Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

Robideaux

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    248

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings

Milwaukee Brewers Videos

2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project

2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Robideaux

  1. Robideaux
    I'm not sure I believe in the concept of a "throw-in," unless you are talking about shedding a negative (net) value player for salary reasons. If you include Davis, you get less pitching.
  2. Robideaux
    I have a feeling you are right, but personally I would want no part of him, at least not as a major component of the deal. His minor league numbers are great, but he has over 800 career major league plate appearances and a career OBP of .300. I'd hand 1B over to Gamel, and push for a higher ceiling pitcher instead of Davis.
  3. Robideaux
    This is the attitude I'm afraid Doug Melvin has, and, in my opinion, it is shortsighted and reactionary. The main target isn't "young pitching," it is to put a team together that has a better chance at winning 90 games. I'm not sure dismantling a good offense to roll the dice on pitchers who are far from a sure thing is an ideal strategy. It's probably better than hoping that the comp picks work out (given the Brewers luck with drafting pitching), but the odds of any one of the young pitchers you acquire ever reaching 90% of Zach Greinke's value is insanely low. I've read that KC wants two pitching prospects for Greinke, and by flipping Prince and Hart, I think we are one of the few teams who could accomplish that. If you can pick up two former high draft picks to revamp the infield defense, all the better.
  4. Robideaux
    I know it isn't going to happen, but if I'm Doug Melvin, this is my strategy for competing in 2011 and beyond. Some of the parts are a bit fungible, but the gist of it is to try to turn Prince, Hart, McGeehee, and Lawrie into Gordon, Beckham, and Greinke. Depending on how the Brewers feel about the ability of Gamel and Weeks to play OF, and Cain to hit, you could flip the excess for pitching. Prince to White Sox for Daniel Hudson and Gordon Beckham. Corey Hart to Rays for Wade Davis Wade Davis, Daniel Hudson, Carlos Gomez, Casey Mcgehee, and Brett Lawrie to Royals for Zach Greinke and Alex Gordon Move Weeks to outfield or trade him if you think he can’t hack it defensively in the outfield. Sign Jason Werth. C Lucroy 1B Braun 2B Beckham 3B Gordon SS Escobar LF Weeks or Gamel CF Cain or Weeks RF Werth P Greinke P Yo P Wolf P ? P ?
  5. Robideaux
    Obviously, the Brewers would (should) make a Hart/Bumgarner trade in a heartbeat, but unless my instincts for relative value are way, way off, there is no way that the Giants trade Bumgarner for Hart--as in a 0% chance of that happening without a significant Brewers prospect (like Lawrie) going along as part of the deal. We might be able to get Bumgarner for Fielder. Bumgarner for Hart isn't even close. I agree with the general sentiment that we need to upgrade the rotation. And I wouldn't be completely opposed to including Lawrie in the right deal, but how sure are we that Wade Davis is good? I don't mean to imply that he isn't, and I know he's been a highly touted prospect, but neither his minor league or major league numbers scream future star. Has anybody seen him pitch?
  6. Robideaux
    Why would you do that? If Sanchez and Parra switched jerseys, it would probably take weeks for most of us to notice. The Brewers would do it because Hart is a streaky, low-OBP average outfielder who is in the midst of a good couple of months and whose value will likely never be higher. And Sanchez would be the Brewers best pitcher not named Gallardo.
  7. Robideaux
    I don’t understand how you could think Willingham is a better hitter than Hart? Over the last three seasons Hart’s batting average is higher and he has had more RBIs and Runs than Willingham. Willingham has a few more homers, but he has also stuck out more times than Hart. Hart also destroys Willingham in stolen bases and sacrifice bunts. It seems to me, based on the important statistics, that Hart is clearly a better hitter.
  8. Robideaux
    Lars Anderson put up a line of 233/ .328/ .345 in his first full season of AA. He had been good in limited experience the year before, so I don't know what happened and he still has value, but that is a big red flag. If I am trading Prince to the Sox right now I am asking for Bucholtz, Bard, Casey Kelly, and Ryan Westmoreland. I'm sure the Sox wouldn't do that.
  9. Robideaux
    When the comp picks are taken in to consideration (and you know as well as anyone that they were a big part of the calculus) isn't it more fair to say trading 6 years of a prospect for a single year of Lee? Doesn't that seem like a good gamble for a team that could make a postseason run this season? None of the three prospects are can't-miss at this point. Certainly, you would rather have guys who have at least shown something in A-ball as opposed to the uncertainty of the two comp picks, who, in theory, could be total busts, but I think a reasonable case could be made that the comp picks will largely offset the value of the three prospects traded for Lee, especially if the rumors of Aumont's chronic hip condition have any basis in reality.
  10. Robideaux
    I'm willing to place at least $5 on the odds that at least 2 of these 3 things will occur next year: - Carlos Gomez will quickly become a deservingly favorite target of the ire of a zillion posters on this site. - Jeff Suppan will be more bad [at baseball] than good and we'll spend the whole season counting the minutes 'til his contract is up. -Tiger Woods wins father-of-the-year award
  11. Robideaux
    Any reason why the Brewers didn't make a move for Lee at this price? His contract? A rotation of Lee, Gallardo, Wolf, Bush, and Parra would have looked pretty good this season.
  12. Robideaux
    I disagree that the Mariners got fleeced. The Mariners get one year of Lee AND the two high draft picks when Lee leaves as a free agent. I don't know the Mariners' prospects like I know Milwaukee's, but from reading Dave Cameron's reaction on USS Mariner ( http://ussmariner.com/200.../the-deal-as-we-know-it/ ) and reading the comments section, it sounds like they are jumping for joy. The two high picks they get will replenish the system with talent. I don't know what Milwaukee equivalents would be? Phillippe Aumont: Zack Braddock with a better pedigree, but if he stays at relief his value is reduced Tyson Gilles: Michael Brantley with better power J.C. Ramirez: live high-A arm with some upside, without the results It seems like less than we gave up for CC, and the M's get Lee for the entire year. Heck, if their season goes down the tubes, they could always trade Lee at the deadline. It makes me wish we had Jack Z instead of Melvin.
  13. Robideaux
    Sport A Top 5 $201,449,289 $135,773,988 $135,050,000 $122,696,000 $115,085,000 Mean: $142,010,855 Bottom 5 $62,310,000 $59,328,000 $48,743,000 $42,796,700 $36,814,000 Mean: $49,998,340 Top 5 spends $2.84 for every $1.00 the bottom 5 spends on player salaries. Sport B Top 5 $91,377,313 $84,654,219 $84,220,991 $82,504,966 $80,532,126 Mean: $84,657,923 Bottom 5 $56,713,022 $56,292,253 $55,314,060 $49,887,530 $49,664,212 Mean: $53,574,215 Top 5 spends $1.58 for every $1.00 the bottom 5 spends on player salaries. Sport C Top 5 $144,023,940 $139,498,691 $131,809,525 $130,391,959 $128,673,885 Mean: $134,879,600 Bottom 5 $93,886,305 $92,245,719 $92,211,978 $91,935,090 $91,055,535 Mean: $92,266,925 Top 5 spends $1.46 for every $1.00 the bottom 5 spends on player salaries. Which one is not like the others? Yes, sport A is baseball. The top 5 salaried MLB teams outspend the lowest 5 at an almost 3-to-1 ratio. The ratio in the NBA and NFL is closer to 1.5-to-1. I never said that there were not discrepancies in the other sports. I said that the playing field was even enough that being smarter than your opponents in the NBA and NFL is generally going to bring success. I don't think that is true in baseball. Especially now that the rich teams have figured out how to turn the draft into a sham. I'm not saying we need a salary cap necessarily, but to deny that economics aren't more deterministic in MLB than the NBA or NFL seems contrarian simply for the sake of being contrarian.
  14. Robideaux
    In the NBA and the NFL, the teams that succeed on a consistent basis do so because they are run better than the others--better coaching, better personnel moves, better scouting, etc. In baseball, the teams that succeed on a consistent basis do so because they spend more money than the others. This is a fundamental difference. A "small market" NFL or NBA team that is efficiently and intelligently run can have prolonged success. A "small market" team in MLB has to be smarter and luckier than the big spenders to pull of that lightning-in-a-bottle miracle run every 5-10 years. Sure, you can quote the exceptions--but the fact that we need to track the exceptions really serves to prove the rule. I bet a simple correlation test between team salary and winning percentage would show a stronger positive correlation in baseball than basketball and football. It would likely be most pronounced at the extremes--which is what a salary floor and ceiling would address. The argument isn't that you spend more money and you automatically win. Teams can and do spend a lot of money in dumb ways, but that the only way to have sustained success is by spending in the upper quartile of the league. In other words, a high team salary is a necessary, although not sufficient, condition of sustained success.
  15. Robideaux
    I have no idea how the Mariners value Clement these days, but if the Brewers think he could stick at catcher, I love to see him included in the deal. Which team would say no to Bedard, Washburn, Clement for Hardy, Frederickson, Brewer (or similarly ranked prospects from Milwaukee) ?
  16. Robideaux
    The current version of the stimulus bill waives the repayment of the tax credit for homes purchased in 2009, but makes no mention of retroactively waiving the provision for 2008 home purchases. Are you saying that you think this would be considered by the IRS in a decision separate from the stimulus bill?
  17. Robideaux
    The only team that was able to assemble a winning team without a top draft pick was Detroit. I'm hoping that Hammonds doesn't think "Hey... this is how Detroit built their team, lets do that in Milwaukee." I don't mean to quibble because I think your overall point is well made, but I don't think it's entirely accurate to say that Detroit was built without top draft choices. Rip Hamilton was the 7th pick. And I realize you aren't taking about trades, but Iverson was no. 1 overall and Rasheed was no. 4.
  18. Robideaux
    So to paraphrase you, "If a player has not reached his "potential" by the age of 25, he ceases to have the "potential" to do better than he has already done." I repectfully disagree. I think your premise in inherently flawed. That doesn't mean that Rickie is going to be an All-Star someday, but it does mean that it is not unrealistic just because he hasn't done it yet. I'm sure we could make a list a mile long of players who had their best season after the age of 25.
  19. Robideaux
    I'm not saying that Cameron's value is higher than you say, but I'm not sure if I completely agree with the logic behind the reasoning. Theoretically, the value differential between the player's salary and his"projected worth" would only really matter given a salary cap (self-imposed or otherwise). Otherwise, for a team with deep pockets, e.g. Red Sox or Yankees, the "wins per dollar" is somewhat of a secondary consideration behind straight up "wins". If that wasn't the case, teams would not be spending big money on free agents because (theoretically, given a totally efficient market) the players would not be outperforming their free-agent salaries. I apologize if I am misunderstanding the implications of your statement, but it seems that, using your logic, the only players with trade value would be guys who have not yet hit free-agency. To wit, Manny Parra is almost certainly going to outperform his salary, but good luck trying to trade him straight up for Mark Teixeira, Johan Santana, or ARod--three players who are, arguably, less likely to be worth more than their salary.
  20. Robideaux
    Wasn't Brandon Lyon worse than Mota last year?
  21. Robideaux
    I'd say that determining competitive balance for me comes down to how correlated payroll size is with winning percentage. Make all the arguments you want about the NFL, but I bet that you would find a much stronger correlation in baseball than football. (I apologize, but I am not going to crunch the numbers, but I'd be shocked if that wasn't true) In baseball it is the exceptions that prove the rule. In MLB we gasp and say "look, it can be done" when a small(er) market team has some postseason success. Obviously having a bigger payroll doesn't guarantee success, but it does give you a huge advantage. Sure, there is a lot of player movement in the NFL, but not "star" movement. If the NFL was MLB, Brett Favre would have been traded away long ago because the Packers wouldn't have been able to afford him.
  22. Robideaux
    My first thought was, "Yuk!" Then I looked at his numbers, and on second thought: "Yuk." Do we really want more than a quarter of our payroll tied up in our 4th and 5th starters? I know you can't undo the Suppan signing, but can't we learn from it? If a contract ends up in the $4 million range, then I'm unimpressed, but not incensed. If it is closer to the $8-9 million that I expect, then any faith I have in Melvin having any sort of plan to rebuild/retool is lost. Sure, we need a pitcher, but who is Looper knocking out of the rotation? McClung? I'm not convinced that the marginal win jump from McClung to Looper is worth millions in opportunity cost. Use that money to bring in a high OBP FA bat for a few million more than Looper. Wouldn't a trade of Hart plus a prospect pu-pu platter (Salome + Nelson for instance) bring in a pitcher who we could plug in between Gallardo and Parra instead of between Bush and Suppan? With a defensive IF that may include Lamb, Weeks, and Fielder, I'd have much more faith in a pitcher that is not so reliant on the defense to get out of trouble.
  23. Robideaux
    ILuvdaBush---The "Soriano in Center"-Experience was about as successful as "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club." Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Albums of All Time 1. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, The Beatles 2. Pet Sounds, The Beach Boys 3. Revolver, The Beatles 4. Highway 61 Revisited, Bob Dylan I didn't realize that Soriano was considered by some as the greatest CF of all time. In all seriousness though, signing Dunn and packaging Hart and a prospect for a pitcher makes almost too much sense for it to happen. Fielder is on his way out, so you've got your 1B of the future in Dunn. By that time, Gamel will hopefully be ready to take over in LF (color me skeptical about his future at the hot corner). If I was GM, signing Dunn would be my #1 priority this offseason. It's fun to think about, but I seriously doubt it is going to happen; it doesn't seem like a Melvin kind of move.
  24. Robideaux
    I second the preference for cats in their pants. Garland = Suppan Version 2.0 Unless he is next to nothing cheap, I wouldn't even consider him. And he won't be, because he "knows how to win." He'd probably be our 5th best starter at 12+ million a year.
  25. Robideaux
    I'm not interested in any of the Yankees guys mentioned. Wang is ok, but nothing special. Put him on the Brewers and he's not winning 18+ games. Cabrera and Kennedy are just names we know because of the Yankee hype machine. If they played for Kansas City, 95% of baseball fans outside of Missouri would never have even heard of them. Hughes does have some legitimate stuff when healthy, and may still, but the Brewers would have be sure that whatever was ailing him last season is ok. I'd still have some interest, but not as the marquee player in a Prince trade.
×
×
  • Create New...