Matt Breen
-
Posts
9,122 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Matt Breen
-
I don't know if 'floor' and 'ceiling' are the right words - but I do think that Melvin operated a little more 'safe' than Stearns has done. Now, I think some of that is because Stearns has basically been given a nod to do whatever is needed - while Melvin had teams that - for better or worse - were too good to tear down, but not good enough to win. Sort of of perennial .500 teams. Thus, I think Melvin thought more short term - and therefore, less risk. He took known quantities - even bad known quantities - and put them out there year after year (Overbay, Yuni, etc., etc.). He signed mediocre veteran starters to big contracts (Suppan, Wolf, Garza, Lohse) who could certainly help the team, but weren't going to carry them over the top. Whether all of that was just Doug operating the way he felt was right - or a refusal to take risks - who knows. But I think the circumstances are pretty different - and Stearns has been given the go ahead take some risks. So I think he's definitely got a wider range of outcomes in his arsenal.
-
2080-ball's Brewers Top 15 prospects: 1. Josh Hader (LHP) 2. Corey Ray (OF) 3. Lewis Brinson (OF) 4. Isan Diaz (SS/2B) 5. Luis Ortiz (RHP) 6. Lucas Erceg (3B) 7. Mauricio Dubon (2B/SS) 8. Brandon Woodruff (RHP) 9. Marcos Diplan (RHP) 10. Phil Bickford (RHP) 11. Corbin Burnes 12. Mario Feliciano 13. Trent Clark 14. Nash Walters 15. Chad McClanahan I just combined the two lists into one. https://medium.com/brewernation/2080-balls-top-10-brewers-prospects-c762475e57c4#.jaj6flpqr -
Yes, Keith Law (same source for the top 100 prospects) listed the Brewers at #6 overall for system ranking. Joel Reuter of Bleacher Report had the Brewers at #3 overall for system ranking (posted 1/4/17). Its part of the reason I started tracking system rankings. There are a variety of opinions and while some are better than others, I feel a consensus is better than 1 person making a decree and fans just following along to that 1 voice. One note: there was only 1 unanimous ranking last season - LA Angels in 30th place. Sources I am still waiting to hear from in 2017: Baseball America Baseball Prospectus John Sickels/ Minor League Baseball Minor League Baseball Analyst (book) Prospect Digest MiLB.com (overall ranking) MLBreports.com MLB Top Prospects With taking the averages of all source ranks last year (entering 2016), the Brewers were tied for 10th with 11.091 as a rating (the lower the better) & tied with the Cubs. 9th was Texas at 9.272 and 12th was Tampa Bay with 11.182 Awesome. Thanks for the info. And thanks for tracking. It's interesting stuff, and I look forward to see where the club ends up.
-
It's something to remember - a Top 100 prospect is no guarantee of anything. Jed Bradley, Taylor Jungmann, Tyrone Taylor, Mat Gamels, Mark Rogers, etc., etc. Every team has their failures - and there are lots of them. That's why you just need to keep producing good prospects. Some turn out, some don't.
-
That makes - so far: #41 - Isan Diaz #67 - Clark #70 - Erceg #71 - Hader #79 - Ortiz #100 - Woodruff I'm assuming Brinson and Ray will pop up shortly. That would be eight players in the Top 100. I read somewhere else that the Brewers system was ranked #6 overall - not sure if that's correct.
-
That is correct. Woodruff was #100. I think people were just reporting who was listed in Law's latest group of 20 prospects.
-
But what if Mace Windu is Snoke? And Finn is Mace's son? http://www.scified.com/news/star-wars-fan-theory-suggests-snoke-is-actually-mace-windu-with-supporting-evidence My teenage son loves the Star Wars universe and is always telling about these crazy fan theories.
-
I love reading the detailed scouting reports from Longenhagen. Usually it's just a sentence, but he goes into specifics on the guys - especially the top players.
-
I'm expecting Erceg and Clark to be borderline Top 100 guys - so that's a positive for them. Hader is low compared to other lists, but I don't have access to his analysis. I think there are still some people that aren't sold on him as a long term starter due to control issues. But whatever - I try not to get worked up about where our guys get placed. To me, the nice thing about the lists are that it boasts our players' values in case we want to trade someone, and it gives me a way to get a hold of the value of other prospects - guys we could potentially trade. Obviously, the higher rating are nice in that it builds hope for the future, but in the end, it really doesn't matter if a player is at #1 or #101. They still have to produce in the majors.
-
Should be out this week. I've enjoyed the new prospect guy that they added last year - Eric Longenhagen. I like how detailed his work has been.
-
Forsythe to Dodgers - DeLeon to Rays
Matt Breen replied to patrickgpe's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
I heard last summer from a baseball writer that the guy the Dodger were willing to deal most of their top prospects was DeLeon. So I think your speculation may have some merit to it. I think the general argument is that he's probably more of a mid-rotation arm than a top-of-the-rotation guy. -
What could Braun bring from anyone? (2017 version)
Matt Breen replied to pete's topic in Transaction Rumors & Proposals
I agree. If Braun had two years left on his deal - even if he was 35 - he'd probably be gone (assuming he hit like he did in 2016). We're seeing teams are shying away from long term commitments, especially with older players. Carlos Beltran, age 56, was one of the first guys to sign. Why? It was a one year deal. No long term commitment. Bautista, Encanarcion - all these older guys have gotten less than they anticipated - in years and in dollars. Other similar player - Napoli, Moss - are still waiting. Only five hitters have gotten a deal longer than three years this off season (three for 4-years, two for 5-years). Those guys ages were 30, 31, 31, 31, 32. It doesn't mean some team won't break the bank (in dollars and years) for a player, but right now, teams are wary of long term commitments for veterans. -
Pretty clear the team wanted a veteran guy to close.
-
I think the numbers indicate a decline as a defensive player - especially as a CF - whether you look at Fangraphs or Baseball Reference or Defensive Runs Saved or UZR or simpley reading what others have had to say about the guy - or watching him play. I would love to know why you find Fangraphs defensive ratings as completely and utterly pointless. Personally, I don't know much about how they are calculated. So I would like understand why ratings such as Fangraphs - or whatever ranking system - are reliable (or not). Perhaps it's a great post to start. Again, I don't really know that much about how ratings like Fangraphs are calculated - so someone explaining clearly why they think they work or not would be kind of cool.
-
Some people believe in WAR - at least to some degree. I don't think anyone takes it as gospel, but it offers a point of reference. If you don't like WAR - that's fine. But 'Outrageous'? Not even close.
-
This is exactly correct. There is no value moving Garza to the bullpen. If he does well in the rotation, he's got value due to the low 2018 salary of $5M. He doesn't even have to be that good - just keep his ERA in the low 4.00s, stay healthy, throw 180 innings. That's a decent #5 guy - especially for $5M. A $5M reliever, however, is not cheap (unless that reliever is really, really good). The big payoff for Milwaukee is if he is in the rotation. So you put him there. If he ends up being terrible, then so be it. You let him go at that point, and count the contract a bust. But if he does okay, he might fetch a prospect - and perhaps some salary relief.
-
I believe that the team that Garza played for in any particular year would be responsible for his deferred salary. So the Brewers are already on the hook for the $2M deferred annually for 2014 through 2016 - thus $6M. In other words, his contract was for $12.5M in 2014 (as well as 2015 and 2016), with $2M of it deferred. So we are responsible for that $2M. If a trade is made mid-season, I'm not sure how it would work. My guess is that it would be pro-rated - but that's just a guess.
-
I think the best thing is this deal lets our young guys go out and try establish themselves as effective major leaguers. Who gets to close will come later - and to the guy that has earned it. Knebel, Barnes, Magnifico, Blazek, etc., etc. It'll be fun to see who steps up. We saw Thornburg go from a question mark to a closer in less than a year in 2016. He certainly earned the role with his outstanding performance. As noted, having Feliz close does (potentially) keep down costs of any future closer - as no one starts to rack up the saves until Feliz is gone (and saves pay big in arbitration).
-
No evidence for Bagwell, but just look at him. I think I remember some rumblings about Pudge a few years ago. It's not surprising though that the voters pick and chose who they are outraged about when it comes to PED's. Canseco said in his book he injected Pudge with PEDs. And there was the time he came to spring training 15-20lbs lighter - a time that coincided with tougher PED testing. All speculation and rumors, however. He never tested for anything.
-
Really happy for Raines. A great player - even better in retrospect. Pudge and Bagwell were great players as well. I'd have been fine with Hoffman and Vlad if they had made it too.
-
If Shaw hits .260 with 15 HR and plays good defense (which he has in the past) - it's a great season for the guy. Could he hit 25 HR? Sure. But I also think he's the kind of guy who could just tank. It will be interesting to actually see him in action this year.
-
This is part of the process of simply giving guys a chance. Villar, Perez, Broxton, Pina, Guerra, etc. - good so far. Other guys were mediocre or outright awful. The nice thing is that we found quite a few keepers from the bargain bin. That's part of building the team into a winner. Of course, that means hundreds of ABs from Flores and Walsh and guys like that. But that's life. You don't win them all. I think we'll have a lot more of that this year - not as much - but still a lot of it.
-
People should look through the comments on the Sickels posting - he answers some specific questions, such as one on Ronnie Gideon: I looked at Gideon and you could put him in the Cs. There’s some thump in the bat, but on the other hand he was an experienced college player in the Pioneer League, his strike zone judgment is questionable,and when I saw him play for Texas A&M I thought his swing was too long to work at higher levels. That said, sometimes those guys surprise you and he’s worth tracking, though right-handed hitting first basemen have a tough profile to live up to. http://www.minorleagueball.com/2017/1/17/14297686/milwaukee-brewers-top-20-prospects-for-2017
-
Sickels just posted the preliminary list of Brewers he's looking at, we'll have to review and post on his site to add others he should consider, or respond via Twitter to this tweet. Sickels has now posted his Brewers Preliminary Prospect Grade Breakdown. Zero prospects in the A/A- categories, but 12 total in the B+ to B- range. It is worth noting his final grades are subject to change slightly when released tomorrow. As a note, here is a breakdown of Sickles prospects ratings by volume coming into 2016 (using his Top 175 list): A : 8 (1-8) A- : 17 (9-25) B+ : 52 (26-77) B : 67 (78-145) The rest of the guys on his list were ranked as B-
-
I'm in the 'meh' ballpark on this one. First of all, I don't think Feliz is that good - he's a solid guy, but nothing spectacular. To me he's a set up type guy a contender should be getting - not a rebuilding club. Second, I'm happy to give guys we already have a chance to pitch regularly in 2017. I still think this is a year to help figure out who our long term assets are going to be - and that means giving guys playing time. Third, if he pitches good - but not great - I don't think he'd net that much in a mid-season trade. Of course, Stearns and Company might see something special in the guy. If so, by all means, sign him. But I'm not sweating this one out. He's a decent arm and would help the club, but I can see positives to not adding him at this time.
