monty57

I would certainly trade them Wil Nieves, just to see him off our roster. If we could get anything in return, that would just be a bonus. Too bad about Posey, I hate to see anyone hurt, particularly a talented player.

By straight platoon, I mean Gomez vs LHP, Morgan vs RHP, with Gomez occasionally getting a start vs RHP, usually when either Hart or Braun needs a day off with Morgan in RF/LF. I would use "soft platoon" to mean roughly 50/50 playing time.

Straight platoon seems like the best idea to me, and hopefully Roenicke is going to do that. I would also use Morgan / Gomez together in the OF on the days Hart or Braun need a rest, but I'm sure Roenicke will use Kotsay for this. Batting order will be another issue. I'd guess Roenicke will put the Gomez/Morgan platoon in the #2 hole with Hart batting 6/7

We better not ever need more than a single from a pinch hitter. Seeing as how none of those guys can hit over .250, I wouldn't even count on many singles.

I think he's primarily there as a player they could afford to lose if forced to take someone off the 40-man. I'm hoping that Rivera was added so that Nieves could be DFA'd when Morgan's back. That would open a 40-man spot, but I've kind of given up hope on Katin. I've watched for years now as Katin keeps putting up numbers and Melvin keeps passing him over, even as we seem to have a perpetual need for a RH bat and a power bat off the bench. I'll be happy if it ever happens, but I won't believe it until I see it.

Too bad with everything he's been through to finally start realizing his potential and then have this injury. Hopefully he can fully recover in the future.

It's my belief that Nieves made the team because Roenicke wants a veteran backup to his young starter. The day after he was hired, Roenicke stated this, and the next day Nieves was signed. Other than that, there's really no reason Nieves should have a job, as he's pretty useless. I hope they've finally realized this, and once Morgan's back they will keep Rivera (who also has a "veteran presence") on the roster and send Nieves packing. I think/hope that they are keeping Kottaras in the minors to work on his defense. Offensively he is the best option for a backup, but I think his defense needs work. Maybe a season in AAA as a starter will allow him to be a very capable backup to Lucroy for the next few seasons. As bjkrautk pointed out, we don't have any better bats to bring up right now, so until Morgan's back, Rivera makes sense as a RH bench bat. Once Nieves is (hopefully) let go, it will free up a 40-man spot. If Almonte learns how to catch a ball without having it hit him in the face (it just happened again a few days ago), then he can come off the DL and we can dump him, opening up another 40-man spot. I don't believe they can cut him while he's injured and they'd have to pay him all season if they 60-day him, so the Brewers are probably trying to hold out until he's healthy to DFA him.

ESPN offered a productive out stat a few years ago. They pulled it back when it was discovered that the teams who led in so-called "productive outs" scored the fewest runs and lost the most games. There is probably a lot of other proof, but this doesn't prove anything as there isn't really a direct correlation to total runs scored by a team and who has the most "productive outs." First, the difference in numbers between the team with the most and least "productive outs" is probably minimal. Second, the teams with the most "productive outs" probably have them because the manager knows they have a terrible offense and have to do anything possible to score a run, as opposed to a team with players up & down the lineup who are capable of producing offense, which can score loads of runs without utilizing any "productive outs." Finally, the teams with the most bunts would obviously be NL teams, as the pitchers hit. NL teams naturally score less than AL teams because of this, so of course most of the teams with the most bunts would be the ones who score the least. Using only this line of reasoning, it would be safe to assume that moving from the AL to the NL causes a player to become worse, because their new team scores less runs. This obviously isn't logical, so the ESPN arguement doesn't really hold water. I don't study the SABR models like many here do, but from the little research I've done it appears most are certainly macro models. As far as "productive outs," I think you need to look micro in addition to macro, as things like who the batter, pitcher and baserunner are, and the game situation make "playing for a productive out" more or less desireable. If every player on the field were exactly average, and every situation was the same, then the numbers should add up the way the macro charts show. However, I'd argue that it is almost never a good idea for someone like Prince to bunt, but none out, runner on 2B with a .200 OBP guy up in a tie game in the bottom of the 10th, and the other team's All Star closer on the mound, and I'd say it's probably wise to bunt. Another thing that's always concerned me with the Run Probability charts (since they are used to determine if "productive outs" are indeed productive) is that they appear to compare stats against themselves. In other words, if a runner is on 1B with no outs, and he is moved to 2B with a bunt, and then he goes on to score, this will be seen as a runner scoring from 1B with no outs and a runner scoring from 2B with one out. The positive effect would then be negated, since it is counted in both numbers. Again, I haven't studied these much, so if I'm incorrect in this, please let me know.

No one really knows what Texas promised Cruz and his agent, so it's probably not good to call someone stupid for a decision he made when all the facts aren't on the table. Maybe the Rangers said that he would be their first call up for a bench spot. While I'm sure he'd like to be a starter, if reality has set in, he probably realizes that his best bet is to find a team that can use a backup utility IF. If he can find that job, his salary goes from AAA to MLB minimum, and once he's a "proven MLB guy," he could find a bench role for years. I never liked him as a Brewers starter, but since he was the only "Plan B" option we had this offseason, I sure wanted the team to hang onto him. If he wants back and we can get him for virtually nothing, then I'm for it. Whether it's Cruz or someone else, I sure hope we do something to get someone else in the organization who can play SS. Right now, if Yuni gets hurt we're in bad shape.

BUC, what got me from the quotes was that Roenicke seems to have decided that Hart wasn't someone he wants playing regularly from seeing him in Spring Training over the past few years when he was a coach with the Angels. I know this is just a post-game interview, and coaches say a lot of things, but that is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard a manager say. If he had said "I watched the Brewers' playoff run in 2008, and Hart looked lost," I could empathize. Maybe he could say "Hart looked great the first half of last sesaon, but fell of in the second half." But making that decision based on a hadful of Spring Training ABs from a couple years ago? We will now play a less talented player because Hart swung at a bad slider in March 2007. I've stuck up for Kotsay more than most, but if Kotsay plays at his best, like he did in Atlanta, he could probably post a .750-ish OPS. If Hart plays at his worst, like he did in 2009, he's around a .750-ish OPS player. Barring injury, the odds that Kotsay could outperform Hart over any significant period are probably 5-10%. Something doesn't jibe when Roenicke stands by Kotsay yet says Hart is a guy he "doesn't want out there nine innings every day." This statement was made after a game in which Hart hit 3 HR and had 7 RBI. I certainly could be jumping the gun, but boy was that a dumb comment by Roenicke. Plus, all the ums and ers make it sound like he was really trying to be tactful and not say something more demeaning towards Hart.

This thread makes me think of the game "Would you rather..." where you get two really bad options and have to decide which you'd rather do. Would you rather eat a scab-filled sandwich or a dead mouse you found in the cupboard? Which one is Yuni and which is Punto? Neither is a good option for an everyday SS. Since there weren't really any better options out there, I can't be too upset that Melvin went with the scab-filled sandwich. I do wish we had some kind of a "Plan B," and I hope something better comes along at trade deadline.

I can not understand the fascination with Kotsay that RR has, it's very distrubing. I have to wonder about his ability to read talent at all. He thinks Hart is a guy he "doesn't want out there nine innings every day," yet he continually put Green on the mound with the game on the line. The first thing he wanted when he came over was a veteran catcher, and apparently the talentless Nieves was A-OK with him. Morgan was only a defensive replacement behind Kotsay and Almonte until he just kept hitting, forcing Roenicke's hand. He starts Kotsay in CF over Boggs. I've really tried to give him a long leash, and make excuses as to why some things are going on, as I really want to like a Brewers manager. Gomez at #2, well, he really didn't have many other options. Morgan riding the pines, well, he's said he's going to start him more. Lucroy batting #8, well, maybe he thinks that as a young catcher he doesn't want to put much pressure on him. Green getting so many appearances, well, maybe other 'pen members are hurting or can't go. Kotsay getting so much PT, well, he is getting on base a lot and hasn't tripped over himself in the field. These things are starting to add up, and it's really looking more & more like he's really just in over his head. The players seem to like him (at least that's what they're telling the cameras), so maybe he's a real nice guy and would be fun to have a beer with, but he's continuing to make some managerial decisions that are awfully questionable.

I responded to the link in the other thread, so I won't repeat myself, but the Roenicke quote you linked to makes me feel a lot of emotions, and none of them are good... sad, mad, confused. If I'm hearing him correctly, because he saw Hart play a few games against the Angels in ST over the past few seasons when he was a coach there, he's decided that Hart is not an everyday player. How does that even remotely make sense?

I've said a number of times that Hart is "All or nothing." However, his "nothing" is probably about equivalent to Kotsay's "all," whereas Hart's "all" is All-Star caliber and Kotsay's "nothing" really is nothing. Hart may be frustrating, but there is no way that he shouldn't be starting every day. When the excuse was that he missed out on Spring Training, I didn't like it, but I could understand it. If Roenicke really thinks he's a guy that he "doesn't want out there nine innings every day," I don't think Roenicke's long for Milwaukee. Not only do I think he's easily the best available option, Melvin decided to extend him, so obviously Melvin sees him as the best available option. He certainly needs to play every day, and I'd have to believe that Melvin will step in at some point if Hart doesn't start playing more.

Congrats to Marcum!!! Certainly well deserved. However, this leads me to ask... would we have been better off trading Fielder for Hudson and others last season when it was reportedly on the table? Assuming the Marcum trade still would have happened, we'd have Yo, Marcum, Hudson, Wolf, Narveson, still retaining Cain, Escobar, Jeffress and Odorizzi. Just a thought when I saw the two names together. We certainly won't know the answer until we see how all the players' careers turn out.

If we are going to talk about reality then this thread is probably done on page one. Branyan isn't likely to get signed. As it would if people like me would stop trying to find something good about schmoes like Kotsay. I guess I just hope he plays like he did for Altanta and not like he did for Boston. The high, high end of Kotsay's potential is probably the low end of Hart's, at around a .750 OPS (although Kotsay's would be more OBP driven). The low end of Kotsay's potential is certainly well below replacement level. Now that Hart hit three HR in a game, maybe Roenicke will decide Hart is no longer "in Spring Training," and we will see less and less of Kotsay. Then Morgan will come back, and we'll only see Kotsay a couple times a week. As far as Branyan goes, if he is healthy, and if we could get him for a cheap price, he could help the team. The negatives I see are: (1) There's a chance that Boggs will leave the organization, but since he keeps getting cut and no one claims him, I think I'm probably higher on Boggs than most people in baseball are, so losing him probably wouldn't be that big a deal. (2) Counsell, Branyan, Kotsay, Gomez/Morgan and the backup catcher really don't give us much defensive flexibility or protection against injury, which leads us to... (3) The opportunity cost... if we are looking to upgrade our bench, would we be better off passing on Branyan and finding someone at another position, like SS. This would be predicated on the assumption that we'd only be able to make one move, which may or may not be a valid asumption. If Melvin is willing to give up Boggs, Kotsay and Nieves or Rivera, then signing Branyan may be a possibilty. We could go with the bench in #2 above and look to grab a SS/2B when/if one becomes available. If Melvin is not willing to give up Boggs, Kotsay and Nieves or Rivera, then I think we'll pass on Branyan and wait for the SS/2B to become available.

Sure there was some hyperbole, but can you honestly say that you're being objective about Kotsay? First, if Branyan were to be signed, Nieves or Rivera would be gone, and Boggs would certainly be the one to go when Morgan returned, not Kotsay. I said early on in Page 1 that ideally Kotsay should be the one to go, but in the real world, it's not going to happen. Even though this seems to be a certainty, this has essentially turned into another thread bashing Kotsay. It gets a little tedious when every thread seems to turn to the same subject, so even though I agree on most points, I just decided to question whether those bashing Kotsay were being objective. I just asked a simple question as to whether there may be a reason Kotsay's numbers have been what they were, and you seemed to take it personally. I've posted a couple of times why I think that just maybe we can expect a little more than the ZIPS projections going forward, and how maybe he isn't as bad as some are making out. I've also mentioned that a 4th/5th OF who can get on base, even if he doesn't have power, has value to this team, which is made up of plenty of guys with power. That's it. Maybe I'm being naive, but there must be a reason Melvin likes Kotsay. Maybe there's something he knows which isn't public knowledge, and maybe there's something other than SABR projections that can help evaluate a player's worth to the team. Branyan has been a better hitter than Kotsay for most of his career, but I have no idea if he's injured, or if there is some other reason he was let go other then a bad start to the year. Regardless, Boggs will very likely be the odd man out, so as I & others have said, the real question is whether having Branyan on the bench for the remainder of the year is better for the team than simply holding onto Boggs. Continuing to say why Kotsay should be replaced is about as useful as banging your head against the wall.

if someone for example thinks SLG is exactly as important as OBP it isn't a matter of discussion because they are simply wrong. Just for sake of arguement, lets look at extremes. Your statement would imply that someone who in 600 AB, gets 300 singles for a line of .500 BA / .500 OBP / .500 SLG / 1.000 OPS would be much more beneficial to the team than a player who hits 120 HR in those 600 AB for a line of .200 BA / .200 OBP / .800 SLG / 1.000 OPS? Neither a .500 hitter nor a 120 HR hitter are very likely, but it would seem on the surface that the guy who hit 125 HR would be more valueable. Even though he got out 80% of the time, he scored/drove in at least one run in 20% of his ABs, whereas the .500 OBP guy probably knocked in runners sometimes and probably scored some runs, but theoretically could have simply been stranded on first 300 times with no RBI. Your statement I quoted seems that you are very certain of your position. I've not studied these findings, so please explain to me how it is absolutely certain that the .500 avg/OBP guy is 1.7x as valuable as the guy who hits 125 HR.

Thank you Russ. I was in the group that didn't want Kotsay signed, and am in the group which feels he should be replaced if a reasonable replacement presents itself. Even though I don't necessarily like him, I find myself defending him against the onslaught of posts that make Kotsay out to be the worst player to ever don a uniform. The "role" to which I referred was that of backup outfielder forced into additional PT by injuries to Hart & Morgan. When one of your projected stars (Hart) gets hurt, you can generally only hope that his replacement will not completely flame out... I don't think Kotsay has completely flamed out. In "defending" him, I noticed that he's had a couple of periods (2007 OAK & time in BOS) where he was abyssmally bad, which makes me think that there is a distinct possibility that something was wrong with him during that time (aka injury or off-field issues). This is something I will likely never know, but it is something Melvin should know if he took the step of asking a couple questions before signing the contract. IF this is the case, then MAYBE we can expect a little more than the projections would otherwise call for. Certainly not Braun, but not Pee-Wee Herman either. To your final point, do the SABR stats take into account correlation among players? i.e. the Brewers have a lot of high-SLG players, so it would seem logical that the addition of a high-OBP player would have greater positive effect for them than the same player may have if added to a team made up of low-SLG/high-OBP players.

The last news I heard on Parra was that he was going in for a second opinion, and that there was a possibility of Tommy John surgery, so we may need him. Herrara's stats from 2008-2010 vs LHP (155 AB): .206 BA, .270 OBP, .284 SLG, .554 OPS, 35 K, 13 BB. During that stretch, righties hit him for a .952 OPS in 199 AB. Unless he was facing Pujols every time, I think this means that he should not be used against righties, but as a LOOGY, he looks to be pretty good.

No they are not. You said yourself they are using 340 games. Who cares if it isn't enough PA for a full time player, besides you? It is plenty of PA to get a really good feel for how he should be expected to perform. Between 2008-2011 that is very close to 1000 PA. Plenty to get a good feel for a player. If you disagree start adding previous years in. You can still add in the roughly 1300 PA from 2005-2007 and you get the same picture. He is a bad hitter. I never said he was good. What I said is that if he were playing through an injury for 100 or so of his 340 games, that it could significantly skew the numbers. I don't know if he was injured or not, but I will note that in Logan's book, if 1/3 of the data in a survey (which already contains a relatively small sample set) is potentially flawed, there is no possibility that it will effect the outcome of said survey. Forgive me for being so Renaissance as to ask a question about a data set which appears to me to have some odd fluctuations which may or may not have a reasonable explanation.

Yes they are. They are taking 340 games over the past four years and saying they have four years' worth of data. Four years' worth of data is closer to 648 games. As I stated in the same post you quoted from, "When you are only using 340 games over a period of four seasons, one or two stretches where someone is playing with an injury, could very well lead to greatly decreased numbers, and the projections would be way off." Do you disagree with this premise? The first thing that went when this happened was his ability to hit LHP As is evidenced by the 245 PA he's had in the last 700 games he's played. But no one is "splitting out hitting stats" but me. Now, I'll agree that he's not a good player. I'll agree he has a hard time hitting lefties. I'll agree he has a hard time hitting righties. I'll agree that he is not a good defender. Could anyone else agree that when you only have 340 games worth of data over a four year period that any projections you make off of that data will have a huge standard deviation? Is it possible that there was an extenuating circumstance or two which led the stats to be worse than they should have been, and if so, wouldn't the projections necessarily be skewed negatively? Kotsay has not been our problem this year. He has filled his role fairly well. Teach Prince how to throw the ball, as his poor throws home have cost us more games than Kotsay has cost us this season. Tell Morgan how to bunt, as his broken finger matched with Gomez's "close your eyes and swing" hitting style are the reasons Roenicke has to choose between Kotsay and journeyman Boggs for the backup CF. There are plenty of things to worry about instead of turning every thread into a why-Kotsay-is-the-center-of-all-that-is-wrong thread.

Definitely interesting, but I would rather save the money by using Gamel as the 1B, so that we could use it on more pressing needs, like upgrading SS and / or CF and extending Marcum and / or Greinke. If we were to trade Corey Hart and move Gamel to RF, then I guess it could be a possibility. Use "Hart's money" to pay Ortiz, and "Prince's money" to upgrade SS/CF. If we signed Ortiz for one year, then Gamel could patrol RF until one of the minor leaguers took over, and Gamel moved to 1B. Because of the makeup of the team, I doubt Ortiz is an option, but if he really wants to play close to Appleton, and he were able to play a passable 1B, I'm sure they could figure something out.

If Kotsay were used on the bench solely for pinch hitting against righties, I don't think we'd have the outcry against him that we are seeing. I do. Look at the threads from the offseason when he was signed. That was before Hart was hurt. I agree that Kotsay is bad, but as I wrote in the other Mark Kotsay thread (this thread seems to be about him more than Branyan), he was terrible in the 56 games he played in Oakland in 2007, after a decent 2006. He was also terrible in the 49 games he played in Boston after a good stint in Atlanta. After leaving Boaton, he was pretty good for the White Sox for the end of 2009 and had a down year with them last year. Rather than simply aggregating all these stats into one easy-to-read ball (as is the preferred method of the SABR crowd), I just ask if there was a reason other then "he sucks" to determine why he had a terrible year (56 games) in OAK in 2007 and why he was bad in Boston. Was he hurt? Did he have a sick family member? Did something else contribute to these two stretches that caused his numbers to be down? They clearly have a big effect on his numbers in recent years, and maybe rather than just looking at his numbers and arguing that "the numbers don't lie," someone like Melvin who has access to inside information we'll never see should inquire as to what caused these massive downswings and if they are likely to recur. When you are only using 340 games over a period of four seasons, one or two stretches where someone is playing with an injury, could very well lead to greatly decreased numbers, and the projections would be way off. That is, unless we are expecting that player to play through the same injuries this season, which doesn't seem logical. As to his defense, he was a DH for most of the past few years because he had better defenders on the team in front of him. Most anyone with sporadic PT in the field is going to look worse than they probably should. He's lost some steps, but he isn't the worst defender in baseball, as some would suggest. He would certainly play corner OF better than Branyan. However, as I mentioned in an earlier post, if we were to sign Branyan, it wouldn't be to replace Kotsay. The first move would be to replace Nieves/Rivera. Then, when Morgan is healthy, we'd need to determine if we would replace Boggs or if we'd finally drop the 13th pitcher and go with a more normal (for any tema outside of Milwaukee) 12-man staff.

Ideally, Branyan could be signed, replace Wil Nieves and Morgan would replace Kotsay when he returns. Since Kotsay is not going anywhere, the question really is whether signing Branyan for this season is worth losing Boggs, as you'd think one of these times Boggs would leave the organization after being DFA'd. Boggs brings better defense, is a switch hitter, and has shown promise in the minors. Branyan brings a good, proven power bat off the bench.