Matt Breen

Colorado Springs may be even worse than Coors Field. The city is about 1000 feet higher than Denver.

Didnt see that coming. But I'm okay with it. It's about getting good players on the field. If the club thinks he's ready, then go for it. We can live with some growing pains - this season is about building for the future. Blazek, Knebel, Goforth, now Wagner. Nice seeing the giving the kids a chance. Congrats to Tyler.

It the Brewers could get Kaminsky for Lind they shouldn't hesitate. Otherwise, dip down into the lower minors if you have to in order to find a player with upside.

NL starters in 2014 had a 3.74 ERA. Lohse had a 3.54 ERA and Garza had a 3.64 ERA. That put them just above average. Solid #3 guys performance wise, but nothing more. This year they have both been terrible. While 10 starts is a small sample, it's to the point where you can't dismiss them either. Whether its age, injury, mechanics or whatever, you have wonder what's up with both players. Perhaps a team can see things in those players that they think they can correct to get either guy back on track. If so, maybe someone would want them. But to me, it's hard to see anyone really giving up much of anything for either guy - at least at this point. Maybe if they can put together a nice string of starts they'll draw some serious interest. I think there are two examples from last year - the trades of Jake Peavy and Justin Masterson. The Giants gave up a solid pitching prospect in Edwin Escobar to get Peavy, who had a 4.90 ERA at the time. They also got Boston to pay $2-3 million of Peavys remaining salary. Masterson was having a worse year 5.51 ERA at the time of the trade. The cards gave up James Ramsey, a nothing special OF. I think the Peavy deal shows that if the club picks up some salary, we can improve the quality of the prospect in any deal. I'm the end, Lohse and Garza's track record (something teams value) might be enough to draw some serious trade interest. But without improved performance, I don't see a lot coming back to the club.

I wouldn't be shocked if Cotts is released this week. Then bring up Jungmann or Thornburg. This team needs to accept that they are playing for the future. Goforth has potential to be a good reliever. Time to move on from mistakes like Cotts and see what the young guys can do. We're just fooling ourselves if we think we can trade him. Then give Jungmann or Thornburg some starts while Peralta is out. If they don't sink, they move into the rotation when we move Lohse/Garza. Like I said, it's time to move on and give other guys a chance.

I throw myself on my sword. This I'd just pathetic.

I'm just don't see why any club gives up much of anything for Garza or Lohse. I don't see anyone giving up a quality player for a guy having a bad season like Lohse and Garza are having. Sure they are likely to do better (and Lohse has done well of late). But these guys are over 30, have ERAs over 5.00, and have given up homers by the bushel. If I'm a GM, these are two guys who might (and I stress might) help you out at the back of the rotation. Then again, they both might just be declining as players. At least Lohse you don't have to worry about being on the hook for two more years of salaries as with Garza. I think the best we are going to do with either player is salary relief, a player in need of a change (Garin Cecchini for example) or a lower level guy who might develop into something down the line. As a comparable, last year the Cardinals gave up a middling prospect (at best) for Justin Masterson - a guy having a bad year. I don't see us doing any better than that for Garza or Lohse. I will add that it does just take one team to make something happen - so maybe I'm totally wrong. Maybe a team values Garza or Lohse more than I think. No matter, let's just hope they both keep pitching better to up their value.

I didn't like the Lohse signing at the time mostly because I wasn't sure of what kind of pitcher we were getting. He was good in 2011-12, bad in 2009-10. He was aging, coming to a tougher pitcher's park, leaving a successful club that seems to nurture pitchers well. Even with out the draft pick we gave up, I didn't like the deal. I envisioned Lohse regressing. I also didn't think we were that good. I figured he'd help, but we needed more than just a little help. To Kyle's credit, he did very well the last two years. And while he's struggling now, I wouldn't be surprised if he comes out with an okay year. While I wouldn't have done it, I understand why the Brewers made the move. They saw themselves as contenders. I'd argue fringe contenders (at best), but whatever. The club was in it to be a winner, and adding Lohse helped them toward that goal (although they didn't actually attain that status). In the grand scheme of the club's plans (try and make the playoffs in 2013-15), it made sense. It was part of similar moves - sign A-Ram, sign Garza, sign K-Rod, etc. They are sort of all part of the same package.

Lingering elbow issues never seem to end well for anyone.

I hadn't seen anything in the forum, so here's an update on Taylor Williams. Taylor continues to experience "occasional elbow discomfort", according to Adam McCalvy. He will remain at extended camp. http://reviewingthebrew.com/2015/05/17/milwaukee-brewers-wise-to-take-it-slow-with-taylor-williams/ Having problems linger so long is concerning. Let's hope this is not something that leads to surgery.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-T0vhtxCvIUU/U_5u1nGn0EI/AAAAAAAAWCA/sOG_5AAmPw0/s1600/CelebRookie187Turner.JPG

To me, Segura stays at SS. He has the most value as a trade asset at this position. To me, this is the most important thing. Segura is under control through 2018. I don't know if he's part of the next successful Brewer team, thus, he becomes a way to acquire assets for the future. Staying at SS gives him the most value. We could trade the guy tomorrow, or a year from now, but his highest value comes as a SS. If this club is fighting for a playoff spot, and the team decided that Segura and Sardinas are our two best middle infielders, I'd say put Sardinas at SS and Segura at 2B. But we're not fighting for a playoff spot - and probably won't for a few years (at least in my opinion). Thus, it's fine to keep Segura at SS to showcase him. Ultimately, SS will be Arcia's in 2017. If Segura is part of the team at this time, we can move him to 2B if he's better than the other options.

Yeah, that worked out well.

Their GM did give $21M and a 1st round draft pick to get a 36 year old Mike Cuddyer. That aside, the Mets are doing fine with pitching and defense. Wright and D'Arnaud are due back soon, perhaps the aforementioned Cuddyer starts hitting.

I'd love Heaney and Newcomb. They slot in your rotation within a year. Kubitza is interesting - strikes out a bit too much, not quite enough power. Could develop, but you never know with this kind of player. While I love the idea of acquiring two high level arms, I'm not sure the Angels would part with both players. They have some serious long term rotation issues - and this would gut their system (which is not good) of impact talent. Doesn't mean you can't try. The worse thing that happens is they say 'no'.

Knebel's issue is control. He's regularly walked a batter every other inning. If he can bring that down a bit, he could be special.

Scooter didn't hit well after all-star break last year. His worse habits seem to have emerged taken root. The K rate is just brutal right now. Scooter looked bad at the plate and in the field. I just hope this is just Scooter struggling to get his mechanics and rhythm in place, and not a case of a batter being 'figured out' by opposing pitchers - and the batter not adjusting accordingly. Hopefully, he'll be back when he gets things together. Just let him rediscover himself without any extra pressure.

Mets got Syndergaard after his A ball season in the Dickey trade. He was ranked 54th by BA at that point. That's the kind of trade we need to look at if we trade Gomez or Lucroy. Teams are so reluctant to give up top guys who are close to the majors. Sure it's a risk, but the upside is worth it.

Syndergaard looks good. Has a nice, easy motion. Throwing 97 with ease.

Jon Heyman says the Brewers are interested in moving Garza: http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/25186170/inside-baseball-tulo-needs-to-go-and-here-are-the-options-plus-mlb-news "The Brewers are playing better under Craig Counsell, but they still look like a likely seller. Kyle Lohse, a free agent after the year, is a natural to go (though they love him as a clubhouse guy). The team also seems especially interested in moving Matt Garza, rivals report, and Garza has two more years left."

Interesting article on pitching coach Leo Mazonne, who oversaw the Braves staffs of the 1990s/early 2000s. There's some good discussion on his pitching programs and so forth - something I find interesting with all the arm injuries suffered nowadays. Also interesting that no one has hired him after his rough stint in Baltimore. I would have thought someone would have taken a chance on him. http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2015/5/13/8585249/leo-mazzone-profile-feature

Thank you. I didn't know the details of the option. I found it all here: http://www.brewcrewball.com/2014/1/28/5354550/matt-garza-contract-details-Brewers I'm probably inclined to think the option is more a hindrance than a help, but that's just a guess.

A few weeks ago, most people would have been really wary of trading for Garza. He just looked bad - serving up taters and passing out walks - and then add in a declining K rate and a long term contract - it would have been hard to justify giving up much for the guy. However, he's gradually overcome the early poor starts and is starting to resemble the pitcher we had last season - a solid, middle of the pack starter (note that he had a slow start last year - he produced ERAs of 5.00 and 4.65 in April and May before coming around in June). For reference, the average NL starter has an ERA of 3.97 this year. In 2014, it was 3.74. Garza's ERA the past two years is 4.04 and 3.64, respectively. There's value in what Garza has done - and what he will likely do going forward. The key is finding the right buyer - a club that wants a solid, (mostly) reliable pitcher, who's not that old (31), for the next 2.5 years. It's all about finding someone at the right time and situation. For some teams, the 2.5 years will be a detriment. For others, it's potentially a positive. It's finding the right situation. All that said, $12.5M for a middle of the pack starter isn't cheap (it's not that expensive either). And Garza has had some injuries over the years that might make someone take pause. I think we can get something decent for him, just how much is another good guess. If Garza can put together a few more good starts (lower the walk rate a bit, up the K rate a bit, lower the ERA a bit), I wouldn't be shocked if we could get a fringy Top 100 type prospect. Like with all these trade ideas, I just hope we look for a player(s) with decent upside. If that means dipping down into the lower levels of the minors, then so be it. I don't want a guy who profiles as a back up infielder - but we take him because he's 'major league ready'. We also have to remember we can wait with Garza. If not one is offering what we want, he'll still be worht something this off season (assuming he pitches okay). No one is holding a gun to our head, forcing us to make a deal. The team just needs to wait for the right offer.

That's probably what's in the cards. Leave Arcia where he is. Rivera played 1/2 of last season at AA, so it's his 'turn' - that's the Brewer way.

Sardinas is hitting .224 - with no power - outside of Colorado Springs, so I'm tempering my enthusiasm for the guy. He turns 22 on Saturday - nice b-day present. Perhaps we can get him 20lbs of muscle to add on to his frame. The kid is a twig.