monty57

Parra or Narveson, I don't care, as both of them are better options than Suppan. My only worry now is that we've gone from three lefties in the pen to one. It's assured now that Parra will be the LOOGY, and will not be ready when it comes time for him to be called back to the rotation. Get rid of Suppan, bring Stetter up to be the LOOGY, and let Parra be an effective multi-inning middle reliever / long man. Days like today, where the Cubs were up nine runs in the 4th, Parra could come in and pitch 4-5 innings and stay stretched out.

Also probably the same reason that the Brewers basically did squat at the trading deadline last year. Not to change the topic, but I think one of Melvin's big mistakes was not being a "seller" last year, when we could have traded Cameron, Hoffman, Looper, Kendall, Counsell, etc and added some pieces for the future. In one of the first times in Brewerfan.net history, I think everyone on the board agrees on something... Suppan should not be starting for the Milwaukee Brewers. Personally, I'd like to see him off the team and replaced by Stetter, who would do more to help the team. If we have to take baby steps and move him to the bullpen before we release him, it's still better than seeing him start. Parra looks good so far, and having a young, inexpensive lefty with a mid-90's fastball in the rotation could go a long way towards helping us this year and in the future. Of course, Macha would be in a zim-zam trying to figure out how to split up three lefties in the rotation.

Mr. Southpaw, I agree with you on how this relates in "real life" but not in baseball. In "real life," it was great for Best Buy that Circuit City went out of business. People still need to buy TVs, so Best Buy gets more customers. In baseball, what do the Yankees do when they've beaten their competition into submission so that they have to go out of business? Nothing, it can't happen. All of the teams are part of the same organization, the MLB. Since owners each own a team rather than 1/30 share of the MLB, this little fact has been forgotten. In "real life," if half of your competition ceased to exist, you'd make a lot more money. In baseball, if half the teams ceased to exist, the remaining teams would make a lot less money. The "big market" teams rely on the "small market" teams and vice versa. That said, making things competitive will not become an issue unless the owners can unite to make it happen. The only way this happens is if overall revenues drop. The biggest way overall revenues will drop is if the fans stop coming out in record numbers. Big market fans aren't going to stop coming, as the unfair system means their teams are always in the playoff hunt, which is why the system isn't likely to change... by definition, the most fans live in the big markets, so revenues for MLB are up when big markets get an unfair advantage. If small market fans got frustrated enough that they completely stop going to (or even watching) games, then theoretically the small market teams would fail, ending MLB as we know it and therefore ending the large revenues for big market teams. However, even small market teams are making money (due to smaller payrolls), so they're not going out of business, and even if they were, some other city would spend massive amounts of taxpayer money to bring the failing team to their market. I think the biggest hope in evening up the payrolls is for continued tightening of the revenue sharing process and a push towards TV revenue sharing. I've stated it several times here before, but I believe all internet revenues are shared. Since it won't be too long before we get all of our TV programming over the internet, a lot more of the broadcast revenue will be shared in the not-too-distant future.

How is this not a good thing? Just a shot in the dark, but maybe if our "can't miss" prospects flop, teams will no longer deal with us for prospects. After our "big three" of Fielder, Weeks and Braun, we haven't had a big surge of talent. Maybe if we're in first place this year and decide to "go for it," we'll seriously have to overpay, as the trading partner believes our prospects are over-hyped. Or, if other GMs think Melvin is "too shrewd" in a trade, they won't deal with him. Neither of these will probably be the case, but I just wanted to throw it out there.

Okay, now we have something of a comp with Ben Zobrist: Weeks career: 2005 96 G, 360 AB, .333 OBP / .394 SLG / .727 OPS 2006 95 G, 359 AB, .363 OBP / .404 SLG / .767 OPS 2007 118 G, 409 AB, .374 OBP / .433 SLG / .807 OPS 2008 129 G, 475 AB, .342 OBP / .398 SLG / .740 OPS 2009 37 G, 147 AB, .340 OBP / .517 SLG / .857 OPS 2010 16 G, 64 AB, .468 OBP / .594 SLG / 1.062 OPS Career 498 G, 1826 AB, .356 OBP / .422 SLG / .778 OPS Zobrist career 2006 52 G, 183 AB, .260 OBP / .311 SLG / .572 OPS 2007 31 G, 97 AB, .184 OBP / .206 SLG / .391 OPS 2008 62 G, 198 AB, .339 OBP / .505 SLG / .844 OPS 2009 152 G, 501 AB, .405 OBP / .543 SLG / .948 OPS 2010 16 G, 66 AB, .319 OBP / .409 SLG / .729 OPS Career 313 G, 1045 AB, .344 OBP / .456 SLG / .800 OPS Zobrist's five year deal buys out all three arby years and two years of FA in 2014 & 2015, so he doesn't have the service time of Weeks, who is in year 2 of arby. Zobrist's contract is five years / $30MM. The final two years are team options, 2014 is $7MM, 2015 is $7.5MM ($2.5MM buyout). Those calling for Weeks to make over $7-8MM in free agency are probably overpaying. I'd still say if we extend Weeks for 4 years (not including this year), 4 years / $24 MM is probably fair. If we sign a 4 year deal including this year (like Yo), 4/$24MM is way too much. They're probably comparable players, as Zobrist has started his career better, but he's a year older than Weeks, so he wasn't rushed to the majors like Weeks.

I agree yount19. Even pre-injury last year, Suppan could at least get batters out. I don't know if it's the injuries he's suffered the past two years, his age, or a combination of both, but he's regressed to the point that he's not fooling anyone anymore, and the fact that he's pitching for the Brewers makes it more difficult for the Brewers to have a shot at the playoffs. This offseason, I thought Suppan was probably still a decent #5 starter. I felt that Narveson and Parra were better options, but I thought Suppan was passable. Through spring, his minor league "rehab" start and his first two starts, it really looks like he has lost it. It's time to cut ties with Suppan, let Parra or Narveson start and bring up someone like Stetter, Braddock or Axford who can actually help the team.

I hope the players we sent to Cleveland do well. I kind of enjoy watching the team and having someone to root for. That said, I think Gomez will be better than Brantley, and we're going to have a glut of OFs in the not-too-distant-future. As others have said, the biggest loss could be that LaPorta could fill in a corner OF spot this season, and we could save the money we're spending on Hart. However, that position (filled by Edmonds and Hart) has been pretty productive so far this season. I still think Hart will be gone next year, with Cain taking over in RF. While I recall the unusual "he could be traded in the future" comment regarding LaPorta, but I was still one of those that thought LaPorta's presence meant that Fielder would have been traded this past offseason for pitching. Seeing how LaProta's progressed, we're probably better off having traded him and keeping Fielder this season, but we'll see how the future unfolds. Hopefully, we'll get our young pitching from a Fielder trade. I blame last year's demise on Bush getting a liner off the arm, Suppan getting hurt when he still had a few drops of gas in the tank, Looper giving up far more homers than he ever had and Parra forgetting how to throw a strike. We were in the playoff chase when the injuries started, but we didn't have nearly enough depth to cover all them. I'd like some young pitching too, but I'm pretty happy to have the memories of CC's fantastic performance getting us to the playoffs. Yes, it still took the Mets collapse, but even with that, if CC wasn't a Brewer, we would never have made the playoffs.

Really hope Suppan is sent to the bullpen immediately, I think Suppan could be a servicable 1-2 inning reliever pitcher for the Brewers, but he should never be put in the position to face the opposing team's batting order twice unless it's a blowout. The way he's looked this year (including spring training and apparently his minor league start), he's hit his cliff and is no longer capable of being a professional pitcher. I really don't even want to see him in the bullpen, as we have better bullpen options at AAA who could actually come into a game and get batters out. There is no longer reason to "keep him for the depth," as I have no doubt that our AAA guys could come in and do at least as good a job as Suppan. Unfortunately they will hold the line that he had too much rest between starts and that is why he stunk. I bet we see Suppan start at least 2 more games before they make a change. I agree. The first start, it was the wind blowing out. Now it will be "too much time between starts" and "he got beat because of an error and a couple of bloop singles." By the time Suppan's let go, Parra / Narveson will no longer be stretched out, and we'll have several 3-4 inning starts by them, further depleting our bullpen.

I'm hoping and praying that Parra is getting some extra innings tonight to get him stretched out to start in five days, but I know it's a pipe dream.

That is interesting, Russ, and I think thumperden hit it on the head. He's been getting hammered this year because he hasn't been locating his fastballs, so the hitter's have been sitting on the change. Yesterday he had nothing to lose by "practicing" locating his fastball, which he did pretty well. The Cubs' advance scouts will note this, and Cub hitters won't be able to sit on the change when/if they face him this weekend. As far as batting Parra and then replacing him on the mound, he did the same thing with Vargas. I think Macha was trying to show that he wasn't rubbing the 20-0 victory in the Pirates' faces. He had Hart on the bench, and he could've pinch hit with the bases loaded, but I don't think Macha wanted to do that to Pittsburgh. I'm not a big Macha fan, but I can't fault him for this.

I've absolutely hated watching Derek Lee rob Brewers of doubles down the line. If Fielder is indeed traded, I'd love to pick up Lee, even though he is on the downswing. In addition to adding a good player, I'd like to hear all the Cubs fans reaction to Lee going to the Brewers. I'd just chide in "but at least you've still got Soriano in Left" and sit back and enjoy.

Absolutely agree. The closer you get to the majors, the more "certainty" you have. I'd much rather get some AA/AAA talent than the draft picks, but the picks do have some value, as does having Fielder on the team. My original post was to Tbadder's assertation that we'd only get injured goods for Prince, who right now has as much "certainty" as anyone in baseball. Whoever we would trade Prince to would have a very good idea what they're getting, wheter it be for a year, a year & a half, or if they can extend him. We would be adding a great deal of uncertainty as to what we'd be getting. The uncertainty would be far less than we would have by drafting players, but it would still be there. That's why we should be able to obtain some "risk premium" in a deal. Sure, we're getting six years of the player, but that player may not be in the majors for six years. Trading in a "guarantee" for a question is where the whole idea of risk premium comes from. The more certainty you get, the less the premium. If we trade for a Rookie baller, he'd better have an awful high ceiling. If we get someone with MLB experience, he wouldn't have quite the ceiling because we know more of what we're getting. FVBrewerFan, that's a very good point. Add to that that we don't have to pay signing bonuses if we get AA/AAA guys instead of draft picks, and it makes me want a trade even more. One small thing. The three players would have to have as much value as Fielder and the other two players they're replacing, which wouldn't be too much if one of those replaced is Suppan :-)

I don't think average middle relievers are ever worth that kind of money. Many starting pitcher rejects can put up a 4.0 ERA in relief. Many starting pitcher rejects are making $8-12MM. What's your point? If Riske had put up the mid-3's ERA with 2:1 K:BB that he had his entire career, we probably wouldn't hear too many people saying it was a terrible signing. Maybe an overpay, but not a team-killer. And not signing mid tier players to long term deals in no way protects from the risk of a player underperforming. There's probably slightly less chance that Braun posts a .600 OPS than Bill Hall. Sure it could happen, but the risk is significantly lowered. I guess it depends on how you define "underperform." I'd rather pay Braun $8MM to "underperform" with an .850 OPS than pay Hall $7MM to "underperform" with a .600 OPS.

Plus, the Riske signing wouldn't look bad if he hadn't been injured for the entire contract. A good middle/late innings reliever for $4.5MM/year isn't terrible. Injuries are indeed the biggest risk of signing star players to long-term contracts. I hope Melvin has learned not to offer long-term extensions to mid-tier players like Hall in the future, limiting our "regression risk" on the deals, and putting most of the risk on the injury side, which can be insured against.

A guy you will have multiple years is more valuable than a guy who will only be with you for the next year. While I get the gist of this, and while six years of Player X is worth more than one year of Player X, six years of Player X is not necessarily worth one year of Player Y. One year of Prince has more value than six years of someone who never makes the majors, so we need to find value that is somewhere near the value we'd get from an extra 1.5 years of Prince plus two draft picks. At the end of my last post, I tried to tie up that if the Brewers aren't in the race this year, I think they should look to trade Prince. If that scenario occurs, the maximum value the Brewers could receive from Prince (in my opinion) should come from a trade. For a team competing for a playoff spot / potential world championship, the maximum value of a superstar is in the extra wins said superstar would help them generate. There are always plenty of teams that believe those extra wins this year are worth potential wins years down the road. If you look at the last few seasons, the advent of the Wild Card has created a situation where we've seen a lack of sellers at the deadline. Limited supply with excess demand drives prices up. However, even though I think the Brewers should trade Prince this season if they're out of the race, I still realize that most AA/AAA players will never play in the major leagues, and therefore have essentially zero value to a MLB team. At the same time, it looks like Prince will have a great career. There is a very good chance that Prince will have more career MLB HR's than the entire Huntsville roster, which probably has more MLB-bound players than most AA teams. I guess every deal (trade, contract, etc.) is done based on "projected future value." The notion that Prince is extremely likely to continue to be good while minor leaguers are much more of a crapshoot is why someone will give Prince a long-term deal at over $20MM/year, while it's much riskier to make long-term bets on a minor leaguer. Heck, even someone like Gamel, who was "MLB-ready" went from #1 prospect in a good organization to "who knows if this guy will make it" status within the course of one season. Every year, there are "can't miss" prospects who fail miserably. We could very easily trade Prince for two or three highly touted prospects and end up getting zero value out of them, or we could end up getting three All-Stars. The risk variance in MLBer-for-MiLBers is much greater for the team receiving the MiLBers, so they should get some risk premium for this. I'm all for long-term "Braun-style" deals for young stars, so I don't want to sound like I'm disagreeing too much. In fact, I probably agree in most instances with what I may seem to be arguing against. Teams, particularly small/mid-market teams, need to build from within and prospects are the way to do it. However, the ultimate goal is for success at the Major League level, and it takes good MLB players to achieve that. Use the minor leagues to get major leaguers at times, and use the major league to stockpile minor leaguers at others. If we're in a situation this year of using major leaguers (Prince, Bush, Davis, Counsell, Hart, whomever) to stockpile minor leaguers, some team will be in a position to use minor leaguers to obtain major league talent. If there are buyers for your selling, especially if the number of buyers exceed the number of sellers (which has been the case in the recent past), your price will go up and you will be able to find an equitable deal. If you can't, and all you're offered is an injury-riddled #3 starter, you play out Prince's tenure and take the draft picks. I think/hope that Melvin would be able to get better than that, but that's nothing but opinion, and I won't take it too hard if I'm wrong... I'll just get another season and a half of watching Prince as a Brewer.

While I understand the sentiment about large market teams who buy what ever they need there are other teams who will have Gerut type players available who won't demand overpayment. If it makes sense for the future without hurting the present I don't care what kind of deal it is for the Sox. I wasn't looking at it so much as a big market/small market thing. It just seems Melvin sometimes (like the Gross deal) does things to be a "nice guy" to the player. I'd hate to see him trade Gerut so that he can get more PT somewhere else and then have us need Gerut's services down the stretch. I'm biased in that I think Gerut could be a good player if given some playing time. As for the Red Sox, if it looks like either of Cameron or Ellsbury will miss significant PT (as it appears Cameron will), I'd guess they'll first try out their AAA guys. When/if that doesn't cut it, they'll scour the remaining free agents such as Dye, who could probably get around well enough to play LF in Fenway and could put up monster numbers in that park.

You play the game to win the World Series. It only happens to one team each year, and many franchises go a long time (or for the life of the franchise in the Brewers case) without ever winning one. Throw in the unfair economic system which allows "big market" teams to win an unequitable amount of championships, and everyone else has to give up a little extra when they really think they have a chance to win. It is not merely "stupidity" that causes owners and GMs to make in-season trades to better their teams, it's the thought that the trade will increase the team's ability to reach the playoffs, and ultimately the Holy Grail... a World Series championship. If a team like Texas really thinks they can do it (I have no idea if they think this), then they probably realize that this could be the only World Series they'll see for 100 years, and that may be worth a AA arm who may or may not ever be a decent MLB pitcher. Plus, not every team plays by the same rules. Sure, prospects have value, but so do proven MLB players, especially the few that reach Prince's level. Is one GM "smart" because he values prospects as much as you and another "stupid" because they feel that Prince would give them a good shot at a World Series and that shot is worth some prospects? It is impossible to say right now who will be in the playoff race, who will get injured, and all the other factors that will arise over the next 2-3 months, but I think it is a certainty that every team in the majors would love to have Prince Fielder, and at least one of those teams would be willing to trade for him. Finally, if it's true that all Prince would bring in trade is "a starting pitcher who has started the arby process and who may turn expensive shortly. Or we'll get a high upside guy with some MLB experience and an injury history," then why don't we just trade Manny Parra for a 1.000+ OPS player to help out our offense so that we have a better shot at the playoffs? When did AA/AAA players start becoming more valuable to a franchise than the superstar players on the MLB roster? I agree with you that building a strong franchise is important, but I can't believe that Amaury Rivas is more important to the Brewers than Prince Fielder. Right now, every major league team has 100 players between A & AAA ball, and very few of them (even the top rated ones) will ever see significant MLB playing time. Of these 3,000 players, maybe a handful will reach Prince's level of play (remember that Prince is the youngest player in the history of the game to hit 50 HR). Therefore, even if we were to trade Prince for a team's top 2 or 3 pitching prospects, odds are that we'd still "lose" the trade, and conversely the team trading the prospects would therefore "win" the trade. However, if we are not in the race this year, it's probably worth it for us to trade him for the uncertain future of prospects, as having Prince on a losing team isn't worth the potential brought from a group of prospects.

I feel for Cameron, but I certainly won't cry over one of the biggest budget teams in baseball getting sidetracked by a couple of injuries. While it would be nice if the Brewers could benefit from Boston's misfortunes, they'd better not bend over to help them. I don't care if Gerut only has less than 10 ABs this year. If they want him, they should have to overpay for him, and then I'd only trade him if we were sure we have the depth in our system to overcome injuries or bad play we could have... it would've been nice to have had Gabe Gross to platoon with Corey Hart late in 2008.

I'll counter your question with another... Which team would not want Prince Fielder in their lineup? Prince isn't a "good" player, he is someone who, if he continues at his current pace, will be in the Hall of Fame. Some team is likely going to give him at least a $160MM contract, but you think that no one would be willing to give up anything but an injury-riddled-never-has-been? I think you're setting your sights too low. It would be hard (particularly in-season) to land a pitcher that's currently on a MLB roster, as that pitcher would be helping his team to the playoffs. However, someone should be willing to trade high-upside AA/AAA pitching for an increased shot at a World Series.

Please be Suppan. Please be Suppan. Please be Suppan. If PEDs can only get you up to 86 on the gun, then this whole steroids-era thing is vastly overstated :-)

Good point, Paul. I'd just add that trading Fielder won't free up a rotation spot, so we'd have too many pitchers if we landed a MLB pitcher in a mid-season trade. We could potentially trade Davis or Bush, who are in their last year, but that would likely be a separate deal. If we traded mid-season, I wouldn't mind getting a package built around a solid AAA pitcher or even someone like Casey Kelly who's at AA for Boston (mentioned in a "Prince to Boston" thread in trade forum). If we're far enough out of it to trade Prince, we'd also probably look to move Bush and / or Davis, and I'd be fine bringing up Butler, Loe, Lofgren, Estrada or even some of the high-upside AA guys to fill out the rotation for the remainder of the season, as long as the players we get back in return are "superstar" AA / AAA prospects. By not getting young, "proven" MLB guys, we could probably get more high quality players in return. It may come down to a "which would you rather have... one good young player with MLB experience and a mid-level AA guy or two high-level AA/AAA guys?" If we could get the pitching equivalent of LaPorta/Brantley, I'd be happy, and 1.5 years of Prince ought to be worth at least as much as half a season of Sabathia.

Sooner or later though, he's got to elevate Escobar into the 2 spot in the order. He's tried everyone else there instead of the obvious. After Counsell's grand slam yesterday, I'd guess Escobar's PT will be cut significantly going forward. It doesn't make any sense, but Counsell was played over Gamel last year, so why not waste another prospect's cheap years? Get used to seeing a lot of Edmonds in CF as well. If it weren't for the fact that Hart plays RF about as well as Matt Stairs and that Macha refuses to play Gerut, Edmonds would probably already be our regular CF.

I just don't see why Prince/Boras would be interested in negotiating in bad faith for 2 years. I've never really heard Boras say anything about negotiating for two years. Melvin and Mark A. publicly stated that they were going to talk with Prince and Boras and that they had no timeline on it. Melvin and Mark A. acknowledged that they had met and that they were not going to "give a running commentary" on the dealings. Then Boras came out and said Prince is a rare talent who has done things few players have ever done and therefore a Texiera (?-sp) type deal was the starting point and he felt Fielder should command a $200MM deal. Sounds to me like Melvin and Mark A. felt they had a chance of wooing Fielder over time to sign a contract and Boras is trying to squash that feeling unless the Brewers want to put Fielder into A-Rod territory.

Agreed, Logan. Especially since (assuming he's healthy) Gamel would likely be called up to be the "big LH bat" in the lineup once Prince is gone. Prince is good enough to get the return himself. Adding another player really makes little sense unless it's to clear a 40-man spot in a multiple player trade, and then it would be one of the worst players on your 40-man, not your best prospect. In the trade, we'd be trying to get the other teams' best prospect, not give up ours.

Well stated, Greeg. Prince has already made tens of millions of dollars, so he's not hurting for money the way pre-arby players are. He really bears little risk right now. Even if he gets hurt tomorrow and misses the rest of the season, he'll make well over $10MM next year in arby. His big risk is a career-ending injury, which isn't something that happens all that often. If he wasn't willing to forego that risk and sign an extension that would buy out free agency years a couple of seasons ago, it's much easier for him to pass on it today. The Brewers would have to come up with a near-market-value contract to sign him. If Boras and Prince really believe that market value for him is over $200MM, there is no way the Brewers should take this any further. They should look at the best way to maximize his value to the Brewers' franchise, and move on to things that are more realistic such as possibly discussing a contract extension with Rickie Weeks.