monty57

I'd guess McGahee makes the opening day roster and platoons w/ Lamb. Billy will probably need some extended spring training to get up to speed after he's healed.

My only worry is that when we are in the middle of a losing streak and and things are tough, who is going to step up and stop the skid. Actually, I'd think anyone on our staff could do that at any time. We may not have the "one guy who will stop every skid" type of pitcher, but I think a solid pitching staff top to bottom can hep avoid those skids in the first place. In any given start, any of our current pitchers could throw 7-8 shutout innings. It may not happen often, but they're capable of it. In years past, Wes Obermueller, Wayne Franklin and the like weren't really up to the task. My big worry a couple of weeks ago was that one injury would kill us. Now, we've added some depth, so I'm fine with the rotation as it is. Is it perfect? No, not by a long shot, but it is a solid major league staff.

I hope Swindle doesn't get released. I'm looking forward to seeing that funky delivery everyone talked about when he was signed. I'm surprised Pena was let go, as there seem to be other choices. Maybe the Brewers know something about him we don't.

The problem with trading Corey Hart is that his replacement is Tony Gwynn. He's the only other OF on the 40-man roster. Trot Nixon could be added if someone else is gotten rid of. If we're going to take that big of a hit offensively (Hart to Gwynn or Nixon), then we had better get a stud pitcher in return. That's not likely to happen. At this point, we should be looking to trade for a reserve OF, not looking to trade away one of the three OFs we have. A year ago, I thought Hart would get a contract extension, and some still think it will come. Personally, I think we play Hart this season, and hope he puts up the numbers he's capable of. If we're out of it come trade deadline, trade him for the best deal you can get and bring up Gillespie. If we're making a playoff push, keep him through the season and trade him next offseason when we should have prospects ready to take his place.

He had an injury to his pitching arm. I'm no doctor, but that has to have some effect on your pitching. Before CC was signed, we didn't have anyone else who could start in Suppan's place. Suppan was giong out, obviously injured, throwing about an inning a start and getting shelled. As soon as CC was signed, Suppan went on the DL. When he came back, he pitched better before falling off again late in the year, possibly due to the injury flaring back up, possibly not. I don't expect Suppan to be a world-beater, and I wish he wasn't getting paid as much as he is, but I think it's kind of obvious that his injury had some negative effect on his stats last year. If he is fully healthy this season, I would expect him to put up better numbers than last year.

I recommend the mlb.com radio package as well. I pay the paltry $15 annual fee just so I can listen to all of the ST games. I probably only use it once or twice during the regular season.

Last year, I went into the season thinking we had two legit #1 starters, and thought Bush, Suppan and Villy should be #3/4 types, with Parra a wildcard that could put up anywhere from #2 to #5 numbers. This year, I think we have one legit #1, with Parra potentially putting up #2 numbers and Bush, Looper and Suppan posting #3/4 type numbers. Of course, I think most of Suppan's problems last year stemmed from his injuries, and I may be in the minority here in believing he can bounce back and put up decent numbers. I don't see us having a gaping hole anywhere, which is nice. Overall, we're probably weaker going into the season than we were last year, but that was before we knew Gallardo would be out most of the season. If we compare our current lineup with Sheets, Parra, Suppan, Bush, McClung/Villy, I think we're probably pretty close to even. I'd say we have a better bullpen, so not knowing what injuries will occur this season, I'd say our pitching should be fine this season. Thanks, Melvin for signing Looper for the MLB team and Chase Wright for AAA insurance.

probably a good idea, but i think the bridges are successfully burnt down where he's not coming here. Nothing really to base this on, but I think the Brewers shied away due to the injury. They knew he had it, Ben thought it would heal and the Brewers weren't willing to take the chance on offering a contract. If the Brewers had publicly mentioned the injury, the Union would have filed a grievance that they were doing this to keep other teams from signing him, so Melvin simply said that the Brewers were letting Ben test the open market. As far as Looper, I know I'm late to the party on responding, but I'm very happy for the deal. Not that Looper is a super star, but he should do very well in eating innings with a mid-4 ERA. In addition to helping the rotation, this solidifies the pen with McClung, who can stretch out to become a starter if there is a significant injury, and probably puts DiFelice and Chase Wright in AAA as possible spot-starters when a minor injury occurs. As has been said, it also gives us another starter who will occasionally go 7-8 innings, giving the 'pen an occasional rest. This may also open up a reliever-for-4th OF trade. We have a long list of bullpen arms, and adding McClung to the fray will make that list even longer. Trading 1 or 2 of them for a decent 4th OF would be nice, and could open up a 40-man spot for Looper without having to cut someone or give the Rule 5 guy back.

I wouldn't mind seeing the Brewers trade for a 4th OF that would be better than Gwynn (on the 40-man) or Nixon (not currently on 40 man). The problem is that the Nats are most likely interested in pitching, which the Brewers don't have much of, at least at the starting level. Now, if the Brewers could trade some of their excess bullpen arms for one of the Nats excess OFs, that could work. Overall, I'd say it's a good signing for the Nats. They need to do something to bring people to the games. Someone who hits 40+ HRs year-in-year-out can help in that regard. Sort of like when the Brewers had Sexson... the team wasn't that good, but at least you might get to see a big HR.

Yes but I don't use income or profits when talking about gains or losses. Operating income and other defintions are what I use to define what the company has made or loss. Profits and income are one in the same to me. Income has a lot of definitions and different terms defining which stage it is in. Profit is money coming and income is money coming. They are both broad terms and are interchangeable. Profit can come before expenses and after expenses. Nate, please understand that there are a number of bankers, accountants, financial advisors, etc that visit this site. If you are going to continue to argue the point, you have to note that the terms and logic you are using are not correct. Saying that in your mind profit and income are the same is like someone coming on this site and saying a base hit and an out are the same thing. Someone who understands the terms will try to correct the inaccuracy. If the attempt to correct the inaccuracy is ignored, some of our "brains begin to bleed" (to steal Kegstand's term). I believe the concept you're going for is fixed costs vs. variable costs, but as kegstand mentioned, I don't think you're using it correctly. A fixed cost is something the Brewers will pay no matter what. If baseball were not to be played this year, the Brewers would still need to pay things like the rent for their facilities, salaries of retained staff, property taxes, etc. Varible costs are things that can, well, vary, and wouldn't necessarily be paid if baseball weren't played this year. Regardless, all of the expenses need to be added up and all of the income needs to be added up, and the net result will be the profit or loss for the team. Parking is a component of their income and their expenses, but it is still part of the bigger picture. You are correct that there are areas other than ticket sales where teams make money. Please cede the point that there are also areas other than player salaries where teams rack up expenses.

In the last two years, Villanueva has had 7.73 and 7.79 K/9, along with WHIP (as a reliever) of 1.05 in 2008 and 1.36 in 2007. How is the "not overpowering enough?" You can't judge a pithcer simply on the speed of his fastball, especially when it's his second or third best pitch.

Strawboss, isn't there something along the lines of the last place team in "The division of death" goes to the bad division, and the top team in the bad division goes to the elite league? Maybe I'm thinking of some vague European sport. Anyway, as has been stated, you've come up with an interesting twist to add to the list of possible fixes, but there are too many groups that would complain about different things for it to ever become reality. Tbadder, if you think of the MLB as the "corporation," then sharing revenues or capping salaries is not socialism. Unlike Social Darwinism, there cannot be survival of the fittest in baseball, as no team can succeed if others completely fail. If Wal-Mart knocks other retailers out of business, then they become more profitable as they get all the customers. However, if the Yankees are the only team left standing because all of the other teams went bankrupt trying to keep up, there will be no one left to play, and I can't believe people would show up just to watch the Yankees play with themselves. I believe in free markets as much as anyone, but baseball (and its observers and participants) needs to realize that it is one entity, not thirty separate entities. They are competing with other forms of entertainment for your and my dollar. On any given summer evening, I can choose to go to a movie, go out with friends, go for a boat ride, etc., or watch a baseball game. The true free market is the entertainment industry, so from a business sense, the Yankees biggest competitors aren't the Red Sox, but rather Hollywood, the restaurant industry, other competing sports, and any other entertainment venue. The Yankees, Red Sox, Brewers, Cubs and everyone else are on the same team in trying to field the most visible product on the market. Baseball needs to make sure they are doing whatever is best to make baseball the #1 choice for the largest number of people possible. I believe many in baseball feel that baseball is best off if large markets have an advantage, so they aren't in any hurry to completely overhaul the system. I think that Bud Selig and others realize that mid- and small- market teams still need to be able to remain competitive in order to keep fans all over the country interested in the product. Things like revenue sharing allow for that... the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, etc. still have an advantage, keeping ratings high in New York, Boston, Chicago and LA, but teams like the Brewers can field a $80-90MM salary and occasionally compete, keeping their fans interested. As a Brewers fan, I would love to see them able to compete on a level playing field. The reality is, we won't see that until TV ratings and other indicators show that having a level playing field will be the most profitable route for baseball. Most of all, I'm glad that on any given day from March (Spring Training) through October, I'm able to view or listen to my favorite form of entertainment, professional baseball.

Well there are some optimists out there that say the economy will be better by Q4 this year, but I agree, that might be extreme optimism. Either way, you can just go year to year and then get the big deal after the storm has passed. Well, you can count the Fed as "extremely optimistic," as they're looking at positive GDP in Q4. Of course economists are terrible predictors, so no one knows for sure. If velocity kicks up (people start spending some of the $8.8 trillion they're currently hoarding in bank accts and money markets), this could be over sooner rather than later. We'll have to see how it plays out. Since there is tremendous uncertainty, most people and businesses are being cautious. As a player, I agree that the best bet would probably be to sign a one-year deal. As a team, it may pay off to offer a 2-3 year deal, since the going price is low now. For example, if no one will offer Sheets more than one year / $9MM, try offering him two years at $16MM. He may bite, and you get an ace starter for $8MM / year. Actually, I think teams are trying to get him on a Pettite-style $5.5MM + incentive type deal, so it might cost even less if it's guaranteed money. Same goes for Dunn, if someone offers him a three year deal, it will probably be for a lower annual base then it would've cost last year, and you're going to get a pretty consistent performer. There's risk involved, but the reward could be pretty nice.

There's no way he will be the long reliever in the sense Elmer Dessens was, where he would only pitch if the team was up or down about six runs. The only way he could be considered a long reliever is that if a starter goes five innings and the score is 1-0, Villy could step in and pitch 2 or 3 innings leading up to Hoffman. I think the best way to state where Villy will be to start this season is "the Marmol role." I also don't see Villy as an option of starting games, as he will not be stretched out, and he will have too valuable a role in the bullpen. I'm with TooLiveBrew that I wouldn't mind seeing DiFelice start the season in AAA simply so that he would be stretched out and ready to step in when one of our pitchers gets injured.

Has there ever been a market as slow as this so late in the offseason? Was there free agency in the 1930's, 1970's or early 1980's, because those are the only times we've seen economic times as bad or worse than we're currently seeing. Jack Welch put it this way, "it's like there's a big cloud on the horizon and no one knows what's coming in the future." But does anyone believe the MLBPA will attempt to file a collusion case against the owners Well, with some owners calling for a salary cap due to the actions of other owners, I doubt a collusion case would hold much merit. it was Barry Bonds not being looked at and there were whispers that all teams were colluding together to not sign Bonds There were also whispers that Bonds was going to go to a federal penitentiary on purgery charges, and most teams didn't want to have to pay him a big contract while he was sitting in jail. Also, while he's probably still good, he's no longer good enough that anyone wants to put up with his team-shredding attitude. I think Terrell Owens is fading into this category as well. I think that, like the majority of Americans, teams are simply cutting back and looking a little closer at their budgets. In past years, teams would see a player and say "what the heck, it'll put us over budget but so what," just like in past years individuals would say "I know I can't afford it, but I'll put it on the credit card." At least for now, that attitude has changed. I think that next offseason teams will look back and wish they had signed some quality players to cheap deals during this offseason, but without foreknowledge of what's coming with the economy, more and more people are playing the "better safe then sorry" strategy.

Suppan was hurt for much of last season, and his stats suffered from that. He is not as good as we hoped when he was signed, but not nearly as bad as many on this site make him out to be. That of course is assuming he's recovered from last year's injury. His contract is bad, especially in light of the current economic trends. I've said this before, but I'm not overly concerned about our current starters. My big concern is that when one of our current starters gets hurt we'll have no one to step up and fill that role. Right now, DiFelice is that guy. Hopefully, Cappy can come back from injury later in the season to fill in. Not to speak for ennder, as I'm sure he knows more about baseball than I, but I believe he's saying "stat wise, Suppan is roughly the equivalent of Garland." He's not saying they're the same "stuff wise." If this is true, I'd love to have another (uninjured) Suppan if he cost half as much. Signing someone like Garland, especially to a one year deal, would be great in that it would allow McClung to fill the role he did last year. Be the long man / middle reliever until a starter goes down, and then fill in as a starter for as long as needed. Since Melvin and Attanasio have stated that they probably aren't going to add much more to payroll right now, I no longer believe that signing someone like this is going to happen. Therefore, I now believe our biggest hope is that we sign a reclamation project or two to a minor league deal and have some insurance in case of injury. There's another thread already dedicated to this, so I won't travel any further down that path.

Is DiFelice signed to a minor league deal? I hope he can start AAA at Nashville, as he would give us someone to bring up if an injury occurs. I agree that Cappy starting the season in Nashville is wishful thinking. The Brewers are definitely building a decent group of relievers. I hope that means we won't have to spend much on a ajor league bullpen for the foreseeable future. The Sounds should be fun to watch this year. I'll have to try to convince the wife to take a trip down to see them. With the next closest first base prospect yet to play a game in A-ball (Brock Kjeldgaard) I hope he someday makes it to the majors just for his name.

I'm with you bklyn. They should have signed another starter for the MLB team (Sheets, Johnson and Smoltz were all bantered around). At this point, most pitchers who could improve the MLB staff are gone, and for some reason they will not go after Sheets. Therefore, I think they absolutely need to sign someone with some MLB experience to a minor league deal. Chansen has done a good job coming up with some possibilities. I don't know which of those would be the best fit and would sign a minor league deal, but someone has to be out there that will be a better injury replacement option than our current AAA staff.

This maybe just backup in case they are able to move Hall for an overpriced pitcher (Washburn, Contreras(?), Robertson, Davis(?), Schmidt, etc) While I actually like the idea of moving Hall for pitching, I don't see it happening, as it would leave us with either Lamb pretty much full time at 3B or a lefty/lefty platoon of Lamb / Counsell at least until the probable call-up of Gamel. You are correct on the reduced value of Hall. If all he does is start at 3B against lefties and pinch hit, he doesn't have much value, and will never be able to be traded at his price tag.

My only problem with this is what good will it do to have him take a walk only to have Kendall and the pitcher batting behind him? Maybe Macha will have some better design to the batting order to get some runs out of the end of our lineup. Well, since we have a 3B platoon, he should only start when Hardy or Weeks needs a day off. Many of his ABs should come as a pinch hitter for the pitcher, where a walk is much better than the automatic out the pitcher spot normally brings. Although I'm glad he was signed for a relatively low price, I really hope he doesn't get more than 20-30 starts all season. This does bring up the question, if Hardy or Weeks gets hurt (15 day DL), do we start Counsell or does Escobar or Irribarren come up?

This makes sense for both sides. The Brewers gain cost surety, as knowing what you expenses are certainly helps when trying to build a budget. Also, they know that Prince could win arby and get a huge payout next year. I think if they truly are discussing $18-20MM over two years, they're thinking in the lines of $7-8MM this year, $10-12MM next year. That would probably be about what arby would cost. I'd assume they'd get a bit of a discount, as they are taking a risk by guaranteeing money over two years. I'd hope for $7MM in 2009, $11MM in 2010. From the Prince/Boras side, they know they could lose in arby and not get $18-20MM over the two years. TigerBrew made a good point that they've probably lost out on some money by not taking the deal offered last year. Also, every player knows that they could get hurt or have a bad season. Even if Prince won arby this year and got $8MM, he could get hurt and miss a big part of the season. I doubt he'd get a big arby raise next year if he plays 30 games this season. I'm really glad to hear this news, and hope a deal gets done. I was very worried that it would go to arby and get ugly.

I guess it would depend on his motivation. From another thread, it almost sounds like he's lost his motivation to play, and he'll get paid a lot of money for a number of years to sit and do nothing, so he may not even decide to play anymore. If he does decide to play, he probably wants a chance to win a starting job, which he won't have unless an injury occurs in Milwaukee. If he's looking at signing on with a team with playoff hopes, maybe he would consider Milwaukee. Also, he may want to stay out of the limelight, making Milwaukee a preferable destination. I'd rather have him at league minimum than our current crop of backups, so I'd be for it, although I don't think it has much chance of happening.

I guess it would depend on his motivation. From another thread, it almost sounds like he's lost his motivation to play, and he'll get paid a lot of money for a number of years to sit and do nothing, so he may not even decide to play anymore. If he does decide to play, he probably wants a chance to win a starting job, which he won't have unless an injury occurs in Milwaukee. If he's looking at signing on with a team with playoff hopes, maybe he would consider Milwaukee. Also, he may want to stay out of the limelight, making Milwaukee a preferable destination. I'd rather have him at league minimum than our current crop of backups, so I'd be for it, although I don't think it has much chance of happening.

The first test will be if he can secure himself as a starting pitcher, which will make him more valueable than as a middle reliever. For the Brewers at this point, he's a starting pitcher. As such, if he can log a decent number of innings and post a 4.50 - 5.00 ERA, he'd probably be worth well over $5MM on the open market. Of course, this market has skewed salaries some, but he has to be worth $1.66MM if he's a starting pitcher, especially with the limited risk a one-year deal assumes. Free agent starting pitchers, even average ones, cost a lot of money. If McClung can keep his walks down to a reasonable level, he could be a decent pitcher. I'm really not worried about him being the #5. I'm worried about us not having any pitchers beyond our starting five that are capable major league starters.

I'd have to say that the Kendall signing was a good move by Melvin. He solidified the catching position at a time when the Brewers were very thin to bridge the cap to the time when hopefully they will have good major league talent. The contract was "team-friendly" in that if Kendall had been terrible, he wouldn't have played enough to vest the contract. Since he had a decent year, his option vested, and he will be back in 2009. As others have stated, I hope he gets more rest this year, as Rivera is a capable backup. I also hope that this additional year with Kendall on the MLB roster will allow Salome to sharpen his skills in AAA so that he will be ready to start for the Brewers in 2010.