Turning2

Can’t stand these non baseball related interviews during the game. Don’t like interviews regardless, but at least it’s tolerable if it’s Brewers talk.

In the offseason, he was listed in a couple articles as a possible target for the Brewers. And I recall someone around here saying he could be a "sneaky good" addition. They tried, it didn't work, and it didn't cost them much. He was a rental placeholder which is exactly what most of us figured he was intended to be. I thought/hoped that he'd at least muster .240 avg and held down 3B for the year while they waited for the prospects to develop for next year / post lock out. Bring on the Coooooooop!

12 it is. Maybe Made ends up with 14 eventually.

A festivus for the rest of us!

If they were determined to rush him to the bigs, now is a good time. As you pointed out, it gives them a window to see what he can do before the deadline. Although, if he struggles, do you really believe they would trade for an upgrade. I don't. Per AI, a .650 OPS translates to roughly a .230 -.250 hitter and <10 HRs. Does that fix the position enough while trying to make a serious run at a championship? Maybe.

That's essentially my definition of "positioning". They didn't mail it in or punt as some others have referred to it. Coming off the 97 wins and falling completely on their face in the NLCS, they didn't aggressively go for it either (and I wouldn't want them to). So when I use "positioning" it's more of a mushy, happy medium term. The reality is, even though they dominated the regular season with 97 wins, the NLCS revealed that they weren't really very close to a WS berth. It would have required some incredible serendipity to get past LA. They could have gone crazy in the offseason pursuing talent, hoping to get over the hump. But they knew the lockout and CBA are on the horizon, so the financial ramifications of that are an unknown. Why commit big money and prospect capital to a couple guys, when adding proven talent might be more manageable after the new CBA is settled? They also knew that they have a solid crop of prospects to be harvested shortly after that new CBA too. Overall, it felt like they didn't tank it, but they went status quo, just keep doing what they do making marginal additions, hoping serendipity shines on them for a change this year.

It would look good on him, but they would have to unretire it.

OK, just a little fluff post. Doesn't matter, but I'd love to see him get #14. We need a long term starter trotting out #14 everyday.

That view aligns somewhat with my suggestion that this year is for positioning for the future, i.e. - post lock out, rather than making aggressive moves and going for it this year. Some people were howling that, after a 97 win season, that they didn't make any upgrade moves in the offseason for a serious push this season. I kept telling them, that they are not making moves for this year, but beyond.

Regarding Mitchell's defense, I recall an interview where he was asked about mitigating injury. The response was taking an approach to defense that was a little more mindful of potential injury - essentially, playing a tad less aggressive. Perhaps that might address the data or perception of a defensive drop off. His lack of power is highly disappointing, but I'm glad he's been healthy and available so far. Probably a fair tradeoff for a dip in defense.

Fair points. My instinct leans towards players with proven MLB ability versus projection and potential. However, that depends on if the solution is desired now or later. And of course, nothing is certain either way. They could bring in a proven vet (whoever that might be??) and he could fall flat too at much greater expense. I'm excited to see Pratt, Been keeping an eye on him since he hit AA. Took some flak for declaring he, not Made, is the SS of the future, or at least.. the most gifted defensive SS among the farm prospects.

Not sure what specifically I posted previously that would make you ask that. I think they are both being rushed a season early. I'd suggest that MIL might be able to cover the offensive shortcomings of a rookie in the OF a little easier than one at SS. But it's really an either / or rather than player A versus player B. I think the team could absorb poor offense from one rookie learning the ropes at either spot, but not both - that might be the best way to put it.

Fair enough. I'm definitely pulling for him. Love his glove (I was a defensive SS with a strong arm too, so I'm biased 😁). Just hope they can do something for 3B now with a more proven offensive player at the MLB level to complement Pratt without a long-term commitment.

It won't make them less competitive; that's not the issue. Will it make them MORE competitive? Possible, but not likely unless they upgrade 3B. If Pratt was pounding .280 with 6-7 HRs in Nashville, he would stand a chance of pounding maybe .250 while adjusting to big league pitching. And they could make a run with that. But he's not. I fully expect him to hit no better than .230 with an odd dinger or two the rest of the way out. I don't see that as an upgrade for now but for later.

It sure is. The bigger question that can't be ignored, and often is - does Pratt clearing that low hurdle, say maybe hitting .220 with a 2-3 HRs the rest of the way out, make them any more competitive for the post season? Nope. I've said before that I believe the front office approached this year as a season to position themselves for the potential lockout and to see how the new CBA affects their financial strategies. I usually get scoffed at. Don't care. This move supports that premise UNLESS they make a significant trade to upgrade 3B. They can absorb one lower average, developing hitter between SS and 3B. They can't seriously compete for a World Series championship with two. Moving Vaugn to 3B somewhat regularly might be an option. It would also support the premise of holding pat until after the CBA is settled. Plug an out of position guy in, rather than move assets to try and fix a hole for a championship run.

Generally agree. But what if he ends up hitting .220 prior to the trade deadline? They can't expect much of a post season if the left side of the infield (regardless of which combo of Ortiz, Hamilton, Rengifo, Pratt) continues providing the punchless offense that it has been. Would you want them to make a trade for somebody at 3B if Pratt can't improve the offense? As a very young rookie with a brief dip at AAA, I don't expect lights out offense this season from him. But we can't ignore, more offense is needed from the left side unless we're content with close but no cigar again this year.

That's too much to ask for from far too many fans. I fully expect him to disappoint a lot of them. Personally, I think it's a little rushed, but definitely a new story line and angle of interest to keep us entertained. The question is how much does it help a playoff run? Solid move for the future, but feels like a lateral move offensively.

It reminds of the 90's O'Douls slogan "What beer drinkers drink .... when they're not drinking beer". Some claim it's marketing baseball and growing MLB's popularity. Maybe, but if bananarama ball is a person's entry point to baseball, how much are they going to enjoy the real thing? Yes, my lawn also needs to be kept off of... LOL.

I have mixed feelings about it. The obvious is that she is an aging woman, desperate for attention. The cleavage schtick isn't hard on the eyes, but it's also kind of pitiful. On the other hand, she is more of a die-hard fan than many others, both women and men. While she likes to draw attention to herself, she's not spending the whole game chatting and goofing off, aping for the camera. She's dialed into the game like a real true-blue baseball fan. I don't know or see many people interested in keep a scorebook every game. And someone said she has to travel a bit to attend the games, not a MIL local. Big money ruins everything. I think it's crappy that long time ticket holders get treated like this. Yet, I can't blame the organization. They have to keep up with modern baseball fan expectations. And THAT is who I blame. Spoiled, pampered fans (mostly 20-35 years my junior) who require an amusement park experience instead of a baseball park experience. Silly, unnecessary amenities, 50+ different kinds of foods that are closer to a restaurant offering than the convenient, practical "take me out to the ballgame" options, All of that fluff requires more and more revenue, not to mention the outrageous players' salaries. So, times change, market expectations change. It is what it is. I feel bad for Amy and others like her. But she could still dress more modestly. What will be interesting to see is if she gets a new seat that's off camera. And if so, will she continue to wear the low cut shirts. If it continues, it would actually indicate to me that her attire wasn't just for getting her "TV time" as some put it.

Maybe Murphy is keep a limit on his innings count for the year. He threw around 140 last year between AAA and MIL. And they have other young arms in the rotation that aren't built up for 150+ yet either. Maybe he is trying to milk them all out as best as possible. Just a guess.

It's nearly as unwatchable as that Banana ball circus.

And that, along with the size, is why I'm skeptical. He might just be having a career minor league year. But that's what we're faced with. Small markets can't buy proven talent, so fans get impatient with prospects who ae succeeding, and want guys rushed to the bigs. I think most guys should spend a full year at AAA unless their offensive numbers are eye popping. There are always exceptions though.

Sorry, I'm skeptical. But I'll keep an open mind. I'll be shocked if he pounds 10-15 HRs, and a minimum .265 average consistently at the big-league level. With that said, they need to get him up now and see if he can outperform Perkins at least. I am curious to see what he can do at the top level. Have watched some of his minor league ABs the past couple years, and wasn't overly impressed compared to the hype. But I'm willing to give him his shot to prove he has and can continue to improve.

That 97 win offense crapped itself once it faced the Dodgers. Toronto did not crap themselves. So - the Dodgers ridiculously unfair starting pitching can be competed against under the right circumstances. MIL doesn't have the money that Toronto does, but it does have prospect capital to leverage. The front office didn't exercise that leverage. If you disagree, show me the trade that added to that 97 win offense that helps it not crap itself if they face LAD in the playoffs again. Now tell me they didn't mail it in regarding improving the offense. It's not insulting to the front office. I understand their business model. They are about staying in the black financially first and foremost. Makes perfect business sense. That means nurturing low cost, in house talent rather than gamble and leverage that prospect resource. And that is understandable. But as such, it's OK to call a spade a spade. They made moves and non-moves to keep the business (known as the Milwaukee Brewers Corporation) in good financial health. I don't blame Mark A for his admission of providing a summer of entertainment, because that is what the mission statement must be for a small market team and its investment group. I'm just saying let's not pretend that they did things when they didn't. They gambled on some guys taking the next step up, staying healthy, matching at least last year's production etc. They didn't add a proven bat..... again. There is never a guarantee that a new acquisition will produce offensively compared to past seasons either. But it is a measured, calculated move trying to improve rather than just hoping internal assets will blossom and that the fans will stay invested, intrigued enough to keep spending money.

I don't filter through every possible option on every roster. Front office gets paid bigly to take care of that. It wouldn't have had to be left side of infield. Perhaps sweeten the Boston trade and bring in Duran or Abreu. I was fine with Ortiz at SS knowing full well that his defense is what matters. 3B options I'm less familiar with who might have been an option. But I have no doubt there are options if you're willing to spend the one asset you have in abundance, which is prospect capital. With that said, I'm a hugger too, and wouldn't have wanted them to go too crazy on that end either. I could see Jett Williams, Luis Pena being a happy medium prospect loss for immediate upgrade gain though for example. Maybe even a guy like Payne or Adamczewski. Package enough of those types of guys along with a maybe a low level pitching prospect and / or a guy like Ty Black, who really needs a legit shot somewhere... and you could swing a deal with somebody for somebody. I saw someone suggest a move now for the Twins' Brooks Lee. Might not be the worst thing. There has to be somebody who can provide a little more offense without a huge cost and contractual obligations. Had to be some options like that in the offseason. I think they're just content to compete enough to sell tickets, keep the fans hooked, and hoping that the new wave of messiah prospects are "all that and a case of beer."