MNBrew

It was Wheeler who just had more-involved TJ surgery.... So Gomez's hip negates the deal? Sorry, I'm not convinced of the integrity of the reports and I'm not buying it. One guy says it's Gomez's hip when it's so obvious where the greater issue is, but via social media that becomes gospel? Just like the trade... Come on, folks, are we really this eager for a trade that we'll believe absolutely everything that's said on social media? We'll dissect and debate stats 'til the cows come home but critical thinking goes out the window and we become total sheep b/c one reporter Tweets something surprising which not only isn't true but also cannot legally be shared due to HIPAA laws (which thankfully Doug Melvin has enough intelligence & integrity to adhere to)... Really? Melvin's the one who's coming across level-headed about this. Alderson's quite upset. What does that tell us?

This looks like the Mets trying to save face.... or NY reporters trying to make it look like the other team's guy is the one who's damaged goods.... NY reporters were premature and therefore incorrect if nothing else the first time 'round!

He's been there forever.

Posted by a Toronto Maple Leafs fan (@DownGoesBrown) on the ESPN NHL page’s right-hand column that features people’s Tweets: "I like this new feature where every MLB trade deadline includes one fake trade that we have to figure out like it's an episode of Astro Boy."

At least the egg is on the NY writers' faces re: leaking the story that apparently never fully was.

Must be because Clancyphile has knowledge of the inner workings of the Witness Relocation Plan: Quietly get Bradley out of town before most Brewers fans remember they've forgotten about him.

Defensive metrics don't tell the whole story. Braun plays a solid, reliable RF. Parra's a Gold Glover who's solid in all 3 spots who's at minimum a smart & highly serviceable CF. Davis' arm isn't great but he makes the plays in LF, including many good ones.

Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 27 minutes ago Rival exec: “I don’t think MIL is really looking to trade Gomez. Price is VERY high -- think they’re hoping to get blown away.” ...and that's just fine. Gomez is worth a large haul, and that's what they should expect. In the meantime, he's under contract at a good price through next year, so there's still plenty of time and "go" time on a trade doesn't have to be right now if there's no worthwhile deal to be had. One of the positively applicable mantras on this site pertains to getting fair value in return for assets in trades. If the right value isn't there, Melvin should & very likely will just walk away -- works just like buying a car since, as we know, sometimes walking away increases the salesperson's interest in closing the deal. As much as many on this site mistrust Melvin to their core, he's proven pretty darn good overall at pulling the trigger when the deal is right.

. . . much, much worse (which I acknowledged in the last sentence of my post) OR possibly better (which I elaborated on). Obviously you want to see him moved. Since he's not a pending FA, I'm eager to know the proposed return from all teams pursuing him before passing judgement on how necessary it is to move him by Friday. A Gomez trade by Friday would surely be exciting. Hopefully the sum of the deal would be right. Ultimately we need to move him when the combination of timing and return are the most optimal. . . . Quite possibly the front office has a better sense of when that is than we fans do. Hey, I love trades as much as anybody. But in the end I want whatever trades the Brewers make to be the best possible, and I'd rather they make no trade at all if the alternative is a shoddy return.

I think we all know the market for Gomez, while strong, can improve from its present state in terms of how the Brewers might net an even better return: - His health could be better instead of battling the hamstring & hip. - He could be hitting closer the top of his game (meaning his norm over the past few seasons, esp. in terms of BA but also XBH & RBIs). - He could be stealing bases with his more typical frequency & success rates. - He could be doing better than having already made 7 errors with the season only about 5/8 of the way done. Odds are at some point at least some of those things will be better than they are right now, and if so, his market value's even better. Then again, nothing's guaranteed.

I like that they could trade just Parra (who's playing crazy-good now) or they could also expand it to several other hitters (Gomez, Lind, Segura, etc.) who they don't have to trade at all, which ultimately should just gain them leverage if more moves happen. It's too bad that other than Cotts, the last-contract-year pitchers aren't helping deals to get done, which is compounded all the more by the pitching market being reasonably buyer-friendly this year.

And they also have been hurting for a SS upgrade since ST. Segura, while okay-ish this year, would still represent a significant upgrade at SS for SD. I like your idea, Boomer5. Ironically, during the Royals' game in KC, while texting my good friend about seeing Cain homer for them in-person (we both liked him on his way up through our system), I saw MLBTradeRumors' bit about Texas maybe being interested in Shields. So if SD's really hoping to get out of Shields' contract, I posed the idea of Garza & Sardinas to SD for Shields with other parts necessary from either side to make the idea work (I'd rather trade Sardinas over Segura, but moving either/both is fine given the notion that Arcia's likely the long-term SS for MIL with Rivera a possibly-better Plan B than Segura). We'd trade unwanted contracts -- they'd get the shorter & small commitment plus the SS upgrade they need, we'd get the better pitcher who'd actually be a good rotation anchor even when he's more like a #2.

I think it's possible even the Brewers aren't fully sure what kind of long-term major leaguers Segura, Gennett, or Davis will be. There's ample evidence on both sides of the coin for all three of them. Of the three, only Segura seems to be a legit possibility at more than one position, and even that's more speculation than anything clear or concrete, which is what I was addressing. Of the three, I'm least thrilled with Davis' overall game and its seemingly lack of growth over the past two years (the BB increase this year is nice, but that strikes me as the only substantive growth, which hardly qualifies as his whole game growing), and that's why I thought he might be trade-worthy . . . which of course would still seem premature if not even excessive if Parra AND Gomez are both dealt as well.

MrTPlush, you might want to read my post a little more carefully before suggesting I'm throwing Khris Davis under the bus. I put Khris Davis in the category that it might be worth trading him under the right circumstances. You're connecting lots of dots on your own here which had nothing to do with my post or the thinking behind it. That only serves to discredit the points you're making. Your post could give the impression you're a Davis fan/advocate. Well, if so, to elaborate briefly... I like what Davis can do when he's playing well, but he's 27 and is in the middle of a 2nd straight rather pedestrian year overall outside of his HR power (HR rate) and now not-horrid walk rate, and I'm just not sold on him as a bona-fide long-term part of the Brewers' core. Possibly entertaining trade offers for Khris Davis would be a position-player equivalent of the ongoing Mike Fiers discussions with Toronto (cue DM: "We're not motivated to move him.") That you raised a question of small sample size re: Segura at other positions -- which has been speculated rampantly since the Brewers got him, yet with little (any?) evidence of him playing positions other than SS -- seems ironic given that in the Gomez/K-Rod-to-Toronto thread you predict that Max Pentecost should move up fast because he was good for (what was actually less than) 107 ABs in A-ball in spite of injuries that have kept him off the field all year . . . and with nothing that credibly justifies that expectation.

I tend to agree with much of the spirit of the opening post, though I'd suggest Gomez is the guy to trade rather than Lucroy, especially with the dearth of big-time offensive bats available on the market (& the # of teams needs offensive help) vs. the larger number of supposedly available pitchers. . . . Gomez should net a greater haul than Lucroy IMO, and unless GoGo mutes Boras altogether, I have to think he's a goner after next year. With Ramirez already gone, the guys I think they should look to move are... definites: Parra, Lohse, Broxton, & Gomez probably: Cotts, plus maybe Garza Two guys I think they ought to think about also moving in the right circumstances are... 1. Khris Davis (like the power, dislike the plate discipline, esp. so since his OBP isn't near good enough if he's not offsetting that deficit in his game by hitting lots of HRs) 2. Sardinas (unless Segura really proves he's not part of the long-term answer at 2B &/or 3B) (** I really like how Lind's produced at 1B as one of our best all-around offensive players. But I'd be tempted to live with Rogers & Clark (or Rogers & Peterson) at 1B if trading Lind can net a really good haul (cue Melvin's "not motivated to move him"). Even though his numbers profile historically as more of a platoon guy, he's also got an .868 OPS playing everyday, and I can live with that quite happily, especially at his current price.) The holes I see the needs to find answers for in 2016 would then be... - a couple BP spots (our GM's annual creativity project) - a rotation spot (maybe) - 3B (if Perez and/or Segura don't slot there more permanently) - CF or LF if both Gomez & Davis are traded (assuming Peterson plays one of those spots) And that's a fill-able list of holes, especially if Melvin makes some good trades over the next week & before 9/1.

Why? He's already come to the Brewers with the idea of an extension that would make him a "Brewer for life" and the Brewers declined. What possible reason would we have to keep him in that case? It's certainly not because we're competing and need to keep him because of that. There are several more factors at play than simply those you've mentioned and many others have advanced in related discussions: - Maybe he's still a guy they're serious about building around. It wouldn't be a foolish idea, though it's obviously not a slam-dunk decision at the moment, either. - His production:salary ratio is too good for the Brewers to pass on, either. - OR they're still interested in eventually shopping him, BUT he's under contract for a few more years, and trading him right now, with how he's producing, would be an instance of selling way too low -- which, if that proved to be the case, would send most on this board into a total tizzy on Melvin & Co. (For those who'd say Lucroy's production wouldn't matter or that selling low wouldn't be the case, just look at how normally-offensively-pedestrian Gerardo Parra's value is going WAY up based on being quite hot at the plate for 2 months IN SPITE OF his contract -- a salary which had some on this site suggesting, prior to this hot streak, would necessitate the Brewers chipping in cash in order to help move him!) - Braun's 2nd extension got done WAY too early. Maybe the Brewers learned something from that in terms of the value of timing -- NOT meaning that it's foolish to extend that far into the future (I'd suggest going that far into the future, while risky, isn't necessarily always foolish), rather meaning that there's no reason that extension would've had to get done anytime this year (after all, Lucroy's offense fell right off the table with everyone else's during last fall's collapse). - Segura didn't handle his game well after last spring's long-term extension negotiations broke off. Maybe the Brewers learned something from that about when it's the right time to deal with serious extension discussions (which the Lucroy ones weren't b/c there were no negotiations, just a proposal that the team wasn't interested in at the time -- in any case, maybe it's not just coincidence that Lucroy started off cold this year just like Segura did last year). - MAYBE, just maybe, Melvin & the FO want Lucroy around for the remainder of his career, but Melvin's smart enough (a concession many on this site would NEVER make) to know that it may be better for Melvin's successor to work through that negotiation, especially since there's no great rush yet since Lucroy's still around for a few years. - I still can't get past these 3 words or the present lack of solution for them: no capable replacement. Until that changes, I don't think trading Lucroy -- at least this summer -- is very wise, let alone a have-to. I think way too many folks here are stuck in trade-deadline-mindset where every justifiable trade that might possibly be made had better be made. I LOVE the trade frenzy at the deadline and love it more when the Brewers are a) active and, better, b) make really good deals. That said, I think executing every single remotely justifiable trade runs a great risk of serious organizational mismanagement. The only justification for trading everyone worth anything is a complete, Astros-like tear-down, and I don't see that happening. In other words, in the end, I'd rather the Brewers make the best/right trades rather than simply the most. Sorry to ramble, but you asked. You may not agree with my opinions or put much stock in my points, which of course is fine, but it's still a legit & rational viewpoint.

Having been at last night's Rays game vs. Baltimore, the Rays' catching isn't much good offensively at all. And while I get the trade-mania mindset these days on account of our lousy place in the standings -- I'm very excited about a few of the possibilities -- I'm still convinced Lucroy's one of the guys they should not be looking to trade.

Of the 4 SS options of value at/above AA (Segura, Sardinas, Rivera, Arcia), I'd gladly put forth Sardinas as the one of those 4 I'd be willing to trade at this point. Arcia's a keeper for sure for now. Segura's got plenty of obvious value but also some questions, yet he could also prove to be part of the future at 3B or 2B for all we know, too. Rivera seems to produce better than Sardinas overall and might also prove a more versatile bat if not also positional player all over the IF. That leaves Sardinas, who may have decent value, too, though little since he came to MIL in the Gallardo trade has pointed that way strongly.

In all fairness, he mentioned multiple times that those were pretty tough questions to answer. He wasn't looking to rant and it was obvious that, for a while, he was reluctant to answer at all. Bill Michaels pushed him with tough questions that aren't necessarily the most fair to ask a player. And when the going's tough, when they're in this deep of a hole, it's easy to see the glass as half-empty. However.... - One possibility no one's mentioned is the possibility that, especially with the seemingly forthcoming FO change, there's enough term left on his contract that there could be a different & well-justified outlook by the time he's at a point of deciding where he'll play on his next contract. - I'd be a lot more comfortable with the prospect of dealing Lucroy IF we'd get max return (i.e., he were hitting like an All-Star again), if we knew there was no way he'd likely re-sign, and if there were anything resembling a viable, starting-caliber replacement at hand (no, Maldonado's proven way too well he's not that). But I don't see any of those things as anywhere near likely or imminent.

^^ This. Suggesting the Twins might be willing to trade either of them would be like suggesting the Brewers might trade Weeks, Fielder, & Braun when they were all on the cusp of the bigs. Ain't happenin'. These are the guys the Twins' franchise has been banking on as their stud core since they got 'em. Both missed most of last year with injuries, but they're total studs and not going anywhere for (probably) a very long time. Berrios is one of the Twins' top pitching prospects, and they're not exactly plush with high-end guys on the diamond, so I'd think he'd be about as close to untouchable as they come in terms of Twins' pitching prospects.

Yeah, but that organizational philosophy doesn't absolve them of their responsibility to develop good pitchers -- you still have to develop well the pitchers that you draft regardless of where you drafted them. And there are lots of good pitchers over the years who weren't picked in the first couple rounds, which just points all the more to MIL's failure to develop much of any pitching under Jack Z.

Fair enough. But the names you added reveal all the more why the guy doesn't merit the teflon coating he still gets from many: Two significant pitchers over how many years? (and Odorizzi has yet to put it all together at the MLB level) . . . And as been noted many times, it's the farm director who makes the picks.

What a terrible loss. Hamilton was one of my absolute favorites for his entire career -- a solid, smart, team-first player who was really good defensively and a sweet hitter with good wheels. I bought a game-used jersey of his at the Brewers' Clubhouse in Brookfield Square. I specifically collected every one of his Topps, Fleer, Donruss, & Upper Deck baseball cards beyond the complete sets I worked on (or just bought) every year. . . . Everything said about him since the news broke corroborates how I felt about him all along. It just doesn't seem real, and all I can think of is how stupid and unnecessary this outcome was. For whatever was behind her actions -- and in reverting to my kid-like thinking, I'm hoping the dysfunction was mainly hers and not his, though that might be too unrealistic -- what she did solved nothing AND, more glaringly, left their child with NO parents. How foolish, short-sighted, and selfish to put personal anger above parental responsibility!

I don't get the teflon coating Jack Z. has in some folks' thinking. Who exactly did he hit on? Fielder, Weeks, Braun, Hardy, Hart, & Gallardo. That's pretty much it. And most of those were home runs before they ever played a game. Thankfully, they made up enough of a core to build a team around for a few good playoff runs. Under Jack Z., the Brewers drafted lots of all-or-nothing hitters and had an absolutely miserable time developing almost any decent pitchers. In all, it's really those 6 guys named that give Jack Z. his reputation & any credibility. Beyond that.... hmmmm..... In the end, I actually agree with the whole sentence IF you just remove the Jack Z. qualifier from it. The Brewers have to draft & develop LOTS better, period.

If by dumping you mean trading, yes certainly people are advocating that, as we could certainly use as much of the remainder of his contract off our books as we can get while we head toward a rebuilding process. Even if Garza rebounds, what good does it do for us competitively? Its not like we are going to be in the playoff hunt the next couple years anyway. If by dumping you mean just releasing and eating the $30M left on his contract, no one is advocating for that. At least not that I've seen. Lohse maybe. I don't have the time right now to go hunting for citations, but I've also read people's clamoring for Garza to be flat-out dumped. Someone in the Wang-got-DFA'd thread wanted every non-productive expensive veteran off the 40-man before Wang, including Garza. There's been nothing out there saying the Brewers need to be dumping salary (outside of this board and probably other similar ones). The point of dumping guys that aren't looking favorable for the long-term plan (a.k.a. rebuilding) is to net as many and as good of young prospects in return as possible. The cost savings is simply a bonus by-product of making those moves. Saving big coin on the MLB payroll via a rebuild doesn't gain the Brewers anything immediate because no worthwhile big-buck FAs would want to join a team right after a dumpster-fire season like this one anyway.