MNBrew

I saw this and looked over his baseball-reference.com page again. Other than a single pretty solid year at AA in 2012 -- mainly really good HR power, decent BA/RBI & really good OBP/SLG in the Texas League, which discredits the numbers at least a bit (remember Lavell Freeman and his near-.400 year at El Paso?) -- he's never shown that much promise. In other words, in spite of the injury that I think I recall, basically he did a bigger Hunter Morris than Hunter Morris did, parlaying a single good year into prospect hype, only to tumble in an Emperor's New Clothes kind of way (essentially screaming "serious outlier") as the following seasons unfolded.

Several people have talked about this sort of thing, whether it's in regard to considering trading K-Rod at the July or August deadline or this coming winter, or simply in regard to good closers on lousy teams. . . . On the surface, I understand the logic ("We're no good, so a good and/or expensive closer is an unnecessary luxury."). But in thinking deeper -- and, to give an example, with a jog down memory lane of the Brewers' 2012 (I think) -- I think it's just plain foolish and short-sighted. Regardless of whether a team is good or not, you need a closer who does his job well at the end of a game. When you get to the 8th & 9th inning with a lead, to continually lose it because of an inept closer (or closers, as the Brewers experienced big time in July 2012 (or was it 2013?)) can completely demoralize a team -- the effects of those failings are even worse on a team's psyche if wins are tough to come by to begin with. How does a young team gain confidence and swagger in winning when they can't consistently rely on their closer to hold a lead and preserve a win? I'd think the negative effects of that scenario inhibit the whole "building a winning culture" that's so important with young, hopefully upward-trending teams with impressionable young players -- in part because it says the organization doesn't value preserving wins enough that it's not worth investing in a closer.

I like Span when he's healthy, but the news just broke today that he's out for the remainder of the year (MLBTradeRumors.com & elsewhere). I think that the cost/risk combo there doesn't equate to the Brewers making a play on Span this winter. I have no problem with Santana as the starting CF. Davis & Braun are no Gold Glovers, but they're not poor OFs, either (remember the knock on Davis isn't his glove, only his Juan-Pierre-like noodle arm).... Schafer or Wren? Come on, JB12, really? One, Wren shouldn't even be in the discussion because he's done nothing to prove he's legitimately MLB-ready. Two, I'd take Shane Peterson over either of those guys. He's no GoGo, but he's far closer to GoGo than to Izzy Alcantara, and unlike Schafer, the guy can actually hit MLB pitching and pinch-hit (rather than almost exclusively pinch-out), which after the year our bench had last year at the plate is something not to be overlooked or undervalued at all!

They HAVE mentioned that they won't bring AA guys up 'til Biloxi's done in the playoffs. (I don't remember where I read it (likely a TH or McCalvy tweet), but it feels like it was at least a week ago.) That could happen quickly or not for a few weeks after the minor league season's done. How long their postseason run lasts could well make a difference in how many (if any) AA guys come up based on how things are going up in MIL by that time. - I'd think Davies and Sardinas are givens. I hope Clark is, too. - If they need extra bullpen arms, Guilmet & Kintzler would seem to be options. Mike Strong, maybe, too, though I think he's more peripheral to the September picture. - I'm more interested in Nevin Ashley than Centeno. I'd guess one of the two is a decent bet. If they like Ashley, they may DFA Centeno, though 40-man spots aren't necessarily an issue at the moment even presuming Davies is added as a September callup. - Dominguez hasn't given them much reason to call him up, but it may be worth bringing him up anyway just to see first-hand & at the big league level exactly what they have in him -- especially when there may be fewer new or other unknown guys compared to spring training.

^^That's quite sound thinking -- both quote and response. However, so also is this: Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and the Brewers have all had recent years when they've been rather highly regarded, either going into the season or due to their play during the 1st half (or so), only to have the bottom totally fall out in a way few could foresee when things were going well (whether in reality as the season progressed or after a seemingly stellar winter of player moves). . . . Heck, even this winter, so many "experts"/cynics (especially on this board) saw the Brewers as being far worse than Cincinnati and look at how that's turning out. The choice between trading more proven assets (Lind, etc.) over the winter vs. holding our cards for a while until possibly next year's deadline indeed CAN backfire, most absolutely! Let's also concede, however, that EITHER side of that choice has an equal chance at backfiring -- either way, it amounts to a calculated risk. My points are these: 1) The grass isn't always greener elsewhere (well, maybe except St. Louis -- most annoyingly, too!), but it's sure true on BF.net and similar boards that familiarity very quickly can breed strong forms of cynicism, mistrust, and contempt for our own team, its players, and even in some cases its prospects, especially compared to other teams and what comprise their organizations. 2) I think the worst thing we fans can do is give up all hope for next year mainly based on the assumption that the Brewers have no chance next year or shortly beyond simply because other teams in our division are currently good or trending upward. 3) The Brewers need to worry about making the right building/developmental decisions, period, not basing those decisions or their approach to them on what other teams in the division may or may not do.

Twins fans surely are frustrated but aren't necessarily that impatient. I'm up here in the same neighborhood, Bill Hall Star. The Twins are just off 4 straight 90-plus-loss seasons and are in the wild card chase for the first time since the 1st year of Target Field (5 years ago) and their young studs are just getting to the majors. Plus they have lots more talent coming up. Fans are frustrated with the post-break swoon, but this is only the first year of an upward climb and most fans are still smart enough to realize that. You don't go all-in at the very start of the window unless you're the Yankees, Dodgers, or Red Sox, and Terry Ryan's smart enough to know that. . . . He knows the Twins needed help but he's always been one careful not to overpay when the timing's not right. All that said, Ryan Braun's contract isn't ideal but he still is an upper-tier player. Joe Mauer, post-concussion has a worse contract and is much less of a player than Braun is even with the effects of his thumb/nerve issue. From a Brewers standpoint, I'll gladly keep Braun and the remainder of his contract vs. Mauer and the remainder of his without a moment's hesitation.

(Note that I'm naming 4 possible in-house 1B solutions who are essentially career 1Bs. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I believe Braun doesn't belong at 1B....) Once 1B is no longer manned by Adam Lind (who I'm in no hurry to get rid of for some of the very valid reasons brought out in the discussion above re: other players at 1B), and if Jason Rogers, Matt Clark, and Nick Ramirez aren't proving to be legit replacements, then I'm willing to bet one of two things will happen: 1. If enough super-good bats are on the team that the Brewers deem moving a non-1B to 1B is the best option for the team, then they'll also have sufficient grounds for judging by then who that best option would be. Anything short of that is trying to look into a crystal ball. -OR- 2. The next long-term-ish 1B is someone not currently a member of the Brewers organization (read: trade or FA). (Also, I believe I remember the story being that Khris Davis told the Brewers he'd tried 1B and it didn't go well. I seem to recall that it may well have been a few years before he saw the bigs, which would indicate A-ball or lower. The other detail that sticks in my head on that topic is that the Brewers approached Davis about it, so whenever he tried 1B, it was long enough ago and inconsequential enough that the organization didn't even know about it.)

I know the spirit of most discussions on this board favors "or" or "and" with respect to trading Braun/Lucroy. I don't favor trading either, and it's not mere sentimentalism or blind whatever-ism. At minimum, trading Lucroy without selling low and without a suitable/respectable replacement makes no sense whatsoever. Sure, Braun's contract the next 5 years is WAY large. But that doesn't mean we HAVE TO trade him or are best off doing so. There certainly aren't many on the current team now headed toward 8-figure contracts right away -- and with many strong young players coming, there won't be for a while. Lucroy is one who deservedly should be headed that way, but he may be the only one over the next couple years. That actually allows the Brewers to manage the rest of the roster reasonably easily, Braun's $20M-ish notwithstanding. I think it's a foregone conclusion with many here that Braun eventually ends up at 1B. Keep in mind, though, that it's neither the Brewers nor the media fueling that, just spiraling group-think that feeds off itself in forums like this. . . . I understand folks' logic. But I don't agree with it -- at least not now. Braun's still a solid OF and there's no need for him to move to 1B. If that's where he eventually ends up, I'm fine with it. I'd hope it be the result of the situation forcing the inevitable outcome. If that's the case, great. But it's not the case yet.

I still can't figure why the Twins didn't make this happen 3 weeks ago at the deadline. Their BP has been lousy and in the past month has only gotten worse. Glad the deal happened -- for the Brewers, Twins, & Cotts. The Brewers' official release says it's PTBNL or cash. I sure hope it's a PTBNL and not cash -- this relatively little amount saved doesn't help like adding another prospect-type guy into the mix.

Dumpster diving at its August, last-place best! Here's hoping the nugget miner is having one good final stretch. (Maybe Guilmet gets another shot, too???)

It'd be almost like Christmas if someone would take Kyle Lohse in a trade now, too -- whether the same (conjectured) trade or a separate one from Cotts.

That's not entirely true, and some of the "bad defense" would mean unearned runs, which of course have no bearing on ERA. Wily's also getting hit kinda hard, which means many ground balls don't get to where fielders can field them.

In the post-Surhoff & -Nilsson era of Brewers catchers, we've not had anybody truly good on the upward or peak part of their career until Lucroy. In other words, we spent plenty of cash on "passable" and I think the results speak for themselves! The debacle of the recent couple years at 1B shows that it's not always easy to just find a guy you can plug in and get respectable/solid play from just because the need to fill the position is obvious to everyone who follows the team (yes, I'm very glad to have Adam Lind). What did aiming or settling for "passable" get us? After the succession of career-backup or job-share guys Eddie Perez, Keith Osik, Paul Bako, we also got Johnny Estrada, Chad Moeller, Damian Miller, and Jason Kendall all on the especially crappy last stretches of their careers. We were left to drool over the stellar rookie- and A-ball exploits of Angel Salome, Lou Palmisano, etc., who of course never came close to sniffing the bigs in any meaningful way. Right now we have no solid catching prospects beyond "passable" unless Adam Weisenburger & minor-league FA Nevin Ashley scream "promising big leaguer" to anyone. . . . unless someone can convince Clint Coulter his best play is to move back behind the plate. For the first time in 15+ years, we have a solid, core-player, worthy MLB catcher on our roster who's made the All-Star game and who's an upper-tier-and-improving defensive player having his first "off" year (rather significantly, too, unfortunately) at the plate. Yes, the team's re-tooling. But the team's not going all Astros/Cubs in terms of a total hard-core tear-down. All things have to be done in context and Lucroy, while a likely-highly-coveted asset (but whom trading at this point would equate to selling seriously low), also serves a valuable role as a core player on a now-rebuilding team -- and I'm suggesting that value fills a greater need for the Brewers now and still quite possibly a few years from now than a few more prospects who may or may not pan out (see: 3/4 of the guys traded for Sabathia & 2/3 of the guys traded for Linebrink, etc.). Every other position player on the field is essentially independent. The catcher, however, has his own defensive game PLUS a significant impact on every pitch of the game by virtue of how he works with the pitcher. So a guy with Lucroy's caliber and experience makes a greater impact than a Maldonado (now obviously not more than a career backup) or most anyone just coming up from the minors. Now, if in another deal we can land a new & rather indisputable "catcher of the future," then I may well look at this differently. Until then, I don't think trading Lucroy's a terribly wise move.

Lucroy's D has been good this year (outside of a higher-than usual error count) including a quite-improved CS%. The thing that brings his value down this year is his terrible offense. Given those two things, there's absolutely no reason to move him to 1B. I'd also posit that it's quite beneficial to have a solid catcher who knows what he's doing to work with a (relatively) younger pitching staff. I hate the Cardinals, but it's no hindrance to them to keep playing Yadier Molina everyday rather than consider trading him or playing their #2 catcher more even though his offense isn't at all what it used to be (3 HRs, .676 OPS). I'm not sure who would be an attractive young C prospect to target in a potential trade. We certainly don't have any obvious "catcher of the future" coming up through our system right now. In the end, I'd simply prefer to keep Lucroy here. At minimum, trading Lucroy anytime before next year would be a serious case of selling low, which would be completely unacceptable.

Re: Davis in CF, I think it comes to this: The Brewers know far more about this than any of us do, and if they thought there was any chance he might work out in CF, they'd have already put him in there. In other words, there are obviously significant and compelling reasons the only OF position at which they'll play him is LF. Taking it a step further, esp. for those who like to stoke this finally-dying fire (perhaps more BF.net-convincing terms), at least Mark Kotsay had previously played CF and for a time had proven he was actually capable of doing so. . . . Given that, the fact that they absolutely won't put Davis anywhere other than LF tells me all I need to know.

^ This is exactly why the Brewers won't even consider him in CF. They already know his arm is SO limited that they moved their best player, Ryan Braun, from LF where he was pretty darn solid to RF to make room for Davis to play the only spot in the OF practical for his defensive limitations. Yeah, he covers ground okay and isn't bad with the glove. But that arm...

It's an off-topic aside, but to establish context for the statement that follows... I don't get why people think Kyle Wren's anything of a prospect. He doesn't strike me as being a whole lot different than how Logan Schafer or even Lee Haydel profiled 5-6 years ago. I think the only real appeal of Kyle Wren at this point is that he's still new-ish to the organization. If he'd been here all along like Schafer has been or Haydel (at the time) had been, his production & ceiling would've been dissected to the point that few valued him for little beyond sentimental reasons. So to go back to BCD80's original premise, I think Khris Davis is worth a whole lot more than Lee Haydel or Logan Schafer. I think this whole thread would've made much more sense if you'd just laid it out as a "Hypothetical: Would you trade Khris Davis for assets of the value of Santana & Hader?" Everything else about how you're phrasing it is still confusing because you're essentially still advancing a proposal of trading Brewer "property" for other Brewer "properties" . . . and phrased the thread title as if it's actually happened.

Excellent article. When I think of where Doug Melvin ultimately failed this team, it comes down to our poor return on high draft picks (not just his fault), and the terrible replacement pieces we have put on the field (that is his fault). When Jeff Bianchi, Yuni Betancourt, Logan Schafer, Alex Gonzalez, Juan Francisco, Lyle Oberbay etc are getting nearly 20% of your team's at bats, those black holes will sink an offense, especially in the NL where you have the pitcher hitting. Far too often, the bottom third of our offense was inept at best. The trades for Greinke and Marcum, while netting a playoff appearance, have really hurt this team in the long run. As Cameron alludes to, our team's fortunes would look much brighter with Escobar, Cain and Odorizzi still in the organization. 4 reactions to the article & the above comments on it: 1. Mostly agreed on 2 of 3 points in the article. Well, 3 of 3, in a way, but I don't fault Melvin for the gambles taken on either side of the Greinke trade. You win some & you lose some, which we all know, and the Royals have done better in the long run than the Brewers did in this particular case. But the return in trading Greinke was still 3 young players who might've panned out but haven't -- YET. However, at the moment I think we'd all agree it's not looking great -- though, for that matter, neither was Greinke in his time w/ the Angels. Then, for all the Brewers tried to re-sign him, LA just blew everyone else's contract offers out of the water. . . . On the flip side, judged similarly, the Sabathia trade worked out pretty doggone well. Brantley was in AAA when traded and took 5 years to start to play like an above-average MLB player, while none of the others amounted to anything. That's a good reminder that while some time has passed since we traded Greinke, there's still time that it could possibly turn out to be a better deal in the long run than it has so far. 2. How sub-par the drafting & developing went for quite a long time has been extremely well-dissected here. To that end, it continues to astonish me that people want to blame Melvin for the drafting "misses" when it's well-documented that the farm director runs the drafting process (even though the GM is in the room). I don't believe you can directly fault Melvin for decisions that were Reid Nichols'. . . . Nichols doesn't make the MLB trades. Melvin doesn't do the drafting. 3. In his early years as GM in MIL, Melvin had far more hits than misses with his waiver claims, scrap-pile pickups, and the "nugget mining" for which he was much-admired. But more recently the bottom half of the roster (position players-wise, anyway) seemed to have fairly few "nugget mining" successes and he put way too many, uh, really sucky players in a position to get significant playing time for far longer than they ever should've. In all fairness, part of the blame is also Roenicke's because he kept playing guys seemingly forever who weren't playing well at all. . . . But on the whole, I think this is probably his biggest failing of the last 4 years. 4. Dave Cameron's sub-headline summary contains two simple yet glaring inaccuracies that are irresponsible & unacceptable. The overall article's on track, but the prefatory summary is NOT. The text in question is this: On Tuesday, another long-term general manager was relieved of his duties, as the Brewers have moved Doug Melvin "into an advisory role", opening up their GM position for the first time since 2002. ... 1) "was relieved of his duties" is often the lingo for "fired" and, regardless of that, clearly implies that the Brewers moved Melvin out as their GM, which is NOT what happened at all -- not to mention that he's STILL THE GM until a successor is named; and 2) "as the Brewers have moved Doug Melvin 'into an advisory role'" is equally flawed for the same reason, as it was Melvin & Attanasio who agreed on a transition plan months ago which they'd been talking about since last year (per every responsible report AND per Attanasio's 12-minute interview during the 3rd inning of Tuesday night's otherwise painful game), and thus with Mark A's blessing both the decision and the timing were Melvin's; BUT he's still the GM and won't move into the advisory role until his successor is named.

I never took those comments that the Brewers were ready to release Lohse. I thought they were indicative of a possible/hopeful waiver claim or, more likely, a trade (either due to a waiver claim or due to Lohse passing through waivers). Either way, it's obvious that no one's really wanted Lohse too badly (or desperately) or else he'd be gone. If that's indeed the case, I'm guessing money's not the issue, rather his terrible on-field results. That said, it's still only August 10th so there are still 3 weeks for Lohse to give folks (i.e., opposing GMs) reason for a little optimism or for another team to have enough injuries or performance issues that they'd come back to the Brewers to try to acquire Lohse. (Technically they could trade for him through September, too, but he wouldn't be playoff eligible, which may not be an issue anyway if he doesn't produce well after a trade OR if he's needed just to cover a start or two during another player's short-term absence.)

In all fairness to Segura -- whose 20-point BA drop this late in the season and whose continued pretty much totally non-clutch hitting are both exceedingly frustrating -- Perez is apparently a better 3B than SS plus has come back down to Earth, Sardiñas is only hitting in the .250s/.260s in AAA (with Rivera hitting about 10 points lower), and Arcia hasn't even seen AAA yet. I think Segura's long term future is probably elsewhere. But in spite of all his glaring flaws at the plate, the Brewers don't exactly have anyone obviously or immediately deserving to start ahead of Segura (in other words, I doubt there's a service time clock issue anywhere in this equation). Until he's traded or outplayed by someone else, I have to think he remains our starting SS. Side note: While Segura has committed 14 errors this year, leading the Brewers (who lead the whole NL in errors & lowest fielding %), he had 7 errors before April was even over. Since then he's on a 2 errors per month clip, which is hardly anything to scoff at from your starting SS. (...I know people love getting into advanced metrics on fielding/defense, which, though improved, are still the least reliable. Without getting too deep into it, errors & fielding percentage still paint a reasonable picture of how well a guy makes the plays he gets to, and as such are a decent -- if still basic -- indicator of a player's fielding.)

While Moran's numbers seem to hold some degree of promise (though his Texas League numbers also bring to mind Lavell Freeman and how the TL used to be good for over-inflating offensive stats), I'd rather have Matt Clark at 1B along with Rogers than Singleton. Just looking at Singleton's numbers -- majors and minors -- suggest too strongly to me a human windmill at the plate, and I have zero interest in that. I still have Mark Reynolds nightmares after last year and don't care to re-live a younger, LH version of him anytime too soon. I'm not sold on trading Adam Lind but might be okay with it for a good, solid return. If Houston were to be the dance partner, I'd want something much better than Singleton to go along with Moran. If there's nothing tradeable on Houston's end that's that much better, then I'm quite content with Adam Lind at 1B.

He seems bound for AAA regardless, so it's just a matter of where he might actually get a chance to play. Obviously with our SS depth, that wasn't happening here.

It's a minor point because of how little he was used, but I'm sincerely surprised Hector Gomez lasted this long on the active roster. He was playing with even lesser frequency than Enrique Cruz and the initial "hide him at the back of the bullpen" stage of Valerio de los Santos' career.

^^ Thanks.

Perhaps, but either way, what he's done this year is nothing special yet in terms of knocking on the door of the major leagues.