Matt Breen

You are right. The same year they signed Riske to that deal, they signed Salomon Torres for one year $3.3 million. The difference was Riske was coming off what for him was a very good season, and Torres was coming off a lousy year. Both were essentially the same though. That's why I cringe when I read stories linking the Brewers to Jason Grilli. Grilli is a buy high guy and will command more years than say a Jon Rauch who's essentially in the same class but wasn't quite as good recently. John, you're right that Grilli would be a buy high guy at this point. Age 36 and suddenly he has an awesome season. Still, it was a pretty great year. I don't agree on Rauch. I think he's nothing more than ordinary. Maybe one year at a low salary (say $1 million). And he has one of the ugliest tattoos ever - the one on his neck. I don't know if I could handle seeing that hideous thing all year. Guys I'd consider: Grilli, Brandon Lyon, Mike Adams (assuming he's healthy), Jeremy Affeldt, JP Howell - those are a few off the top of my head. Obviously, price and years comes into play on any player. None of these guys is worth four and five years. I wouldn't even mind the team trying to add LaTroy Hawkins for another year. He's nothing great, but if you could get him for a one year deal at $1 million, I think he could help. He seemed to really be a quiet leader in 2011 - a guy people respected (the story of him buying Tim Dillard a couple of suits is awesome). http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/140826113.html I wouldn't expect a lot out of the guy, but he could be a mentor to the young players, and still get you 40-50 innings.

Arid has 5 years and $114 million left on his contract. That doesn't include $18 million he receives for some 'historic' HRs. He has a very good shot to get at least two of those (he gets $6 million for each), meaning he'll at least make $126 million over 5 years. That means you're on the hook for (roughly) $31.5 million of his contract. That's probably not a bad deal for someone. But the big issue is where do you play a-rod. He can probably handle 3B for another couple of years, but the guy is getting to be a liability in the field. He'll be 38 next year. He'll only get worse. Also, he is starting to struggle against right handers. He had a .717 OPS against the last year. Not a good sign. His injury issues are also a concern. Arod needs to be in the American league. He can DH, maybe even move 1B in a year or two. It will help him stay healthy. By the end of his contract, he's probably a part time player. He can contribute more in the AL due to the DH being open to him. Even at $6 million a year, he would quickly become a waste of money and roster space in Milwaukee.

No doubt Dempster has risk in the signing. But two years would hopefully minimize the long term pain if he suddenly fails. I don't see us going big on a player like Sanchez. Or even Jackson. I think Jackson will at least four years - maybe even more. As crazy as that sounds, he's young and a decent pitcher. It only takes one person to offer him the bank. The other alternative would be to sign a pitcher with upside, but with some health issues. McCarthy is someone that might be had for one year at a reasonable price due to his health issues. Roy Oswalt pitched poorly last year, but he might be had at a low salary with a lot of incentives. You might even sign two of these types. I'm guessing at prices, but perhaps McCarthy gets a one year deal around $8 million. Oswalt gets a one year deal at $2 or 3 million and a bunch of incentives. Hope one of them does well. The nice thing is that you aren't mortgaging future years for these guys, and they bridge the gap to some younger players. Just a thought.

The more I consider Dempster, the more I think he will fit with the Brewers really well. - He won't cost a draft pick (unlike Kuroda and Lohse). - He probably won't require more a couple of years on his contract - maybe 2 years and an option will get it done. Greinke and Sanchez will be getting 5-6 years. I think Edwin Jackson can get four years as well, considering he's pretty young. - He won't cost as much as top flight guys. I'm thinking in the $10-12 million/year range - He's been relatively healthy the last few years (unlike Marcum, McCarthy, Oswalt, Haren) - He's been pretty effective the last few years (unlike Blanton, Guthrie, Liriano) - He knows the NL central and has thrived in it. - He's always pitched great at Miller Park (not a big thing, but nice to know). - He's going to be 35 next year - not old, but certainly not young. His peripherals haven't fallen off a cliff. He strikeout and BB rates are pretty good and consistent. - His vetoing of a trade to LA last year might show he has limits to where he wants to play. He seemed happy in Chicago, so Milwaukee shouldn't be too hard of a sell. - At 35, he's probably looking for a contender while he has a chance. - He's Canadian My biggest issue with Dempster was his weak 2011. He was much more hittable than previous seasons (or 2012). At 35, you worry the guy who had a 4.80 will re-emerge. However, looking at Fangraphs, his FIP from 2007-20012 has been 3.42, 3.87, 3.99, 3.91, 3.69. So the year he had a 4.80 ERA, his FIP was more inline with his recent performance. Those same number indicate that last year he was probably a bit lucky with his 3.38 ERA. His WAR over the last four years has been very consistent - 3.7, 3.2, 2.7, 3.3. Personally, I hope we get Greinke back. But so much about Dempster screams he fits perfectly with the Brewers. He likes the Midwest. He knows the NL central. He won't cost too much or need too many years. Yes, there's risk. But I think he fits what management needs - and what they can afford.

Totally agree with this one. Kuroda's a good pitcher, but the team needs to keep investing in the farm system. It's how they'll stay relevant.

Hard to compare a guy who is going to turn what, 39?, next year and who has had such a flukey career to Greinke (not that Greinke is the epitome of consistency). It would be foolish to expect a Cy Young performance in 2013, and I doubt any team does. But you are probably right. Then again, I may be overvaluing Maldonado but it seems like he might have the potential to be a starting catcher, which is incredibly valuable just by itself. I think it's easy to undervalue Dickey. I didn't realize how good he's been the last three years until I actually looked at his stats: 2010-12: 616 2/3 innings, 2.95 ERA, .663 opponents’ OPS. That's pretty awesome. And I agree, I don't think anyone is going to expect him to repeat 2012. But even if he pitches like he did in 2010-11, someone's getting a pretty good pitcher. Even at his age. The thing about Dickey that's interesting is his age - he is 38 (just turned it two months ago). He's never had the big payday. In 2011 it was the first year he'd made more than minimum. So he WANTS the extension now. He knows this isn't going to last too long. So whomever gets him is going to probably get a chance to lock him up for an extra couple of years at a much lower rate than guys like Greinke and Sanchez. Yes, it's a risk at his age. But you offer him a two year extension at $10-12 million a year, you could have a good pitcher at a reasonable price. At the worst, if you don't sign him to an extension, you get a very good pitcher for $5 million for one year. That's worth a lot, especially for a team looking to content and also looking to maintain financial flexibility.

I think the Mets get a lot more for Dickey than Maldonado. The Angels gave up a lot more for two months of Greinke. Same with Tigers for Sanchez. Plus, Dickey is cheap, and if you don't sign him to an extension, you can get the draft pick (assuming he continues to pitch well). Of course, there's your perception of what Dickey will do in 2013. And your perception of Maldonado. Is he even a full time player? Is six years of a part time player enough for one year of a Cy Young type pitcher? I just think the Mets can get more.

I'd probably say no to Saunders, unless it was pretty team friendly. The guy is, basically a back end of the rotation guy. His ERA usually floats in the lower 4.00 region. He gives up a lot of hits, doesn't strike out a ton of guys. He'll be 32 next year, so he's not likely to get better. There's nothing wrong with what he does, but it all comes down to cost. A one or two year deal at $6 million/year is okay. But much more than that gets risky. I worry that with a little slippage in velocity, he could be really hittable, and his value go south fast. He's young enough that something like that is probably a couple of years away, but he seems like the type of guy that will get bad in a quick fashion. Again, there's nothing wrong with Saunders. I'd have no problem with the team getting him on a reasonable contract. He won't cost a draft pick either - unlike guys like Edwin Jackson or Kuroda or Lohse. It should be noted that Saunders pitched well for Baltimore after they traded for him last year. They reportedly want him back. He also, reportedly, wants to go back. He's from Virginia and likes pitching close to home.

Interesting article about Haren by Dave Cameron at Fangraphs: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/dan-harens-health-and-what-we-dont-know/ He wonders if there's more issues with Haren's health than anyone realizes. You'd certainly have to run the guy through the ringer to make sure he's healthy before signing him.

Monty, I think you're right about Haren. I don't think anyone will risk a 4-5 year deal on a guy with some health issues. Not at $15 million/year. The guy is not that old - 32 - but he's got a ton of miles on his arm, and he struggled last year. Assuming he feels he can return to his pre-2012 form, his best bet is to take a one year deal and re-establish his value. Then he can nail one more big contract. That makes him an interesting option for the Brewers (assuming the team thinks he can rebound). Haren at 1 year and $12 million is WAY better than Lohse at 3/$36 million.

I'm wondering the same thing. His numbers are pretty awesome, even if he's older. Huge strikeouts, low walks. Really good stats. Let's hope he keeps it up for milwaukee.

Lohse would be an awful signing at those rates. McCarthy or Dempster would be way better.

Parra is next. Unless they can trade him.

This is about right. A guy like Veras making $500,000 is one thing. When he makes $3 million - time to let him go.

I thought the team might keep Veras around. But whatever. I bet Loe and Parra are next. K-Rod was a given. This opens up a lot of innings for the team to fill. A challenge, but not impossible. I assume the team would try and trade any of these guys before just letting them go. Which means no one wanted Veras.

it only takes one team. I don't think it's crazy to think he'll get a 2-year - or even 3 year - deal. Dempster pitched well last season - 3.38 ERA, 173 innings, 1.2 WHIP, 153K, 52BB. That's pretty good. I looked at Fangraphs and his FIP was 3.69 and xFIP 3.77 (if you like those kinds of stats). Again, pretty good. It was interesting to look at Fangraphs, and Dempster's FIP and xFIP have been very consistent over the past four years. A good sign. He had a 4.80 ERA in 2011, but his FIP was 3.91. At his age, Dempster is unlikely to get better. But he has a good shot at being league average or better (NL starters had a 4.07 ERA last year). A two year deal shouldn't cripple a team financially. Is a year safer? Sure. But I bet someone steps up to the plate and gives him more than one year. I won't be shocked if it is the Brewers. 2 years. And maybe an option. I think the team fits Dempster well (Midwest, NL central, contender - hopefully). I think Atlanta would be a good fit for him too. I'm not saying Dempster is my #1 target. I just think he and Brewers will find each other attractive. I'd love a one year deal with an option. But I bet they offer a 2-year deal to secure him. It still leaves the team with some money for a reliever or two.

Dempster has way more going for him than Suppan ever did. Suppan never struck out many guys, and walked too many. Not a good combo. The year before he joined Milwaukee he had a 1.453 WHIP. That plain sucks. He had disaster tattooed on his forehead. He was moving to a tougher park and had a worse defense. That he ended up sucking was not a shock. Dempster, on the other hand, has a solid strikeout and walk rate over the last few years. Better than Suppan ever had. However, Dempster's performance had steadily trended downward from 2008-2011. His HR allowed rate went up, his hits allowed rate went up, ERA went up, WHIP went up. His Ks and BBs were about the same. It culminated in a poor 2011. He has a 4.80 ERA and a 1.43 WHIP. Not good. That makes 2012 so frustrating. He did very well. 3.38 ERA. 1.20 WHIP. Which pitcher is Dempster? I honestly don't know, not really watching him much over the last few years (except Brewer games). Dempster will be 36 next May. It's a risky age. However, I think he's the kind of guy the Brewers will target. He seems to want to be in the midwest (when he vetoed the deal to LA). He's familiar with the Brewers and NL, so that probably helps. That we have a decent team can't hurt. Thus I think they'll target Dempster with a shorter deal - maybe two years. Maybe with an option if necessary. Hopefully at no more than $10 million annually. I think Dempster fits the mold of what the team wants - and (hopefully) can afford. They get a veteran arm that can give them 180-200 innings of solid ball for a couple of years. And he won't cost a draft pick. Dempster's age worries me. As does his poor 2011. If that is the 'real' Ryan Dempster, then it's a waste. I really like Zack Greinke or Anibal Sanchez - but I think a lot of other teams do as well. Greinke will get $20+ million, while Sanchez will probably get $15 million or more (plus 5 or more years). Other guys just don't fit that well. Edwin Jackson and Kuroda will likely cost a draft pick. The Crew doesn't seem to want Marcum. Joe Saunders looks like he's going to go back to Baltimore. Francisco Liriano, Brandon McCarthy and Carlos Villanueva have questions marks and aren't guys you can probably count on for 180 innings. Joe Blanton and Jeremy Guthrie just aren't very good.

My bullpen for 2013 Axford Henderson Kintzler Narveson Peralta or Rogers (one of these guys becomes a starter) Thornburg 1 Free Agent (get a decent free agent reliever: Mike Adams, Jeremy Affeldt, Sean Burnett, Jason Grilli, Brandon Lyon are examples - try and get one on a two year deal - they'll probably cost at least $4 million/year) Mike McClendon (I'm not real confident in him, but I think he should be given a fair shake) Jesus Sanchez (dominated after moving to relief last year, so let's give him a shot at the pen) Cody Scarpetta (I believe he's out of options and we lose him. He has a lot of talent and I think it would be good to see if he can make the jump to the bigs, even after missing last year.) 1 Free Agent reclamation/old/surprisingly unwanted guy project (bring to camp a veteran on a one year deal who is either aging and no one really wants, or is coming off injury and wants a job, or simply gets stuck and can't find a job - examples include LaTroy Hawkins and Brad Lidge - don't expect much of anything, but if you're lucky, they pan out and you get someone for cheap. Sometimes you can get lucky and sign a guy for cheap after he surprisingly cant find work). There are a lot of guys here. But injuries will take their toll. And several of these guys are longshots. Some could get sent back to minors. The point is to keep things cheap. Spend a little money on one more established player. But after that, go with our own young arms, and maybe add a few cheaper vets if things work out.

You know, it might be wrong to give up on some of these guys, but I'm okay with it. Each of the guys listed - Loe, K-Rod, Veras and Parra, will probably have a good (maybe even very good) season(s) in their future. Relievers can yo yo around so much. But all these guys have the makings of needing a change of scenery. We can probably do better. And if not better - at least cheaper.

Rams, thanks for all your analysis. I appreciate that it's not a sugarcoated 'homer' look at the system.

Agreed. Lohse is a huge risk. I'd avoid him. Not at age 34. He's been all over the board performance-wise in his career. I don't trust him. The only way I'd take him is on a short deal. One or two years. But nothing more.

Where do I say we should trade away several MLB ready starters for bud Norris? That would be moronic. No where do I advocate this course of action. I suggest Norris as a potential rotation guy. If you don't like Norris that's fine. But I never said anything like you suggest.

I believe that Norris has a far more likely chance to produce a 4.00ish ERA over 180 innings than any of Peralta, Rogers, Thornburg or Burgos in 2013. People seem to think it's a given that several of our group of young pitchers are going to show up and throw league average ball next year. But it's just not that simple. None of the above mentioned guys is a sure thing. They all have warts. Injury issues. Control problems. None of these guys is even guaranteed to be a 'top 100' prospect next year. But history is against more than one of them turning into a quality major league starting pitcher (I stress 'starting' pitcher). I'm not saying this because I think our players suck. I'm just looking at history. It's hard to become a quality major league starter. Look at the Top 100 prospects in baseball (from baseball america) - http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/rankings/top-100-prospects/all-time.html Pick a year from the early 2000s or late 1990s, and go through the players. You're lucky if 1/4 or even 1/3 of the pitchers have become quality starting pitchers in the majors. Many of the guys will become quality relievers - but the majority of them just end up not being any good. They get hurt. They can't throw strikes. Whatever. But top prospect pitchers are dicey subjects - at best. And if you limit your take to the top 50-100 slots (which is where our pitchers will likely fall if they make next year's list), success is even more fleeting. And, some of the 'successes' simply take time. A guy might struggle for a year or two (or more) before becoming good. So to think we are going to insert two rookies and have success is betting against a lot of history. Can it work? Sure. The A's did it this year. But it's rarely something that does work. And to think we can be the team that bucks history is a poor way to win in 2013. Assuming we want to contend in 2103, the team is best if it only has one rookie in the rotation. If that person fails, you have others ready to step in. And players will fail. Sometimes forever. Other times they need to be shifted to relief. There's nothing wrong with that. It's part of the process. Also, there will be injuries. The more depth the better. And two of the probable starters - Estrada and Fiers - have a limited track record in the starting role in the majors. To have the extra arms available should either implode is essential. Honestly, I hope Rogers, Thornburg and Peralta are all in the majors next year. One as a starter, the others in the bullpen. I like the idea of talented, strong, young arms being available. We seem to have no ability to develop not only starting pitchers, but relief pitchers as well. Most of our guys are other teams' rejects. The guys don't have to stay there forever. The chance might arise to move into starting due to injury or another player's ineffectiveness. I guess many people are optimistic about our young players. That's great. I really am as well. But I think that if we are to contend in 2013, that relying on two of them to succeed in crucial roles is unrealistic.

I just have to say I'm happy the Cardinals are out of it. Pujols may be gone. LaRussa may be gone. But they are still annoying. Not quite as annoying as in the past, but better anyone but them.

What about Bud Norris of Houston? Had a real nice 2011 before regressing last year. He's kept his peripherals about the same for the last three years. He's not great, but would have potential to improve on last year's numbers. He's arby eligible next year for the first time, meaning we'd have him for three years. He's 27, so he should be entering his prime. I don't know much about Norris other than what I've seen against the Brewers and the stats I see online. I don't see him developing as a upper tier rotation guy, but more a mid rotation guy. I don't know what he'd cost in a trade, but if that's the route you want to consider to add a veteran arm (instead of a FA), he might work. Just a thought.