monty57

Well, to be fair, I doubt Melvin gave him a chance as to who his starting SS was from Opening Day, Zaun played every day until he had a season-ending surgery and the roster now has two rookie catchers on it, Hoffman was given a very long leash, and there really wasn't another option when Axford was given a shot. Hawkins and Coffey got hurt, leading to having to pitch rookies in crucial roles. Once they were given the chance, they succeeded, and Macha's method of using extremely small sample sizes to come to an absolute conclusion has led to our current setup. In other words, if Melvin completely eliminates any other option, then Macha will play rookies.

My friend isn't "connected," it's just what he's heard rumored. My response was the similar to yours... it all depends on the return. If we trade him for three months of Cliff Lee, I'm really upset. If we trade him for a equal caliber, equal service time starting pitcher, I'm not so upset. If it's a completely unfounded rumor, than I'm certainly fine with keeping him in our system. I know a lot of what Melvin says is "GM speak," but I really don't want us to be buyers at all this year. I just worry what parts of our future we are willing to give up for 1-2 more wins this year.

I'm with you, Invader... I think he should bring back some good prospects. I was just playing "devil's advocate" as to why Melvin may sometimes play it safe. Even top prospects sometimes flame out. That said, I still hope Melvin opts for the higer upside approach, even if there is more risk involved.

While attendance is probably a concern, I'd guess his bigger worry would be trading for a high-upside AA arm who flames out and never reaches the majors. High risk / high reward. I understand his concern, but right now we have plenty of "decent" options for the starting rotation for years to come, so I would like to see Fielder used to get a potential star. Of course, my job's not on the line, and I don't have to worry about going down in history as having made one of the worst trades in history. Could you imagine if Fielder ends up with 600+ HR and Melvin traded him for a couple of AA guys who never made the majors?

And the even sadder part is a 14-13 month after multiple losing months has our owner and GM saying they'll be buyers this year. I was talking with a friend yesterday who said he's started hearing rumors that Gamel is going to be traded.

Well, there's been some worry that Melvin will want a pitcher who is already "major league proven," which would probably diminish the potential upside in the pitcher in exchange for less downside risk. Personally, I'd rather see them get higher upside potential and more service time, even if it means they won't be in the Brewers' rotation until 2012. Really, at this point we have six pitchers for the five spots in our rotation, so we don't need someone who is in the majors right now. Plus, most playoff bound teams aren't going to give up a good MLB pitcher, since they need them for the playoff push.

C'mon they played at a .750 clip last October :-) They're better than they played earlier this year, but unfortunately they dug themselves into a pretty deep hole.

Bush is making $4MM, which isn't chump change, but a SP with a low-4's ERA is probably worth that. As far as trade value, I don't expect a whole lot, maybe a decent upside A/AA player, which (along with $2MM in salary relief) is more than we'll get when he walks when the season's over. If it weren't for Davis coming back, I wouldn't be in any hurry to trade Bush, as he has been pitching fairly well (as has the rest of our rotation lately). As it stands, we have six SP and five slots. Five of them are under our control next year if we want them (Yo, Wolf, Narveson, Parra and Davis has a team option). One of them is not going to be a part of the future of the team and has some trade value to a team looking for a reliable 4/5 starter (remember, St. Louis is so desparate they signed Suppan). It seems the logical thing to do would be to trade the odd man out... Dave Bush. Instead, we'll put yet another starting pitcher into the bullpen where he probably won't be very effective and will lose all of his trade value. I really hope the silence about the rotation is because Melvin is working on a deal, but I'd guess they're just delaying telling whoever is going to the pen, so as to delay upsetting someone.

Is Gerut still on the team? The last I heard he had some kind of bruise in his foot and I haven't seen any more of him for about two months. It seems he has one of those "injuries" that seem to keep unperforming players on the DL for quite a while. Since Hart started playing everyday, we've basically been playing with 4 OF (3 when Edmonds is injured), using Inglett as a kind of emergency 5th OF. So, really, the Katin vs. Gerut debate is being overdone. It's really a matter of whether Katin, or anyone else, will change our GM & manager's love affair with a 13 man pitching staff. Before the season, I lobbied for a Gerut/Hart platoon in RF, as I thought one of them could have a breakout season, and I thought it was just as likely to be Gerut as it was Hart. Once Edmonds was signed, it was pretty much a death warrent on Gerut getting any PT, and his awful start this year has put him in a situation that he will not be a part of the future of the team. If he were to go to a team where he could start every day, it is possible he could regain his form, as he seemed to be much better when given everyday playing time than he was off the bench. Since this is a thread about Katin, I'll just say that it seems Melvin has something against him, and I'd guess it's his low walk rate. I really can't think of any other reason he wasn't called up last September. Katin does make a lot of sense as a RH batter off the bench and a backup corner OF (where he won't see much PT with Braun & Hart around), but he won't get a shot until we decide to drop a pitcher off the MLB team. With Coffey back, Davis back soon and Hawkins now throwing off a mound, I doubt that will happen any time soon. Katin isn't going to force Braddock or Axford to the minors, and Melvin probably won't DFA someone to get Katin to the majors. My guess is that's why Gerut's "foot injury" has lasted as long as it has and will probably last until the end of the season unless an OF gets traded or hurt. Katin reminds me of Heether... a guy at AAA who does everything to show that he is worthy of a spot on the 25-man, but for some reason doesn't get it with the Brewers. Macha/Melvin don't like rookies in reserve roles, so we'll continually pay $1MM+ to fill these spots while players like Heether and Katin rot away in AAA until they finally get their shot elsewhere.

Bush has had two bad outings this year: May 21 @ MIN, 1/3 inning, 7 runs and April 25 @ Cubs 3.2 IP 9 R, 7 ER Other than that, he's got a 3.07 ERA in his other 12 starts & 1 relief appearance (not including today, where he's currently given up 2 runs in 6 IP). Even with those bad outings, he's got a 4.35 ERA, which isn't terrible. There has to be someone out there who would give us something for him. This is a great oppotrunity to trade an excess commodity to someone in need. If we throw one of these guys in the bullpen, we are only hurting ourselves.

How significant an upgrade is Braddock in middle relief (LOOGY) / Narveson long relief over Narveson middle relief (LOOGY) / Capuano long relief? If service time isn't important, it must be because middle & long relievers aren't that important win-wise, which means there really won't be a significant difference between the two scenarios listed above. If there isn't a significant difference, than why not save a cheap year on Braddock and dump Capuano when the season's over? If you don't value relievers, than I would guess that you would like to save money in the bullpen. You can save money in the bullpen by not throwing away cheap, useful pitchers like Capuano and keeping Braddock cheaper for an extra year.

Corey Hart 2008 Pre All-Star .831 OPS Post All-Star .659 OPS 2007 good all around year boosted significantly by 1.039 OPS in June and 1.022 OPS in September (.762, .798, .768, .879 in other months) 2009 pretty bad all around He's always been streaky, and I still think there's a good chance he'll be below average (sub-.800 OPS) in the second half of the year. Of course, there's also a chance he'll remain above average. The belief that a good half season brings his trade value to the level of "...a team lets the Brewers choose any two pitching prospects from their system..." is probably overstating his value by a significant amount. There are very few players in the league who would command that in trade, and Hart's value isn't up there with the Ryan Braun's of the world. I doubt he (or anyone else on the MLB roster) will get traded this season, as we're probably going to be buyers. I'd guess he'll be shopped in the offseason. Regardless of what he does in the second half of this season, he will get around $7-8MM next year in arby. His history would seem to show that for your $8MM, you will either be way over paying for a .750 OPS player or underpaying for a high-.800 OPS player. There doesn't seem to be an in-between for him, he's all or nothing. Again, if we could get a couple of high upside young arms for him, I'd take it. Of course, I think we're hoping for a miracle if we're shooting for the playoffs this year, so while I'm not into trashing the team to build for 2013-2014, I'm not into giving up the future for extra wins this year. With a few correct moves, we should be competitive next year with or without Hart. We could miss out on a really good year, or we could benefit by not having a bad fielding .750 OPS RF.

So you have no problem with a moderately talented pitcher who is showing some success and may be a starter for the Brewers for the next few years sitting in the bullpen for 2-3 weeks at a time without seeing the field? Next offseason, when we're deciding our 2011 starting rotation, you won't have a problem with the question marks surrounding Narveson, as we won't really know what we have in him? You won't be upset when we have to go out and sign another $7-9MM 35-year-old free agent because Narveson hasn't "proved himself in a starting role?" You won't be upset when we lose a year's service time on Braddock because we decided to jettison a moderately talented Capuano in order to keep Braddock on this year's team (when Braddock has already used his option) rather than simply sending Braddock down? Trading Bush makes all the sense in the world to me, but I doubt it happens. I've defended Melvin all over these boards, but I'm really starting to see what some of the posters are talking about when they say his methodology is designed for a big market team. Are we really going to waste a year's service time for Braddock on this year, when we could have nearly as good of production from Narveson / Capuano? That just doesn't seem like something a well run small/mid market team does. Neither does relegating a young talented starter who you control for a few years to the bullpen in favor of two starters who will walk at the end of the year. Neither does trading away or DFA'ing all of your potential cheap young role players so you have to continually sign aging vets for $1MM+year. We have a lot of talent on this team. However, we dug ourselves in such a hole that we will need everything to play out perfectly in order for us to have any shot at the playoffs this year. In other words, we'd need a miracle. A prudent manager shouldn't operate to the detriment of the future in hopes of a miracle. I've said it before, but if Melvin plays his cards right, we won't need a year wasted on rebuilding. If he continues to try to eke out 1-2 more wins in a losing season, we may need a more serious rebuild in the future.

If Atlanta (or someone else) were willing to give up some high-upside young arms for Hart, I'd definitely do it, but I think JohnBriggs is right. Mark A & Melvin are swinging over to the buyer category. In a perfect situation, Hart would remain a Brewer, help us to the playoffs next year, and leave as a Type A free agent. Personally, I share Invader's concerns over Hart. A few months ago, I thought we'd be giving him up for nothing at the end of this year, and many wanted to DFA him after he won his arby case. If an uber-hot streak (which he's been prone to in his career) can lead to a couple of high-upside pitching prospects, do the deal.

It'll be either Narveson or Parra, who are both pitching well and will be a part of the future of the franchise, leaving Davis and Bush in the rotation, getting starts for the rest of the season and then walking for no compensation at the end of the year. My guess will be Narveson, who will take Braddock's spot as LOOGY, with Braddock going back to AAA. If we dump Capuano so that we can throw Narveson in the "pitch once a month" role that Capuano's currently stuck in, I'll be upset... more for the waste of Narveson than the loss of Capuano.

I like the free nacho idea :-) Again, I'm not against waiting until the offseason to trade him if that is when he will draw the most return. It just seems Melvin has already decided that there is no chance that the most return could occur during the season, so he's kind of told other teams not to bother trying. Maybe he has put the feelers out and is just telling the fans what he thinks they want to hear. Maybe Melvin's into reverse psychology and the quote is trying to get other GM's to call him with a huge offer. I think that the Brewers could easily run a PR campaign that will make the Brewers fans understand the trade. "We sat down in good faith, trying to keep Prince here. His agent, known around the circuit as Satan, said Prince was looking for a $200MM deal." People in Milwaukee aren't dumb. When this same thing happened with Carlos Lee, the fans continued to buy tickets, and they would continue to buy tickets if Prince was traded. Milwuakee just has to make sure they don't look like the late-Selig-era Brewers. I think Boras makes a good target of fan angst, and just like in the Carlos Lee deal, the fans will quickly get over the trade. With that in mind, the main reason the Brewers should trade Fielder will be for the betterment of the franchise. Would it be better to trade him during this season or during the offseason? I don't know the answer, so I would see what is available during the season, and if it's not enough, I'd wait until the offseason. If, however, we're out of the race and some desparate GM backs up the pickup truck and dumps a really good deal on your lap, you have to take the deal.

I agree with Logan on this, and I think the Astros analogy unfortunately could be a good one. All we need is the "make a splash" FA signing this offseason like the Astros did with Carlos Lee, which is crippling them. Even if the prospects we trade only project to be bench players, bullpen arms or 4/5 starters, we will need those players on the team. We continually pay $1MM+ for each of our role players. If we can start filling the role player positions with $400k players, we can have excess money to be used on our everyday players, whether that's through extending young stars, signing FAs or taking on salary in a salary dump trade. Plus, some of these players will outdo expectations, giving us a cheap, homegrown starter Unless things really change, I would look to trade players like Edmonds and Counsell for AA players who could help us in the future rather than trading AA players who could help us in the future for players comparable to Edmonds and Counsell in an effort to eke out another win or two this season. As FVBrewerfan noted, we can trade some of our players without really reducing the talent on the team. For example, we will need to open up a rotation spot when Davis is healthy. We could move Narveson (who's pitching fairly well and under control for a few seasons) to the bullpen and cut Capuano, or we could trade Dave Bush, who's walking after this season anyways. I'm for trading Bush. Another example would be Counsell. Inglett is outplaying him, but only gets limited playing time. We could trade Counsell to a team who is looking for a utility guy who hit pretty well in the recent past, and "has a history of being clutch in big games." Inglett could fill in as the main utility guy, and Cruz could be brought up as a defensive specialist bench player. Example #3: Edmonds has hit alright, but breaks down when played too often, and Macha can't help but start him everyday against RH pitchers. He's hitting well, playing decent defense, and has a name that will draw interest in trade. We could bring up Katin as a much-needed RH bat off the bench and start Gomez on a regular basis to improve our team defense and show us what we have in him for the future. There's more, but I'll stop there. We have excess players, and trading a few of them who will leave at the end of the season seems the prudent move, and doesn't seem to me to be giving up on the season. We can maintain our talent level this year, save money and give playing time to people who have a chance of helping us in the future. Now, if we traded Fielder for minor league pitching, we will have punted this season for next year, but as much as I think Melvin should explore all possible opportunities in a Fielder trade, it appears he has decided that "you get more for a pitcher during the season and more for a position player during the offseason" is an absolute rule, and like the law of gravity it can't be broken. I don't want to come off as a Melvin basher, as I've defended Melvin a lot on this board. It just sounds like he's already warned other GM's that Fielder is basically off the market until the offseason. Maybe I'm misreading the tea leaves.

Of course we can't read Mark A's mind, and of course there is a chance that he's lying to his customers simply to gain additional sales. If I had to bet, I'd say we'll do similar to last season, which is making a few token moves of mid-tier prospects for rent-a-players in order to "stay in the race." The only thing I'm hanging hope on is that barring injury we really don't have any position where a moderate upgrade would make a big difference. That said, I really, really hope we don't do something stupid like trading top prospects for Cliff Lee. If we are to become buyers, I hope it's for someone like Dan Haren, who we would control for a few more years. I still think we could trade a few of our players like Craig Counsell, Dave Bush and Hoffman/Coffey without really diminishing the talent level of the team. Inglett should probably be ahead of Counsell on the depth chart right now, we'll need a spot in the rotation when Davis is back, and our young bullpen pitchers are outdoing the vets. Essentially, we could "sell" and still get better, and the money saved would go a long way towards paying for someone like Haren. The bottom line for me is that we are still a small-to-mid-market team, and as such we cannot continually trade away prospects to "boost ticket sales in August and September," when we are not a true contender. Occasionally, we need to re-stock our minor leagues by trading away players who are in their final year and aren't going to be part of the future. We didn't do it last year, and if we spend prospects to acquire more stopgap solutions again this season, we will seemingly just be delaying the inevitable need to re-stock. I still believe that if Melvin plays his cards right we could be a better team next year than we are this year. If we don't take advantage of some situations, and instead waste some of our chips to gain an extra win or two this season, we could hurt our chances at being competitive next year.

Well, Mark A was in the booth tonight and said his conversations with Melvin lately have mostly been about buying rather than selling, so call me foolish, but I don't think Melvin's trading Fielder this season.

Why do they have to have the money to re-sign him? Why can't it be a team that's in the playoff hunt that wants to upgrade for this season and next, or even a team that will trade for him and then flip him this offseason? - Tampa is falling back (3 games back and in third place now), and they have Pena at 1B, hitting for a .739 OPS. They've got plenty of young talent to put a deal together. - Toronto is 7.5 back, so they may not be big time buyers, but Overbay is hitting for a .697 OPS (that's Bill Hall territory). They've got excess pitching they may be willing to move. - Baltimore could fall into the category of being able to trade for him and sign him long-term to build around their young players - Smoak in Texas is hitting for a .735 OPS. They're tops in their division, and may want to stay there. Smoak's young, so they could trade for Fielder and then move him in the offseason or next trade deadline if they think Smoak is ready - Kendry Morales of the Angels broke his leg celebrating a HR, so they could really use a 1B as they're 4.5 behind Texas. - Oakland is probably not a buyer, although they did just trade for Conner Jackson. Barton is hitting a .794 OPS - Seattle is probably not in the mix, but they are in desparate need of offense and have loads of money. They did just trade for Branyan, but could be an option this offseason. - The Mets are 0.5 games behind Atlanta, with Ike Davis hitting a .794 OPS. Their fans aren't going to be happy if they have a chance to upgrade, pass it up and miss the playoffs. - The Dodgers are 5 games back, with Loney at .778 OPS - Colorado is 6 games back with Helton at .662 OPS. Add some offense to that pitching staff, and they could make a run, especially if San Diego starts to falter. That's just looking at 1B, and not considering the DH in the AL, which could add more teams. As the playoff chase heats up, I'm sure teams would like Fielder on their roster. I hope Melvin's comments don't stop teams from asking. I wish he'd be more proactive about it, instead of sitting on his hands waiting for the phone to ring, but the bottom line is that if the Brewers let it be known that Fielder is on the market for the right price, it wouldn't take them long to find someone who could find a spot for him on their roster.

Maybe so, but then why even bother with Capuano this season? Pitching-wise, he did everything far better than anyone would have expected this year, so why waste the resources simply to showcase him for someone else? He has been unlucky in the sense that as soon as he was ready to start, all of the Brewers' pitchers finally started pitching better. However, you would think that Macha would be able to find an inning here or there to pitch him. If he has to go out and throw now, I have concerns his arm would explode. I guess the "long man" is supposed to be an aging vet who is expendable, and Capuano probably fits that bill, but he was dominant in the minors this year, so we might be wasting talent by not pitching him occasionally. I'm still up for trading Bush. Other GM's know the numbers that YoungGeezy listed (or if they don't, Melvin can let them know). He's a perfect option to be traded to a playoff-hopeful team in need of a 4/5 starter. We need a rotation spot to open up and we aren't getting anything for Bush after this season. Might as well get something for him when Davis is ready.

I agree with Tigerbrew that Bush should be traded, as he's gone after this season anyways, while we have Narveson and Parra for a few more years. What will probably happen is Narveson going to the pen with Braddock going to AAA. Capuano will end up on a missing person's report, as no one will see him for weeks at a time. That's a shame, as he was pitching very well in the minors. I'm sure he's upset with the situation, so he'll sign with someone else next year.

Backupcatchers hit it on the head. The previous owners wanted to build a World Series champion to maximize their selling price. Zambrano openly complained and was going to leave after arby if he didn't get a big contract, and Ramirez had an opt out clause that he tendered right when the Cubs needed him for their run. I kind of equate the Soriano contract to the Ryan Howard contract. Both teams know/knew they had a WS contender, and are/were willing to sign them to a long-term contract in order to have them for the WS run, even though they know/knew the player wouldn't be worth their pay for the final years of the deal. It's not often you have a Championship-caliber team, so both teams were willing to overpay some in hopes of a Championship. A few years ago, when the Cubs were supposed to be the dominant team in the Central, many posters here were discussing how bad some of these players and contracts would be in a few years. I'll just laugh if some of their top prospects are stuck in the minors or traded because there's an albatross contract on the MLB team blocking them. I would put a note of caution on their minor leaguers, however, as they have a history of being over-hyped (Bobby Hill, Felix Pie, Corey Patterson, Hee-Sop Choi to name a few). One thing Cubs GM's have been good at is trading these over-hyped prospects for real MLB talent.

There's a bit of self delusion here, thinking that trading the spare parts on the 25 man roster is going to net great long term gains. Contending teams don't dump top prospects at the break for average veteran talent anymore. No, but Edmonds playing 80% of the time won't show us if Gomez can grow as a player. Starting Bush & Davis won't tell us if Parra and Narveson can be starting pitchers next year. Can Katin hit MLB pitching? Won't know if he spends all year at AAA. Plus, we'll save several million dollars if we can trade some of these guys. However, if we are to trade Fielder or possibly Hart, we could probably get someone who could help as soon as next year. Plus, if Bush is good enough to net us draft picks (making him a Type A or B FA), then we would get something in trade for him. I personally doubt we get any comp picks for him. Even if he were to be Type B (doubtful as I believe it takes two years' data and he had bad numbers last season), we probably wouldn't offer him arby.

What channel? I'm in Chicago for a conference, so I could watch.