monty57

Hopefully he's 100% healthy and tears the cover off the ball. With Broxton finally breaking the ice and getting a hit, I thought Presley might be let go, but they must want to keep the insurance around with Braun being dubbed "the hottest name on the trade market."

I think the "shoulder fatigue" DL stint makes sense. That gives Garza a month or so to prove himself, and hopefully get someone to trade for him. Time that up with Peralta's minor league "rehab assignment," and either a spot is opened up for him in the rotation, or Peralta comes back as a BP arm. I'd love to see Peralta "find it" as a starter, but the odds of that seem to be getting slimmer and slimmer.

Unless he's gone on a hot streak since I last checked, Diaz has been pretty disappointing this year. Not giving up on him of course. Slow start, but he just turned 20 last week, and it's his first time above Rookie League. No one knows what the future holds, but we need to stockpile high-upside guys like him if we want the farm to continually feed talent to the majors. Hill has looked okay so far this year, and should be perceived to be a big enough upgrade to some team that we can get another decent prospect if we pick up Hill's salary. I'd be pretty happy if Hill was the "salary dump" guy we were forced to take from Arizona, and he ends up netting us another prospect.

There is no reason for the other two if they are supposed to be major league caliber. Broxton and Walsh are two different situations. We would lose Walsh if we tried to send him down. The question is whether the team wants to stick with him through his struggles to see if he can figure things out, and at least to this point, they like him enough to keep him. He needs to hit better, but at least he is providing some value as a bench player who can back up a couple of positions and get on base when he's needed as a pinch hitter. Broxton was completely lost at the plate, so he got sent down. He destroyed AAA pitching, and deserved to be brought back up. Now we will see if he got things straightened out and can perform at the MLB level. Lots of prospects bounce up and down before they finally stick, so while I wish he were hitting better, I don't have any problem with the way he has been handled. If nothing else, he provides a good defensive upgrade late in games, so like Walsh he can provide some value even in a bench role. We have the roster spots, and the 24/25 man generally aren't relied upon to be stars. These guys are getting try-outs to see if either of them have a future with the team, and at the moment they are our best options options to put there, so let them keep their current roles and see if either can step up.

Not my money, but I would assume the Brewers will eat the cash in order to get a better prospect for Hill. They have to be netting tens of millions in profits this season, so the good prospect plus the write-off is more important than getting salary relief. For the opposing side, getting Hill and not having to pay him could be worth a decent prospect. If this is the case, paying $5.5M will effectively bought Isan Diaz and whatever prospect they get for Hill. Since he's playing okay, that could be a decent return.

Huh? I don't think you're familiar with the Pirates at all. MLB Pipeline and Keith Law have the Pirates system ranked 8th. The Brewers are 9th and 5th respectively in the same rankings. I believe BA has the Brewers 7th and the Pirates 11th. They have two pitching prospects that are far better than any we have. They could add a third really good pitching prospect depending how well Kingham comes back from TJ surgery. Even if they can't sign McCutchen to another contract, they still have two outfielders signed long term with another really good outfield prospect on the way plus whatever they get if they decide to trade him. Same with Gerrit Cole. Yeah, Taillon will probably replace Locke soon, with Glasnow waiting in the wings, and that will make for an outstanding rotation. They have Cole through the 2019 season (hits arby next year). He's represented by Boras, otherwise I would think extending him to get a couple of should be a priority for them. He, Taillon, and Glasnow at the top of the rotation could dominate. They seem to be utilizing the playbook Friedman used while he was with Tampa, so I expect them to always have a decent farm with a young, talented MLB roster.

A few days ago someone used as proof that the Brewers were tanking that they were on pace for 66 wins. Now they're on pace for 72+. Yes, I think Stearns should be fired because he's failing at his one true goal for the coming years, which is losing 100+ games and getting the first overall draft pick [/sarcasm] This year's team is fun to watch, and there is reason for excitement. We're building a nice foundation to build upon, and could be a good team quicker than most people would have believed when we started the sell-off midway through last season.

a 5+ year rebuild plan makes the most sense. If that's the plan, then we should fire-sale everyone on the MLB roster, as none of them will be around, and guys in the upper minors (like Arcia) will be into their arby years and close to being traded away. Depending on how the cards fall, that may be when we are actually looking like a playoff team, but I don't think we should plan for it. That strategy would be better served for a team with no talent in the upper minors, and a MLB team stacked with bad contracts and untradeable players. We have too much talent in the system right now, along with loads of payroll flexibility, to plan for a 5+ year rebuild. While our competition is a factor, we shouldn't focus on building our franchise based on what we believe others will do. Stearns just needs to do what he thinks is best to build the Brewer franchise the way he wants to build it, and let the other guys do what they're going to do.

The model for Stearns, the Astros And where has anyone in the organization said that this was the model? The Brewers were going downhill fast, and after a horrendous start to last season (following a horrendous finish to the prior season), they traded away some tradeable players to restock the farm while holding on to some other guys. Then they didn't hit the free agency market hard. We will see where we go from here, but that's basically the nuts and bolts of what has happened so far, and I'd argue that they are better at all levels, even the MLB level, then they would have been had they not traded Gomez, Fiers, Davis, Lind, Segura, and K-Rod (and anyone I may be missing). The Brewers are in rebuild due to necessity. As Braun said, they were not breaking up a juggernaut. People immediately jump to the conclusion that we're going to copy the Cubs or the Astros, but I don't think that's necessarily accurate. Building up the farm is the logical first step they had to take. From there, anything can happen. The Astros decided to sell off a lot of prospects last year to "go for it," and it didn't work. Their biggest "get," Carlos Gomez, has been a tremendous flop, and the trade went a long way in rebuilding the Brewers' farm. I'd say the Astros kind of followed the Melvin/Attanasio model of taking a strong farm and using it as trade bait to attain short-term satisfaction. They still have a lot of talent, but they traded away a lot of the future for the chance to win last year, which was probably a year or two ahead of when most people thought they should be a World Series favorite. They didn't need Gomez last year (and he hurt them more than helped), but they could probably use Hader, Houser, Phillips and Santana in the future. I sure hope that's not the model we'll follow. We are still in the early stages of the Stearns era, so let's not jump to judgement about what he will do based on what another team did. He seems to have a plan to build every level of the franchise, which is necessary for long-term sustainability. This is a different tactic from Melvin, who liked to stockpile all of his top guys so they came up around the same time, which is a recipe for opening a short-term window for potential success. He doesn't seem to cling to the name on the player's jersey, which is a change for Attanasio, who often stated that fans like to see names they know. He seems to like control (good K:BB) pitchers, and guys with plate discipline, while Melvin seemed to like pitchers with big arms but maybe not the best control, and hitters with more power than discipline. These are a few things I've noticed. I don't know that we have enough information to figure out what he will do, but it seems he's looking at making a team that can be good over a long period. Of course, I may just be seeing that because that's what I've been hoping for for a long time.

He is near the low end of MLB SS in RZR, UZR, UZR/150 and in Fangraphs and Baseball Prospectus' total defense ratings. Aren't those all stats that really require several years' worth of data to have any significance? In the short term, I don't think they are very meaningful. As others have stated, it seems his faults (both on defense and base running) are mental. I haven't been able to watch many games lately, but I've still seen him twice thrown out at third base on a ball hit to SS when he was on second. That's basic base running, and has to be a "mental lapse." Overall, he has played capably this year, and is physically able (and young enough) to be even better. I could see him becoming a capable starting SS if he can get better focused. Even with his faults, I'd have to think that he has increased his value with his play so far this season. Whether it's as a starter or as a utility guy, I'd have to think that most teams in baseball could use a guy like him. If he can iron out some of the "ifs," then he could be a nice asset for the Brewers. Of course, the Cubs dealt with "mental lapses" from Starlin Castro for years before finally shipping him off, so not all players can overcome these issues, but giving guys a shot is part of what this season is about for the Brewers.

A switch-hitter who gets on base with plus baserunning skills who can play 5 defensive positions? ...who is still in his pre-arby years. Lot of extra value in that. I think the author of the article hit the nail on the head. The Brewers are using every avenue available to build a better future. The draft is certainly one of their tools, but equally important are the multitude of other ways they are adding to the system. It is far more valuable for the Brewers to hit on a few pick-ups (who add a few wins and "cost us" the #1 overall pick), than it is for all of their pick-ups to stink, netting us the #1 pick. We're still going to get a good draft pick, and the added value we can get from someone like Carter should more than make up for the relative value lost falling from say the 1st to the 5th draft pick. We got Carter for nothing, and he can either be traded or held on to. We got Villar for a minimal cost, and as noted above he has proven valuable. Broxton stunk when he was here, but then tore up AAA, so hopefully we have something there. Kirk N. has proven to be a decent placeholder, who can transition to a solid backup (if not traded) when Phillips arrives. The list can go on. Stearns wasn't looking for Babe Ruth in any of these deals, he was trying to upgrade the overall talent level in the franchise as a whole, and I think he did. Stearns didn't trade away much of value, and in return received many years of service time for a lot of players. Most may not turn out, but some will, and those that do will make up much of your future Brewer teams. He's holding out for a mountain of gold for Lucroy, and hopefully that pays off. Lucroy has been doing everything he can to make his value go up, and that could make one of those teams that wouldn't bite at Stearns' off-season price tag give in and pay up to get him. Coming off back surgery, Braun probably wasn't tradeable this offseason. For those that would like to see him traded, the best hope is for a productive season where he is reasonably productive. If we get that this year, Stearns will probably be able to trade him next offseason. As the author stated, the Brewers are in the early stages of a rebuild of the entire franchise, in an attempt to continually have talent arriving at the MLB level for many years to come. To do that, you add guys at all levels, and continue to add guys any chance you get. I like what I have seen so far.

Let's hope he can keep the hot bat going in Milwaukee. He's been on fire since he got sent down.

Monty, you touch on a lot of good points in your post (long post, so I didn't quote the whole thing), but I am going to take issue with this specific, bolded part. The "over a century" part was not referencing a specific act, but rather the notion of players mostly "policing" themselves. The opinions of the players will evolve over time, which will mean what is acceptable will change over time. Players used to come into spring training fat & out of shape. It didn't take a rule to change this, it just evolved, likely because team leaders didn't accept it anymore, and the economics of baseball has changed to where it's smart to make it a year-round endeavor. Kind of the "invisible hand" approach. As to the take-out plays at 2B and home plate, I think that had economic appeal to owners. It's very rare that batter who is purposely beaned sustains a long-term injury, but middle infielders and catchers were repeatedly getting hurt on take-out plays. Now that these guys make millions of dollars a year, owners didn't want to take that risk any longer. But this isn't opposite to intentionally hitting someone, as purposefully throwing at a player has been illegal for a long time, it's just impossible to know for sure if the pitcher is purposefully throwing at a player, while it's pretty obvious when a player is nowhere near 2B, or when they bowl over a catcher.

THey're the moral authority of baseball and routinely drilled our guys because they were young and disrespectful just doing celebrations, no taunting really. I think LaRussa used beanballs as a strategy against the Brewers more than using it to uphold "unwritten rules." Everyone knew milksop Macha wouldn't do anything to retaliate, so his teams led the league in HBP by a wide margin. His refusal to take issue with this is probably part of the reason he "lost the clubhouse." Meanwhile, LaRussa knew he could confuse Yost and get him to do something at the wrong time, like hitting the next Cardinal batter, thereby putting the winning runner on base at the start of an inning. LaRussa was the instigator here (and I'm sure he was "having fun" at the Brewers' expense while doing it), so I would have loved to have seen some retaliation. Just do it smartly, like having Weeks turn Carpenter into a punching bag at a time when the Brewers were out of it and the Cardinals were in the playoff race. Then he could come out the next time up and tap Molina on the shin guard (a la B Phillips) and see how Molina reacted :-) CheezWizHed summed it up nicely regarding celebrating vs over-celebrating, and I think most people have a good understanding about what is and isn't acceptable. I like celebrations, but when things go overboard I think the opposing side needs to have some recourse other than calling the Commissioner's office (Macha's strategy, which did nothing but get his team laughed at). Bautista's bat flip was discussed at great length all offseason and into this season, so obviously many people took issue with it, and everyone knew something was likely to happen. He got hit in a way that he wouldn't get hurt, and had he just ran to 1B and let it go, it would have been over. His decision to take issue with it and try to injure the second baseman is what led to the brawl. People celebrate and there isn't issue. Sometimes good people over-celebrate, and then when they get plunked, they shake it off, knowing that they probably deserved it. Sometimes pitchers over-act in hitting someone, and that's when they get charged. One side (hitter vs pitcher) isn't always right and one wrong. Either can go overboard, but as long as the majority of people understand the parameters, things work, as they have for over a century. I agree that the demographics of baseball are changing, and what constitutes "overdoing it" will change with time. That's great, and that's the way change should happen.

And no I was never a trash talker or outgoing player in any sport, just not my nature as an easy going shy introvert type. Didn't say you were a trash talker. You seem to be quick to want to try to demean me, so I can easily believe that you would love people who "trash talk" and tease others, and would want rules put in place to promote that while eliminating anything that might take away from what you like. But if we're going to make broad personal generalizations based on this discussion I'm guessing your also the type that wants to instill their morals and religousy social views on all of society too, on issues like gay marriage, marijuana legalization, etc instead of just living your life and letting others live theirs. No, I'm Libertarian, which is the epitome of living my life and letting others live theirs. That's why I'm for letting the players police themselves like they have for over a century. They can determine what actions constitute acceptable and non-acceptable behavior far better than you or I, and probably better than the current commissioner. Someone who wants to instill their moral values on another would be one who wants more regulations/laws/rules put in place by a central authority in order to restrict one person in order to benefit another. I don't like people who "talk trash" and taunt and tease others to demean them. That's nothing political, I just don't like people who act that way. Those are the bullies I referenced. The post you originally seemed to have issue with was in response to a poster saying that someone in the NBA punched someone else who was "talking smack," and the NBA responded by heavily penalizing fighting, but not "smack talking," which has lead to a lot more "smack talking" and no retaliation. To me, that doesn't seem like a good end result, as it means more people are acting like asses, both in the sport and those who see those in the sport as "heroes." Hence, my "society" reference. This isn't about someone flipping a bat, it's about what the "celebrations" will become if rules are instilled that promote one behavior ("celebrating") while heavily punishing another behavior (retaliation for over celebration). That will likely lead to really bad behavior (my reference to dancing around the bases and hiding props under bases) and no "peer policing" to stop it, which will lead to more rules put in place to quell this trend, which will lead to more rules, etc. Things are fine as they are, the occurrence of retaliation is rare, and the occurrence of injury during retaliation is basically non-existent (to your point of hurling a deadly projectile). We don't need new rules that would probably make things worse rather than better.

You think it's fun to watch someone being a jerk. From the tone of your post, I'd guess you have some experience in this field. I think it's good to see someone who is acting like a jerk get punched in the face, as that usually stops said person from continuing to act like a jerk. I still believe that most parents and coaches try to teach sportsmanship. If you can beat someone, beat them and shake their hand after the game. Teasing/taunting/"talking smack" does nothing other than make one person (and their fans) feel "big" at the expense of someone else. Encouraging this behavior and penalizing any retaliation will simply make the behavior worse. I'll stop now, because I really don't feel like continuing this discussion. I'd rather talk about baseball, and not the childish actions of a small portion of a handful of athletes, when most professional athletes are good people.

Reward bullying behavior and penalize standing up for yourself against said behavior. Can't see how that would have a negative effect on society.

There are varying degrees to "retribution": Throwing at the thigh is probably like punching someone in the arm for saying something stupid. Probably acceptable in most of society, and often laughed at (or at least understood) by everyone involved. Throwing at the head is like taking a bat to someone for saying something stupid. Not acceptable in most of society, and should get the person in trouble. Things can go overboard in either direction, but as long as the participants have a general understanding of the boundaries, things don't generally get too out of control. When/if outside forces step in and try to redefine the boundaries to match their beliefs, there is likely to be some backlash. For over a century, baseball has "policed itself," in large part with hitting batters and charging the mound. Those things have generally kept either side from going too far. Considering how many pitches have been thrown in MLB history, charging the mound is about as common as getting struck by lightning twice. Therefore, the boundaries haven't been breached too often, and there probably isn't a big reason to force change. But, if we say "that person's beliefs are more important than yours," and that they should be able to "have fun" at your expense, then right or wrong I would bet that we are going to start seeing more fights in baseball.

You shouldn't put a statement in quotes if it is not what the person actually said without using something like brackets or "..." that clearly show that you are adding or subtracting something from the quote. You can say what you believe a person means without using quotes, as the reader will (or at least should) understand that it is the reporter's interpretation of what was said (i.e. Gomez understands why fans are upset), whereas putting quotes around it means it is what was actually said, without editing.

Yes, being taunted and "trash talked" to is very fun. That's why everyone loves bullies. Football eliminated most celebrations when players took them over the top (i.e. Randy Moss "mooning" the Green Bay crowd and players hiding props in the goal posts to use in their celebrations). I'm sure the concern is that players will continue to try to outdo one another and pretty soon you've got a circus. Do we really want to see players moon-walking around the bases or hiding a cell phone under 2nd base and pretending to call someone to describe the home run they just hit? At some point, respecting other human beings should be considered, and if someone does something to disrespect others, then I can understand when that person/group gets upset about it. And, while some fans may like seeing players "taunt and trash talk," other fans won't want that, and it will turn them off from the game. Personally, I like watching baseball for baseball. I dislike watching someone get "taunted and trashed talked to" in pretty much any situation.

Why does everyone complain so much about Colorado Springs... Colorado Springs is higher in elevation than Denver (6,023 feet vs "mile high"), and there have been many stories written over the years about how hard Denver is on pitchers. As Casey mentioned, pitches don't break, so you're "developing" your pitchers without the ability to work on anything but the fastball, which will fly about 600 feet if hit. Many pitchers have had their confidence shattered playing in Colorado. Plus, if you look at a mountain, you see snow at the top of the mountain. That's where they're playing. Most here are from Wisconsin, so we know how much it sucks to play sports in 30 degree weather and a snowstorm. That's what the team has had to put up with for much of the year. Finally, you are correct that half the games are played on the road, but baseball is about mechanics and repetition. It would be very tough to do things one way at home and another on the road. Colorado Springs is great for putting together a bobsled team, but not for trying to develop and assess your AAA baseball talent. No one wanted to play there, and the Brewers are only there because they got screwed over by Nashville and were stuck with the last option available. They badly want out... so badly that they have given Gord Ash one job, which is to find a suitable AAA "landing spot" that is not Colorado Springs and sign a long-term deal so they don't get stuck like this again. Putting Peralta, whose problems seem to be mental rather than physical, into a situation like that would probably do more harm than good. Promoting promising guys from AA to AAA could harm the development they've shown. This is a bad situation for a team that is in rebuild and almost solely dependent upon developing their talent on the farm. So, to topic, I think the best thing for Peralta is probably to keep throwing him to the wolves at the MLB level for a while longer to see if he can get things straightened out there. As a fan, it isn't much fun to watch a guy flounder, but this year isn't about winning at the MLB level, it is about putting players in the best situation to develop for the future. Peralta turning things around could be huge for the future of the franchise, as he could be a valuable trade chip if he proves he can be a good MLB starting pitcher.

Honestly, Colorado Springs has Lopez all messed up right now, Hader should never place a foot there. He needs to be skipped over. Moreover, if they are sending Wily down over going to the pen, send him to Biloxi where he can dominate a little and really figure crap out. Like with Jungmann, what is point of sending them down to Springs where you know what the result will be. They cannot get out of Colorado fast enough. I'd rather have them play in a cow pasture in Iowa next year then face another year in Colorado. In a normal situation, Peralta should be sent to AAA. There, he could work on figuring things out, and if he can't do that, he could make the transition to the 'pen, while the team would probably get another year's service time out of what could be a dominant reliever. With Colorado being the AAA team, there isn't really a way for him to figure things out other than sending him all the way down to AA, which would mean one of the SP from Biloxi (most of whom are promising prospects) would have to get screwed up at Colorado.

[dt][/dt] More recent reports have him working 91-93 as a starter. Jorge Lopez made the "stuff" jump as he used to be 90-92 and is now 93-95. Wang is a decent bet to see his stuff tick up slightly but probably not like that. Is this the year? Wang is pitching tonight. If the Shuckers' gun on the scoreboard is correct, he sitting in the upper 80's with his fastball and mid 70's with his breaking pitch.

One AB sent me over the top last week. We had guys on 2nd and 3rd..1 out. The game score was fairly close at that point. Walsh up...takes 3rd strike looking or swinging. I don't know if Walsh will put things together, but after years of watching most of our team swing out of their shoes in this type of situation (even with two strikes), it's a bit refreshing to see the team taking a better approach as a whole. In my opinion, Walsh's approach is much better than that of someone like Gomez. He doesn't have nearly the talent of Gomez, but has a much better approach. He might not be able to hit MLB pitching, and if not, then he won't be around long. Right now, we don't really have a better option for the 25th man, so there is no reason to send him packing. Better to hold onto him for injury insurance and to see if he can right the ship, and only get rid of him when/if someone forces him off the roster. Right now, I'd send Rivera to AAA when Gennett comes back in order for him to get things together. While his future is probably as a utility man, he could use more time in the minors. We don't know what the future will hold, and we may be happy we have extra guys if someone else gets hurt, or if someone gets traded. I still think Hill will not be a Brewer in the second half of the season, and that will leave some PAs for guys like Perez and Walsh, allowing for them to show one way or another whether they will have a future with the Brewers.

Zero chance the Brewers will (or should) play in the FA market next off-season. Zero. I don't think we're far off on our estimates. I just don't like using absolutes in an uncertain world. The likely scenario is that Lucroy is traded this season, opening a big hole in the MLB roster with hopes of shoring up a couple of holes on future MLB rosters. Without Lucroy and with some question marks in the rotation and other areas, it's unlikely they try to compete next year, so it's unlikely they spend too much in free agency this coming offseason. There is also a chance that Braun will be moved, making it very unlikely that they will be competitive next year. But, there's the chance that some people play well, and Lucroy is traded for good prospect who can step right in to the MLB rotation. I could see Attanasio being willing to sign a good free agent pitcher before they're probably ready to be in playoff talks. Maybe not likely, but possible.