RobertR

Seriously, I think people WAY overrate Gabe Kapler. He's played in 10 seasons and is a career .273/.331/.425 hitter. And he's injury prone. He missed all of 2007 and couldn't even stay healthy as a 4th outfielder in 2008. He managed all of 85 plate appearances in the 2nd half, when the Brewers really could have used him with Braun's injury and Hart's struggles. He's more likely to post a year like 2006, when he went .254/.340/.354, than he is to repeat 2008. Or 2005, when he went .247/.282/.351. 2008 is his first above average year since 2001 and he's 33 this year. The Brewers caught lightning in a bottle with Kapler in 2008, but thinking he'll repeat it is likely wishful thinking. Robert

Burrell's a DH, and Zobrist hits like a middle infielder anyways and is better suited there. Now, I'll agree that something probably has to give between Upton, Crawford, Kapler, Gross, Perez, and Joyce, but it's nice to have options and the Rays could just as easily trade someone at the end of Spring Training. Certainly being an AL team means they don't have to worry about roster construction as much as an NL team which probably makes their decision process easier. Robert

While I may not be exactly a fan of teams grooming guys to be short relievers, I'm also aware that you have to tailor things for particular circumstances. Eckersley got his role because of his age and injury history. If there's a good reason to limit a guy, there's a good reason. It's when you do so without a good reason, that I think you kind of defeat yourself in the process. But, I don't want to appear overly dogmatic about the whole developing relievers thing. There's no single right way to develop pitchers, relief or starters. If it had been a top 25 list, I'm sure Aguilar would have made my list. Good chance if it was a Top 21 list for that matter. I've got him ranked a little over a half dozen slots below the concensus, which in the grand scheme of things isn't much. A guy that could contribute to the MLB team, but there are some caveats and risks involved. I just happen to think that some of the starting prospects will be able to convert to reliever as a fallback and have more upside. Robert

I should add that I'm no fan of training a pitcher in the minors to only go one inning. I'm not fond of it in closers and setup men, but I'm especially not fond of that in guys that will likely be cutting their teeth in MLB in the 5th, 6th, or 7th. The ability to sop up multiple innings and keep other guys fresh is often taken for granted in the bullpen and is one of the reasons that bullpens can struggle down the stretch. Robert

I get what people are saying. Prospects are good. That's not really my point. I'm kind of in the "There's No Such Thing as a Relief Pitching Prospect" camp. Or, more precisely, the percentage of touted relief prospects that develop as intended and contribute right away probably is less than you'd think. They're not as valuable as starting pitching prospects and they have a tougher path of development since they don't pitch as much. And an injury is probably more devastating than it is to a starting pitcher. Having a group of relief pitching prospects is a very good thing, but picking any one out of that group is probably as much an exercise in luck as anything else. It's very possible that the guy that will be the most effective relief pitcher at the MLB level simply isn't on anyone's radar for various reasons. To me, developing relief pitching is more a function of depth, with only a few exceptions, and any one relief pitcher carries a very high degree of risk, at least until he's logged time at AAA. Which isn't to say that if they make it through the fires of the minors and the growing pains of the majors they won't be valuable. Only that they carry more risk of flaming out than other prospects. And, with few exceptions, they don't have the reward of other everyday position player or starting pitching prospects. They do have a significant reward, obviously, but every good prospect has a significant reward. Or, basically, if you're a relief prospect below AAA, I'm going to be wary. Which is not to say that the Brewers shouldn't draft guys they project to be relievers, but that I think it's easy to overrate those guys if they have a good year, or underrate them if they struggle one year. Robert

Kapler really didn't take Gross' job. Someone in the Brewers got the idea that somehow Gwynn would be more useful on the roster than Gross. That didn't last long. And the Brewers certainly could have used Gross when Braun got injured and Hart went into the tank. I don't think Kapler is going to replace Gross in TB either. He's going to replace Hinske, Gomes, Ruggiano, Haynes, Baldelli, etc. who also played RF in 2007 and backup Upton and Crawford. Robert

I'm missing something in the above. I get the "his stuff is wicked" idea, but the "he can provide salary relief" part flies over my head. Every prospect can provide salary relief. We were paying Craig Counsell $3 million last year, so a utility infielder can supply salary relief. Heck, the Brewers would be better off if they had another top pitching prospect instead of paying $10 million for Suppan. Or if they had a young prospect at catcher instead of Kendall. Or a cheap, young prospect in CF instead of Cameron. I'll put forth the argument that relief pitchers are among the most fungible players in all of baseball. Plenty of them are waived every year and find success elsewhere. And, I think it's partly because they pitch so few innings that very few get the playing time to find their legs at the major league level, at least with their first organization, because people get so sick of them costing the team games in the meantime. Robert

I'm confused on the difference. Mainly because I think being a statue has the same outcome. Robert

While I know where you guys are coming from, I'm of the school that would rather convert a failed starter into a reliever than groom a guy exclusively for relief. And that's particularly because I think guys who only pitch about 60 innings a year are at a disadvantage for developing. Aguilar isn't without issues at AA, a too high BB/9 rate specifically, and IMO, it's going to take some time to work out those issues at the higher levels. I'm really not expecting him in MLB before 2010. Beyond that, I have concerns about his height and weight. Obviously, relievers do develop as relievers. And, young, cheap relievers have value at the major league level. But, I'm more of a "take a group of them and see what sticks" guy than someone who believes in valuing any one reliever, especially a right handed reliever, too much. Robert

Obviously, Kapler produced much more than anyone expected last year. That said, given his handedness and the fact that he was unavailable down the stretch, I'm not too worked up about it. Especially since there are no guarantees that Kapler will repeat what he did. Robert

I'd look for Brad Nelson to be in the mix if Braun or Hart go down. Robert

Yeah, I want no part of Young either. Especially if he's going to whine about moving off SS. Heck, here's the OBP/SLG of Weeks and Young in 2007. Young .339/.402 Weeks .342/.398 Young's better defensively, at least if he'll move off SS, but Young is overpaid now and likely to be an albatross in a couple of years. Giving up anything of value for Young, without Texas throwing in a lot of money, is a mistake. Robert

I like Cain's chances of getting some significant playing time. Gwynn is nothing more than a defensive backup, IMO, and if Cameron goes down or is traded, I don't think it will take long before Cain is given an opportunity. Maybe Iribarren would be called up as a short term stopgap, but I think the Brewers view Cain as the long term answer and would take the opportunity to get his feet wet at the major league level if the opportunity presents itself. There's long term and short term benefits there. Robert

I'm not particularly enamored of Swisher, at least for the Brewers. The Brewers have enough defensive problems on the infield that I'm not particularly interested in downgrading the outfield defense as well. I just don't see the upside to this particular trade. And, frankly, I'm willing to wait until the trade deadline with Cameron if there's not a trade that clearly helps the Brewers now. Especially since at the current stage I don't think there's a lot of pitchers on the Brewers staff that are consistent "bat missers". I also think you have to take into account that the Brewers can still be contenders for the playoffs in 2009, depending on what they do to fill out the starting rotation. Unless there's a dire financial reason to do so, I really don't see the marginal cost difference between Cameron and Swisher offsetting the marginal win difference. Especially considering how valuable marginal wins are for a playoff contender. Robert

I dropped Gamel out of the top 3 because of his defense. I consider him a first base prospect, and I think you have to put up really spectacular numbers at that position. Then again, I'm the one that had Lawrie #1 on my ballot. I had Cain at #2, probably the toughest one to defend, since I like his breadth of tools and the fact that he'll play a premium defensive position. Cain won't win a Gold Glove like I fully expect Escobar to, but I fully expect Cain to be above average offensively at CF, while I need to see more out of Escobar offensively since he might have had a flukey season based on BABIP. Basically, I see Cain without some of the upside of the other top prospects, but who's also really unlikely to flame out offensively or defensively. Heck, here's my ballot. 1. Brett Lawrie 2. Lorenzo Cain 3. Alcides Escobar 4. Jeremy Jeffries 5. Mat Gamel 6. Angel Salome 7. Jonathan Lucroy 8. Caleb Grindl 9. Jake Odorizzi 10. Taylor Green 11. Alex Periard 12. Zach Braddock 13. Brent Brewer 14. Cole Gillespie 15. Cody Scarpetta 16. Evan Anundsen 17. Cutter Dykstra 18. Brad Nelson 19. Efrain Nieves 20. Evan Frederickson Basically the same Top 20 as Brewerfan, but with a slightly different order. And, without Aguilar, Dillard, and Peralta, as I really don't like the upside of minor league relief pitchers. Especially minor league relief pitchers at lower levels. If I had to do the ballot over, I'd flip flop Green and Grindl. Robert

If anyone is interested in playing for money, there are potential openings in a couple of roto leagues I'm in. One's an AL only 4 x 4 keeper league, the other an NL only 4 x 4 keeper league. League fees are $130 per team and there's a live auction for each the end of March / beginning of April. Minor league draft too. If you're interested, let me know. I'll know more after next Sunday, re: how many spots are available, if any. Robert

It wouldn't exactly be shocking if David Price was a full 2 wins better than Edwin Jackson. Of course, injuries could happen and young players could regress, but the Rays still look like solid favorites to me. They very well might be a team I'd put money on to at least win the division if I was in Vegas. Robert

I think complicating the issue is that it's clear that the Brewers don't want to go over "slot" to sign some top prospects that slip due to signability concerns. That's why the position of the picks matter to them over the number of picks. Robert

After watching a good chunk of Larsen's perfect WS game, I don't ever want to hear again about how hard guys threw in the old days. The game is far more athletic now. It's nice to have the channel though. I get the feeling things really won't kick in until the regular season, although they certainly could do plenty during Spring Training. BTW, I believe that there's already a Ken Burns' Baseball topic in the Off Topic forum. People might want to search and bump that one rather than creating a new topic. Robert

That's a great deal for the Rays. Fills one of their few holes and doesn't even cost them a draft pick. Or a prospect. They very well may be a better team in 2009 than they were in 2008. I'm looking forward to seeing what David Price can do. Robert

When evaluating a prospect, organizational need plays no part in my analysis. Things work out in the long run, a guy plays or he's moved for something that fits the team's needs. Injuries happen to guys ahead of prospects all the time as well. I understand why people do otherwise, but IMO you're not evaluating the player purely as a prospect when you do that. Robert

My list. There Will Be Blood (it didn't come to Milwaukee until 2008, so I'm counting it.) The Dark Knight Slumdog Millionaire Happy-Go-Lucky Wall-E The Band's Visit The Visitor In Bruges I've Loved You So Long Hellboy II: The Golden Army Still need to see: Milk, Rachel Getting Married, The Wrestler, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frozen River, Man on Wire, Burn After Reading, Frost/Nixon, and Let the Right One In (missed an opportunity in October). Everything below Wall-E could get bumped after I see those.

Counsell is also better defensively than Miles. Not to say that I thought Counsell was a particularly good deal, but veteran utilitymen are pretty interchangable, just with different plusses and minusses. What's curious is that I didn't know the Cubs needed another middle infielder. Especially one that's no great shakes at SS. Robert

I also rented The Visitor recently and liked it a lot. It's a little slight story-wise, but the performances, especially Richard Jenkins's, carry the film over any rough patch. At the other end of the spectrum, I rented The Incredible Hulk. I don't quite think they have this comic book character figured out yet. I kept checking out when it went all cgi as they really haven't done much to make me care what happens at that point other than seeing some special effects. Gollum is a much more effective cgi creature. I didn't regret renting it, but all in all I found it pretty forgettable and I won't be revisiting it. Non-dvd related, I saw a preview of Doubt over the weekend. I liked it, with slight reservations, and I think people who didn't see the play will likely get more out of it. At the very least, I can say it's intelligent, well acted, and beautifully filmed, although I think the directing is heavy handed and the film version lacks the ambiguity of the play. Robert

Blyleven is getting in. It may take a few more years, but the voting trend is pointing in the right direction and more stat oriented writers are coming into the ranks of voters. That will make Mussina's road easier. I'd put Mussina between Blyleven and Morris. And I think he'll get in as he definitely could have stuck around and padded his win total some. I think he just scrapes over the bar and you certainly aren't going to put anyone worse than him from the recent era into the Hall. Robert