Matt Breen

Don't know why they don't just bring Hammel back on a short term deal then. That makes a lot more sense for them than trading for Nelson. Some people have speculated that Hammel was hurt in the 2nd half of last year - when he was pretty mediocre. The Cubs deny that - but who knows.

Analysts have pretty much noted what others are saying about the Cubs pitching - it lacks depth. While even with mediocre pitching that team will be really good, they are potentially vulnerable if there are some injuries in the rotation. Not that they couldn't make a trade if something happens. They certainly have the resources for it. But if there is a weakness, that's where it is for Chicago.

Ultimately, we'll probably end up with Andy Wilkens after all is said and done.

Ruth had a better season because he was able to drink and chase women and eat junk food - all without seeing it on the Internet.

One thing about the draft picks is that there was some question that the commissioner could actually strip a team of draft picks. The draft is a carefully constructed system defined by the CBA. Taking away draft picks takes money out of the game. But by giving the picks to the Astros - there's no overall lose of picks.

Cardinals played the system. They figured they'd lose picks. That's why they signed Fowler - they knew they were going to lose their #1 pick.

I know what you mean. Example - why is James Kaprielian - the 16th pick in the draft - rated #57 on the MLB Pipeline - which is a higher ranking than the #3, #6, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14 and #15 picks? How'd that happen? Was it the the amazing workload he had after the draft - all 18 innings pitched? Or perhaps it was because of the strained flexor muscle in his forearm. Or maybe it was simply because he was a Yankee.

A guy like Butler pretty much comes down to what the org thinks about him. If they see a really talented guy who could potentially rebound with a change of scenery - then go for it. But if they see a guy who just was never that good - or his skills have eroded for whatever reason - then pass. Obviously, he was well thought of at one point - ranked to 25 by BA. So it's foolish not to do your due diligence on the guy. If the tools are still there it makes for an intriguing option.

That's what I'm afraid of. I think the judge figured that the 'damage', financially, was $1.7M. So I'm betting the commissioner says something like this, "This was a rogue employee, who had been sentenced to prison for 46 months. The man is barred from ever working for major league baseball ever again. It was not the fault of the St. Louis Cardinals organization that this happened, but their employee did cause hardship to the Houston Astros. The courts have set a price on that at $1.7M. Therefore, the Cardinals will pay those damages to the Astros." It won't look good for baseball if they say the organization is responsible - so they'll say it's a rogue employee - no harm meant, etc.

Updated: Cardinals have been ordered to surrender their top two picks in 2017 and $2M to the Astros. http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/18586344/mlb-orders-st-louis-cardinals-forfeit-top-2-2017-draft-picks-pay-2-million-houston-astros ------- Original post: A decision about any punishment for the St. Louis Cardinals is likely to come soon from Major League Baseball - possibly this week. It seems a judge has unsealed the investigation info - allowing the league to get a better handle on the situation - and finally get it resolved. I recommend reading the article below. It even has all the court documents embedded on the site (if you like reading that kind of stuff). I'm hoping the Cardinals get slammed (but I'm not holding my breath after the slap on the wrist Preller got last year). http://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/astros/article/As-MLB-ruling-nears-new-details-of-Cardinals-10891605.php

Anyone know what happened to Butler? He killed it in the lower minors - not bad at AA - then just blew it. His second year - 2013 - playing at A-, A+ and AA levels - he threw 150 innings and gave up only 96 hits. That's phenomenal. His strikeout rate really dropped the next year at AA for a full season. ERA was okay - 3.58. But then things just went south. Horrible ERAs, low strike rates, increased walk rate. Just wondering if anyone knows anything about him. He seems like the kind of guy who we should take a flyer on - but I don't know that much about him.

Brewcrewball put together all the rankings and analysis by K Law on their site: http://www.brewcrewball.com/2017/1/28/14424312/milwaukee-brewers-have-8-players-ranked-in-top-100-prospects-by-keith-law-espn It's a good read.

Pretty sure those were not counted as errors, but they did arguably cost us 2 games. It should be his job to turn a double play properly. I think one of the areas of a game that gets ignored too often is the little things - things that might not count as an error - but hurt a team. That means taking proper routes, being in the right place to begin with, being in the right position as a cut off man (and hitting the cut off man), and turning double plays properly, etc., etc. I'm not going to fault a guy for being slow or having a weak arm - the team knows that weakness up front. It's all these little things that can add up to a lot in the long run. To me, it may be a market place inefficiency that the organization can (and should) exploit. It means good coaching and a consistent organizational philosophy that coaches and management and players buy into.

Wieters was once an outstanding defensive catcher. He was pretty mediocre in 2014-15, but got better rankings last year. He had TJ surgery in 2014 - so that he struggled in the aftermath isn't a shocker. He seems to have gotten better - but I doubt he's back to where he was (but that's just a guess). The article about the team's interest in Wieters said he's known to be a good clubhouse guy. Don't know how true that is.

Folks, I want you to know that I deleted a post that was political in nature - plus the responses to it. I would just like to, respectfully, ask people to refrain from such commentary. It is against board guidelines, and ultimately, it derails a thread faster than anything. I would also ask that if someone does post something political - especially you might find offensive - please refrain from rebutting or attacking that person. A polite reminder that such comments is not out of order (and was done in this case), but it would be great if we could keep any other comments offline. But feel free to report any such posts or to contact a mod about them. Please reference the board etiquette page if you like: viewtopic.php?&t=4208 If anyone has any questions about this, please PM me or any of the Mods. Thank you.

This is likely one of two things: 1. Boros drumming up interest in his client and throwing out the Brewers to help stir the pot. He's good at this kind of thing. 2. Wieters isn't getting much interest from the rest of the league and is trying to find a place he can play full time - and thus try and rebuild his stock for a better deal next year. I'm skeptical about #2, because you would think a team like the Nationals would be a better option - great staff, playoff caliber club. Of course, maybe the Nats just like Derek Norris - although you would have to think they have some serious concerns after hitting .186 last year. Or maybe Washington won't guarantee him anything more than a part time gig. Who knows. I'm guessing it's Boros drumming up business for his client. We're his 'mystery team' that he always seems have floating out there. I'm guessing he's just feeling out Milwaukee as a way to scare other clubs who might be interested in Wieters so they increase their offers. But hey, I guess it can't hurt to check in on the guy. If the price is right - you never know.

They aren't going to say, 'Scooter is out of a job and there's no room for him on the roster because he lacks versatility. So what will you give me for him in trade?' That'll net you next to nothing. They could just be giving lip service to how the team believes he is worth something - even without a regular job - just to force someone to actually give us something of value in a trade. Or maybe not. Maybe the club honestly feels he can contribute. I could see him getting 20-30 starts at 2B (for Villar needs a rest, and when Arcia needs a rest, Villar could move to SS). Then maybe a handful of starts in LF. Plus some pinch hitting. Maybe 200 ABs - tops (assuming no major injuries). Of course, all that playing time is then taken away from someone else - likely Perez. He gets regulated to the RH batter in a 3B platoon - plus maybe some starts at 1B and the OF. Total of maybe 40 starts at 3B, another 25 elsewhere? Just a guess. With pinch hitting, DHing, he maybe gets 300 ABs with that.

gracias.

A few things about this: 1. It's a fascinating idea and I've always wondered if it would really work. I've even considered a 13 man 'rotation' where you have four guys a game - basically get them try and limit them to only having to go through the rotation once a game. You have a 13th guy for mop up action, extra innings, etc. If a guy pitches every third game, that's 54 games. Say they average 2.1 IP, that's 126 IP in a season. 2. I think the time someone would try it in its purest form would be an expansion team. No star pitchers - just a bunch of mediocre guys who are happy for a gig. 3. As noted, the plan goes awry when you have really good pitchers. I mean, you got Clayton Kershaw so you want the guy out there 250 innings. Perhaps you could build a hybrid system to accommodate players like Kershaw. Let them pitch their 6-7 innings - that sort of thing. 4. Regarding your 'extra' man. Ideally you get a knuckleball guy. Have someone that could throw 5 inning back-to-back-back without any issue. The guy might not be that good - but he could clean up blow out games, and go deep into extra innings if needed. Just a thought. 5. The system would eliminate 'match up' pitching (for the most part). You might regret the flexibility of bringing in a player to face one or two batters - that sort of thing. 6. One interesting thing to committing to a plan like this is that you don't over pay for pitchers. You're not drafting them with your high picks, you're not giving them $25M a year contracts. That means you could really focus on drafting and developing hitters. At least, theoretically. 7. Teams are always looking for advantages. Let's be honest - the cost of young starting pitching can be enormous. With this system, you can find those guys who don't quite cut it as 6 inning starters - or wipe out relievers - and acquire them - likely at a far lower cost than other pitching prospects. I would love to see someone try this. As I said, I think an expansion team would offer a great opportunity to give it whirl. The other situation I would love to see it happen is with a club with really bad pitching - and a bad farm system. I'm thinking the LA Angels. Their major league staff is pretty awful, and their minor league system is pretty bare. So why not give something like this a chance.

Wondering if anyone saw Keith Law's Top 40 selections -- specifically, where any Brewers slotted (I'm assuming Brinson and Ray are in here somewhere). Thanks.

Games they win in first half of the year are games they dont need to win the 2nd half of the year. Sure. But as noted in the second sentence, they are a very good team already. There's a very good chance they make the playoffs without Braun. And it's not like they don't trade for Braun now if the opportunity arises - but at a price they are comfortable with. Could they flounder and wish they had Braun from game 1? Sure. But it's a really good team as is, and come July, they may decide that they are better off spending their resources (money, prospects, whatever) on other needs that gets them deeper in the playoffs than adding a bat like Braun. Or maybe they decide Braun's the thing they need at that time - well then they can make the deal then.

In case anyone is wondering, we'll do the 2017 pre-season poll at the end of March/early April. That'll let people see how things shake out during spring training and let us take into account any major moves the club makes during the next couple of months.

I think it should be noted that the Dodgers are a very good team right now. The odds are that, even without any further moves, they are a playoff caliber team. Thus, they can retool or tweak or whatever they need to do during the season. For them, they don't need to be set for the season on March 31. They need to be set on July 31 (or even August 31). The wise thing for a team like LA is to not make moves unless it's on their terms. They can take the first 1/3 or 1/2 of the season and see where they are at - and then make the adjustments. If at that time they see Braun - or anyone else - as essential to a World Series run - then they can make their move. Holding onto their prospects just gives them more bullets to spend at the deadline - assuming they even need to make a big move.

Brinson is #5 on the OF list. http://m.mlb.com/news/article/214298354/2017-top-10-outfield-prospects/?topicid=151437456 Corey Ray didn't make the top 10, but he was the first guy in the 'next up' section. Top 100 revealed this Saturday.

I think most people can give Clark a pass after some injuries last year. He was only 19 last season - and quite young for the league. And his 2015 performance was very good. I've read some concerns about his performance last year - but at this point, people are in the 'wait-and-see' mode regarding Trent. So much can happen with a player - mentally and physically - at his age. Phillips, on the other hand, was healthy last year, and his production, specifically his batting average, revealed a potential flaw in his approach. With the hit tool he displayed last year, scouts saw a guy who just isn't going to hit enough to be a major league regular. I saw one report that said something like 'stiff wrists, noisy footwork, long swing'. To be battling all of that in the upper minors doesn't inspire confidence. You have that a A ball - scouts probably see it as correctable. But get to AA and AAA - that's a different story. I also think that AA is when guys really start to get put under the microscope. Often guys in the lower minors are seen by scouts and writers once or twice in a year. But once they reach AA, there's a lot more scrutiny. And Phillips just didn't inspire confidence in many people. Brett needs to make some adjustments this year - let's just hope it happens. He doesn't have to hit .300 - but if he can hit .250-260 - add in good patience, decent power and solid defense - there's a lot going for him.