monty57

Although their numbers have gotten pretty similar, historically Weeks has been better at getting on base than Hart, while Hart has been more of a slugger. I was pretty low on Hart a couple of years ago, but I think he's pretty underrated these days. Remember that he missed a month this year and still hit 26 HR and has learned how to get on base. Either way, Weeks and Hart are pretty interchangeable in the batting order, whether deciding who will bat leadoff, or if they're in the 3-4-5 spots with Braun. I hold onto hope that they'll find a SS who can bat leadoff, allowing Weeks, Braun and Hart to bat in the middle of the order. I'm less concerned who is 3, 4, and 5 than I am that those three players fill those spots.

The thought of paying a 40+ year old Albert Pujols $25MM+ per year is pretty frightening. Whoever signs that deal had better hope they win the World Series in the next few years to justify the deal, or hope that they have the same "magic water" Tony La Russa serves which allows Pujols to heal from a broken arm in two weeks, and allows every has-been to suddenly find All Star form.

And I think it will lead to bringing a DH to the NL which I am adamantly opposed to. I think that's the biggest point. Personally, I "grew up with" a DH, as the Brewers were an AL team. I've since gotten used to seeing the pitchers hit. I'm sure I'd once again get used to a DH if it was instilled in the NL, but I agree that it would get a lot of arguement from a lot of people. The question baseball will have to deal with is whether or not it would be enough for fans to walk away from the game. Many fans like you are adamantly opposed to the DH, but would you stop watching baseball if the NL instilled the DH rule? One thing that to me seems certain is that the Players Union would not be willing to lose the DH in the AL, as it allows big money contracts to go to players who would otherwise probably have to retire. Therefore, more interleague will probably eventually lead to a DH in both leagues. As it is the NL teams would be at a distinct disadvantage having to play so many more games using a DH True, but if the NL teams know that they will have more interleague games, I'm sure they'll adjust to it. As it stands, there's really not a reason to stash a DH-type guy on the bench or in AAA for 15 or so games, but it may make sense for 30+ games. Astros fans are also almost unanimously angered by this proposal. Houston has always been an NL team, why should they just all of a sudden become an AL team?. Have you seen a trustworthy poll, or is this just your opinion? I was happy to see the Brewers move to the NL, as (1) they were terrible and I thought it might breathe some life into the team and the fans (2) I live amongst a bunch of Cub fans, so I thought the rivalry would be fun. There are probably a decent number of Astros fans who would like to get out of a 6-team division, and who would like a rivalry with the Rangers. They're nowhere close geographically to any of the NL Central teams, so there's not a natural rivalry like WI/IL, where people in each state just naturally hate teams from the other state. Rangers/Astros would be a great rivalry over the years.

Interesting thought to bat Green second, but my guess is that if they don't get a leadoff-type hitter as SS, we'll see Weeks or Hart leading off with Morgan batting second. I'd guess it'd be Weeks, Morgan, Braun, Hart, Gamel/Green, Lucroy/SS, Gamel/Green, Lucroy/SS. Ideally, we'd get a leadoff hitter, allowing Weeks, Braun and Hart to hit in the middle of the lineup. I hope that they at least kick the tires on Furcal. He's a great defender and has been a leadoff hitter for his career, although his hitting has been pretty bad lately. Plus, St Louis wants him back, so we'd send them scrambling for a plan B if we signed Furcal.

If they were to get him, I'd guess they'd keep Lucroy and either Maldonado or Kottaras. Roenicke likes to use his 2nd catcher, so having someone like Doumit who can be a third option at Catcher wouldn't be a bad thing. However, if he already turned down a $3MM deal, I doubt he's a Brewer in 2012 unless the offers completely dry up and Melvin is able to snag him just prior to Spring Training.

A poster in another thread linked to a Melvin quote which said we aren't going to spend $3MM on a utility guy (referencing Hairston) who is not going to play everyday. Unless Figgins is going to be the everyday SS, I don't think he's an option.

Gindl's just a possibility. Melvin's history has been to find a veteran for around $700-800k for the 5th OF role. If the Brewers are playing with a tight payroll, they may decide to save a few hundred thousand, and fill the 5th OF from in-house. If they do, I'd prefer Gindl to Schafer, as I think Schafer has the higher upside and I'd rather see him start the year in AAA playing everyday. Plus, we've already got Morgan & Gomez, so Schafer's ability to play CF isn't that important for the Brewers to start the 2012 season. If I had to bet, I'd say Melvin will find a cheap vet... I just don't have any idea who, so I put "Gindl?" in the parenthesis as a possibility. I'd say that Hairston and Gindl or a random $700k vet corner OF have a good chance of being better than Counsell / Kotsay, so if they're around the same price, I'll take Hairston/vet OF. That's not trying to knock Kotsay, just saying that his timely hits for us this year allowed him to get $1.25MM from the Pads, and we could probably get similar 2012 results from a "random vet." Meanwhile, Hairston at around $2MM should bring far more than Counsell brought us for $1.5MM last year. Melvin said that with our payroll we aren't going to pay $3MM for a bench guy this year, so we have some idea as to what he's offering Hairston. I'd guess our whole bench will make around $6MM this year, our free cash will go to SS & the bullpen and Gamel & Green will start.

Good. The Brewers need to spend their free cash on a starting SS and restocking the bullpen. The Brewers are probably offering Hairston around 2 yr/$4MM, and I'm sure he'll test the market to see if he can get a better deal. I hope he comes back, but not if the price is too high. If the $3MM price tag that's been floated around is true, Melvin's statement could very well signal the end of Casey McGehee as a Brewer. If they can find a lefty-mashing RH 1B/3B to go along with either Hairston or a utility guy who can play good defense and either Gindl or a cheap vet 5th OF, I'll be fine with the bench. No need to spend a lot of money on the bench when your regulars should play nearly everyday and guys with one skill (RH bat who can hit lefties) should be fairly inexpensive. With a limited budget, you have to cut somewhere, and I'd rather have a good starting SS than an expensive backup.

There are so many variables at work that we can only guess as to what the roster will look like in 2013. Really, the chance of any potential option we look at now occuring two years from now is miniscule, but we're all just speculating here. I do have some faith in Melvin, that he's at least cognizant of when we have contracts expiring and isn't going to turn a blind eye and say "boy, I hope things work out okay." First, we have a lot of pitchers coming up through the ranks, and some of them will work out to become MLB starters over the coming years. Thankfully, that will get us to the point that we don't need to keep signing or trading for our entire MLB rotation. I would be surprised if he doesn't at least try to extend Greinke, which would give us two "top of the rotation" starters for the next several years, plus Narveson if we want to keep starting him over our other options. Just extending Greinke would probably allow for us to work in our rookies without the need to make a big trade or FA acquisition for another starter, but that option exists if the rookies don't work out. If Greinke doesn't extend, then I'd guess at least one of Wolf, Greinke or Marcum will be traded this offseason for near-MLB-ready prospects, starting a rookie as our #5, along we a quick trigger on trading the other two mid-season. I'm hopeful for a playoff run this year, but am realistic enough to understand that losing Fielder and our bullpen arms will hurt us, so it is possible we are sellers mid-season. I'd rather take a probable small downgrade this season if it means a probable big upgrade in the future. As Briggs has stated, even if we are in the playoff hunt and don't trade away any of our starters, we would have loads of money coming off the books at season end. Lots of free cash leads to lots of options to upgrade the team. We could try the FA market, but it also opens the option to pick up salary in a trade. Oftentimes, you can get vets for almost nothing in terms of talent going back, as long as you are willing to pick up the contract. There are a lot of options available, but I don't think blowing up the team is a likely one... they've worked to hard to build up their revenue stream to take the risk of losing it all in one fell swoop.

Only three "rivalry" games (Mets-Yankees, Cubs-White Sox, etc.) every season instead of six. I understand why baseball wants these "rivalries," as they make more TV money from these games. However, they lead to one team in a division having to play a good rival, while another team in the division has to play a bad rival. The Cardinals' rival is the Royals, so they've had an advantage by getting six games a year against them. I'd certainly like to play the Orioles every year while my division rivals got the Yankees, Red Sox and Rays.

Not really sure how he makes any sense for a team like the Padres who aren't likely to be competitive this year. If used correctly, I could see how a rebuilding team would like to have a "good clubhouse" veteran to help the younger players. As long as he's not regularly being started (or pinch hitting) in front of better, younger players, he could have value.

If we can re-sign Hairston, there's a possibility we could actually have a decent bench this year. Hairston, Morgan/Gomez, RH corner IF (McGehee or other), 5th OF (Gindl?), Kottaras/Maldonado. Plus, if Gamel is starting at 1B, and we're not paying millions to Counsell and Kotsay (and possibly McGehee), we should have some money to upgrade SS and the 'pen. Thanks for your time here Craig, but it's definitely time for the Brewers to move on.

I think there's a better chance the 5th OF could be a Schafer or Gindl I hope Gindl or Schafer gets a chance at his job. If the Brewers go with one of their minor leaguers, I hope it's Gindl. I think Schafer will be the everyday CF of the future, once he proves he can stay healthy, so I don't want to see him riding the pines. Gindl probably projects as a 4th OF, so I wouldn't mind seeing him get the backup OF job.

Monty57, I think there are a good amount of people who care about a chance to see some AL teams. I think I have been misunderstood. By "no one cares if..." I mean it's taken for granted in other sports that interleague play happens, and no one is opposed to it. When the Packers play the Chargers, we don't see a bunch of "traditionalists" screaming that the Packers should only play other NFC teams. For some reason, there is opposition when it comes to baseball, as if somehow baseball is tainted if an NL team plays an AL team at any point other than the World Series. I'm all for much more interleague play, and think baseball and the fans will benefit from it.

I was luck enough to have tickets behind the Lakers bench during a Bucks-Lakers game during the Kobe-Shaq era. 1) It was awesome....you don't realize how enormous Shaq is until you're 10 feet away from him. Basketball is a different environment, but I wouldn't want to deprive a young fan of seeing these superstars. 2) I guarantee that the Bucks sold more tickets for that game than they did playing "conference foes" like Atlanta, Toronto and Cleveland (this was pre-LeBron). I agree. In other major sports, it's taken for granted that teams will play interleague games all the time. For some reason, people think that an NL team playing an AL team early or late in the season will be a huge disruption. They need to figure out what they're going to do with the DH, but other than that, who cares if the Brewers are playing the Braves or if the Brewers are playing the Orioles? I generally only watch Brewer games, so I barely know the players in the AL. It would be fun to see them play more teams. I used to argue for the DH when the Brewers were in the AL and that's what I was used to watching. Now I'm used to watching NL ball, and I like the pitcher hitting. I'm sure that if they decide one way or the other (for or against the DH for all teams), the world will continue to spin and life will go on. If I had to bet, I'd say the DH would win out, as the Players Union wouldn't allow it to go away. It would take me a while to get back used to seeing a DH in the lineup, but I'd still cheer for the Brewers, DH and all.

Almost every organization have a guy or two just like this, especially at a corner spot. But the Brewers are one of those teams that don't have a guy like this, so whether it's this guy or some other RH bat who can hit lefties, it's worth exploring.

No one cares if the Packers play the Chargers on opening day. No one cares if the Bucks play the Lakers. Other than the DH, why does it matter if NL teams play against AL teams on a regular basis?

I think every deal signed has impacts on all future deals signed, as the teams and agents are looking for "comps." Boras is surely licking his chops that a guy with similar numbers and a year of arbitration just signed a big deal. I expect someone will give Prince more than $20MM/year, and I think Boras/Fielder will try to get someone to sign an 8-year deal. Someone will bite, and for 8 years / $184MM, I hope the Brewers stay far, far away.

I can't believe we'll start this season with only 1 SP signed past 2012. To be fair, we have Yo and Narveson signed past 2012, and an option on Wolf for 2013. But I do agree with your premise. I highly doubt we will let most of our rotation walk in the same offseason. We'll extend and/or trade some of them before that happens. Honestly, this would be easier if we thought we were going to be bad this season, as we have a number of guys who could bring back a lot in trade. Of course, that's probably why we're not going to stink this year.

I think the taxes are more complicated for "entertainers." Whereas "normal people" can conduct business out-of-state and not have to pay income tax in the non-resident state, states all saw how much money they weren't able to grab as musicians played in-state or visiting teams constituted 1/2 the players on the field, so they created a law where the entertainers have to pay taxes based on income made while in each state. Therefore, when the Yankees come to town, Wisconsin makes more money than they do when any other team visits. If this is indeed the case, then tax-wise it would be beneficial to play as many games as possible in non-state-tax states like Florida and Texas. Of course, I'm not an accountant, so I may be way off.

I think the taxes are more complicated for "entertainers." Whereas "normal people" can conduct business out-of-state and not have to pay income tax in the non-resident state, states all saw how much money they weren't able to grab as musicians played in-state or visiting teams constituted 1/2 the players on the field, so they created a law where the entertainers have to pay taxes based on income made while in each state. Therefore, when the Yankees come to town, Wisconsin makes more money than they do when any other team visits. If this is indeed the case, then tax-wise it would be beneficial to play as many games as possible in non-state-tax states like Florida and Texas. Of course, I'm not an accountant, so I may be way off.

I think the taxes are more complicated for "entertainers." Whereas "normal people" can conduct business out-of-state and not have to pay income tax in the non-resident state, states all saw how much money they weren't able to grab as musicians played in-state or visiting teams constituted 1/2 the players on the field, so they created a law where the entertainers have to pay taxes based on income made while in each state. Therefore, when the Yankees come to town, Wisconsin makes more money than they do when any other team visits. If this is indeed the case, then tax-wise it would be beneficial to play as many games as possible in non-state-tax states like Florida and Texas. Of course, I'm not an accountant, so I may be way off.

They may end up with Reyes but it won't be before he checks in with all the suitors unless they've completely put up a ridiculous over-market amount of money. Or Reyes really wants to play in Miami. I agree that it's likely premature to say a deal's nearly done, and all three of the players will likely shop their wares for the best bid, but we don't know what will be the deciding factors in where the players end up. We didn't get Randy Johnson a few years ago because we satisfied some of his requirements, but weren't on the West Coast. Meanwhile, Marcum was happy to come to Milwaukee, because he's from the Midwest. Maybe Reyes has a lot of family in Miami and would jump at the opportunity to play there. Who knows?

They may end up with Reyes but it won't be before he checks in with all the suitors unless they've completely put up a ridiculous over-market amount of money. Or Reyes really wants to play in Miami. I agree that it's likely premature to say a deal's nearly done, and all three of the players will likely shop their wares for the best bid, but we don't know what will be the deciding factors in where the players end up. We didn't get Randy Johnson a few years ago because we satisfied some of his requirements, but weren't on the West Coast. Meanwhile, Marcum was happy to come to Milwaukee, because he's from the Midwest. Maybe Reyes has a lot of family in Miami and would jump at the opportunity to play there. Who knows?

They may end up with Reyes but it won't be before he checks in with all the suitors unless they've completely put up a ridiculous over-market amount of money. Or Reyes really wants to play in Miami. I agree that it's likely premature to say a deal's nearly done, and all three of the players will likely shop their wares for the best bid, but we don't know what will be the deciding factors in where the players end up. We didn't get Randy Johnson a few years ago because we satisfied some of his requirements, but weren't on the West Coast. Meanwhile, Marcum was happy to come to Milwaukee, because he's from the Midwest. Maybe Reyes has a lot of family in Miami and would jump at the opportunity to play there. Who knows?