MNBrew

Thanks, djoctagone. I didn't think I was dreaming that up.

My goodness yes. We've had two playoff appearances in the last 5 seasons after having none in the previous 20 before he got here. You don't like the way he's built the team- that's well documented. But don't let your dislike of their methods cloud your judgement on the merits of what has been done here. I guess the question could be: "Could anyone with reasonable intelligence have taken over a team with Fielder, Weeks, Hart, Hardy, etc in the system, an escalating payroll with a new ambitious owner, and Jack Z & crew running the drafts, all at a time when the NL Central was considered the weakest in baseball, and still have made at least two playoff appearances?" Don't get me wrong, I lived through many years of bad Brewer baseball and am glad to have some playoff memories, but Taylor's the guy who inherited a bad system top-to-bottom and got us headed in the right direction. He got fired for one bad free agent signing (Hammonds), and Melvin took over a franchise on the rise. He could certainly have blown things up by trading away the prospects he inherited to try to win right away, but I think he gets more credit for turning things around then he should. I also worry that his big spending ways and inability to build a decent farm will at some point in the not-too-distant future lead us to a period not unlike the 1990's in Milwaukee (or at least present-day Houston because at least we won't have the Selig clan running things). I think Melvin planned his "window" to close right around when he was scheduled to retire. Then he got an extension offer and decided to stick it out, so he's now pulling out all the stops to win in the next two years. The next guy's probably going to inherit a mess. I guess people will see what they want to see. Monty, could you possibly ever admit it if Melvin proved to have done a good job? Does the degree to which he's well-regarded by his GM colleagues carry any credibility in your eyes? Jack Z. drafted good-hitting position players, many of whom were lousy fielders, and pitchers who mostly couldn't make it up to the top of the system -- whether the issue was the Brewers' failure to develop them or not, it can't lie solely on the team's shoulders -- as evidenced by the fact that we kept having to try to bring in top-caliber pitching from other organizations. What I think will be an interesting lens to look through will be the general success rate of the Brewers' pitching prospects' development since the year when Rick Peterson was the pitching coach and he was at the core of developing a system-wide pitching plan & scouting approach. . . . To me, it's one sign of a good GM when he can see what's generally not working and be open to totally re-thinking how to improve the situation, as they did with this systemic approach to drafting & developing pitching. In a market like Milwaukee, when success on the field results in attendance around 3,000,000 for multiple years running, you have to be mindful of both the present & the future, and it's a very delicate balance. If they went all-young & cheap, justified or not, you'd have oodles of fans (arguably less "deep" in their baseball savviness, but still a large portion of the ticket-buying public) up in arms that they weren't investing that LARGE revenue right back into the payroll. . . . I'm not sure signing Kyle Lohse was the absolute best decision. However, I'm not sure it's exactly idiotic, either, or "yet another sign" that Melvin's a spend-a-holic. Since the best offense in the NL is returning almost fully intact PLUS set up far better at SS, the bullpen's notably improved, & it's fairly obvious that the biggest question mark going into this season is the youth in the rotation, just how long does Melvin go before bringing in an affordable reinforcement to Gallardo & Estrada when... - Rogers loses not only his command but also serious velocity, - Fiers keep pitching in ST against relatively easy competition like he did over his last 10 starts, - Narveson's ability to remain fully healthy all year is hardly a reliable thing given his surgery less than a year ago (I'm not convinced he's the Adrian Peterson of pitchers), and - it's pretty obvious they're giving Peralta a good-length leash at the MLB level? It was pretty well established at the time of Dean Taylor's firing that he did good work on the drafting/scouting side of things, but he was completely out of his league when it came to putting together reasonable talent at the major-league level.

Since Bianchi only played in one game nearly a month ago (Mar. 2nd) and has barely been progressing in the time since, I'd think he has a much greater chance of being placed on the 60-day DL. I'd also think the Brewers could very easily back-date Hart's DL time to put him on the 60-day DL, too. I thought there was a deal about March 25th or 26th being the typical end-of-ST start date for DL stints, but there was someone put on the 60-day DL by another team a good 2-3 weeks ago.

Hmmm.... Not stellar news, but I don't think he's ever been as great of an announcer as his status with the networks over the years seems to suggest that he has. That said, I think you also have to hand it to a guy who's persevered & succeeded like he has to get to the point of being able to retire on his own timing & terms.

Not my favorite move but not anything I rue. In other words, I sincerely believe this is a better move than keeping Donnie Murphy.

Ditto. Gonzalez is starting at 1B with Green (if/when healthy) and Lalli (if he's on the team) more likely to play at 1B than Maldonado. To the main topic of the thread . . . It's still possible Hart, Bianchi, & even Rogers could be put on the 60-day DL. Bianchi's not coming along at all -- opening day's only a week away -- and would probably merit a good couple weeks of extended spring training to be ready to play in games once he's healthy, and then after that a max-length rehab assignment would seem a more feasible next step than being activated onto the 25-man roster.

Holy "glass is half-empty"!!! The games still have to be played on the field, not on paper. If the bullpen overhaul is only half-successful, it's still a big improvement on a team that wasn't exactly crap and still wasn't eliminated from the playoffs 'til very late last year. And yeah, there are still rotation questions, mainly along the lines of which Fiers, Peralta, & Narveson (& eventually Rogers) will show up. Anyway, you make some solid points, Monty, but there are 2 that merit rebutting: A. "Aging" is true for most every team with established players in at least some respect, but the "how" is what tells the tale. Braun, Weeks, Hart, & Gallardo are in their prime. So might Aoki be, age-wise, but we don't know yet if last year is part of an upward MLB curve for him or just a one-year wonder. Axford, Gomez, Estrada, & Lucroy are all both established and still improving. Segura is definitely on the young side. Overall, Ramirez is the only regular you might consider "older" but his numbers give NO indication of any decline having begun yet. And there's now Lohse, I suppose, but you can't find much in his numbers the last 2 years that point to him on the decline, either.. . . And you have to figure that within a couple years, Hart, Weeks, & Ramirez likely will all be replaced by younger players. . . . and we'll have the guys to do so, even if we're not sure at this point who they'll all be. B. "Worst farms in baseball" just plain isn't true. That point sounds like the same flawed logic that the farm's still terrible because of what we gave up for Marcum & Greinke, which is a flawed theory because the only guy who has promise AND is still in the minors is Odorizzi, which hardly would cause the Brewers' farm system to be allegedly barren. Even Jon Sickels sees lots of potentially solid MLB contributors in the ranks and doesn't see the cupboard as bare at all. I'd agree with anyone's assertion that we lack true "blue chip," seemingly-sure-fire-future-All-Stars, but that doesn't negate the numerous quality players ascending through the ranks.

Since the whole contest started, I've been trying to convince myself I wouldn't like what was chosen, like what it looked like for real, or want to buy a cap or - far worse - a jersey . . . in short, that I wouldn't care.... Hmmmm... 0-for-4 & just waiting for one of those 25% days at brewers.com store to be seriously tempted.

Morris has already been returned to minor league camp, so I don't see how you'd consider him any kind of possibility unless the next 2-3 options at 1B also get hurt. Also, CheezWizHed, I think I've read that having Lalli on the roster (if he makes it) would be in part so that Maldonado can remain the backup C, not get 1B playing time, or so that Roenicke could use either Maldonado or Lalli to PH as situations dictate and still have a C on the bench.

Really? I can't justify agreeing with that in any way. His improved outing today, while only one game, proves that he's not totally raw or mentally unable to deal with where he's at (at least more so than had he had another shaky outing -- we ought to be seeing this progress, after all!).

Thread's going a different direction at the moment, but I figured I'm mention that I saw a TH tweet today that Burgos has been optioned to AAA.

If you (and BP apparently, not sure when in 2012 this was written) can't see an improvement in his approach I don't know what to tell you. The poster xisxisxis has a track record of posts that show he believes Melvin's a crappy GM no matter what rational facts are presented to the contrary, so it's not illogical to conclude that you can tell him anything that will change his mind. David, do you sincerely feel that Melvin truly has no long-term plan? Or do you just disagree with what you presume his approach to be? I think he doesn't have a job if your assumption is actually the case. But Melvin hasn't become one of the most respected GMs in the business because he's inept or has no well-reasoned long-term plan. He has a delicate balance to maintain in this market with rather limited margin for error, which for the most part he's done increasingly well as time's gone on and the team's become more successful. I wonder if some folks hold GMs & managers to "Eckersley-level" standards for success under the flawed premise that those outliers on the most-incredibly-successful end of the spectrum -- which are just about impossible to attain -- are actually the norms and should be used as the basis for judging all others. Rollie Fingers was one of the best closers of his time, but some would want to look at him now and contend that he wasn't so great because, well, look at how much better Eckersley was during his years as a closer. The Eckersleys & Mariano Riveras are the flukes, not the norm. For everyone who thinks Melvin's a lousy GM (or Roenicke's a lousy manager -- pick your typical brewerfan.net gripe!), I'd sure like to know who they think would come into the position with better credentials/track record and a greater certainty of better achievement. Failure to suggest legit alternatives often tends to point to closed-minded judgements.

Incredibly sad & touching story. Thanks for sharing the link.

Well, if he stays unsigned long enough, there's a good chance you WILL see it because there's always someone's attempt at a clever April Fools Day thread.

Even some of the "experts" say the Brewers' farm system isn't so depleted, just short on "sure thing" prospects. So this mantra everyone keeps repeating that the Brewers have a weak farm system is a myth and thus sheer nonsense.\ Is the farm system stellar? No, of course not. But is it devoid of eventual solid MLB contributors? Heck no: there are plenty of prospects with legit MLB promise & potential. Blue chippers? Probably not, but still plenty of players with solid MLB futures. From the Greinke & Marcum trades of 2 winters ago, the only prospect we dealt who's left in the minors is Odorizzi (since Jeffress really wouldn't seem to be considered a prospect anymore). And we've drafted plenty of seemingly high-end guys (this year's 3 pre-2nd-round picks, 2 #1's last year) & have guys like Morris, Nelson, Davis, etc. coming up.

This whole argument is flawed. Braun's not asking to have it both ways. Whether you like it or not, his "take my word for it" response is his response to the public -- his PR -- and it's very likely NOT his detailed response to MLB or any other official investigation. I'm sure Braun & his attorneys don't figure a "take my word for it" will satisfy the actual investigation. On the other hand, if he didn't buy or take PEDs, how can he show that he didn't (see pebadger's post a couple pages ago) in a way that satisfies anyone inclined not to believe him? In all likelihood, most of those disbelievers -- whether investigators, MLB officials, or the public -- will never be satisfied, and that's just how it goes. Braun's cooperation with the investigation should be expected to be totally honest. MLB is his employer (and specifically the Brewers' ballclub, of course), not the public. It's not the public's investigation, and it's not a public investigation or a public court trial. While his public image is obviously deemed by many -- including you -- to be at stake, that's not the same as his employment status being at stake. No one has to like that some of these details are privileged and confidential, but they are, period, and some folks are just going to have to come to grips with never knowing the full story no matter how much they don't like it.

This is what multiple people are saying. But I heartily disagree. As long as Braun does right & makes right -- tells & upholds the truth to those either investigating or in charge of his employment -- that's all that truly matters. What an awful indictment of the culture the media's created that people not connected to Braun or MLB that are somehow owed or entitled to the story! Wanting to know the story is one thing, especially if it's just to make sense of it personally, but believing we're owed the whole story, to me, is nothing short of fundamentally wrong. Technically, of course, the amount anyone believes Braun or believes in Braun may be predicated on knowing the full story. And there are many layers of being a fan of his & of the Brewers potentially affected by all this for many, many people. But knowing the whole story is not our right -- no matter how much the media wants to suggest it is!

PEBadger's got it right. Agendas, agendas, agendas.... Poor! I just watched the main ESPN.com/mlb link on Braun. Both the host & T.J. Quinn (the reporter) sure seem to be making certain assumptions in how they're framing the story, and it starts with the host's set-up intro of Quinn where Quinn then chimes in with his report. I quote directly: "How is baseball approaching the allegation about this Miami clinic providing PEDs to baseball players, specifically Ryan Braun?" From what we're hearing, there are no allegations of PEDs re: Braun, just a name on a sheet, and Braun offers an immediate & viable explanation, Braun states his intention to cooperate fully, and now Cervelli on the Yankees chimes in with a similar reference. So that whole set-up is overt sensationalism, just plain irresponsible journalism, or both.

Ennder, granted it's only 1/3 of the case you presented, but the only non-MLB guy left in the minors or still a legit prospect from the "going for it" trades (assuming you mean Greinke & Marcum) is Odorizzi. Cain & Escobar are starting in KC, Lawrie is starting in TOR, & Jeffress can't pitch with enough control to stick in the bigs or pile up even respectable AAA stats. So unless you're putting a lot of weight on Odorizzi, those trades have precious little to do with the prospect list being "poor" right now. Let's not forget that our trading Greinke essentially brought guys back who parallel 3 of the 4 we traded to get Greinke in the first place (Segura/Escobar = promising young SS's, Hellweg/Odorizzi = high-end power pitchers, Pena/Jeffress = promising strong arms with suspect control). As Jon Sickels' prospect analysis pointed out recently (I don't remember if it was his or someone else's), the Brewers don't lack solid prospects, just blue-chippers.

Since the prospect of Hart missing April & May was causing the Brewers to look at the likes of Juan Rivera & Lyle Overbay, I'm hoping this notion of him just missing April means they're less likely to feel the need to go out & get a "blah" fringe-type outsider who'd possibly endear himself and be kept past Hart's return & therefore stand a greater chance of keeping a Green or whomever -- a more long-term "piece" -- off the 25-man.

One injury or young-guy uber-slump and we still have a starting-caliber MLB SS already on hand, which sure beats whatever it was Izturis supposedly brought last year. That's why I really like the Gonzalez signing. When your late-inning defensive replacement becomes your everyday starter and still hits like a late-inning defensive replacement (or a pitcher) -- and gets to keep doing so because there are no viable options! -- well, there you have the Brewers' 2012 SS situation pre-Segura. Your depth is invariably better when you have 5 starting-caliber IFs (NOT our IF situation last year) and 4 starting-caliber OFs (definitely our OF situation last year).

Or Parra will strike out the side but walk almost everyone to still allow a couple runs first. Won't miss those moments on the navy & gold's mound!

A. You're writing like Overbay already has signed. He hasn't yet, and there's no guarantee that he'll choose to sign in Milwaukee. B. Taylor Green never a prime prospect? He's only been their Minor League Player of the Year twice with much of the gap between the two years due to the wrist injury & recovery from it. Henderson & Fiers were never considered great prospects but they've done well so far. Heck, Hart was never touted as much of a prospect. But how a guy is "billed" isn't necessarily the same as how they're viewed by the organization, and I'd put much more stock in the latter.

I'm on about the same wavelength with these two exceptions: BP: I see Fautino DLS (no options) or Kelvim Escobar (huge pedigree, potential "Kapler Revival/Effect" factor) both more likely than Sanchez (all options remaining, yes?). Bench*: Gindl over Khris Davis. Davis was a stud last year but still missed a good chunk of the year. Gindl's been working his way up through the system and has the skills that merit being the next OF prospect to get MLB roster (& playing) time. Also, if Davis proves to be that much of a prospect, he needs to be playing everyday in AAA rather than 3 ABs/week in MLB for Hart's April & May DL time. *The asterisk to the bench situation, of course, is if Overbay or an equivalent signs on, which would seem to make Green the backup 3B/2B & 5th OF.

I really, really, really like this move. Gonzalez has pop. Maldonado has pop. Green has some pop. How much more pop do we need? I want decent hitters who can get plenty of hits, drive the ball, & hit some out. I think that describes what the bench now has when you add Schafer into the mix, too. And I'll note here again that if Overbay is signed & makes the team, I hope he doesn't stick long-term at Taylor Green's expense (or at least in a way that hinders his productive MLB development).