adambr2

Lopez has never earned more than $4.9M in a season and earned $3.5M last season. He's essentially a poor man's Orlando Hudson, and Hudson has never earned more than $6.2M. I think saying he EASILYgets $8M in arby is quite a stretch. Frankly I couldn't see more than $6M.

I'm going to be as blunt as I'm feeling right now -- this was an incredibly foolish move by Melvin. I don't care if the Dodgers are being foolish too, I just care what the guy running the Brewers does. Lopez is still relatively young. He's a type B, making him more attractive to teams because they give up no compensation. He's also been an inconsistent player throughout his career, coming off a career year. This may be his one shot at a multi-year multi-million dollar deal. He's not going to flush that away and take a chance at regressing. Even if he does...do you really think there's not a single team that would take Lopez and a modest $5M salary off our hands? So where was the risk involved at all? We forfeited a sandwich pick for nothing. And our GM is constantly complaining about the draft compensation system and how he has no way to get picks back. Well, you did, you just chose not to. So I really don't want to hear him saying anything about it for awhile.

I know some will disagree, and I know he's made us pound our heads into a wall many times, but I'd take a shot on Sheets any day. Even with as much as he antagonized us in his last season, he gave us 200 innings and a 3.09 ERA. That would be huge. Hell, if he could give us 180 innings of 3.50 ERA, that's worth a Gallardo right there. 1 year, $7.5M contract with an $11M team option for 2011. How about it?

Did Cameron say he would take less to stay in Milwaukee? I thought I remember something like that. I wonder if we could get him closer to $8M than $10M. I know it doesn't seem like a huge difference, but every little bit is going to count this off-season, because we're going to be limited in our flexibility as it is.

I know it's hard to look forward to 2011 when we're trying to build towards 2010, and we obviously want results now. Still, looking at the bigger picture, I'm a lot more excited for 2011 than 2010 for a couple of reasons. 1 - Expiring bad contracts The 2010/11 offseason is going to be one of getting some major payroll relief. We'll pay Hall $7M in 2010 to play for the Mariners, and then we can wipe that slate clean. Also mercifully coming to an end in the 10/11 offseason is the Jeff Suppan contract, which we can get rid of after 2010 for a petty, in comparison, buyout of $2M. On a lesser, but still important scale, unless he magically returns to form in 2010, the David Riske contract will also expire. We're talking about $25M, or probably well over a quarter of our payroll, that will be wiped clean between the 2010 and 2011 offseasons. I haven't looked ahead to see what the 2010/11 FA crop is going to be like, but we're obviously talking about a massive extra amount of flexibility afforded to the franchise. Not only will we be able to be very active in free agency if we so choose to be, we'll have plenty left for a number of options, signing Prince or Gallardo, and on a lesser scale, signing Gamel, Escobar, Parra, Weeks, or any number of young players who may yet prove their worth in 2010, to long-term contracts. If Prince is traded by then, we're obviously talking about a huge return and even more payroll flexibility to work with. 2 - Farm system Our farm system, while plentiful, currently contains very little MLB ready talent beyond Escobar and Gamel. Look for that to change after 2010. Not only may Lawrie, Lucroy, Cain, or perhaps a surprise prospect or two be ready by then, but the numerous pitching prospects that we currently have in the lower levels may be beginning to develop into full blown great pitching prospects. Look at all the names. We've got Rogers, Scarpetta, Braddock, Butler, Jeffress, Cody, Anundsen, and Periard who could be MLB-ready, or at least close, by 2011. In addition, we've got Odorizzi, Arnett, Peralta, Heckathorn, Frederickson, and Bucci who won't likely be MLB ready, BUT by that time may have established themselves as up-and-coming MLB pitching talent in either AA or AAA. Will they all pan out? Obviously not, but if half of them do, we're talking about a major benefit to this franchise by 2011 not only because some of them may be ready to step in and help the MLB team, but also because the ones who aren't may very well be attractive trading pieces at the 2011 deadline if a deadline push trade is made, which, for the reasons stated earlier, we would more than likely have no problem affording. I realize this is really all tough to project at this point, but these are the main reasons why I really consider 2011 to be our next big "shot." We'll have money to go along with MLB talent and minor league talent. If we play our cards right prior to and during the 2011 season, 2011 may be the best team that we've put on the field in years. I understand that we still have really no idea of what 2010 will look like -- but to be perfectly honest, the way things look right now, I'd be fairly content to tread water in 2010, get something out there that can put us around .500 again and at least give us a SHOT and keep attendance high enough to keep the payroll up, rather than going for broke next year.

With the Suppan and Hall contracts still hampering us from probably being TOO active this offseason, lets look at what we can do to ensure our future. If there is mutual interest, let's get Gallardo locked up long-term as a Brewer. I'm thinking something along the lines of 6 years, $43M. That buys out his remaining pre-arby year, his 3 arby years, and 2 FA years. 2010 - $1M 2011 - $4.5M 2012 - $7M 2013 - $8.5M 2014 - $10M 2015 - $12M Gallardo is coming off a solid, although not yet dominant year. He's still the closest thing we have to an ace. We know how difficult elite starting pitching is to come by these days. Gallardo may very well be the most essential piece of our future. I don't believe he is an injury-prone risk. Of course, you're taking a risk with a long-term deal with any young pitcher, but some risk is unavoidable if you're going to build a competitive ballclub. Take advantage of the down economy and get Gallardo signed before he really starts to realize his full potential. Gallardo in return gets lifetime financial security at a young age. Everybody wins. Get it done.

Casey is a guy who would be very nice to have on the roster again in 2010. He's cheap, versatile, and relatively young. In a sense, he's almost like post-2005 Bill Hall. (obviously not the same kind of player, but similar situation). Obviously, we could go into 2010 with Casey as the super-utility guy, give him some starts at 3rd, 2nd, and maybe RF. Casey was a legitimate ROTY candidate in 2009, and deservedly so. His infield defense is passable at best, but he's not a butcher, and there's room for improvement. He's got very nice pop for a 2B, at least he did in 2009. But for the same reasons and others, he might be a good "sell-high" candidate in a trade. The IF is going to be somewhat of a logjam if Prince returns, with Gamel at 3rd, Escobar or Hardy at SS, Weeks at 2B, etc. You can't help but wonder a bit if 2009 might have been a flukey year for McGehee, and there is always the issue of whether or not his knees will hold up. Believe me, I'd like to see McGehee return in 2010, stay healthy, and prove that his 2009 was no fluke. If he does this, he could be a very valuable part of our offense. But it wouldn't hurt to gauge what he is worth on the trading block. Good enough to bring in a top prospect? Maybe a #2 pitcher when packaged with JJ? It might be worth a look. Or will other GM's lowball Melvin and be hesitant to give up much unless McGehee proves himself again in 2010? If so, it might be better to hold onto him.

I'm assuming you are talking about Jason Bourgeois. I don't know much about him other than he's 27 yrs old and has bounced around the minors his entire career. He got his first big league experience last year with the White Sox. Doesn't walk much for a lead-off hitter, but doesn't strike out much either. Good stats this year in AAA but I have no idea how that would translate to the big leagues. He'll probably be a September call-up this year.He's basically Tony Gwynn Jr, without the fanfare because his name is Jason Bourgeois.

It would be a helpful solution for sure, but not one that the powerful MLBPA would ever agree to.

Also, the lessons learned are the exact reasons why I didn't include Riske in the list -- I don't think he was a bad signing and don't blame Melvin for that one. At the time, Riske was a very established AL reliever with a track record of success. He had 5 prior years of proven success. There was no reason at the time to believe that we were getting anything but a good reliever for less than closer money. Also, the Riske signing was not one that would be very detrimental to the franchise if it didn't work out. Sure, it sucks that we owe him $4.5M next year, but it's not an overwhelming problem, nothing that really hinders us from making a big move somewhere. $4.5M is just a little painful, $12.5M and $8.4M alter the scope of your planning. Basically, the Suppan signing had a ton of red flags. The Hall signing had a few. The Riske signing really had none. That's why I don't really consider it a big mistake, even though it hasn't worked out so far.

Okay, I don't expect Mark A. and Melvin to publicly admit that these contracts were a mistake. But the fact of the matter is, we have over $20M tied up next year in 2 guys, one that is a #5 pitcher at best, and one that probaly wouldn't even have a roster spot if it weren't for his contract. Most teams have a bad contract or two, but a franchise in Milwaukee cannot afford to have 25% of their payroll tied up to it. Again, I don't expect any public regret, but I do expect that Melvin and Mark A. have or will sit down, talk, and say, "Okay, we messed up. How can we avoid this in the future?" Lessons learned: - If a franchise is going to make a big long-term signing just to make a move to put themselves on the radar, it needs to be a worthwhile signing. It would be easier to stomach Suppan's struggles if they were very unforeseen, but the fact is that he has not drastically underperformed his career averages. We bought high, and his regressions weren't all that surprising. They came with age and playing in front of a worse defense than he had in St. Louis. Big-time FA deals like this are fine, but the Brewers can't afford a big one for a mediocre starting pitcher like the Yankees or Mets could. When they pick their spots, they need to count. If you're going to shell out a big deal for $10M+ on a starter, go ahead and spend the extra $3M a year or so for one that is a very good bet as a #1/#2 starter, not just an innings eater. It'll be worth it in the long run. - Let Melvin do his job, Mark. I know as the owner, it's tempting to intervene, but it's pretty well assumed that Melvin would have been reluctant at best to pull the trigger on a Suppan deal if Antanassio had not gotten involved. Don't be easily wooed by the mirage of a great playoff performance. If the pitching market is down that offseason and you're going to have to overpay as a result, maybe it's not a good offseason to try to make a move for that area. - Be wary of a good sporadic single season performance. I have less of a problem with the Hall signing, because Hall had a good 2005, and improved in 2006. Still, the numbers suggested that he was probably overachieving a bit and was due for a bit of a falloff in '07 and beyond. I'm sure none of us thought it would be this bad, but again Hall is a guy where we gave him a big deal at his peak and are forced to bite the bullet now. Bottom line, you're never going to be able to get it right 100% of the time. But you do your best to avoid buying high. Long-term contracts for young guys are a great thing for a franchise like this one, but pick and choose your spots wisely. Braun was a fantastic signing. Gallardo would be a much safer bet than Hall was, with his proven talent in the minors and very established likelihood as an up and coming ace. I don't think anybody thinks Gallardo is overachieving at this point, but many thought Hall was in '06. Even Weeks, at this point, I wouldn't have a problem with, because we'd be buying low and the deal wouldn't kill us if it didn't work out. We'll be okay, and we'll be sitting much better after 2010. I just hope that we take a look at obviously two of the problems that are plaguing us right now and how we can avoid mistakes on this large of a scale in the future.

I'm no expert on measures of defensive ability, but I have a hard time believing that a right fielder's defense could be bad enough to nullify the value of a perennial 40 HR 100 RBI .400 OBP guy. Not that RF defense is unimportant, but it isn't as crucial as a position like SS or C. I'd say a good 90-95% of plays involving a right fielder could be made by any RF'er or replacement. It's the other 5-10% of play where range comes into play, and having a centerfielder like Cameron is definitely a help. Maybe he'd make more sense as a first baseman if Prince was dealt. I don't think we'd be losing any defense with Dunn over Prince at 1st.

Since ESPN is reporting that the Nationals are looking to trade him now... This move simply makes sense to me. The Nationals have no reason to keep him, none. He's not in their long-term plans, they're just paying him $10M a year to fill an outfield spot. We get to make a major move without even really having to make a major move. Swap them Hart and throw in a mid-ceiling pitching prospect like Butler, and I think you've got a done deal. Dunn gives us a Prince-like power bat and OBP to add to the meat of the order. We're talking about a .200+ OPS upgrade from Hart. Washington gets a possible #4-#5 starter at some point in the future, and gets younger and much cheaper in RF. Dunn is not going to be a picture of perfection as a defensive RF, but we're really not losing a ton there replacing Hart. This gives us an option for a replacement for Prince at 1st if we were to trade Prince and re-sign Dunn after 2010. Next year, it gives us an absolute murderers row in the heart of the order with Dunn-Braun-Prince that would give us a chance to win the game with the bats any given day. This option appears to be there, it seems like a good way for us to get better in a hurry and for next year without giving up much, and to be honest I'm quite surprised that the front office doesn't seem to be entertaining it.

So, is it all that crazy to think of seeing if there's still any mutual interest between Sheets and Melvin when he comes back from injury? I'm sure some would hate the idea, but is there a single person who doesn't think that a healthy Sheets would be huge for this rotation right now? If we want to add high quality, but don't want to give up our top prospects, that's about the best shot we would have.

I like the DiFelice idea, but he has just been so valuable to the bullpen, that I'd be concerned about the ripple effect. Not to say that Villy isn't important to the pen, but I think our pen could go on without him and not miss too much of a beat if he's performing in the rotation. Plus, I'd be concerned about DiFelice against lefty-heavy lineups, especially the 2nd or 3rd time in the order. DiFelice is a guy who seems to rely on deception -- I think he'd be a starter who would start off hot and hit a wall in the 5th or 6th when they've seen him a few times. I think he's better in his bullpen role.

As of today, our 5 man rotation resembles something that we would have expected to see from the 2001 Brewers. The only good news is that we have an ace. After that, it gets ugly. When Suppan has been pretty easily your 2nd best starter, you're in trouble. 3 of 5 guys with ERA's at 5+. One with an ERA at 7+. It's horrid. The internal options are available, but not necessarily better. With Bush and Looper, we're pretty much stuck into hoping that both will step up again. I'm not particularly worried about Bush -- I believe he'll come around. Looper has struggled too, but if history is an indicator, he'll end up around 4.50. We can live with that. I expect Bush and Looper to improve, and Suppan to slightly regress. Parra on the other hand, may or may not figure it out this entire year. We can't count on him definitely doing so judging by just how bad his first half has been. McClung and Villanueva are both internal options from the BP. If it was up to me, I'd give Villy a crack at Parra's rotation spot right now and see how that works out. One way or another, this rotation can't keep us in 1st performing how it has this year. I've been wondering a lot more lately about how Capuano's progression has been coming.

I don't mind Hall watching his homeruns. I mind Hall watching his flyballs that end up plunking off the wall or just shy of getting out. There's really no excuse for that, and he's done it time and time again. If you can't tell if the ball is going out, you had better take off hard out of the box.

Since Florida is in town, and I saw this come up on a JSOnline blog yesterday. Seems like Helms gets nothing but hate every time he comes back to Milwaukee. I just don't get the hate for Wes Helms. He didn't dog it out on the field. By all accounts of any coaches that worked with him, he tried hard. He didn't ever badmouth the fans or Milwaukee, said he liked Milwaukee and wanted to stay. So by all accounts, he was a good guy, and heck, he even played a big part in beating the Mets the last game of the season last year to help us make the playoffs. He was just a guy who didn't really live up to the expectations that we put on him and had some injury issues. Yeah, he was overpaid, but it's not like his $3M salary was franchise crippling. There are a million guys like that. Most move on to other teams relatively unnoticed. But not Helms. So I know there are people here who hate him. Just please explain to me what the reason is.

Hey MLB - We have, a roof. It is retractable. It can be left open when the weather is nice, or closed when the weather is like it is in San Francisco today. In Milwaukee, you can guarantee that they will get the game in. We don't need to start the season on the road every freaking year. Just a thought.

Well, I don't think he's saying that Jason Kendall in his prime and Mike Rivera now are roughly equal in talent. If we're talking about where they're at going into this season, I don't think that's an unfair statement. Let's be honest about what we have in Kendall -- he's an aging, professional catcher who will give you a sub .250 AVG with almost no power in the lineup but has improved his defense enough to justify himself still starting at the MLB level. He OPS'ed .647 and .612 the last 2 seasons. Rivera had an .812 OPS last season, although in a small sample size of only 62 AB's. Starting every 5 games this year, I'd conservatively expect him to regress into the .700-.750 realm, (he OPS'ed .783 for us in '06 in 142 AB's). He's not going to be as good defensively as Kendall, but he's not a butcher, either. So, I'd say that expecting Rivera to be a little better on offense and a little worse on defense is accurate.

I heard this on espn first take this morning and had to laugh, but after saying the mets offer, they said boris/Lowe are still hoping for 5yr/90 contract. Its no wonder why so many of these fa are still unsigned. Hahaha...Boras and Lowe can hope all they want, they're not getting that or anything close to that. They don't control the market at this point. Lowe isn't going to sit out next year for nothing, especially at his age.

Wow, the Mets are offering Lowe 3 years, $36M? Value for starting free agent pitchers is really plummeting. I imagine Lowe will end up getting around $38, but still, less than $13M a year. Man alive, can't we just give Sheets 2 years, $25M, and call it an offseason? Even if that was our last move, that would only probably put us around $80M in payroll, including Cameron and all our arbitration payments.

With the prior rumors of the Royals being willing to trade Grienke for Francouer, I'd sweeten the pot and offer the Royals Hart and a decent prospect (Green or Lucroy) for Grienke. This would be no real payroll increase for the Brewers, so we could then afford to sign Dunn and our offseason would be complete. Our rotation would be: 1 - Gallardo 2 - Grienke 3 - Parra 4 - Bush 5 - Suppan And for our lineup, something like this would be ideal: 1 - Weeks 2 - Dunn 3 - Braun 4 - Fielder 5 - Hardy 6 - Cameron 7 - Hall/Lamb 8 - Pitcher 9 - Kendall That's a perfect lineup to bat the pitcher 8th in, though I doubt they'd return to it. That, my friends, is a great rotation and a lineup that can flat out rake. Dunn/Braun/Fielder for the meat of the order is tough for any pitcher. The lineup would probably set the franchise strikeout record, but a franchise record for runs scored, too.

I will gladly take Braden Looper over Jon Garland.

The more time goes by, the more optimistic I get that we COULD get a deal done with Sheets if we want to. The market conditions are perfect right now for it. Free agent values are falling, and teams are shying away from Sheets based a lot on injury concerns. If this continues, I see no reason we couldn't bring Sheets back for 2 year, $27M, with a team or vesting option for the 3rd year. That's NOT a long term risk, especially considering the potential reward. It's basically equivalent to the remainder of Suppan's contract. If necessary, I'd even be willing to consider something like a "dual option" 3rd year, with a $15M club option for 2011 and a player option for $10M. I can't see how a mild risk like this wouldn't be a good idea for us, unless there's a lot more problems with Sheets' elbow than we know about. If it works, we've got 2 aces at the front of our rotation and a potential third ace at #3. If it doesn't work out, we're right where we are now anyway. It's not a potentially franchise-crippling contract.