monty57

Brining back Aram to me was more about a complete lack of 3B options rather than a go for it mentality. I think they misread the situation. They thought he still wanted to play a few seasons and would seek a multi-year deal, giving them a draft pick. He was ready to retire, but gladly accepted a farewell tour for $14,000,000. Once he exercised his option, they were kind of stuck. Without Ramirez, they could have justified punting on the season, but with him they had to "go for it," or they would have wasted the money they're paying him and upset the fans in the process. We already see some transition in the way they now draft, and the Rangers trade for young prospects all represent a departure. I agree. Lind seems to be a pretty good pickup for little cost, and I like the Gallardo trade. Just my opinion, but I think Melvin realized a few years ago that they needed to change tack, but Attanasio is just now coming to that conclusion. They still have the trade chips to bring in some good young talent, which is why I think this is a pivotal season. They either make one last playoff run, or they sell a lot of talent to bring in a youth movement. Lohse, Parra, Ramirez and Broxton are no-brainer trades. The key will be whether they go "all in" and test the waters on Gomez if they are out of it.

Well Im not sure adding Cain, Escobar, Jake O, and Lawrie would matter all that much, and you'd take away 2011. The big "turning point" decision was to not trade Fielder and Hart, but instead trade prospects for Greinke and Marcum. Yes, Melvin made an "effort" to trade Fielder, but demanding two young, MLB proven pitchers was unrealistic from the start. Had he asked for a package of prospects, he could have received a king's ransom, as is "proven" by the fact that Fielder was worth a $200MM contract the following offseason. If someone would pay that, someone would give up prospects for him. So, the question (and there is no knowable answer, it's all theoretical) is where would we be now if we had traded Fielder and Hart for a mountain of prospect talent and still had the prospects we traded away. We would not have had the 2011 we had, but we'd probably be better off today. There's a lot more, but I don't want to go too far down that path right now. It's still early in the season, and the Brewers still have talent on the roster. Let's see what happens this year. A playoff run will probably lead to some type of rebuild when we lose Lohse, Ramirez, Parra and Broxton, with Gomez going into his final season and probably give up some talent when we "buy" midseason." Meanwhile a slow start could lead to a selloff that could re-stock the farm, helping future years. A lot could happen, so let's see how we play in the next 22 games against division rivals.

From the volumes of text I've written on that topic, I think you know where I stand on how the team has been built for quite a while. If this is about why the Brewers are where they are, I'll lead anyone to most of what I've written in the past few years. However, this article is about the possibility of the Brewers collapsing this season, not why they are in that position. I think a collapse is possible, due to things such as lack of depth and trust in aging vets and unheralded young players. However, my guess is that if the season were played with no moves being made, the Brewers would end somewhere around .500 with an outside shot at the playoffs. A slow start will mean trading off guys like Lohse, Ramirez, Parra and Broxton, while a fast start will mean more trades like the Broxton and Parra trades of last season, where we give up a mid-tier prospect in exchange for taking on salary. As to after this season... well, there's probably a reason Melvin isn't jumping at the job for life Attanasio has basically offered him on a platter.

Agree. It stinks to get swept in the opening series, but it's still only three games. Let's not get ahead of ourselves with "the season's over" talk. That said, we do need to heat things up, because the next 22 games are against division rivals. Baseball's funny because there are hot and cold streaks throughout the season, but a hot start leads to "buying" at the deadline, while a cold start leads to "selling." The Brewers of the past few years have been all or nothing (perhaps to do the reliance on HR/high K guys??). The two years prior to last year, the cold streak was early, leading them to sell only to have hot second halves. Last year was the opposite. I think that if we play this year out with no moves, we'll end up somewhere around .500, and within sight of the Wild Card spot. However, if we stay cold for a couple more weeks (against division rivals), we'll probably jump at selling Lohse, Ramirez, Parra and Broxton who are all FA at season's end. But that's just thinking "out loud." We do have the talent to compete this year, so hopefully that will start to show itself sooner rather than later. Edit: Note that in the 2nd paragraph I'm not saying we'd "sell in May and go away," but if we stink it up against division rivals in the next three weeks, we may dig ourselves into a hole that we can't dig out of by the trade deadline, and in that situation Melvin may be an early seller (early July as opposed to late July) to get maximum return from some aging guys on their final contract year.

You are kidding yourselves if you think he will ever be a 950 guy again w/o PEDS. You may be right, but I want to see a full season of him playing with two thumbs before I'll jump to that conclusion. Obviously, few players ever reach that level, and simple age regression could be enough to keep him below that. I wonder if it's reasonable to believe he can be a mid-.800 OPS guy going forward. If he can bounce back somewhat after the surgery, then the Brewers could be in the playoff hunt this year. If he is a mid-.700 OPS guy on the wrong side of 30, then the Brewers are in real trouble, as his contract (for that production) will kill them going forward, and he would be virtually untradable.

maybe he should start by being a little less selfish I'll give you cocky. Everything about him screams cocky, but when has he ever been selfish? He was drafted as a shortstop out of college, and made the move to 3B without a fuss. He played (poorly) at 3B his rookie year, and was pulled often for defensive replacements and never said a word. Then he was told to move to left field, and all he said was "I think I could be a good third baseman, but I'll do what the team asks." He nearly won a Gold Golve as a LF, while winning an MVP, and was moved to right field because Khris Davis has no arm. Even though he was being moved for an unheralded rookie, he made the move without a word. As far as injuries, he gets injured often. Usually something with the ribcage/oblique. He could easily jump to the DL, but instead he plays through the injury. Most people call that "being a team player," not "being selfish." For the last couple of seasons, he played with nerve damage in his thumb which would seem to be really tough to do. I believe this is a big part of the reason his numbers have been down, but most of society will simply say "steroids" and use the injury as "proof" of their narrative that he was never good, but simply a product of a drug lab. He could easily have elected surgery, missing part of a near playoff season, rather than put up sub-par (for him) numbers. He didn't. He played and didn't say a word. Now he makes one seemingly meaningless (and true) statement and that's somehow meaningful? Somehow that means he shouldn't do something as "selfish" as getting injured and missing one game. I don't buy it.

Laugh out Loud. And what if Jake Arrieta isn't the SP he was last season. Kyle Hendriks performs as bad as Jimmy Nelson is being concerned? After Jon Lester, doesn't that make the Cubs a 67 win team too? He's looking at teams that people consider a playoff contender. The Cubs are looked at kind of the opposite of the Brewers: The Brewers are "They were at the top of the division last year and have roughly the same roster, so they could be a playoff team, but if a few things go wrong it could be disaster and the start of a long downfall" While the Cubs are "They have sucked for years and will probably be near the bottom of the division again this year, but they have some great young talent and if things go right it could be a winning season and the start of a string of many good seasons." I don't think people should look too far into this. The author basically made fun of himself and said these aren't likely. But, I don't think it's wrong to target the Brewers as the team among this year's pre-season "favorites" to be the one to falter.

where he threw the tester under the bus, backed up again, drove over him again, backed up, etc. until the sound of beep beep beep seemed like it was echoing across the phoenix valley because it wouldn't stop Regardless of Braun's innocence or guilt, it is a good thing that the person who mishandled the evidence was exposed, as he should never hold that position again. Had his actions occurred in something important, like a murder case, the murderer would have gone free due to his negligence. He kept medical evidence in a beer cooler in his basement. I wouldn't trust that guy with flipping burgers, as he'd probably be too lazy to refrigerate the meat.

It depends on the injury. If it is the dreaded oblique, then you're probably right. If he was just taken out because it was a 10-run blowout, and it's nothing, then he could be in the lineup today. As he said in his quote, let him sleep on it and see where it's at this morning. If it's still there, get an MRI and make a determination. You don't want to miss 15 days of your star player if one day's rest would do the trick, but you also don't want to turn it into something that nags him all year or becomes a more serious injury.

Where's all the folks that thought Parra makes too much money now? He's going to be in use early and often for us this year. Yeah, with Braun's history, Gomez's aggressive play and a still unproven Davis... all of whom are right-handed, I could never understand the somewhat intense desire to see Parra traded. If we are going to make a playoff run, he will play a big role in it, and if not, he should be easy to trade at the deadline. As to Braun, hopefully this is just a small thing and he was only pulled as a precaution in a blowout. My hopes for the year have risen a bit this spring with the thought that his thumb is healed and he will be back to his old self. Of course, the occasional injured ribcage muscle is "his old self." :-)

I feel for San Diego. Being in the same division as the Giants and Dodgers is tough. It will be interesting to see if all the moves they've made this offseason will be enough to bridge the gap this season, or if all these moves will just lead to another third place finish. They are in a different place than the Brewers, however. While the Brewers seem to be around max revenue, meaning extra spending can only bring meaningful additional revenues if they make the playoffs, the Padres can add a lot of revenue if they can spur fan interest and get more people to the park. Spurring fan interest could also lead to massive future TV contracts, while the Brewers are in the unfortunate situation that their TV deal is always going to be one of the smallest in the league simply because of where they're located. Also, while the Brewers have been around max payroll for years, the Padres started this offseason with a low payroll, and all of the moves they've made have pushed their salary to around the level of the Milwaukee Brewers in a market that should allow for a payroll larger than the Brewers. I don't follow the Padres, so other than looking at Cot's I don't know the "ins-and-outs," but while they've traded away a bunch of the farm, at the MLB level they have some big names/big talents signed for the long term, with some good young MLB talent. While they have some big obligations, they have a lot of money dropping off the books after this season for guys who aren't key pieces (Benoit, Venable, Morrow, Kelley, etc) and Justin Upton and Ian Kennedy will be FA, adding up to around $36MM coming off the books after 2015. They should have plenty of cash to cover their obligations and add talent, and they will still have a lot of talent, especially if BJ Upton can bounce back at all to fill in his brother's shoes when he leaves. I don't want to see the NL West turn into the AL East where two big spenders dominate the division, making the playoffs every year, so I hope the Padres' plan can work and they can be a thorn in the side of the Giants and Dodgers for a while.

I agree that Gomez will not re-sign with Milwaukee, unless they have the biggest deal when the current contract is up, which is unlikely. However, I disagree that Taylor's development is irrelevant. If he tears up the minors, putting up numbers that really get him noticed, the Brewers could be more willing to deal Gomez next offseason if they get a huge package back in trade. I'm not saying that Taylor would be as good as Gomez, but if he puts together a season like Nelson did last year, completely dominating AAA, it should make the Brewers more willing to trade Gomez. As I said earlier, I think they'll hold onto him and only trade him if they're out of it at the 2016 deadline, but there are factors that could change this. Taylor's progression is one of those factors.

If he stays healthy and productive, I don't see any way we sign him beyond the current contract, so we either trade him or lose him to free agency. I'd like to see him traded before he leaves as a free agent, but I doubt we trade him unless it's at the 2016 trade deadline. After this season we'll lose Lohse, Ramirez, Parra and Broxton. If we're not in it this trade deadline, and assuming some of the aforementioned guys are performing well, we could trade them, and I'd bet we'd make sure to get a 3B and some pitching between what we'd get in trade along with the freed up cash. These MLB-ready acquisitions would be touted as the reason we're a playoff team in 2016. If we don't sell this year, that means we are in the playoff hunt, and it's doubtful that Attanasio would trade away Gomez after a year in which we were in the playoff hunt. Instead, he would use the money saved by not paying Lohse, Ramirez, Parra and Broxton to find a free agent 3B and fill some other holes and try to win in "the last year with Gomez, Braun and Lucroy all playing together." I guess the one thing that could allow for him to be traded would be for someone like Taylor to play so well that the Brewers and more importantly the ticket buyers could believe that he could step in and be a star. This is akin to trading Gallardo because of what Nelson and Fiers have shown.

For a young pitcher, the of course struggles aren't unexpected, and I followed closely Peralta's early exploits. My concern re: last year is that the longer Nelson was up, the worse his outings progressively got. I have high hopes for Nelson like most/all here. My greater concern is that he's being handed a spot without showing signs of any consequence of meaningfully correcting what went wrong. I think he should still have to earn his spot, so the teflon coating his spot in the rotation has doesn't make total sense. . . . Sure, there's a balance to maintain in order not to kill a guy's confidence, and Melvin's shown over time he'll make the necessary move(s) when merited -- both upward and downward. That the more experienced (though not by tons) Thornburg seemingly has no chance at Nelson's spot in the rotation at the moment despite his pitching markedly better certainly raises eyebrows But Thornburg's short, so he has to be a reliever :-) Seriously, I agree that Thornburg hasn't been given the shot at starting he deserves. I think he'd at least be a decent (mid-to-back of the rotation) starter, but barring injury the rotation this year was set in stone as soon as Gallardo was traded. So, while Thornburg wouldn't like it my hope is that he's sent to AAA as a starter, to be called up when someone on the MLB roster is hurt or pitches his way out of the rotation. That would at least give us two options (along with Jungmann) who are stretched out and ready to step in.

I agree that C. Gomez looks to be the best choice, and will probably win the role. I also agree that Segura has been bad for most of his MLB career. I would not be surprised to see Sardinas called up mid-season to take over the starting SS position. I was just saying that if Gennett is slated for leadoff (I don't think he should be), then someone else has to be leadoff vs LHP. Roenicke doesn't like shuffling the order at all, but potentially swapping Gennett and Segura (leaving the rest alone) would be acceptable to Roenicke, and would likely be better than simply leaving Gennett in the leadoff spot, or putting H. Gomez in the leadoff spot with a platoon. If I had to guess, I'd say this would be what it will look like: vs LHP CF Gomez 1B Lucroy RF Braun 3B Ramirez LF Davis C Maldonado 2B H. Gomez SS Segura {pitcher} vs RHP CF Gomez C Lucroy RF Braun 1B Lind 3B Ramirez 2B Gennett LF Davis SS Segura {pitcher} This is dependent on Braun's thumb. If it still gives him problems, Lucroy and Braun should be at swapped, but if he's back to pre-thumb injury form, he's one of the best hitters in the game. Gennett fits well as a #2 hitter vs RHP, and a lineup vs RHP with Gennett 2 and Lucroy 5 would be good, but I don't think Roenicke will move Lucroy around in the order. Davis and Ramirez could be swapped, but it (hopefully) shows the strength of our lineup vs RHP this season that they could be in the bottom third of the order.

No one was saying Segura should be the everyday leadoff guy, just that if Gennett is the leadoff guy vs RHP, Segura could be the leadoff guy vs LHP. With similar OBP, the extra SLG for Davis vs LHP in my opinion is a reason not to put him leadoff over Segura. I'd rather see that SLG a few spots down in the order, knocking guys in. Plus, Segura has speed which is beneficial at the top of the order not only for stealing bases, but also for scoring from first on an extra base hit, or going first-to-third on a single, allowing for the #3/4 hitter to get an easy RBI on a sac fly. I share your concern over Segura, and I think he should have a short leash this season, but in a scenario where we don't have a great option for a leadoff guy, Segura batting 8th vs RHP and leadoff vs LHP should at least be considered. Of course, all the talk this spring has been about leadoff, but I'm with Briggs that putting Ramirez at cleanup could be costly. While we don't have a good leadoff candidate, we have a number of guys who could be productive cleanup hitters. Unfortunately, the spot will probably go to Ramirez, who is probably not the best choice.

I'm just wondering when MLB will realize that it would be cheaper to simply buy Cuba than it is to offer these contracts to the players.

The Dodgers' knock on Guerrero is his defense. They may see him as an OF more than a middle IF. They have said that he looks more comfortable defensively this year than last, but that could just be "coach speak." If they truly don't see a place for him, then they would probably trade him for just about nothing, as they can't send him back to the minors. In this scenario, I would be thrilled if the Brewers could send some mid-tier prospect(s) and pick up the salary. Or, better yet, maybe the Dodgers think Ramirez is still a quality player, and the Brewers can find a way to make a Ramirez-for-Guerrero trade. I agree with the posters that say any trade would have to find a way to nix the opt out option. It's not worth it to trade for him if he can opt out after one year.

You bat Segura lead off vs lefties and 8th v righties. And you toggle him with Scooter. Scooter is lead off v righties and 8th v lefties Crazy talk. The little known 11th Commandment is that once players are put in a position in the lineup, they must remain in that position regardless of age, ability or performance. That's why Gennett will hit leadoff vs. LHP and why Ramirez will still be our cleanup hitter even though he's no longer the player he once was. Sarcasm aside, that would be a really good idea. I'm kind of down on Segura, but hitting him leadoff in the roughly 20% of the games a LHP starts wouldn't be bad, and Gennett should probably not even bat against LHP, much less lead off against them. Putting him 8th vs LHP would limit the damage vs LHP, and would put H. Gomez in the 8th spot in the order on the days he plays 2B vs LHP (because of course the replacement has to take the spot in the lineup of the person he's replacing).

Not sure about Henderson, but I agree with the rest this. I really hope they decide to put Thornburg in AAA as the #6/7 starter. "Long man" is a waste for a talented semi-young guy like Thornburg, but I worry that's where he'll end up. I'd much rather see him stretched out in AAA, as we are woefully thin on starting pitching depth and Thornburg is a better option than Jungmann. Having both of them starting in AAA alleviates the depth problem a little, and doesn't stick us in the inevitable situation of stretching him out on the fly in the majors, where he gets inserted into the rotation and can only pitch 3 innings his first outing, 4 innings the second and 5 innings the third, basically destroying the bullpen for an extended period. I'm worried about Clark's defense at 1B, but with Jimenez backing up 3B, Gomez or Herrera backing up SS/2B and Lucroy/Lind getting most (or all) starts at 1B, Clark would basically be a LH power bat off the bench/emergency 1B/corner OF. He could provide some value in that role, especially considering that we may have some positions that get swapped out late in games either for defensive reasons (LF) or pitcher match-ups (1B/2B). Cotts hasn't looked good so far this spring, but I think he's pretty much guaranteed a spot on the 25-man. Note: when I say "not sure about Henderson," I mean I have no idea on the situation. If he's 100%, he should be on the roster, but if there are still concerns stemming from his injury, than he shouldn't be given a spot just because of what he once was.

It does not guarantee any such thing. While it is one possibility it is not the only one. Note I said the guarantee was that the money was spent. Contracts in baseball are guaranteed, so if you sign someone, you are on the hook to pay them, regardless of team or player results. I followed that by saying "if" you have to borrow to increase payroll, you will have to repay the loan. I never said it was guaranteed that they would have to borrow, although I think there would be a pretty good likelihood that that would be the outcome. I don't really want to continue this "debate," because it seems something I have said has upset you. That seems to be that I said I would not want to go "in the red" unless there was a really good chance that the additional spending would land us in the playoffs or sell a lot more tickets (both of which would increase revenues, hopefully at least offsetting the extra payroll expenses). I'm cautious that way. I've seen too many businesses fail because they shoot for the moon and don't reach it. I have tried to present an argument to explain my reasoning, and I'm sorry that my terminology was upsetting, as that was not the intent. As I don't believe this is anything worth getting upset over, I'll just stop posting in this thread.

Since we will have a big hole at 3B following the 2015 season, Cecchini seems like a good target and has been brought up a number of times. However, I don't really see it happening at this time. The best bet to get him will be mid-season if we're selling and the Red Sox are buying. We would have some good chips at that time, and that's probably our best bet to shore up 3B for the future. Otherwise, we would probably be looking at the rare prospect-for-prospect trade. He's probably not worth Arcia, but we'd likely have to give up something like Coulter or a couple of our promising guys in the low minors.

I pretty much agree with all of this, except that if Clark is indeed as bad as he has appeared, then I don't want him anywhere near first base. He's probably not as bad as he's looked, but a first baseman who ducks his head away and throws his glove in the general direction of a ball thrown in the dirt is going to cost you just about every game he starts. First is generally regarded as the easiest position to play, but the one thing you have to be able to do is scoop balls thrown in the dirt. Hopefully I just saw him with "early spring jitters." He's made it this far as a first baseman, so I hope he's actually a decent defender. If so, and especially if he can fill in at corner OF if needed (not as a normal player, but on the rare occasion when Parra has already subbed in and for whatever reason the LF/RF needs to come out), then he could be a good option for a bench spot. Generally speaking, he would mainly be a LH bat off the bench, so his most important feature would be his ability to hit. Maldonado (lock to backup C), Parra (lock to backup all OF positions), one of Gomez/Herrera/Sardinas (Backup middle IF), one of Jimenez/Rogers (backup 3B, maybe 1B), and Clark (LH bat, backup 1B/corner OF). All in all, not terrible. Certainly better than having two players who only play 2B and two players who only play 1B, which hamstrung us last season. Of course, our backup middle IF may have to play about a quarter of the games if Gennett cannot hit LHP, our backup 3B may need to play a lot if Ramirez's body doesn't hold up, ditto our backup 1B as Lind's back is already forcing him to sit this spring, and our backup C will have to play around a quarter of the games because we can't seem to find a RH-hitting first baseman (normally the easiest-to-find commodity in baseball). Therefore, our bench will be extremely important this season, so let's hope they perform well.

That's case in point that simply spending does not guarantee anything. The Brewers need to get value out of the dollars spent. Gomez and Lucroy are tremendous values. Because they're pre-arby, Gennett and Davis can be tremendous values even if they're "just average" MLB players. The Brewers are never going to spend with the "big boys," so they need a strategy that is not dependent on "let's break the budget." As long as the Brewers get value out of their positions, they have a payroll that should allow them to be competitive. However, not being a "big market" means that they have to be smarter, and making a trade for Broxton at $11MM (roughly 10% of payroll) can hurt their chances. $11MM for a closer is a lot of money, but they don't even trust him as a closer, and had to go out and spend more money to get a closer, putting close to 20% of their payroll into the back of the bullpen. Of course in a perfect world money wouldn't matter, and we could just throw money at the problem to solve it, but that's not reality. Just listen to the Red Sox after the Moncada signing whining that they have to spend $60MM to get him because with all the recent rule changes it's one of the only ways they can "get an advantage." In the Brewers' world, it has to be about getting value. The two best ways to do that in baseball are through pre-arby/arby players, and through extensions given to pre-arby players. Free agency by nature means that you have to be the highest bidder to land a player, so it is really hard to find a value there.

Good to see that the guys fighting for a spot are all hitting well to start the spring, making for a tough decision. Clark seems the obvious choice, but in the limited time I've seen him play 1B (TV games this spring), he's been awful. He dove out of the way of a throw in the dirt from Segura in one game, and had a weak grounder to first bounce off his chest allowing the runner to reach on what should have been an easy out in another. Has anyone seen him play on a regular basis. Is he really as bad as he's shown, or is this just an anomaly?