MNBrew

No guarantee of that. Someone would have to a) want Hart, and b) give up something to get him UNLESS the Brewers had to give him & his salary away in order to save a few bucks toward Holliday. To me, the issue is gaining as much talent & depth as you can. That's why I'd love to see Holliday here with Hart, Gomez, & Gerut the remaining 3 OFs. I'd much rather see Braun & Holliday in the corners (whichever alignment works better) and let Hart & Gomez duke it out for CF starter vs. 4th OF. That'd be a huge risk in some respects, but it's one I'd be willing to take. If no Holliday, then I'd love a Baldelli signing: starting OFs: Braun, Gomez/Baldelli, Hart reserves: Gomez/Baldelli, Gerut

Amezaga doesn't do much for me, nor does Oeltjen. Until he proves otherwise, Gerut's more recent history profiles more like a 5th OF. Gomez's year last year was really that of a 4th OF. Any OF we sign needs to be of starting caliber, or 100-game-starting 4th OF at worst. That's why I'd really hoped for Suppan-for-Pierre swap. There are guys out there better than Pierre to be had. We need to land one of them somehow. Anyway, that's why I like Baldelli off that list. It has a snowball's chance at best, but I'd love to see Mark A. steal Holliday away from the Cardinals. It would make OF defense a daily adventure if Hart were starting in CF over Gomez, but the offensive oomph added would more than offset that. **Snap** Now I woke up.

Baldelli was an accidental omission from my typing. He's on my handwritten list and would be high on my list for non-starting OFs. Other than Lowry (not good enough compared to the others to interest me) and Kennedy (we already have Counsell, a lefty, to back up middle IF spots -- which is why I favored either RH corner IF types or at least fully versatile guys), I looked at all the others you named and didn't like them overall enough to include them on my list (I'm aiming high, after all). I've long felt your 4th OF essentially needs to be your 4th "starting" OF, capable of being a solid, strong-contributing starter for 100 games or more, in the event of injuries, slumps, etc. As such, Baldelli rated very high on my list. But Lowry - blah.

Looking over the list on ESPN.com last night, given the Brewers' present holes and potential upcoming "bargain" prices, these are the players whose profile or stats looked to me like they could be a potentially worthwhile addition (depending on the circumstances), however realistic OR unrealistic: Infield (depth may be needed): Nomar Garciaparra (more likely on the corners) Eric Hinske (corners + corner OF) Orlando Hudson (only if Weeks gets hurt between now & ST) Aubrey Huff (corners + corner OF) Felipe Lopez Mark Loretta (sunset of his career, but still wish we'd never let him go) Melvin Mora Miguel Tejada Outfielders (potentially as a starter or as part-time players depending on how strongly you believe in Gomez): Garrett Anderson (LH bat) Rick Ankiel (more name than actual value i think, but some solid skills) Endy Chavez (solid production, experienced part-timer, could be CF or 4th OF) Johnny Damon (not likely, but still a solid player, would start) Jermaine Dye (if Hart were moved to CF or in trade) Vlad Guerrero (not likely -- more realistically a DH from here on out) Matt Holliday (highly unlikely, but if Mark A. were to make a hard play for a serious splash, move Braun, etc., it would at least be a very positive addition w/ other dominoes to fall as a result -- would also weaken St.L.!) Scott Podsednik (LH, CF or corners, still hits well & has good speed) Randy Winn (see Dye comment) Pitchers, non-injured: Doug Davis Jon Garland Braden Looper Pedro Martinez Brett Myers (?) Joel Piniero (big $$ expected after contract-year wonder-production) Jarrod Washburn Pitchers, injury recoveries: Erik Bedard (if this guy were healthy, he'd be worth the risk) Randy Johnson (not likely, but even at his age he's still better than Suppan if healthy) Ben Sheets (not at the dollar figures he's talkin' 'bout) John Smoltz (see Randy Johnson comment) Chien-Ming Wang (see Bedard comment) Pitchers, other: Brenden Donnelly (pitched decently when healthy last year; don't really need him; if he's unemployed going into ST, worth signing for AAA & injury insurance) From that list, I'd target (listed alphabetically): IF: Garciaparra, Hinske, or Lopez (if he just sits there unemployed) OF: either Holliday OR Chavez, Podsednik, or Winn P: Bedard plus Davis, Looper, Martinez, or Washburn Thoughts?

Not picking at your post, Flood. It was just the last one in the thread. I agree w/ many of your points: - I think if Bush & Parra can pitch w/ ERAs even at the lousy 4.50 point, the team stands to be in much better shape. - The less Suppan starts (unless he becomes a Piniero-like contract-year freak), the more the team stands to be better. - If a healthy Looper could replace Suppan, that would help. - At minimum, Hawkins replaces McClung &/or Smith/Burns/etc. That stands to be a major upgrade, as does having Vargas for the full year IF he pitches like he did once he arrived. - Zaun wouldn't have to do much to be an upgrade from Kendall. However... I don't get the whole notion that Escobar's a downgrade from Hardy. It's apples & oranges. Hardy's much like Cameron: when he wasn't hitting for power, he wasn't doing much -- and that was way too much of the time. Hardy's OBP was lousy and even when he was hitting well, his BA w/ RISP was typically atrocious. I'll grant you that Escobar won't have much power for a while (if ever). But I cannot believe that if he hits well (BA-wise) & gets on base half decently beyond the BA, he's a downgrade from last year's crap-hitting Hardy solely due to the fact that he hits fewer HRs than J.J.

Tag to post #41 -- two hypotheticals: 1) If Looper were to halve his HR total (39), but still everyone who was on base from all 39 HRs eventually scored each time except the batter himself for 19 of those HRs, 19 fewer runs scored off him would've reduced his 5.22 ERA to 4.35. 2) If Looper gave up only 2/3 as many HRs as he did in '09 (26 instead of 39), but none of those 13 would've-been HR-hitting batters scored, shaving those 13 runs off his 5.22 ERA would've resulted in a 4.62 ERA. Premises: - Not every would've-been HR-hitting batter would've made an out, and some may have scored anyway. - Not every baserunner would've scored if some of those HRs had turned into extra-base hits or flyball outs, though of course the majority may eventually have. You can shoot a zillion holes in all this, of course. There's no way to cover every possible scenario. But I tried to illustrate a couple MILDLY OPTIMISTIC projections, based on Looper's 2009 numbers, of what his ERA might've looked like IF he hadn't given up so many HRs. IF (and it's a hugely hypothetical IF) the knee repair makes him a better pitcher in 2010, it's just possible that the misery known as "Braden Looper, 2009 Brewers starting pitcher" might result in a better Braden Looper in 2010, and at a lesser cost. NOW, going back to the original question... Yes, I think they have: - seemingly VERY strong bullpen - improved rotation w/ addition of Wolf (though several suspect '09 starters remain & the rotation could still use an infusion of more talent) - HR production likely reduced, but offense does stand to be "better balanced" IF players perform up to reasonable expectations (or returns to form in the case of Hart, for instance), IF Macha lets the running game happen to maximize the increased team speed, IF no one nose dives like Hardy did last year, and IF the current holes in depth are filled w/ productive players.

Once this New Year's weekend is over and spring training will be a little over a month away, I think we'll see Melvin & all his GM friends start shopping the bargain aisles and ignore most other aisles. The FAs remaining will realize if they're gonna get picked up, they'll need to sit on those shelves. I have this sneaky hunch that Looper may be back next year once no one offers him what he'd hoped he'd get. If he pitched all of 2009 on a bum knee -- that's now repaired -- and if that knee's now certifiably healthy, he may be a notable improvement in 2010 over the Braden Looper of 2009. In other words, if the knee problem is what kept him getting so many pitches up high turned into HRs, a healthy knee might help his location enough to halve his HR total, which alone would make him seem like a much better pitcher. I'm not saying I think Looper's the best option. But if a healthy Looper is better than the Looper of 2009, then you can't rule him out yet. For as bad as he was, his ERA was still a full run LESS than 2 of the other starters. So if he can give up only 2/3 as many HRs and drop his ERA to the 4.50 range, that wouldn't be the worst bargain bin pickup.

Up front, I like so much of what Cameron brought, I believe in Gomez's upside, and the cost savings behind the move was essential. That said... Gomez is a stud w/ the glove but is still far more prone than Cameron would've been to throw to the wrong base and other mental blunders. Not sure what stat category that sort of thing falls into since I only absorb the basics, but I've witnessed that enough times & heard enough more about it in the sports talk here in the Twin Cities to know that Gomez's periodic knuckleheaded plays aren't just limited to when he has a bat in his hands.

Looking at the Mets' track record over the past 10 years -- ability to win consistently vs. the $$$ they spend on big-name acquisitions -- two things would seem to stand out: 1. The Mets' spending seems very inefficient for the amount of time these big moves result in contender status. 2. No FA should want to sign with the Mets if winning matters at all more than money does. What Bay's acceptance of the Mets' contract proposal means is that it was really all about the money. That team still has more holes than my 7-year-old socks. And even if they didn't, well, they're still the Mets. If it'd been any other NL East team the Brewers would've needed to have lose so they could make the '08 playoffs, the Brewers probably wouldn't have made it. The Mets being the Mets, you just knew the Brewers had a good chance once they finished off the Cubs that wonderful Sunday. Good luck in Queens, Mr. Bay. You're really gonna need it.

Ditto, TLB. That the Brewers look fairly certain to sign him does not at all mean they're looking TO him with the expectation of making a big-league contribution (though if he did in a positive way, it'd really be a bonus). You have to sign Mulder if you can get him. But the Brewers' hope obviously is that he might have his best chance of regaining some kind of form working under (or under the system of) the pitching coach under whom he had his greatest success -- which was quite substantial. Realistically, besides a solid major-league rotation & bullpen, you need AAA depth and some up-and-coming minor league talent so you have backups & options. If you can also have a wild card or two (however unlikely any contribution from them would seem -- however unknown their chances are even to the organization) up your sleeve, you simply have more options. You need guys with talent who you can have a chance of getting, and that can take on various looks -- taking into account budget considerations, the price some other more recently injured pitchers either got or are asking, and Mulder's previous history of serious ML success, I'd much rather see the Brewers attempt to re-sign Mark Mulder than Mark Prior or some of the other injury recovery options still lingering out there. All that said, I agree w/ the premise presumably behind JB12's post, too, that the Brewers' rotation sure still needs more shoring up -- that is, more of a talent upgrade -- if that can possibly happen.

Minor league rehab assignments have time limits. I'd think there's a greater likelihood Riske goes back on the DL and pitches in extended spring training just to keep working his arm back toward game conditions. If he proves healthy enough, then they send him to the minors on a rehab assignment. Based on how it so often works, it wouldn't be unusual for him to stink a bit in the bigs, then get put back on the DL for further recovery, conditioning, & injury rehab time before yet another minor league rehab assignment. And by then, of course, it's August and the season (& his salary have pretty much gone to waste again). On a different note, Thumperden, you forgot Capuano on your list of lefties.

As much as certain trends of his lead to natural questioning of Juan Pierre's worth, you also can't fully ignore what he did last year. If the Dodgers were THAT willing (as in about $10.5M's worth of willing) to get rid of him for not much in return, the Brewers probably could've gotten a half-decent prospect in return had they traded Jeff Suppan to get him. Sure, he's a speedy, GOOD-hitting leadoff hitter with no power, but you need guys like that and Gomez showed more knucklehead tendencies in his 2 years as a Twin than you'd ever believe, so having an experienced, successful guy like Pierre to cover Gomez's spot in the lineup & the field would've been a darn solid idea. I'm willing to place at least $5 on the odds that at least 2 of these 3 things will occur next year: - Juan Pierre, while not a great player, has a decent chance of making the White Sox look smart. - Carlos Gomez will quickly become a deservingly favorite target of the ire of a zillion posters on this site. - Jeff Suppan will have more starts in 2010 that are bad than good and we'll spend the whole season counting the minutes 'til his contract is up.

Where would there be room for Capps at this point without having an 8-man bullpen? 1. Hoffman 2. Coffey 3. Villanueva 4. Hawkins 5. Stetter 6. Vargas (tentative deal in place) 7. Lofgren (Rule V) or Narveson or Suppan or Dillard or Smith or . . . etc. (in other words, someone cheap)

I liked Catalanotto a lot last year, and on the surface I like the idea of him coming back. However, I think that 2 salient negatives pretty much ruined his chances of returning: 1. poor PH-ing 2. 9 RBIs in 144 ABs The guy can hit decently, but obviously not as well as hoped for in situations more crucial for productivity.

Looking at the present roster (just past non-tender deadline) & payroll situations, is Eric Hinske someone who might be a fit as a reserve 1B/3B & 5th OF (corners)? He's versatile, hits w/ some power, & surely wouldn't be too expensive unless his year on the Yankees has completely skewed his perspective on what's realistic (AND someone would actually pay him at Yankee proportions). To me, that he's from WI is incidental compared to actual baseball considerations. But if he'd be a decent fit, maybe his roots would help make the Brewers an appealing team for him. Thoughts?

Rosenthal clearly states he has no evidence, that it's simply a hunch. It's not a rumor, only speculation, & blatantly presented as such. I agree w/ Rosenthal's logic. Whether it would/could happen is a whole different discussion, however.

While the payroll definitely pushed higher in Indy this week, I believe the Wolf move is a necessity and Melvin's being understandably crafty as he works at adding the 2nd starter. I totally believe someone else will be added. I just have no idea who or how. Regarding timing, budget, etc., keep in mind that there are still around 170 free agents looking for work and another batch of non-tendered guys will officially flood the market at 11 p.m. tonight. I think showing some patience toward Melvin & what he can still do is definitely in order. While the likelihood of this would seem very low, check out THIS article by Ken Rosenthal. WHAT IF Melvin just might be thinking big? Cliff Lee as a Brewer -- likely? Probably not. But the way Melvin works, there may be some outside chance the Crew could pull this off. Also, the Braves have non-tendered Kelly Johnson. So what if the Brewers could land Vazquez in a deal that might include Weeks, possibly Hart, & a pitching prospect? If this could happen, I'd then try to entice the Dodgers to swap Pierre & a bit of cash for Suppan. The key seems to be thinking big, aiming high, & finding some way to do it without totally gutting their offense this season. And I believe that's exactly Melvin's first goal. Rotation: Gallardo Vazquez Wolf Parra Bush/Narveson/Santa Claus 'Pen: CL: Hoffman Coffey Hawkins Vargas Villanueva Stetter ??? Starters: 1B - Fielder 2B - McGehee SS - Escobar 3B - Gamel LF - Braun CF - Gomez/Pierre RF - (Winn?) or Gomez/Pierre C - Zaun Reserves: IF/OF - Counsell, Gerut, Hinske (corner IF & OF, decent bench guy, likely a very agreeable price) C - one of Rivera/Kottaras/Lucroy/Salome

You'd think that Luis Cruz could be dropped just as easily as he was just added. You need an AAA shortstop, but he's not worth a 40-man spot.

Again teams dont give up picks for Class B free agents. Only the bottom 15 teams for Class A free agents give up picks.Correct on Class B, but not re: Class A. Bottom-half teams give up only their 2nd round pick for a Class A free agent, not their first-round pick. Top-half teams give up their first-round pick for a Class A.

My sister-in-law taught Dukes in HS. Silversurferr is right.

Ooooh, I really don't like using a 40-man spot for AAA depth you never hope sees the Miller Park clubhouse. Heck, Jim Rushford had better ML chances than a no-hit infielder. On the other hand, he becomes an easy guy to dump later, too, and possibly even sign to a minor-league, make-good deal. Sheesh, I really don't want to see this guy playing in the bigs for us. I'd much rather see the Brewers make a play for Matt Tolbert from the Twins if they can't re-sign Counsell.

You have to start somewhere and most other options are worse. It's not like Wolf pitched like Suppan, Bush, Parra, or Looper last year. He pitched well. I like the move & I hope it happens. Is he an All-Star? Of course not. But he's no pariah, either. The sky's not falling. (You can't really think you'd catch lightning in a bottle or get great quality pitching for 1983 salary levels!) And you have to figure Melvin's far from finished -- at least as far as efforts go, anyway, because it does take 2 to tango.

*Choke* I have too many strong memories of that 8.50+ ERA and two lousy years thereafter. No thanks.

If the Dodgers are indeed willing to take on a bad contract, and the Pierre-Suppan swap is a real possibility, I completely see Pierre as the lesser of two evils. Losing Suppan is addition by subtraction in spite of our need for pitching. The key is the need for better pitching. I'm willing to roll the dice even w/ Narveson. Pierre hit .308 last year w/ a .365 OBP & 30 SBs, playing better while starting. Defensive questions in CF notwithstanding, I'd take that gamble & figure out the 2011 payroll aspects later.

Haudricourt chimes in on the MLBTR speculation about the Juan Pierre notion, particularly that by getting a bit of cash from LA to offset the difference remaining on the 2 contracts, a Suppan-Pierre swap might just make a whole lot of sense. And I'm thinking he may just be onto something. Now, before everyone tears down the whole thing all over again, consider this: Especially if the Dodgers used some cash to even out the money involved, it's not just a wash. Suppan's money was mostly coming from this year's budget. The Pierre money would be spread over 2 years. Why's that good? Only half of it goes onto this year's salary spreadsheet! Therefore, at least a few more million dollars would have just been freed up to go for even more pitching this year. It's not that the whole idea is perfect. It's more that Suppan's been that bad, and this presents a fiscally responsible method for addressing that problem AND creating more OF depth (which is needed) at the same time AND freeing up more 2010 payroll space for pitching. So even if it's not a perfect idea, at bare minimum, it's hardly stupid at all on several fronts.