MNBrew

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but what's TINSTAPP?

LouisEly, nice job. The only thing that really surprised me was the C for Catalanotto. Otherwise I think I'm about on the same wavelength. Cat's no great defensive whiz, but played both 2B (some) and the OF respectably. After a slower start, he started hitting and ended up pretty decently 'til family circumstances took him out of the picture for the rest of the year. For what they brought him in to do (and remembering he's not anything resembling a power hitter, I'd say he's probably more in the B or B+ range. And I'd actually like to see him back next year, though I'd see the club not really addressing his situation 'til they've made their decisions about Cameron's & Hart's future roles & "fits" within the plan.

Is Braun that much of a dink? Isn't being obsessed about production still a good thing? Or maybe the better & more astute way to ask is this: What about good production is harmful for the team? The winning season (more recently) and the playoffs (by early August) haven't been a realistic consideration. There's no shame in personal landmarks once contention isn't a possibility IF they don't contradict or interfere with the team's and teammates' functioning. In other words, aside from the obvious daily goals of hustling and winning, what else is there to try for? I'm not trying to be a Braun apologist. I was surprised by Witrado's take on Braun and what seems like a very personal stance against him. Can someone enlighten me since the Twin Cities doesn't care about the Brewers and I have a hard time finding out deep details otherwise? Thanks. As another side note (thus the edit to the post), just hearing Witrado's slant toward one of the team's few really good players makes me wonder. The guy sounded more like a talk radio host or caller rather than a beat writer, whose work is predicated on dealing with these players professionally. Yes, you need to tell the truth and call it as you see it. But there's an element of journalistic professionalism that to me should trump somewhere in the process. Look, up here in the Twin Cities, the Mpls. beat writers still call a spade a spade. But they sound like professionals reporting on the topic, not nearly as jaded as Witrado came across sounding. I appreciate the candor. I want to learn the guy's insights based on his role covering the team. But I can do without what came across as an attitude.

I'm certainly no Einstein, but McGehee's continued strong play and ROY candidacy are legit reasons to keep him in the lineup. It is possible that Gamel is the long-term plan. And if so, then perhaps McGehee is the chip they look to deal over the winter for a good return. And to do that, bigger numbers and higher ranking in the ROY voting should increase his value and sweeten the potential return. And in the meantime, Gamel is still going to need 6 more full seasons on the roster to be FA-eligible (under control at least through 2015), regardless of whether or not he was called up for this month or didn't play much those weeks after interleague play was done. Now, I'm not saying that's the plan. But I am saying I really think Doug Melvin is pretty darn smart and good at his job, and I'm inclined to trust his instincts. Macha, I'm not as sure about him, but . . . Anyway, just advancing a scenario/explanation. It really does seem unusual that the Brewers' infield is almost an embarrassment of riches: MVP caliber offensive stud (Fielder), excellent everyday contributors in various roles (Lopez - leadoff, McGehee - run producer), solid veteran bench/utility guys (Counsell, plus other guys at other times), reasonably established young players with high ceilings (both with something to prove in the way of comebacks - Hardy & Weeks), and top prospects getting their feet wet to varying degrees (Escobar, Gamel). It sure will be interesting to see how Melvin handles all those players/circumstances this winter.

Amen, TLB!!!! I don't get how it's all Melvin's fault that the Brewers have no upper-level pitching prospects. Look, Jack Z. drafted lots of good hitting prospects, relatively speaking. But if folks are giving credit that way, apply the same standard: Jack Z. drafted lots of pitchers with poor durability, questionable mechanics/talent/heart, debatable ceilings, etc. That's not Melvin's fault. Melvin has had trouble acquiring much good STARTING pitching. (His track record for the bullpen, overall, has been quite good.) And, since most of the good hitters we have are home grown, you could also say he's had trouble acquiring top offensive talent, too, that didn't have questions about character (Lopez), age/trending downward (Counsell, Cameron, Kendall), actual ceiling (McGehee), etc. I don't care how folks "stat" it out, there just an unbelievable amount of the success rate that comes from fortunate timing and luck and the ability to sustain an East Coast payroll -- beyond all the skill & diligence that every team tries to start with. Certain things are fairly easy to control or predict. So much, however, is not. Every GM blunders periodically. Not every team has the good fortune of a massive bankroll or the luck of a bad blunder coinciding with a wave of great prospects.

There's no saying that a pitcher acquired with the money saved by letting Cameron go has to be obtained through free agency. If it means there are some very good SPs the Brewers could realistically get if they would just take on their salary, the pool of possible SP talent we could get just got deeper.

Are you kidding? Kendall would still be lucky to have 50 RBIs batting cleanup. You only get one RBI for a sac fly or RBI groundout. Base hits can get you more than one RBI at a time. Kendall often can't do that.

The Brewers have a tight-knit clubhouse, a good team atmosphere. Milton Bradley isolates himself and yaps without caution to the media, placing the blame on everyone else in doing so. Talent's not his issue. Character & integrity are the issues. The Cubs knew that going in. No one should give them relief of taking Bradley in a trade, especially not the Brewers. 95% of the time I can't stand Suppan being in our rotation, but I would never do this deal.

TBWS, I've probably watched as many Twins games as you have. You must be seeing a different Blackburn. Yes, he was quite good in the 1st half. But he's been poor in the 2nd half -- not average, but definitely poor. Hardy's hardly a spare part. Prior to this season's slump, he's been one of the best all-around shortstops in the NL, offensively and defensively. He's had a bad year at the plate, but still very solid defensively. Escobar is likely this team's future at SS, which gives the Crew enough SS depth to make Hardy trade bait. But that's different than being a spare part. McGehee is having a great rookie year. The only "too bad" thing for him is that his playing time really didn't become substantial 'til the season was already at least 1/4 or more over. Otherwise he'd probably be a shoo-in for Rookie of the Year. Once again, the Brewers have depth at every position McGehee plays, including 3B, where Gamel has been the brightest prospect. Potentially expendable? Yes. But that also doesn't make him a spare part. I agree in principle that the Twins (starting pitchers) are definitely a possible trade match with the Brewers (infielders). I just think you're overvaluing the Twins' side of your suggested equation.

You know, the OPS thing is so disproportionate when Escobar has such a relatively small sample size, is a developing 21-year-old upper prospect, and doesn't hit HRs like Hardy.... For all you ragging on Escobar's OPS being worse than Hardy's, Escobar triples in his 1st AB and now has an OPS of .708. One triple and he suddenly greatly distanced himself.

I actually do see the Twins as a possible trade match for Hardy, just not for the package you described, flee. That said, I'm not sure what we would ask for back from MN that's realistic. Gomez IS NOT the answer, I do know that much. We need pitching, & the Twins do have it. But Liriano, Perkins, & Slowey have been hurt, Baker & Blackburn & Swarzek have been inconsistent, Duensing has done pretty well, and Pavano's not likely trade fodder if he were to re-sign. The Twins have SP depth, but that depth is loaded w/ question marks, too. The Twins need relievers -- or at least they did before picking up Rauch & Mahay. I also think that Seattle (Rowland-Smith & Morrow?) could be a match, as could Baltimore (don't know names there off the top of my head), and Boston (esp. lumped w/ Prince for a major haul in return). Probably others, too, but none come to mind at the moment.

Wow. I've thought the Twins might make a good trade partner, too. But I think this trade idea is a bit optimistic. The Twins will work like crazy to retain Mauer. Plus Morales is a strong-hitting young C, too. Span is an OF they'll keep because he's a dynamic leadoff hitter. Gomez is an enigma -- good D, fast as blazes, but can't steal 1st base -- intriguing because he's got a ton of talent, but more often than not frustrating because he doesn't connect all the dots with any consistency. Baker is their best starting pitcher, is 13-7, doesn't walk many, and is in the 1st year of a 4-yr., $15M deal. The Twins have tried hard for a couple years to get Orlando Cabrera at SS and finally have him. They may look to re-sign him rather than have to give up assets in order to land his replacement in a trade.

Alright, "ironic" wasn't the right word. Somewhere within that I see advocacy for the status quo and total change, even if the timing isn't simultaneous.

The Brewers love Cain, most definitely. But you're saying he only needs one more year to prove health, competence, & success at both AA & AAA. That's just hugely optimistic. You point out that he played in AAA in '08. Yes, but the 6 games he spent at Nashville in '08 were as an injury fill-in. 2/3 of the '08 season he still played in high-A. To count on Cain as the starting CF in '11, IMO, is a gigantic leap of faith. I do find it ironic that many on this site believe Cain should be ready to be the everyday CF by 2011 at the latest, yet many also feel Cameron would more than justify another substantial contract due to his worth relative to other CFs.

Huh? Nearly ready? Hardly, let alone anything you can seriously count on for 2 years or more. Way too much time & ground still for them to cover. Besides, Cain topped out at AA and hit .214. Schafer hit .313 in high-A and .217 in a handful of AA games. Is that really "nearly ready?" Fielder should net Ellsbury & Lester + another very seriously good nearly-MLB-ready pitcher (Bard?). Add Hardy to the deal and you can add Buchholz, too. Anything less is seriously underselling. If I'm Melvin, I'd take Lowell back in the deal, too, if Boston would take Suppan. ...And playing out some of the ramifications of that trade, at worst, 1B costs Lowell's salary (offset of Fielder's). Or, with someone young (McGehee or Gamel, for instance), it's a huge savings. Ellsbury is much cheaper than Cameron. Lester is much cheaper than Suppan. So not only does good talent come back, but there's a lot more cash left to make more deals with (Vazquez, anyone?). The Santana deal isn't exactly a great comparison. First, none of those Mets scrubs were A+ prospects. But it was the best deal the Twins could get because everyone knew that they kinda had to trade Santana. Second, that deal was made in the winter. Melvin has stated so many times that you get more for pitching during the season, more for hitting in the off-season. The Santana deal conveniently underscores that.

Holy selective memory! The same team as Yost? No. No Sheets. No Sabathia. After Gallardo, no consistency (and after June, no quality) in the rotation. I'm not thinking the guy's the 2nd coming of Joe Torre or even Tom Trebelhorn. But who do you think should be the manager? Who could/would do any better with a team with such a horrid rotation? Castro was fired and clearly he wasn't the problem.

In spite of the cynicism out there, one thing Melvin clearly has shown is that he has no apprehension about going after the "big fish." He aims high. He doesn't often win. But you know he's serious about trying to address the Brewers' needs by going after some of the best possible talent. Because of that, hoping for Halladay, while seemingly a long shot, maybe isn't as crazy as some would think. When Melvin doesn't pull the trigger, it usually seems like it's because of what the opposing team is asking. It all depends on what Toronto would be asking for in return.

For big-market teams, teams with a lotta dough, they can turn over their personnel all the time to appease the media & masses everytime things start going badly (think: Mets, most especially). For teams like the Brewers, the mid- to smaller-market teams, there's quite a lot to be said for stability, in part because the margin for error (in personnel but especially in finances) can be so limited. What I think that means is that there are going to be ups & downs along the way. And the downs are particularly depressing when they've followed such exciting success as last year's (however borderline-ish they got to nearly missing the playoffs). What I see as key to this is always keeping the big picture in mind. When that gets totally screwed up, then it's time to clean house entirely. But that's not the case right now. Right now, the sky is falling, and in an especially ugly way because our rotation is pitching horribly. In the long run, there are plenty of positives at this point. This ugly slump is pitching-driven and that's where improvement must happen. As frustrating as this all is, the Brewers could pretty easily still be "within their window" with the present talent to be regular contenders. It will just take a small handful of exceedingly important decisions -- and some serious luck landing the right players -- to keep the Crew in the playoff chase at this point for the next few years. I do believe the knee-jerk reaction by people to want to can Doug Melvin to be totally normal, but hardly the right decision.

The Estrada trade made lots of sense at the time. Estrada had been quite productive as a hitter, and Davis was said to want/expect a very Brewers-UNfriendly salary the next year (an arby year, right?). It just didn't pan out nearly as well as hoped.

And furthering PF's point, if you do open it up that way, the performances of the young talent brought in has certainly exceeded the performance of those traded away. Capuano alone has almost as many wins and innings as all those young pitchers traded away put together -- and he hasn't pitched for 2 years. There's beginning to be some serious romanticizing around here about the talent that got away in Jorge DLR. The guy had an ERA of 8.60 when the Brewers traded him for Tony Graffanino. Graffy performed well after that and DLR was still terrible for KC -- and again in '07 and really had Suppan-level stats for Colorado in '08. Heck, he's basically pitching like Braden Looper this year but with a big pile of strikeouts. I'd still say he's hardly a loss.

Ennder, I agree almost in full with your whole assessment except for part of the bit on 2008. I think last year's team was MUCH closer to being a solid playoff contender than this year's. In hindsight, I believe Melvin was right that last year was the year to go for it. Had they not done so, I think the Brewers would be in an even deeper mess this year. Of the players lost, none have done much good at the MLB level, although LaPorta & Brantley have done fine at AAA. Perhaps the only additional feather we'd have in our cap was 2 more solid hitting prospects from which to deal. But I don't think Lee or Halladay makes the kind of difference this year that Sabathia did last year -- and certainly not enough to make up for how out-of-this-world St. Louis has played since July 1st. Maybe if we'd gotten Lee AND Halladay, but that would've totally gutted everything and everyone would be trashing Melvin for emptying the whole store.

Lopez is a career IF who played a small handful of games in the OF last year. While I'd really like to see him back as a Brewer next year, personally I don't care for the idea of trying to turn him into an OF at all.

What Riske had shown was everything you'd want to see when signing a middle reliever: success & durability over time. The fact that he had a few bad games early on and then became badly enough injured that he hasn't been able to pitch like himself (or basically at all) for over a year is NOT something ANYONE could've predicted. How can anyone know when someone's gonna be rendered unable to pitch when their history to date has been one of great arm health? Signing Riske was hardly a "sexy" move, but it seemed pretty smart on several layers and filled a decent need. Ripping it apart now and calling it a stupid signing is pure 20/20 hindsight. Using that as a reason to suggest Melvin is inept and needs to be fired is emotionally charged and misguided.

Someone earlier listed David Weathers as a guy Melvin misjudged in getting. The guy had a couple shoddy outings shortly after we got him, sure, but lately now he's been pitching like you'd expect. His track record this year specifically and the past 10 years in general would seem to indicate getting Weathers into the bullpen mix provides a much better option than Jorge Julio, Mike Burns, Villanueva, Dillard, McClung, etc. Overall, Melvin has done well. They've had good guys coming up and some who have stumbled or flamed out still were darn good talents. There's NO sure way to know how it'll all pan out. And Melvin's in 100 times better a position than anyone on these message boards to make the right call. Just because you wanted him to land a young stud pitcher doesn't mean he actually had a chance to do so. Is the team's rotation a mess? Absolutely. But in the interview at the root of this thread, Melvin's just being honest and realistic. To rag on him incessantly for that more often than not, based on the tone I infer from many remarks I'm reading, would seem to indicate that in the minds of many, the Brewers' situation is incurable to the point where anyone who they might hire inevitably would be able to do a better job than Melvin could. I cannot disagree more strongly with such a contention. I don't think Melvin's a saint. But it's not a perfect world, developing pitching isn't an exact science, and mind control over good FA pitchers and 29 other GMs just isn't possible. Melvin has missed at times (Todd Ritchie, anyone, or hanging onto Turnbow so long?). But no one really could've projected such a massive regression from BOTH Parra & Villanueva, plus a trend reversal by McClung -- all 3 being counted on as vital cogs on the pitching staff -- plus injuries to Bush, Riske (extremely durable prior to becoming a Brewer), and Suppan (though the problem there is more than injuries, I'm convinced) -- or Looper giving up HRs at a batting practice rate. The balance was tedious to begin with, but who could've anticipated this many negative things occurring and knocking the team off track SO badly -- esp. against so many crappy teams? Anyone can say, "But Melvin (or "they") should've known." Yeah, and you can say that with every team every year. It could've happened in Milwaukee, whether it was 2009, 2008, 1984, 2002, or 1982. But that logic is horribly weak and purely hindsight. Doug Melvin knows better than any of us how putrid the pitching has been. And you know he's going to do all he feels he can to remedy that without screwing up the long-term future of the team. But part of his ability to succeed lies with FA's interests/attitudes, as well as the 29 other GMs in MLB. Melvin made a series of outstanding moves early in his Milwaukee tenure that totally fleeced the other teams involved. Maybe that's why some teams don't want to agree to his terms. . . . Of course, I'm just guessing at that. But then again, so is everyone else in their assertions that Melvin is the root of all this pitching development evil and the lack of a better rotation in Milwaukee. (edits for grammar & clarity)

The flaw in this premise is that Hardy is ENTITLED to FA at the end of 6 years. You have to play well enough to earn that, and this year Hardy flat out HASN'T done so. I'm sure Melvin wasn't looking to create this situation. I'm sure 100 to 1 that he by far would've preferred for Hardy to have another All-Star caliber year. Then he'd be in a perfect position to sell high, to deal from strength -- to be able to use that classic Sexson & later Overbay line of "I'm not motivated to move him." But Melvin not only knows the stats, he has the ultimate inside scoop on what's going on, how Hardy's really handling it all, etc. -- not just like us where we think we know what all's going on -- and he obviously saw enough to know that the Brewers just couldn't afford Hardy any more chances to get himself right in Milwaukee -- it wasn't working at all -- and that for the good of the team he had to get him down to AAA so his struggles wouldn't contribute to costing the team any more games. The JS guys wrote a lot in July esp. about how Hardy looked totally lost. When you just can't get un-stuck, something has to give. The only person Hardy really has to blame is himself. If he comes out blaming the Brewers on this, he's really just proving that Brewers made the correct call in the first place.