sbrylski

I highly doubt that's the offer. He pieced two sources together to come up with LaPorta+Escobar, and if we go back a few pages to another source that listed five prospects of which the Indian's could choose one, I think the latter rumor is still the more accurate one. If that is the offer, I'll be a lot less excited. From "nice move," to "now we have to wait and hope we didn't screw up big time."

These trade talks have taught me just how in love I am with most of our current prospects. "We might not have to give up LaPorta or Gamel? Wahoo! Wait, that means Salome, damn. What, they're interested in someone else? Alright! Oh, Taylor Green, crap..."

I've never heard it, but I have heard of it.

I had Kemp shoes when I was younger. I'm pretty sure they were these, except in white:

Don't hold the costume to your face like some do, it looks dumb. Pump your arms and run, who cares if you can see!

This is true. Didn't he have a Rascal Flatts walkup song for a time? Ugh. Miller Park needs to play more Conway Twitty or Don Williams. George Strait or Alan Jackson. ect... Or these guys: http://www.cmt.com/sitewide/assets/img/artists/nitty_gritty_dirt_band/nittygrittydirtband09-280x336.jpg

Meant punt. Sorry. It was directed at those who say that 09 should be forgotten. What people forget is that this team should be largely intact next year, and you would hope, be better. Ben Sheets is a huge loss. I do not think that the majority of deals that dont involve Laporta or Gamel, hurt our chances much at all for next year. Carlos Villanueva was the only guy that I mentioned that would be contributing to the team next year, and I do not see him as having a ceiling higher than a #4, or #5 starter. The Brewers could certainly get by without him, and our system is deep enough to sustain the loss of the Salome, Brantley, and Escobar's of the world. Our rotation is barely above average right now. We lose our best one in Sheets, and our rotation is now dragging the team down. Sure, the system is strong enough to make this move to get CC, but is it strong enough to pull off another big trade over the winter to find us another starter? It could be, I suppose, and we definitely could be a good team in 2009. But we won't be a great team, and we'll be really digging into our chances of becoming a great team in the future by trying to be a good team in 2009.

Here's a weird one: During my dreams over about the past year, there have been random times where my legs felt heavy - like I was running waist deep water. I would try to step and my leg would get like stuck in mid-air. Just during random dreams that would happen. (I've read it means something like not being able to escape you daily stresses or something.) But then the other night it happened, and instead of fighting through it I just lifted my other leg - I was suddenly hovering in the cross legged position. Only problem was I would gradually start to spin like a top, and it was hard to control it. Then I was suddenly at my Grandmother's old house, in the living room with my younger sister. I showed her my new hovering trick, and she yelled sarcastically "You have demons!" and thought the hovering was very funny, but wasn't concerned over the spinning. I flew around for a while in my Grandma's house, and that's all I remember. So I have no idea what this new twist in my dreams means.

A lucid dream.

Maybe, as long as we continue to draft well. I just think we'll be stretching the limits of our draft picks and payroll to field a top team consistently, and it might be better to ride 3-5 year waves. (Again just to be clear, not full blown Marlins. We should actually lock up the guys we can as we have been starting to do.)

I agree that Fielder would go, I said so in my earlier post. And yes, the chance is there to be good, but at the expense of another trade to fix the rotation. Suddenly our second wave of offense isn't looking quite so great.

Where did you hear this rumor? And if so, excellent!

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, are you okay punting 2009 for a better chance at the playoffs this year? I'm saying we should punt on 2009 if we are going to make this trade. And yes, I'd be okay with it, I think punting on 2009 will make us a better team in the long run whether we make the trade or not. We've developed into a slightly above average team without any real strong pitching now or in the near future. Continuing to trade off prospects to hold our pitching head above water will run us into 6 years of 85 win baseball and then blam, we gotta blow it up again. We can do it once in a while, but then spend some time to recuperate a little, don't try to force wins out of your system. I'm not suggesting Marlins, just at times we can tone it down to a .500 ballclub or a 78 win team if its going to help us the next four years.

Seeing just how much Sabathia is asking for in extension talks (he wants Santana money), put a damper on this. I liked thinking we would have a chance to resign him or Sheets. But assuming we won't or won't be able to, I would take a Sabathia trade as punting on 2009: 1. Our projected rotation next season won't be in shambles, but it won't be very good either. Just two guys there with upside, one coming off a major injury. 2. We've all heard the Fielder trade speculation, and regardless of how much we hope, we'll get more bidders and more value if we ask for high potential minor league pitchers rather than young established pitchers. 3. Our second wave will be hitting the beach. Rookies and players making their debuts mid-season brings back memories of 2006. At best its a team that can hope to contend if everything goes right. But, I think the beauty of our current organizational makeup is in the way we should see a extremely quick turnaround. A decently stocked upper minors in pitching from the Fielder trade, a full roster of offensive prospects already in AA, and some above average big leaguers who can add even more through trade. This offseason extend Hart and maybe Weeks, trade Fielder and Hardy, and start debuting our prospects in 2009, by 2010 and 2011 we could be and should be even better than we are now and have an even bigger window with which to win. If we try to field a champion in 2009 through more trades of prospects, I'm afraid we'll just end up dooming ourselves to a number of 85 win seasons, rather than a short cycle pattern of 80-95+ wins that could be possible. That all changes if we are able to resign Sheets or CC in the event of a trade. But if DM and Mark A are smart about 2009, I'm all for gunning it for CC this season.

Brantley>>>Gwynn Minor League Totals Gwynn - .274 / .352 / .344 / .696 Brantley - .314 / .403 / .374 / .777 And Brantley has been a year younger at each level. Comparatively, Brantley's easily better in most aspects at the plate. The concern with both has been their lack of power. Players without power see their OBP fall as the advance to higher levels. Gwynn's statistics definitely suggest he will never be a good offensive player in the bigs because, despite the stereotype, he doesn't make enough contact. When more advanced pitchers start to attack the zone to take advantage of his lack of power, the hitter has to spin that around and start slapping or lining them all over the park. Gwynn doesn't really have that ability; he has struck out ~14% of the time in the minors. Brantley, on the other hand, is both still young enough to grow into an acceptable level of power (he has shown a little improvement so far this year), and seems to have to ability to take advantage of aggressive pitchers: he holds a much higher batting average and is very difficult to strike out. He's a very fundamental and "professional" hitter with an "advanced understanding" of the strike zone. His strikeout rate (~9%) and walk rate (~13%) are both better than Gwynn's and very solid compared to just about any minor league hitter. I think Brantley still has to keep progressing and take at least another step forward before he can be projected as a great OBPing leadoff batter, but his potential is just that, while Gwynn's has always generally been 4th outfielder.

Unfortunately, he said we won't give up two on that prospect list.

Actually, I asked him, and he's not a big fan. Does that mean we have to stop calling him that? Absolutely not. Sometimes acceptance just comes with time and repetition! Fill me in. Why "Eggs?"

If we were to add Sabathia, I really don't think its that far fetched that we are able to retain either him or Sheets. In fact, I'd be a little more willing to trade for and then extend Sabathia, and take two picks for Sheets. Sabathia is younger and has been more healthy, I'd feel more comfortable with a 5 year deal for him than Benny. And I hate to torture everyone, but imagine what could have been - Sheets, Sabathia, Gallardo playoff rotation... EDIT: For the record, I would use LaPorta if that's what it took - but only if we would be serious about trying to resign Sabathia. LaPorta plus a lower level prospect. Otherwise, three of the following prospects would be my max: Gillespie, Braddock, Cain, Gindl, Brewer. And really, I think this would still be very competitive with offers by other teams. EDIT 2: Nobody will see this and nobody will really care, but I meant to add one of the catcher prospects to the available prospect list - either Salome or Lucroy.

Yeah county music! None of the music threads around here have a hint of country in them, it seems.

If I were an athlete, I would hate signing autographs. I don't understand them, for one, and it would be annoying to me at anytime. And then I'd get labeled as a jerk, probably.

Its not yet the AS break, and Branyan wasn't in the bigs until the end of May. Let's just hold off on a contract like that for now...

I'm not sure its a match. I'd love to have Sizemore, but both teams are going to have a SP on the top of their offseason lists, rather than swapping offensive players.

Just a surface look, but here's some food for thought: WPA, 2008 .5 = 1 win Sheets, 15 starts: 2.37 Gallardo, 3 starts: .65 McClung, 6 starts: .39 Suppan, 16 starts: .25 Parra, 15 starts: -.07 Villanueva, 9 starts: -1.04 Bush, 14 starts: -1.29 Sheets is the only pitcher who has been winning us games. Other than that, the best we have is a guy or two who can keep us in games, and Gallardo coming back from a knee. This isn't exactly a surprise, but it's interesting to see the differences numerically. So if you're questioning Sheets' value to the team, think again, he is hugely valuable.

I don't pay enough attention to MLB baseball except for the Brewers. So my question is: how many quality MLB starters in today's game consistently/effectively hit 96+ on the radar gun? There are zero starters who have an average fastball speed of 96+ mph this season. Link - (sort by FBv) Dustin McGowan leads the league at 95.1. That doesn't really tell you how many can hit 96+ when they want to, but its a start in the right direction. I would guess Jeffress' fastball velocity average would sit around 92 and 93, which would put him in the top 10 to 15 in the bigs among starters.

I'm sure Chacon's recount is slanted, but it doesn't sound like Wade was being very tactful.