BritInWI

Hi all, I have a 2006 Robin Yount bobblehead. It's the one with him in his 1970's uniform. The box has just a little wear and the figure itself has never been removed from the protective plastic case. Does anyone know what this might be worth, and would anyone here be interested in it? (it's just sitting in a closet right now)

What amused me the most about this article was the awful writing. Punctuation and sentence structure aren't exactly his strong suit. There were several times where I had to re-read a passage carefully to pick out what he was actually saying. If you've been getting paid since 1989 to write like that, it says something about the publication in general. As for the actual content of the story - "boo hoo, the Yankees didn't get to fleece someone again with their over-hyped prospects. There must be something underhanded and anti-Yankees going on, so we'll say they agreed to the trade and then reneged on the deal. Evidence? We're the Yankees - who's more trustworthy than us? But don't worry, we'll get them back for not handing us a World Series..." http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

Like two more Jeff Suppan's http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/tongue.gif

And a huge hole at the front of the rotation. The one thing that I don't get here is why no-one seems to worry that the rotation, which already needs some help (due in part to Sheets having trouble staying healthy), will go from having a part-time hole at the top to a full-time one. A trade like this will free up some money certainly, but with two relief pitchers coming back in the deal that money would need to be spent making a trade for a top of the rotation starting pitcher. Or do we enjoy the thought of seeing the bullpen worked to death again?

I get that. But his OPS last year was .772. The year before his big year it was .745 (granted, a smallish sample size) and he never came close to that in the minors either. Still, I was suggesting that we shouldn't entirely dismiss Hall's 2006 with respect to trade value, so I suppose that I should give the same respect to McCann...

I have to agree with this. Take out the "top prospect" from the Brewers and then you might have a deal. Hall for Johnson, Boyer and a prospect sounds fair, depending on the prospect. I know some will think that's overvaluing Hall, but that's only true if you think Hall's 2006 season was a fluke. So if that's fair, and the Brewers already turned down Francoeur and Soriano, then there's no way the Brewers can take this as is, let alone throwing in a top prospect. If this report is true, then surely the offer came from the Braves and not the Brewers (perhaps I misread but I didn't see that specified above). By the way, what's with the love for McCann? I think he's good, but he's not that good, is he? Does he call an amazing game or something? He doesn't throw out a lot of runners, and his numbers are better than Estrada's but not enough to make me want to insist on him as part of a deal for Sheets.

It's that sort of attitude that can ruin a small market team for many years. The Cubs can afford to trade prospects as they can just reload in free agency. Also both of those teams are veteran teams so "win now" makes a lot more sense for them. The Brewers are a young team, the core of which should remain together for at least a few years yet, and should improve as they get older. So we have much more reason to expect that this team will continue to contend and improve than we do to worry that they won't. On the ESPN chat, one of their correspondents said that he had a hard time finding holes in the Brewers right now, current form not withstanding, and wouldn't be surprised if they decided to stand pat. So it isn't just me that's saying it. While I'd like to see some moves, to go into a "win now" mode in the first year all of these players have been together is nothing short of panic, and a panic move never turns out well.

I think you're right. But to be fair to Melvin, he's probably hearing a lot of offers that make no sense for the team or require him to mortgage the future for this season. We're all excited about this season being "our" year, but this is a very young team and what should be just the first of many contending years, so giving up the farm to "win now" is a little less attractive. That being said, I was surprised at how much he surrendered to get Linebrink. He must have had some negative (or less than glowing) reports on Inman.

ESPN are now reporting Gagne to Boston (been keeping one eye on their live chat). I know a lot of you were loving the idea of Gagne, but I was dreading giving up too much, so I'm pretty relieved (no pun intended). I'd much rather we spend our resources (if we're going to spend them) on a starter who can eat some innings, letting the quality guys we already have in the pen rest up a little every now and then.

I don't buy that it would take Gwynn, plus a player, plus a pitching prospect for Gagne. Or, if it would, that the Brewers would even consider this for one second. Sorry, but we sat here last year talking about how little we would get for Lee considering that he was going to be a free agent and it was unlikely he'd be back. I'm not sure how this is any different, beyond Gagne having even less value to the Brewers than Lee did to teams chasing him last year. Gwynn has some good value in his own right. I'm not overrating him, but he plays CF well, hits for average, and has some ability on the bases. A two month rental for a closer (who may not even close here) is not even close to Gwynn, another player from the roster plus a pitching prospect IMHO. Not for the Brewers. Gagne, for the Brewers, is pure luxury. With Cordero, Turnbow, Linebrink and Wise already, the Brewers need another bat or an upgrade in the rotation a lot more than yet another one-inning guy. Sorry to have this outside of the main Gagne thread, but I wanted to respond to this one comment directly.

Point taken. But at the same time, there was talk about moving Sexson to the OF, which everyone agrees he could play - just not very well. It could also be a similar case here. They want to get Quinlan's bat into the lineup so they put him wherever they can to do so. I fully understand why people want his bat. That's never been the issue for me. It's the idea that we would take on someone whose role could be severely limited due to defensive issues, giving up a decent player in a contract year and still have to pay a chunk of his salary.

I'm a little surprised at the love for Quinlan here. I think some people failed to read Aracko's post properly. Or did I somehow misread it??? While objectivity from fans is sometimes questionable, an Angels fan probably has more idea of Quinlan's abilities than most of us. and These stuck out like a sore thumb to me. If he's that poor defensively, why do some here view him as a replacement for Koskie (if Koskie can't play)? Or a replacement in the OF for Jenkins? It sounds like, at best, he'd be a backup for Prince, a decent pinch hitter, and a DH when playing in AL parks, only playing third or the OF very occasionally. I can't see how that's worth giving up Jenkins and paying some of his salary too. Quinlan really needs to go to an AL team. If the above assessment of his defensive abilities is accurate, then he'd be a liability, not an asset. Would you want a "barely adequate" 3rd baseman behind Suppan et al...?

Apologies if anyone else here has already voiced this speculation, but it seems like this is a lot of money for Suppan. More than he could have expected before the FA season started. So why hasn't he signed somewhere? It seems to me that his agent has him waiting for Zito to sign. One of the teams at the forefront of talks with Zito is the Mets. The Mets have also been linked with Suppan if they don't get Zito and appear willing to throw around a large sum of money for a starting pitcher. So it makes sense for his agent to drag things out, hoping Zito will make a decision before Suppan gets tired of waiting. If the Mets don't get Zito, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them top the Brewers' offer (assuming there is one). None of this makes me optimistic about the Brewers' chances of bringing Suppan in. If the Mets get Zito, perhaps one of the losers for his services decides to throw money at Suppan (as the next best available pitcher - not counting Clemens). If the Mets don't get Zito, it's very likely they'll push hard for Suppan, as they've already expressed interest. The best chance the Brewers have may be that Suppan gets tired of waiting and/or playing second fiddle to the Zito in the Mets' affections and decides that he wants to sign before the holidays...

Brett - I agree and disagree. I didn't see DHonks say anything about Fielder's ability, just that Overbay was better. That being said, like you I'd be nervous about giving Suppan a contract that large - "market value" be damned, the Brewers payroll is only so big, and what would a contract like that do to arbitration or extension negotiations with a pitcher who is IMO better, like Capuano? Now if Mark A is prepared to cough up the dollars to pay Cappy accordingly....

Yes, but I'd feel more confident in it had it come from a source other than the only report that claimed we were interested in Lopez, which itself seems to make sense to very few of us. It just sounds like "here's why the Brewers would want such a lousy pitcher".

I've heard of one report that had them talking to the Orioles about Lopez (or vice versa perhaps). The talks apparently went nowhere and there was no indication which side shied away. Under those circumstances, I think that's not the best assumption to make, but that's just me.

How does it make sense for the Brewers if there's no other deal to bring in a pitcher of comparable quality and durability to Davis? I'm not trying to claim Davis is a stud or anything, but you've just created a hole in the #3 spot of the Brewers' rotation with no-one to fill it. So to get a potential upgrade in CF, you've weakened the starting rotation and probably put more pressure on the bullpen by removing someone you could count on to pitch 200+ innings. As I've said before, a deal like this only makes sense if it's done in concert with other moves that clearly leave the team as a whole better than it started. If you don't do that, why stockpile other teams with talent? You might just as well stand pat and wait another year or so for more young talent to come up. Perhaps it all comes down to the (inflated IMHO) opinion that some have here of Milledge. I've seen far too many "can't miss" prospects never make it or never be more than ordinary, either because of talent or attitude, to be excited about Milledge yet. It's funny - I'm used to seeing prospects traded for quality major leaguers. I'm not used to seeing quality major leaguers being traded for a single prospect, as some here seem to want to do. Colby had it right - you can like Milledge better than I do, but you shouldn't give up too much for him at this time...

I was personally more concerned about giving Capuano away than Davis but if (and it's a big if) we could get a comparable starter for Jenkins and/or Mench, moving Davis would be OK. As I said before, I don't think it's a good idea to just move holes around on your roster, or potentially create extra ones. The only condition I would have would be that the combination of moves leaves you clearly better off than standing pat would have. Of course, Doug Melvin appears to be nobody's fool, so I doubt he'd do anything stupid...

I have to admit to being a bit stunned at how many people think the 2007 Brewers will be improved by dismantling the pitching rotation. To me, there's no way the Brewers can afford to trade Sheets, Capuano, Davis or Bush without having a comparable replacement waiting in the wings, unless we're already playing for 2008. I like the look of Villanueva, but six starts isn't enough to guarantee him a starting spot. If that small a sample is enough to judge that accurately then Eveland and Jackson shouldn't even get a sniff of the rotation. My point is that we really have no clue how they'll do, and the other youngsters are still a year or so off. Giving up one of the established starters (probably placing more pressure on the bullpen in the process) to get a position player is just asking for more of the same for 2007, especially someone who hasn't proven a thing at the major league level - never mind "throwing in" a prospect for the privilege. If I'm giving up a 28 year old left handed starter with a proven track record as (at least) a #3 starter, who is three seasons away from being a free agent AND a prospect, I'd better be getting something more than a risky prospect who has a reported attitude problem. I'm not against making a trade (OK, I'm against this one), but I am against filling one hole by creating another one.

According to this site, the Brewers came in at #24 this past season. Here's the business end of things... 24 &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp Milwaukee Brewers $57,568,333 25 &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp Cleveland Indians $56,031,500 26 &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp Kansas City Royals $47,294,000 27 &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp Pittsburgh Pirates $46,717,750 28 &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp Colorado Rockies $41,233,000 29 &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp Tampa Bay Devil Rays $35,417,967 30 &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp Florida Marlins $14,998,500 Minnesota were 19 and Oakland 21. &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp

Thanks for the clarification. I can't say I agree entirely but I at least understand (and respect) your point. I guess that I just don't see where moving the money around makes any difference at all. I'm not saying that Mench and Jenks shouldn't be moved, even though the Brewers are selling low on both, but I don't see that it matters where the Brewers are paying the money if they're no better and the money still comes off the books in either event. And to be honest, I like a rotation of: Sheets, Capuano, Davis, Bush, Villanueva at least as much as, if not more than: Sheets, Capuano, Benson/Clement, Bush, Lopez I just don't like Clement, Benson or Lopez at all. The Hype Machine has built them up to sound like potential #1 or #2 starters and the reality is quite different. Lopez is a 31 year old (in a month) who has had two decent seasons, the last of which was three seasons ago. Benson hasn't had an ERA of under 4.1 since his rookie season (3.85) and has struck out 100+ or pitched 200 innings just once since then. Clement has been better but if you took out the two good years from his career, we wouldn't even be discussing him. Davis was relatively poor last year, but at least you can say that even then he was still able to be an innings-eater and for the two seasons before that, he was much better than those three. As for Villanueva, 53.2 innings isn't much of a sample but he showed enough to think he will give you at least as much as Lopez and unlike Lopez, his best years are likely still ahead of him. So I guess that, after all that, what I'm really saying is that I agree that it's not just moving the money around. It's moving the money around and making the rotation worse in the process IMHO.

Brewerfan82, I've been lurking here for some time and it's been a while since I've seen anything that I felt needed comment (which no-one else has made in my place), but this one just confuses me - perhaps not an abnormal state of affairs... How do all of these extra moves actually make the Brewers a better team? I just don't see it. All that's been done other than Roberts for Clark is that the money's been moved around. I just don't see Benson/Clement as much (if any) of an improvement over Davis. I don't see Lopez as an improvement over giving one of the youngsters (like Villanueva) a try in the #5 spot, and even if you feel Cabrera is an upgrade over TGJr (and I'm not convinced), it's still just the 5th OF spot that you're upgrading here. Given all of that, assuming you can find a taker for Clark (as has been speculated recently) and bring in Roberts at roughly the same salary, all you've done is move Jenkins, Mench and Davis for the sake of freeing up a few million dollars (at best) which are then unused... Considering those three contracts, if you don't want to resign any of them after next season, are all up anyway, it just seems like making moves for the sake of making moves and that's never a recipe for success. I wish I had something more constructive to offer in place of this, but perhaps I'm just missing something that you can explain to me?

Well, I'm here, from home, but interestingly I haven't changed anything yet. The problem, whatever it is, seems to be an issue only at night... strange...

Thanks guys. I'll give this a try and see what happens. If I disappear from the site for a couple of weeks, you'll know it didn't work... http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

Yes, I understand (I used to teach a class on basic Internet functionality). I'm baffled. This has gone on for a few weeks now. If it wasn't just this one site (and specifically the boards). I don't have a problem with any other boards, so I wonder if there's something specific about the host for this board that's a little different?