monty57

I think that the "prevailing wisdom" is that anyone who routinely chokes will never make it to the major leagues. These guys are the top one percent of the top one percent. Really, really good baseball players (guys who would dominate vs 99% of society) do not make it to the MLB. Even bad MLB players are still elite. If someone has a serious flaw in their game - in any aspect of their game - they will not make it to the majors, or if they do, they probably won't last long. To the example of giving a speech, if someone begins stuttering and stammering every time they get in front of people, their boss would do well to never put them in front of people. Same with the guy in A-ball who routinely chokes. He just won't make it to AA. I agree there is tremendous pressure in professional athletics. There's always someone ready to take your job, teammates and fans who will hate you for not performing, ruthless media, etc. If you can sustain the "normal pressure" of being a professional athlete, how much more pressure is being in a playoff game? I'm sure there's some, but maybe not as much as is being let on. Compound that with the fact that baseball players fail more often then they succeed, and that the "additional pressure" situations are pretty rare, it would be really hard to determine if one person truly is "clutch" or not. The most "non-clutch" player in baseball could come through in a big situation, while the most "clutch" player could fail. If they only get one playoff series in their career, how do you know who was truly more "clutch" in the playoffs?

Why did you suggest he just had more balls sneak through? Seems to me BAPIP isn't a measure of balls that sneak through as much as a measure of balls that get through. One would think balls being hit harder would have a higher rate of doing that. I think it reasonable that someone juicing would hit balls harder and increase BAPIP than when they weren't. Agreed, plus steroids will make you faster, so that could lead to more infield hits. But, as LouisEly said, the SLG shows a big spike, and Melky admitted to using. He's hitting less FB (steroids wouldn't really affect that) but more of his FB's are leaving the park (steroids would affect that). More of his grounders are turning into hits, and that could very well be from harder hit balls (as Thurston's quote above states) and greater speed, or it could be "balls sneaking through." Since he admitted using, I'd guess more of the former than the latter.

Yeah, the "qualifying offer" was negotiated into the new CBA, so it has to meet the requirements of the CBA. I'm not sure which way things will go with Marcum. If he's saying that the team hasn't approached him, then I don't know how likely it would be that they will offer him a one-year deal. His statement of "If I had the opportunity [to re-sign with Milwaukee] I'd love to," may mean "If the Brewers offer me a multi-year, market value deal, I'd love to take it." While I'd love to get him back on a one-year deal, I think Melvin will try to guage the market, and if he thinks someone is going to offer Marcum a multi-year deal, he'll offer him the "qualifying offer." If he doesn't think someone will offer him a multi-year deal, he'll try to sign him to a one-year deal for less than the "qualifying offer."

He's hitting .280 this year with a .346 OPS. Not great, but decent for a CF. I assume you mean OBP :-)

I've probably gotten my hopes up too high on the aforementioned Tweet, and the seemingly perfect situation of getting Marcum back for a reasonable price for one year. If he doesn't come back (or we can't get someone on a one-year deal), I hope we don't sign a multi-year deal with a B-level veteran. We have too many good arms coming up to block them with a high-priced vet. To topic, as long as the Brewers were 100% certain that Marcum's arm is healthy, I wouldn't be mad if they made a qualifying offer. When healthy, Marcum is worth $13.5MM in free agency, and the one-year deal fits our time-frame with our prospects. They'd better make sure he's healthy before doing it.

It takes a lot of opportunities for a handful of PAs to not skew the results. Look at McGehee last season who's one 3 HR game made a significant difference in his numbers for the entire season (from utterly dreadful to just God-awful bad). Even over a long career, the number of PAs with bases loaded are not that large - I would have to think significantly less than the 600 PAs players get in a season. Maybe your "Counsell-esque" player really is a better hitter with the bases loaded, or maybe he just happened to hit his line-drives at opportune times. If I'm looking at batting Tony Gwynn Sr in his prime vs Craig Counsell in a tight situation, I'm going with Gwynn.

marcum has made it known he doesnt think he'll be back in Milwaukee I'm not sure where you're getting that. This is from an article on the Brewers' website today: "If I had the opportunity [to re-sign with Milwaukee] I'd love to," Marcum said. "That's definitely a possibility. It's a great organization. Most of the guys are going to be back next year. It's a good group. They still have a chance to do some things in Milwaukee. It's pretty special." A month or so ago, I believe it was Hardricourt who Tweeted that Marcum may be open to signing a one-year deal with the Brewers to rebuild his value. I would guess that if this is true it would be for less than $13.5MM. If Marcum is healthy, I think he's certainly worth offering a one-year $8-10MM deal. He bridges the gap to the prospects and he could be flipped at the deadline next season for prospects.

Im not sure if they will keep Ishikawa. What they do with him will decide who they might sign in free agency. What they do with Hart and with the {probable} one veteran starting pitcher they'll sign will determine the direction of the offseason. If they trade him, we'll get another pre-arby guy(s) to fit in somewhere. We'll have Gamel as a starter with either Ishikawa or someone else as the backup. If they keep Hart, then Gamel will probably be the primary backup, with Hart getting some starts in RF, but predominantly at 1B. What they do with Ishikawa is completely dependant on what happens with far more important players on the roster. If your scenario of trading Gamel for a reliever played out, then yes Ishikawa would probably be the primary backup. If they sign someone like Marcum to a one-year deal, they will be able to field a decent rotation while allowing some young guys to "get their feet wet" at the MLB level. Marcum could be flipped at the deadline if he's healthy and pitching well, and the Brewers are out of it. If they sign someone to a multi-year deal, then in my opinion they are simply blocking some players who should be in the MLB rotation in a year or two. If they somehow end up signing Greinke, all hell will break loose, because they will either have to trade some salaries to cover him, or they're "all in" and will do things no one on here will correctly predict. If they keep him, I'd like them to sign Jeff Keppinger, Marco Scutaro or Freddy Sanchez. Whoever is the cheapest. Then bring up Bianchi to be middle IF depth. If they dont offer him arby, I'd like to see them get Eric Chavez, but I think he might be too expensive. They could go after Mark Teahen. He'd be real inexpensive and can play 3B, 1B or RF. Lefty too. I went with Jose Lopez. He's young, bats right, and can play 3B 2B and 1B So it sounds to me like I'd keep Green, Gamel, Maldonado, Bianchi and Schafer as our bench (all talented and being paid league minimum) and sign a couple vet relievers to one-year $3-5MM deals to hold the fort until our minor league pitchers are ready to fill in the bullpen. You would trade Green, Gamel, Maldonado and Schafer for relievers and sign vets to replace Green, Gamel, Maldonado and Schafer. I think my option is less risky (at least long-term) and more feasible. I don't know that you'd be able to sign some of the guys you're looking at (A) for the amount of money we'd be willing to pay and (B) to sit the bench on a team that isn't likely to make the World Series. If we went your route, what do we do in 2013 when our entire bench leaves and we don't have anyone in the minors? Do we simply patch a bench together every season? How much would your bench cost? I also don't think everyone you mentioned will be free agents. The list of IF FA's according to Cot's who do not have options in their contracts (1B Carlos Lee, James Loney 2B Jeff Baker, Jeff Keppinger, Freddy Sanchez, Skip Shumaker SS Geoff Blum, Luis Rodriguez, Ryan Theriot 3B Miguel Cairo, Maicer Izturis, Kevin Kouzmanoff, Scott Rolen). I don't see Teahen or Scutaro. Injuries happen but you dont plan for them. Of course you do. You don't know who's going to get hurt, which is why you try to build as much depth as possible. This year's team had unexpected players step up in a big way (Fiers and Estrada for Narveson and Marcum, Maldonado and Kottaras for Lucroy, Hart and Aoki for Gamel) and have suffered at the one position they didn't have depth (Gonzalez). If you take away Maldonado, Green, Gamel and Schafer, along with the probability that they are going to non-tender Morgan, they will be seriously deficient in depth if basically anyone gets hurt. You can't expect someone to step out of seemingly nowhere every year and post an OPS in the upper .700's (Maldonado, Aoki) or an ERA under 3 (Fiers). OF would be our deepest position, but there would be a lot of questions as to whether the guys you mentioned are MLB ready. How good is our playoff shot next year if we have an OF of Braun, Josh Prince and Lee Haydel for a significant period? The only reason to trade away pre-arby guys like Green, Maldonado, Gamel and Schafer for relievers would be to push for the playoffs in 2013. Besides not being a strategy I like (all in for one year), I don't think it would even make our team better in the season we'd be going "all in." I've wished for a long time that we could have pre-arby guys both contributing at the MLB level as starters and in "role player" positions. Next year we will have some pre-arby guys starting (Lucroy, Segura and maybe Gamel and Schafer), some pre-arby guys in the rotation (Fiers, Estrada, and maybe one of Peralta, Thornburg, Rogers), and some pre-arby guys on the bench (Maldonado, Bianchi, Green, maybe Gamel and Schafer). We are still not quite to the point where our bullpen will consist of a really strong group of pre-arby guys from our farm, but we will have a few, like Henderson and De Los Santos, and we are not far away from having a lot of other guys who can't quite make it as big-league starters but will make good bullpen candidates. Give us one year of vets on $3-5MM deals, and we should be able to field a strong bullpen with young guys from our farm. Please don't trade away our few decent pre-arby position players to fix a problem that will fix itself soon enough.

For Marcum to leave next year? OK, that's one year later for us to try to get a comp pick. I'd lay out a 4 year, $28 million deal with incentives for innings pitched. If Marcum is healthy in that timeframe, it's a bargain. If he does have more durability issues (As was the case in 2011 and this year), the payroll hit is moderated. If Marcum signs a lower-value, one-year deal, it is only because he knows the market for him will be soft after his injury this season. He may do a one-year deal to "rebuild" his value so that he can sign a higher-value, long-term deal when that one-year deal is up. He knows he probably only has one long-term deal left in his career, so the only way he'd sign a deal for $7MM/season over multiple-years is if he was injured, in which case the Brewers wouldn't offer it. On the open market, a healthy Marcum is worth a lot of money. If he comes back, shows he's healthy and and pitches like an ace, he may not be available on a one-year deal, in which case making the qualifying offer may be worth it. It all depends on if Marcum is healthy, how he pitches and how the market looks once the season ends. In a perfect world, Marcum signs a low-value, one-year deal and he helps the team to the playoffs next year. Another good scenario would be for Marcum to accept a lower-value, one-year deal from the Brewers, and then have them flip him for prospects at next season's trade deadline. Either way, if we can get him on a low-value, one-year deal, it's low risk/high reward.

If he plays a full season, I think he's very capable of putting together a .800+ season with 15-20 HR's, 40 SB's and great defense in CF. He may hit just .270/.315, but that's still MORE than serviceable. The question is what to do with him. I think we should start him everyday going forward. I wish we'd be able to move Morgan for a reliever who could help us next year. But, will we have any kind of a clear picture going forward with Gomez? He'll be in his final (4th) year of arby next season, and his play this year will probably mean the Brewers will hold onto him and pay him $3-4MM next year. Boras is his agent, so he probably won't sign an extension. If he gets everyday starting duty next year and tears the cover off the ball, he'll have priced himself into an eight-figure salary, which I don't want the Brewers to commit. If he stinks, and ends up as the RH part of a platoon with Schafer, then I wouldn't want to guarantee him a multi-year deal. If he's up-and-down like he has been his whole career, then we're in the same situation teams have always been on Gomez... he has a lot of talent, but is he ever going to "get it?" Once the pre-arby/arby years are done, teams are going to have to guarantee money in order to get their answer. Is it worth paying him like an .800 OPS, elite defense CF when he could just be "serviceable," or if he could dive back into a sub-.300 OBP season? So, if he is likely unwilling (Boras is agent) to sign an extension, what is in the best interest of the Brewers? Should they try to trade him this offseason and give the starting job to Schafer, should they offer him arby and trade him next season, should they offer him arby and let him walk next offseason, or should they offer him arby and try to sign him to a market deal next offseason?

I dont view Schafer and Green as valuable to this team next year (and future years) as others on this forum do. Morgan and Gomez will probably each make $3MM or so next season, so there's a pretty good chance that at least Morgan will be non-tendered, and it wouldn't be completely out of the question that the Brewers think Gomez's hot second half makes him a good trade candidate. At the very least, Schafer should be our 4th OF next year, is pretty likely to be the left-handed part of a platoon with Gomez, and could possibly be our starting CF. Green is the primary back-up at 2B and 3B. Weeks and Ramirez both played injury-free this season, but there's a good chance one of them will lose some time next year, at which point I'd rather see Green everyday than see Ransom everyday.Both are certainly tradeable, but they have value to the Brewers. Even with the Segura pick-up, we are still pretty thin on position players prospects... especially MLB-ready ones. If we made your trade, we'd kill our depth and put the team in a position of significant risk if someone gets injured next season. To me, signing a couple of relievers on one-year / $3-5MM deals is less risky than trading away our top (at least most MLB-ready) position prospects for relievers. I'm happy we traded Kottaras for someone who will likely be in the pen next year, as Kottaras was obviously the odd-man out in Milwaukee. Hopefully we can make a similar trade with Morgan, as he'll probably be non-tendered. Other than a handful of elite guys, relievers are very up-and-down from season to season. I'd rather not "spend" young, cost-controlled position players who could contribute in Milwaukee for relievers.

I think we got really lucky getting a major league ready young prospect at our most difficult "sucking black hole" of a position of negative equity.. SS. Go Jean Segura!! I don't think we got lucky. Getting valuable players at positions of need is the reason you trade valuable players away. Greinke is a good player, but by trading him we were able to bring back more value. I love the thought of having Segura for six (or very possibly 8-9 with a "Lucroy-style" extension) years. Prior to the trade, I heard many posters saying we could never compete without extending Greinke. Now everyone is ecstatic that we have Segura, because he's a big piece that will help keep us competitive for a long time. He can become a new "core player." Few are still talking about how we're doomed without Greinke (or Fielder, Sabathia, etc who "we couldn't win without"). Hart is a valuable player. I like him. He has been a "core player" for a long time. If I could turn his final year of "control" for a Segura-level player who can become a "core player" for six+ seasons, I'd do it in a heartbeat, especially since we have in-house options to replace him. This might mean we have slightly lessened our (already slim) playoff chances in 2013, but another Segura-level prospect would greatly enhance our chances for a long time into the future, and would give us tremendous financial flexibilty. Ramirez is a different situation. I don't like the back-ended contract, but since we didn't extend Greinke we don't need the salary relief. If we trade Hart for another pre-arby guy who will fit in at the MLB level, we really don't need the salary relief. Simply inserting one or two good pre-arby guys can significantly effect the payroll situation in a positive way. The "cost per win" stuff is all fine-and-dandy, but it's pretty useless to me when deciding which direction to go. If we don't have the money, I don't care if a stat-table says someone is "underpaid," as we'd need to dump him. If we have excess cash, I certainly wouldn't give away a productive player for nothing just because he's providing "even value" in comparison to what he's paid. The only times to give away a player for nothing are either if you need salary relief or if the player is a clubhouse cancer... neither is the case with Ramirez. If we could find someone who would take on the entire contract and send us some really good prospects, I'd have to consider trading Ramirez. If we don't get that offer, then Ramirez will remain a Brewer. I don't think it's very likely he's going to be traded, and will probably be a Brewer for two more seasons. For those talking about trading away our good young players for relievers... really!?! That's like trading someone a $20 bill for a $5 bill. I understand that our bullpen has cost us a lot this season, but let's not go overboard. We should be able to get some of our 2013 bullpen from the minors, and I have no problem with Melvin offering one-year deals to some veteran relievers. I really hope he doesn't trade away our decent trading chips for relievers. They're the least valuable players on a team, and they are a crapshoot from one year to the next. It's very possible that Loe, Parra, Veras and K-Rod are all good relievers next year, and it's very possible that whatever relievers we'd buy with Gamel, Green, young pitching, etc would be every bit as bad as this year's Brewer bullpen has been. Melvin has a habit of getting himself in a situation where he's stuck with the underperformers because he can't send them to the minors to get things figured out. Hopefully soon we will have a bunch of guys from our farm who can fill out out 'pen for league minimum and with options remaining. We're not quite there yet, but should be in a year or two.

In a down season, I doubt we'll see too many call-ups. As others have mentioned, a couple of relievers would make sense, but as someone else mentioned McClendon isn't playing. When you're not in the playoff race, it doesn't make much sense to call someone up just to sit the bench. I'd have no problem letting guys who won't be here next year (like K-Rod) sit while some guys from the minors pitch, but that won't happen.

I think Schafer will replace Morgan next year, saving us around $2.5MM. I'd like to see us trade for a long-term bullpen answer, but I don't like trading a potentially useful pre-arby guy for a bullpen arm. It'd be great if someone would bite on Morgan over the next couple of weeks. I don't really know who else I'd trade for bullpen help... Maybe the one of Ransom/Bianchi who Melvin doesn't think will be Segura's backup next year.

I was just trying to add a little humor into things. I enjoy posts by both of you guys, so I hate to see things get derailed by "non-baseball stuff."

C'mon guys, it's not that big of a deal. Except that it's "allude," not "elude." Elude means to escape, flee, avoid, dodge. As in "the next time we see a topic in which we're going to beat a dead horse, we should elude the topic." I don't think the Brewers are likely to contend next year either. That I say they aren't likely to do something instead of saying they aren't going to do something is semantics, and they say you shouldn't argue semantics :-)

I'm not opposed to Marcum on a one year deal but why has Estrada earned a rotation slot? Everyone coming up behind him has more talent and he's just not the type of player that should ever stand in the way of any legitimate prospect. He's good enough when we don't have anyone better, but he's easily replaceable when we do. He may perform better than any of our young pitchers in year 1 but once those guys get to years 2 and 3 there shouldn't be much of a comparison. Wouldn't it make more sense to use him as a fall back option and start the youngsters in the rotation to see if they can hack it? TC, you missed the most important part of my post: "Estrada could be a good trade chip, as he would have a few years as a starter under his belt, and still have some inexpensive team control. Moving him to the 'pen would only decrease his value" To me, it's about value. Estrada has performed pretty well in his limited exposure as a starter 2011: 7 starts, 3.70 ERA, 41.1 IP, 35 H, 17 ER, 5 HR, 10 BB, 33K, .235 BAA, 1.09 WHIP 2012: 13 starts, 4.40 ERA, 71.2 IP, 71 H, 35 ER, 15 HR, 12 BB, 73K, .259 BAA, 1.16 WHIP He'll be first year arby eligible next season, so he's still got three years of control left. Barring unforeseen circumstances, I'd let him start next year in the rotation. If he continues to pitch like a decent #3 starter, they could trade him at the mid-point next season or in the offseason and probably get some decent prospects in return... for Marco Estrada, a guy I wouldn't have given anything for prior to his showing he has value as a starter. Moving him to the bullpen to allow another rookie to "get his feet wet" in 2013 will substantially decrease Estrada's value. It's not about him being "proven," it's about maximizing his value. I don't see him as a long-term answer for the Brewers because, as you said, the Brewers have plenty of guys coming up through the minors who are more talented than Estrada. Other teams who don't have that luxury will give us other talented youngsters for the right to have Estrada pitch for them. If Estrada starts the season in the rotation and chokes, move him to the pen and bring up the talented rookie. You've lost nothing. Little risk, lot of reward by letting him start.

Why do any of you feel that Peralta or Thornburg or Rogers will be better than Narveson next year? I don't get the complete write off of him. He had a pretty significant shoulder surgery which may or may not allow him to pitch next year, if ever again. That's compounded by the fact that he will be hitting arbitration for the first time next year, so if the Brewers decide to offer him arby, he'll probably make $1MM or so. The Brewers may have to make a decision on him before they ever get a chance to see if he can pitch. If that's the case, I doubt Melvin will risk it, especially with the prospects finally making it to the major league roster. If they want him back, I'd guess the Brewers will non-tender him and offer a minor league deal like they did with Capuano. If they decide to go this route, Narveson will become a free agent and will have the option to sign with the Brewers on the minor league deal, or test the market to see if there's a team willing to take a flier on him on a major league deal. It's sad for Narveson, as I liked him and thought he could be a relatively inexpensive veteran #4/5 for the next couple of seasons, but unfortunately that's life in baseball. By "law" of the CBA, the Brewers don't owe him anything.

I disagree. Payroll is always going to be an issue Bingo. No matter what you do in life, money matters. Spend more than you make and you'll end up bankrupt. Spend exactly what you make, and you'll never get ahead. Make more than you spend and you will be in much better shape. Guaranteed contracts in baseball are tough. They can seriously limit teams' financial flexibility and get GM's into bad positions. They're like home loans that eat up a lot of your revenues for an extended period and can be hard to get out from under. Before we get excited about having a little money to spend, I hope Melvin holds back to see what we have in the young guys. We might just find that we can put together a really good team without having to max out payroll and limit our financial flexibility.

I'd bet Melvin will get one FA starter, but would highly doubt he'll get two. I hope he shoots for a one-year deal to a guy trying to rebuild his value (aka Marcum or someone like him). The rotation could then be Gallardo, Marcum, Fiers, Estrada and one of the rookies, probably between Peralta, Rogers and Thornburg. At the mid-way point next year, if we're out of it, Marcum/other vet FA can get dealt for prospects and we bring someone up from the minors. If we're in the playoff hunt, we should still have money to fill holes (unless Melvin needlessly maxes us out pre-season). Fiers and Estrada have both earned a spot and keeping them both starting is in the best long-term interest for the Brewers. If the best case scenario happens and we have a surplus of young, MLB ready starting pitchers in a couple of years, Estrada could be a good trade chip, as he would have a few years as a starter under his belt, and still have some inexpensive team control. Moving him to the 'pen would only decrease his value, and the person starting in front of him would be hard-pressed to match the numbers Estrada has posted as a starter. Let him prove he's not worthy of a starting spot before taking it away from him. Signing one or two free agents to multi-year deals this off-season would really do little but block some prospects from ever getting their chance to start over the next few years. Also, I don't like the thought of putting "the losers" of Thornburg, Burgos, Rogers into the MLB bullpen. They need to stay stretched out as starters in the minors, so when their time comes (whether it's 2013, 2014 or 2015), they will be able to hit the ground running and throw enough innings to get them through a MLB season. The only exception would be if one is out of options. For example, if Rogers needs to be on the 25-man roster next year, but Peralta is obviously a better option for the rotation, then I'd have no qualms about moving Rogers to the 'pen. Hopefully, he'd be groomed for a setup/closer role, and wouldn't be doomed to the dreaded "long reliever" slot where he gets as much opportunity as Livan Hernandez is seeing this season.

If you're used car shopping for a $3000 Honda, and hear a rattle, you may not pay any attention and just pay the $3000. If you're buying a new $700,000 Bentley and hear a rattle, you'll pass on the car. If big market GM's get any hint of an idea that Greinke falters because of his anxiety disorder, at least some of them will have second thoughts about offering him a Hamels-size deal. The last thing any GM wants is to have a Zito-esque contract failure. I still think Greinke will get a big deal, but I'd bet some of the big market GM's are watching how Greinke does in L.A. pretty closely.

First off, PK's list shows how important pre-arby guys are. Trading Greinke and plugging Segura into the SS saved probably $5MM that would've went to pick up another so-so SS. Having a few pre-arby pitchers keeps our payroll down. I've went from worrying that extending Greinke and signing a SS would mean we were going to have to trade Hart and/or Ramirez to feeling that we'll be able to field a decent team with an $80-90MM budget. Going off the list, I'd guess they'll add one SP on a one-year deal at around $10MM (Marcum or another guy trying to rebuild his value). That puts us around $74MM. I'd guess the backup SS will be either Ransom or Bianchi, so $74.5MM. I'd guess we'll add two "setup guys" for around $4-5MM each, with the other bullpen spot going to a prospect, so $83-85MM. Schafer will have one backup OF spot, and the other will go to a $1MM vet. That'd put us around $85MM for payroll, with plenty of room to add payroll if we're competitive around trade deadline. One alternate to this is that I think the Greinke offer will stay on the table, and on the off chance he tests the market and finds out that the Brewer deal is the best one out there, I think the payroll will be in the mid-90's. Another alternate scenario would be to trade Hart for a prospect, putting Aoki in RF and Gamel at 1B. If we did this, we could go into the season with a payroll under $80MM. We'd probably be a little worse in 2013 and would probably be better from 2014-2020.

If someone offers a huge return, trade him this offseason. That probably won't happen, so I'm fine with both Gomez and Schafer on the roster next year. Both will help the team, as Schafer's MLB ready, Gomez will be worth the $3MM or so he'll be paid (even if he fails to hit) and Morgan's likely to be non-tendered. Maybe Gomez would be a good deal at 4/$25, but Schafer would make about 4/$2.5 over the same time frame, and there's a good arguement to be made that he'll be more valueable. Gomez has played his role well in his time here, but he's not a "core" player, so I hope we move on when his contract's up. Either way, I'm glad he's playing every day now. We can see if he's finally "got it," and we can build up his value in case someone wants to bowl Melvin over with a trade offer. I just wish that he & Weeks would swap places in the batting order.

Depends on the GM's who were thinking about making an offer. They're all people, and they'll all have different opinions on things. He'll probably get a monster deal somewhere, but I'd guess some big market GM's will be a little leery if he stinks in his only venture into pitching for a big market team.

I believe the number of games will remain the same, but they'll be spread out over the entire season. Previously, they were all bunched together, so you could call someone up for a couple of weeks if you need someone to DH. JJGott's point is valid in that having a good bat on the bench (which is always important) is now a little more important as it will be harder/less convenient to call someone up to DH in interleague games.