MNBrew

I'm not a Melvin apologist, but I am an advocate. Here's my 2¢ on the topic: What's really unbelievable is, reading the first 90 or so comments on the JSOnline story of Macha's dismissal, just how many people feel like this is really far more Doug Melvin's fault for not getting more pitching. Yes, some of Melvin's moves backfired, but... - How do you get free agents to come to Milwaukee who don't want to come to Milwaukee? - How do you overpay good pitchers who aren't inclined to come to Milwaukee without totally blowing your whole payroll? - How do you get stud pitchers to drop Milwaukee from their no-trade clause lists when you try to trade for them (which apparently happened when they made a strong pitch for Roy Halladay last winter)? - When you can't get even most mediocre FAs to consider Milwaukee, and you actually make a GOOD decision by not bringing back Braden Looper (surprising how after 14 wins he didn't get signed by anyone!!!) or not signing other really not-very-good pitchers, why should you catch flak for doing nothing when the alternatives would've amounted to doing something much worse? - How do you anticipate solid pitchers with great track records for being healthy coming up with injuries that pretty much scuttle their whole year (Hawkins & Davis) or the whole life of their contract (Riske)? Granted, some things he has no control over, and certain gambles didn't pan out. It just works that way, and you take some heat, regardless. But what do all these nonsensical people think they could've done if they were in Doug Melvin's shoes? There are plenty of positives about this team that most Melvin haters seem to blatantly ignore: - The hitters are generally very solid (although, yes, they could be better contact hitters and could hit better w/ RISP) AND good position playing prospects are still at all levels of their minor leagues. - Most all the starting position players are home-grown -- actual Brewers draftees. Given where the organization was years ago, this is MASSIVE progress. Most of these guys aren't just passable, but current or potentially future All-Stars. - They've finally developed & laid out a system-wide, clearly articulated approach for developing pitchers. They hired a pitching coach with a proven comprehensive plan. Some results started to show. Some of those results were not going to be instantaneous. It's the right direction to be moving, even if it should've occurred sooner. - The bullpen actually got a whole lot better as more young guys were brought on board. That should hardly be a hopeless situation. Villanueva, though not good in the middle, wasn't a total waste and pitched better again after returning from AAA, though he's still a possible non-tender candidate, although not nearly as strong a candidate as Coffey. Only Coffey truly kept getting worse as the season wore on, all the way to the end. Even Hoffman had an ERA of 2.67 from June through the end of the year. - Randy Wolf & Chris Narveson both actually came along quite well, and Chris Capuano was quite solid overall once he got the first few kinks worked back out. Those are many positives this team has as it looks ahead. Many of those things can be attributed to Doug Melvin. Looking at the pitching staff, only Hoffman's & Bush's non-returns can be assumed. This picture's not totally terrible and should be a solid foundation: Starters (or potential starters): Gallardo, Wolf, Narveson, Capuano, Rogers, Jeffress Relievers (or potential bullpen members, anyway): Axford, Braddock, Parra (very good ERA as a reliever), Hawkins, Loe, Villanueva, McClendon, Coffey, Kintzler This is hardly a lost cause. If they can land 1-2 excellent starters (FA or trade, though more likely trade), the whole picture will look even better. To me, there's no doubt whatsoever that Melvin deserves to continue as Brewers GM.

Some of the more consistently strong organizations are ones w/ tendencies toward stability. For that reason, I think Randolph makes tons of sense: A different approach but not totally starting over. - Peterson was his pitching coach in NY, so there's already a time-tested trust level there...and besides... - They've only just begun implementing the organization-wide pitching plan, in which Peterson has a huge role. - Sveum's hitters, while all have room for improvement, still had a pretty strong showing this year overall. - The rotation needs much more talent, to be sure, but the majority of the players are young and could well be here for awhile. - Per something I read, Randolph was seen as having a pretty good rapport w/ the players. And (if it truly makes a difference) he certainly ought to have much more "cred" with Prince & Braun than Macha did. Randolph as mgr. New bench coach -- whomever Willie likes. Cirillo as 3B coach? That'd replace Randolph's role as IF coach, though there would be plenty of qualified options. I just don't think the Brewers need to throw the baby out with the bathwater and start totally over again. Stability counts for something. The last 2 times the Brewers actually promoted from within (non-interim situation) were Harvey Kuenn & Tom Trebelhorn. There are no guarantees, but those two circumstances turned out better than most any other managerial hire they've had not named Bamberger (1st time, mind you -- NOT the 2nd time).

I remember a year or two early in the Dale-Murphy-MVP-era '80s when the Braves had not just no lefties in the rotation, but none on the staff at all. They weren't a great team but they weren't chopped liver. In other words, I agree w/ DHonks: We just need good pitchers, period. If they do well enough at getting guys out, it shouldn't matter the hand with which they throw.

Multiple folks are saying this. The Brewers have to be one of the better teams at NOT hiring retreads. The Macha hire doesn't make me gun-shy of guys with MLB managerial experience. Terry Francona's won a couple World Series in Boston after winning nothing in Philly. Charlie Manuel won in Philly after not winning in Cleveland. Let's see... Ken Macha - "retread" Ned Yost - rookie mgr Jerry Royster - rookie mgr Davey Lopes - rookie mgr Phil Garner - rookie mgr Tom Trebelhorn - rookie mgr George Bamberger, 2nd time - "retread" ... the last time before Macha the Brewers hired a re-tread was for the '85 season, and his previous experience was managing the Brewers. Only Trebelhorn had a winning record, and only Garner & Yost also had above .500 seasons.

I know the Orioles have been linked with having interest in Martinez and playing him at 1B, C, and DH. It wouldn't be a bad move to sign Martinez and have him as the backup or emergency catcher and then have him play primarily at 1B though that would mean either Gamel or McGehee need to be traded. How about this scenario: 3-team trade: Billingsley to the Brewers; Loney, Gomez, McClendon, and cash to the Rays; Prince, Parra, and Upton to the Dodgers. I am not sure the Rays accept that offer but it would replace an expensive Upton with a cheaper option in Gomez and Loney will be cheaper than any free agent the Rays could pick up. McGehee plus a low prospect to the Marlins for Nolasco. FA Signing: Beltre to play 3B. Lineup: 1. Weeks 2B 2. Gamel 1B 3. Beltre 3B 4. Braun LF 5. Hart RF 6. Cain CF 7. Lucroy C 8. Escobar SS 9. Pitcher Rotation: Gallardo, Billingsley, Nolasco, Wolf, Rogers/Narveson/Capuano Bullpen: Axford, Coffey, Braddock, Hawkins, (2 of) Rogers/Narveson/Capuano, and Loe. Bench: Inglett, Cruz, Kottaras, Farris, and Katin That would give the Brewers a great rotation. I am not sure of the 3-team trade there seems to be something missing for the Rays and I just can't find that piece in the Dodgers system. Might have to add a positional player from the Brewers farm system to get that trade to work. That rotation would be the best rotation in the NL and would rival that of the Yankees and Rays rotation. Offense would be the big question mark here. Will Gamel and Beltre be able to replace Prince's production? Hart won't do what he did this year again next year so you have to expect some regression from him. The bullpen maybe a little shaky though. The McGehee/Nolasco idea might work. There's much to like about Billingsley, but your big trade is nuts: Brewers get 1 good but not elite pitcher. Brewers give up one of the league best monster hitters at age 26, strong young righty AND lefty relievers, a lightning-fast defensive whiz who can't get on base, AND cash? You're kidding, right? That's ridiculous! Maybe Billingsley for Fielder, straight up. But not Fielder + 3 other MLB players plus cash. Maybe Fielder won't net the return we're hoping for in an ideal world. But Fielder's a young, elite power hitter, and you're throwing him in with those other young guys plus cash as if he's only a promising prospect, not a proven 50-HR, 100-walk, 100+ RBI hitter.

I totally agree w/ jackalope. A-. Hindsight's 20/20. And some people will just NEVER be happy with the GM. For every move folks want to rag on Melvin for making, there would be at least as many complaints about Melvin doing nothing -- and arguing that he's totally inept -- had he not made any moves. I think Mark A.'s comments yesterday are right on: Melvin's an excellent GM who just had an off year (at least in the FA dept.). Wolf's a bad move? Wolf had 1.5 lousy months after a respectable April start and followed with 4 good-to-excellent months (with the bullpen-saving Pittsburgh disaster start mixed in). Since Peterson made his suggestion about pace, Wolf's been extremely solid. Given that, I'm sure glad we already have him under contract the next two years. Ditto Hoffman. His 1st 2 months this year were terrible beyond belief. But all last year he was great. And the last 4 months of this year, his ERA's been 2.67. De La Rosa was excellent the last 4 months of last year. He was terrible in KC after the trade and not worth much in Colorado 'til he got hot last year. This year he's been nothing special thanks mainly to injury. Graffanino performed very solidly here 'til he blew out his knee. Did you really want to wait out 2.5 more years of crap pitching? Everyone's bashing Parra (justifiably). But Jorge was 1.5x worse when we finally pulled the plug & dumped him for Graffy. That was a totally brilliant move! Roast Melvin for dumping JDLR but scream to get rid of Parra? Holy selective reasoning! Melvin's dumpster-diving was about a 75% success rate for 3-4 years. Few if any GMs can claim such strong success over that same period of time. Several other low-grade signings have worked out extremely well as noted above. Most trades weren't total failures. Some FA moves have been outstanding. Unfortunately, last year's batch of bigger-money ones didn't pan out well except Wolf, and it took getting through nearly 1.5 bad months after a respectable April for him to get back on track.

The longer Garner managed the Brewers, the less he seemed to do well. No thanks. Randolph, Sveum, Money, or someone from another organization... (Not that they haven't been debated a lot already. I just didn't want to talk down an idea without also making a suggestion.)

Melvin also mentioned recently (wish I could remember where -- JSOnline or brewers.com) that Garland is from California and was more interested in landing a job in California than in coming to the Brewers. Sure, any of us would love to have had Garland's 2010 performance in this year's Brewers rotation over anything Doug Davis did. But hindsight is 20-20 and, as Sage mentioned, as with David Riske a few years ago, there was absolutely no indication that any, let alone the majority, of Davis' Milwaukee tenure this time would be spent on the DL. Given how playing for Milwaukee is viewed by many FAs, you can't underestimate the better chances of signing a player w/ positive vibes about Milwaukee (Davis) vs. someone who, for whatever reason, would rather be pitching somewhere else (Garland).

The thread title is perfectly correct. The increasingly low-brow American English accepts more and more of what used to be considered improper. Grammar as in this title actually reflects what's more proper, about which more & more of our society is becoming completely clueless. And yes, Tulowitzki's hot streak is beyond incredible. If the Brewers could've had someone hitting like that in April, we might not have started with a 4-14 home record and might actually be looking at the baseball world from a vantage point above the .500 mark.

That's the best line yet.

Peterson's job is not in jeopardy in any way, shape, or form. Has a Brewers pitcher starting pitcher under-achieved? Attanosio has already put the blame of our pitching woes squarely on the shoulders of the man who deserves it, Doug Melvin. Peterson is one of the strengths of this organization. Man, X, you sure don't miss any opportunity these days to blast Melvin as the root of all evil, do you? I, for one, think you're totally off. On just one point in support of Melvin, you can't make good pitchers want to go somewhere they don't have any interest in being. How's Melvin supposed to do that? Overpay? That's half the rest of that problem already. What was Melvin supposed to do while the minor league cupboard of certified ML-ready talent was grossly understocked going through the winter? Shoot, Randy Wolf's body of work since June (minus that terrible bullpen-saving Pirates outing) is quite impressive. Given the fixes Peterson helped bring about, that signing's looking to be pretty solid. And that can help change the a good part of the view on Melvin's "success rate" last winter -- especially in proportion to the money spent on Wolf's deal, which now should hardly look like a total waste. I also give Melvin good credit for seeing the pitching problem across the organization, realizing & then implementing the necessary steps to begin fixing the problem system-wide. Like what Dean Taylor first inherited as GM or Yost as manager -- it's NOT an easy or instant fix. But this new organization-wide approach to pitching sure seems to have a much better chance of fixing the problem than of perpetuating past issues. I don't care for Macha, but I don't think Randolph, Sveum, or especially Peterson should be going anywhere. Sedar & Fischer? I'm not sure I really care. But especially w/ Peterson, systemic & philosophical change takes time to affect proof in the form of results. Changing directions in the form of a 3rd pitching coach in 3 years would seem downright dumb.

Many hitters aren't power hitters, including a lot of shortstops. For someone guys like Escobar who aren't power hitters, I'm FAR more concerned about BA & OBP than OPS, to the point where any argument on their worth being predicated primarily against the measuring stick of the .800 OPS seems extremely flawed.

The biggest problem right now is that Escobar's totally hit the wall here in September, hitting below .200 and with only 2 RBIs over 2.5 weeks so far. We all know how our most recent memory often makes the strongest argument.... If, during September, Escobar had only been keeping up his average monthly production for the year prior to September, the intensity of this discussion might be a bit different.

That's utter nonsense on so many levels. Escobar's playing a full 162 game schedule for the first time. He's worn down a bit, just like so many rookies playing everyday, but that PT in the bigs is helping his development in the long run. You can't get the equivalent of September (6th full month of the season) experience by still playing in AAA, anyway. When Hardy couldn't hit a barn wall from inside the barn the 1st half of his rookie year, then got so hot to elevate his whole year to the levels of offense Escobar's maintained all year, no one was talking about a cheap year being wasted. Hardy needed that developmental time in the bigs then just like Escobar did now. The premise seemingly behind your Melvin-bashing remark is that any half-decent rookie should arrive in the bigs as a fully-polished product, so to speak. Most rookies don't have a realistic chance of an All-Star first year. And some who do flame out quickly. I'll take the gradual path with the hope that it bodes better for the long run. . . . Escobar's still quite young and should be better at age 28 than Hardy. If he's not, I'm sure we'll have another SS prospect on which to pin our hopes by then, anyway. (Alright, now roast me. Pretty much no other comments in this part of the thread are coming away unscathed.)

I think any appeal of Guillen is that he's the anti-Macha. The guy makes headlines way too often for the wrong reasons. And this strong White Sox team under his leadership is fading quickly. Gee, a tense manager? Late season fade? Easily visible emotions? Sounds like another version of Ned Yost, only on a team with large-market payroll & resources. No thanks. I want quality, substance, character, & class in all facets, along with a way of doing things that engenders a simple but deep respect from players, media, & fans alike. Style that generates intrigue often does so at the expense of those other, more valuable qualities. I'll take someone along the lines of a Joe Torre, Ron Gardenhire, or Bobby Cox because they embody those qualities. Any number of managers could. I think Willie Randolph just might fit that bill if given a chance. I think Ozzie Guillen doesn't. Macha isn't totally lacking in those qualities, but it's just plain obvious that he doesn't have nearly enough of that whole package. (Side note: Ozzie Guillen didn't exactly become a fan favorite when he beat out our own Earnest Riles for the AL Rookie of the Year. Riles had at least as good a year if not a better year. But Guillen played for the Sox and had the big market media helping draw lots more attention. So Guillen won in that tight race in part because of the "popularity contest" factor due to sheer visibility. I've had a hard time liking him since, and his turbulent managerial style has done nothing to improve my opinion of him.)

With his good start tonight, would you believe Chris Narveson is now 3-1 in his last 10 starts w/ a 3.29 ERA? 54.2 IP, 45 hits, 20 ER, 15 BB, 49K. Very solid, and all the more so considering how terribly he started out. Now the offense totally stinks. 4 runs in the last 4 games, 1-3 record. Sheesh.

One of my best friends from HS of course argues that the trade of Gorman was actually the beginning of the end. Not sure if it was Sutton taking #20, Manning taking over CF, or just the Curse of Stormin' Gorman. (Side note: I was at the game on Sunday, June 5th, 1983, against Cleveland solely for the white RC Cola-sponsored commemorative batting helmet giveaway which also happened to be Gorman's last game before being traded. So if you've ever seen those batting helmets, now you know they were given away at Gorman's last game as a Brewer (prior to his brief return in '86 -- I was also at his first game back at County Stadium). I gave away the batting helmet many years ago but just happened into another recently solely by chance -- and also for free -- and that's now a family keepsake that's not going anywhere.) Sorry for the digression. I love what Hoffman did last year. But the one great year alone is not worthy of retiring a number, even though he also accomplished #600 as a Brewer. Added point: Also, if Fingers' couple great Brewers years hadn't overlapped the team's best 2 years, or if he were only going into the HOF now vs. when he did, or if there were already some career Brewers already in the HOF when Fingers got inducted, I'm sure there'd still be Brewers wearing #34. Rollie was great for 2 years, but in hindsight, the Brewers really shouldn't have retired his number.

Uh, Sutton wore #21 as a Brewer, not #27. Pete Ladd wore #27. He would've worn the #20 as he did for all those years w/ the Dodgers except that that was Gorman Thomas' number.

Point of interest, however mild to most: Mobile's SS tonight, Dan Kaczrowski, is a former student of mine. Good kid. Very nice family.

Swallowing the whistle -- and the seemingly arbitrary way it's done, not to mention for whom -- is part of what makes NBA refereeing such a joke. A rule is a rule. Young & Anderson (the 3B coach), intentionally or not, put themselves & their team in a situation where that rule stood to be invoked. Unfortunately for them, it was. Ticky tack or not, it's a perfectly legitimate call. It's like running out of a baseline. Whether it's normally called or not, it could be called in so many situations. So, arbitrary enforcement or not, a player has no good grounds to argue that call, either, if he was indeed out of the baseline.

Didn't Axford qualify for the save since when he came into the game, the lead was 3 runs, and he pitched more than one inning?

Maybe this seems like a dumb observation, but most of the interactions we see players having w/ Sedar are at 1B when they've somehow gotten on base. That's usually going to foster a positive interchange anyway, along with noticeable words of encouragement from Eddie Sedar as the 1B coach to those players. Isn't that what you'd expect to see out of most players w/ their 1B Coach? It's just the nature of the beast, which is why I don't put much stock in what we see as the positivity of their relationship w/ Sedar, or judge that as a serious indicator of their rapport with him. I still think Randolph or Sveum would be better leaders of this team than Macha, and I lean toward Randolph. Randolph's a proven successful NL manager and he's got a World Series ring to show for it (which certainly trumps Sedar's .534 minor league winning percentage). Randolph's firing in NY was as much or more a reflection of the dysfunction the Mets' franchise is than it was of Randolph's body of work as the manager. Sveum obviously has the players' respect, though far less actual managerial experience than either Randolph or Sedar. The outsider thing seems way overrated. Keep in mind that until Macha, every Brewers (non-Interim) managerial hire has an outsider AND a rookie MLB manager since George Bamberger was hired the 2nd go-round and fired in late '86.

Anyone get a uniform number for Jeffress? No Brewers on TV in the Cities w/o some sort of package.

Macha's hint sounds like Gamel, Villanueva, & Jeffress. If Kintzler were in the mix, that'd seem good, too. But I doubt Rivas is called up unless there's a real need for him.

Lucroy hasn't hit for a lot of power and he needs to walk a little more. But to say he's not good offensively is ridiculous. Not every catcher's going to hit like Johnny Bench, Joe Mauer, Pudge (Fisk or Rodriguez), or Posada. In fact, most aren't. But lacking an All-Star behind the plate, what Lucroy brings I'll take every day of the week without question.