisitions. We couldn't meet the package the Cubs gave up and we shouldn't have even tried. Stearns didn't get beat to the punch, he made the wise and calculated decision. Strearns has shown plenty of nuance. He showed nuance when Lucroy backed out of the Cleveland trade and managed a very good return despite that impediment. He showed tons of nuance in getting the packages he did for Thornburg and Smith. He has shown plenty of nuance in the roster churn that has resulted in this team being where it is. Of all the moves he has made (or hasn't made) show more than enough nuance and that he belongs in the game no matter his age. I appreciate your commitment to a win now philosophy but I am very happy our GM does subscribe to that theory.

He reminds me a lot of Yovanni. He really has been flying under the radar. He's not Yovanni. He and Medeiros are the two pitchers I keep missing at Mudcat games but the season isn't over yet. The reports I have heard always make me put him in that group with Ventura and Perrin. Guys who don't rely on velocity. Unfortunately that usually means we have to take a wait and see approach with those guys and see how their stuff plays as they move up. EDIT: I think I remember some report about an uptick in velocity with him but I can't find it. If true and there has been an actual change in the skill set, then yes, there might be something there. Until I hear such, I rank him down list despite the results.

Why does it say that? Why couldn't it say "You guys are awesome and got us this far, we believe this group can take us all the way".