monty57

The Cubs cut Barney to make room for Bonifacio, so I'm not sure what their plans are for him. If they were planning on trading him away soon, I'd think they'd have held on to Barney. Cub fans are starting to get antsy about their long-term rebuilt project. It wouldn't surprise me to see them land Price in trade and extend him. In that case, they may want to toss a couple year extension at Bonifacio, who has been pretty good for them, and could help bridge the gap as their position prospects start to get to the majors.

At this point, I'd think "#3/4 workhorse" is more Nelson's expected minimum, with the possibility of being a "low-end 1 / high-end 2." The guy has an upper 90's fastball with some decent secondary pitches. Not ace caliber, but still a top-of-the rotation potential. And, his first three years will cost around what David Price will make in about two starts next year. Price is an ace, which is why he's going to demand a lot in return. The question is whether the marginal increase this year (the Brewers are in first place without him) plus next year (minus any correlating moves, such as possibly not being able to sign a first baseman or exercise Gallardo's option) is worth giving up six years of the prospects involved in the trade. GMs often have a shorter-term perspective, because if the fans turn on them, they may not be around long-term. Therefore, GMs are often willing to trade away prospects in order to try to win now. From a pure value perspective, I think that Price is worth Nelson, Coulter and Thornburg. I just don't know that I want the Brewers to trade away that much in order to get him.

If the Brewers were to make a move for a starting pitcher who would be a perceived upgrade on Nelson, then Nelson would be a part of that trade. He is not getting shifted to the pen, and no team is going to trade us a starting pitcher who is (right now) better than Nelson unless they get Nelson back in the trade. Unless we swing a major, David Price-type trade, I think our rotation is set. That leaves 1B, the bullpen and the bench as the only real positions where we could do something. With Jeffress up, Henderson and Thornburg likely returning, and Estrada now in the pen, I don't think we'll make a move for a reliever. That leaves either 1B or bench, neither of which will probably be a very major move.

If Nelson is mandatory I think Coulter is the guy I would want to trade out of the next tier (Coulter, Arcia, and Taylor) but everyone's opinion might be different on that. Coulter is definitely the power bat out of that group; but the other guys appear to possess more tools than Coulter. I'd probably pick Taylor just because we have other OF options. Coulter looks like either a catcher or 3B, and we could use depth at either of those positions. Ditto Arcia at SS.

Considering they could get about equal to that in the offseason. Its worth it. That has not been how Melvin/Attanasio operate. I'm not into absolutes, but I'd say that if the Brewers trade for Price, there is absolutely no way they would trade him this offseason. Instead, they will exercise Gallardo and Ramirez's options, and possibly push the budget into the red in order to sign a mid-30's free agent 1B to a 3-4 year deal to go for it in 2015. We would have less a chance of extending or resigning Price than we did with Sabathia. Agreed. Love it or hate it, we would be playing for another "window" of the 2014 and 2015 seasons. This time, at the end of the window, we would lose Gallardo, Lohse, Ramirez, and Price. That might be a tough hole to fill. I've never been a big fan of this strategy, but I figure I either have to accept it or find another team to cheer for. All that said, while I don't think I want to give up this rumored package, I still think it will be outbid by Seattle, St Louis or the Dodgers.

If that is indeed what Tampa is asking for, given his m.o., I would imagine Melvin will make the deal Can they trade Thornburg, who is on the DL?

That wouldn't do it. The Mariners will float Walker, and the Cardinals will float Tavares. If we want Price, Nelson would be part of the deal, but we'd have to add someone from the MLB team, as we don't have enough in the minors to keep up with the other suitors. Gennett's season makes him desirable, so potentially Nelson and Gennett? I still don't think this is a better offer than Walker or Tavares plus some other prospects. If it's not, then we'd really have to do something like Lucroy or Gomez for Price, which is (or at least should be) an obvious no-go. So, in that light, would you give up Gennett, Nelson and maybe Taylor or Coulter for Price? That's probably our best realistic offer, I wouldn't want to do it, and I still think it wouldn't be the accepted offer. My guess is that if traded, Price will end up in Seattle (Walker), St Louis (Tavares) or LA (Pederson). In any of these cases, Tampa would be receiving a potential superstar, which trumps our offer of potentially good players.

I hope at some point MLB figures out the difference between steroids and HGH. If it is indeed true that HGH simply helps the body heal, then I think it should become legal because in that case, it is probably about equivalent to a cortisone injection. Meanwhile, looking at the physical changes in players like Sosa and Bonds, steroids are roughly the equivalent of Steve Rogers' super-soldier formula. That baseball seems to perpetuate the myth that players like Braun took steroids leads me to believe that Mr. Selig ought to be forbade from the Hall of Fame based on the "integrity, sportsmanship, character" rule.

Even the shadow of Hart is probably better than our current 1B situation, so it's worth looking into. However, I think he's broken down, so I wouldn't put a lot into getting him so that we could make long-term plans around him.

I don't expect anything too big, so no I wouldn't be upset if they stood pat. Doing nothing is better than doing something you'll regret (like trading away Nelson).

I think this was a pretty good read. The Brewers have been pretty-much injury free, and have had a number of over-performers, with few under-performers. Meanwhile, the rest of the division has had a lot of injuries and under-performing players. That pretty much needs to continue through the second half in order for the Brewers to win the division. As to the Wild Card, I don't know how many games everyone has against everyone else, but generally it's tougher to make the WC in a division with four competitive teams than it is in a division with two good teams. Washington/Atlanta and San Fran/LAD get to beat up on Miami, NYM, Philly, Arizona, San Diego and Colorado, while all we get to beat up on are the Cubs.

I'd like to see them make a run at Sandoval myself or a lefty hitting 1B who's a clear upgrade. "Opportunity cost" is certainly a variable in whether or not to exercise the option. The thing is, they need to decide on the option pretty quickly after the season is over. If they decline the option because they would rather go after someone like Sandoval, they need to be sure they're going to get him or they could get stuck with patchwork at 1B and 3B. I think Ramirez is already someone who would benefit from a day or two per week off, so I think there is a good chance that he will not be worth the option price next year. However, if we don't exercise the option, we'd better find answers at 1B and 3B somewhere. Filling 1B has been tough for the past two years, so I doubt that Melvin could find answers at both positions. One thing: Cot's has 2015 listed as "$14M mutual option ($4M buyout)" so the option, if exercised would be for $14MM, not $16MM as I thought it was and others have also mentioned.

About 2/3 of the way through the season, he has a .284/.333/.455/.788 line while playing in around 75% of the team's games. His career OPS is .844, and his last three seasons are: 2011 .871 OPS 2012 .901 OPS 2013 .831 OPS He's a guy who for much of his career sat in the mid-.800's to low .900's OPS. I think those days are past, and while he's still an MLB player, he's probably more a high .700's OPS guy who is best served getting some days off. That decline will likely continue as the years tick by. Our problem is that we don't have another 3B. The question this offseason will be whether it's worth it to pay a lot of money to see if Ramirez still has a full season of decent baseball in him. We still have 60 or so games to judge him by this season, and then we'll see how the offseason goes.

Roderick - that is where I am coming from. Having Papelbon as our closer for the next few years sounds like a good idea to me. The Brewers team will be mostly intact from this year to 2015. We just need a new closer. I'd rather just extend K-Rod for another season for less than they'd have to pay Papelbon. I think the Brewers see Thornburg as their closer of the future, so one more year of K-Rod and then four years of a cheap Thornburg makes more sense then paying Papelbon that much money.

I hear Soriano's available as well.

So he's got an .878 OPS (the 18th highest in all of baseball) when he's got a pretty bad injury to his thumb, and ESPN decides they need to write a negative article about him? I don't have "insider," so I can't read the article, but I'll guess that when discussing his "power outage" they don't mention that he's got as many HR as Puig in 38 less AB.

I like the idea of extending players, but I think it's best used for extending young stars while they're in their pre-arby years. A contract like Lucroy's or Braun's first deal don't bear that much risk for the team relative to the potential return from the player during the deal. Melvin has been somewhat successful with offering extensions to guys who have questionable early careers, but have put together a good season or two. Again, these contracts aren't overly expensive, so the downside of getting something like a Bill Hall result shouldn't sink the team, while a result like that of Gomez can really help the team. Extending someone who is nearly a free agent bears the most risk, as the contract is basically a free agent deal. As in free agency, we don't have much chance of re-signing the superstars once they reach this level, so we historically have only extended "second tier" guys here. Examples are Weeks and Hart. Basically, the only advantage to doing this is that a rogue team can't come in and make a ridiculous offer to drive up the price, but my thought is that if the player wasn't worthy of extending earlier in their career, they probably shouldn't be extended in their final arby year. Price would fall into the final group, as the superstar who is already so close to free agency, that it would make little sense for him to sign an extension. At this point, unless the Brewers (or whoever he's traded to) offers a ridiculous amount, he would be better off to go to free agency and see if a bidding war gets him far more then the "experts" predict. The teams that are being rumored to get Price are Seattle, St Louis, and the Dodgers. That means we're competing with teams that will probably offer deals built around Walker, Tavares, and Pederson. I don't think we can come close to beating those offers. Bottom line, if we go to the Rays and say "we'll give you Nelson, Coulter and Haniger," they'll say "that's great... throw in Lucroy or we're going to take the Cardinals deal centered around Tavares" at which point we hang up the phone and move on to plan B.

Toronto dumped him after a shaky start to the season, and we picked him up for nothing.

Well, the odds are probably 45% on that one pitch, so if you fail to get the bunt fair, you still have the rest of your AB to swing away. If the other team is going to do something to greatly take away your chances when you're playing "your game," then I think it makes a lot of sense to change your game until they stop. If you can greatly increase your OBP when you're up with the bases empty, then you are really helping your team win. Obviously everything is situational, and a bunt single with two outs/bases empty helps less than a bunt single with no outs/bases empty, but it's still a single in a situation where (with the shift) you're probably going to get on base around 30% of the time and hit a HR maybe 5% of the time. Does anyone have the stats for players vs the shift? I'd guess teams only play the shift vs players who it will significantly hurt.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to hijack the thread. I'm just fed up with Weeks, a player who I used to really like. This thread should be about Jeffress, who hopefully will be a big positive for the team. He's went through a lot, has a ton of talent, and deserves this call-up.

Good to see Jeffress up. Hope he continues to dominate the way he did in Nashville.

One day Weeks doesn't bat when he's supposed to for Gennett, forcing Maldonado to the plate and burning a bench player when Weeks has to go out to play defense, followed by the above referenced move the next day. This following Weeks' refusal to play where the team asked him earlier in the year. Oh, and he hasn't been a good MLB player for quite a while. Will anything cause a move to happen to get Weeks off the Brewers? Sorry for going off-topic. As to Jeffress, glad to have him here after a long and winding road. Hopefully he does well and never sees the minors again.

So is this the move Agent39 was talking about?

There's some "adult language" here (for anyone who's never seen Animal House), but I thought this sums things up nicely :-)

This coming from Lloyd McClendon, him of the career .244 avg / .325 OBP / .381 SLG / .706 OPS. Yeah, great idea to publicly slam a guy whose "bad" outing consists of 1 ER in 5 IP. Cano better hope he doesn't go 1-for-4 today or he might get benched for a week... can't have a guy in the lineup who can only hit .250.