TheCrew07

Hook is now the third person from the organization this winter to speak in glowing terms of Frederickson's progress during instructs. I want so desperately to believe in him, but part of me is also wondering if it might be a bit of organizational spin, we'll know soon enough I guess... Hook also referred to Nieves as a command guy, which pretty much confirms that I wasn't crazy when I was writing down the stalker readings over the player's shoulders at 85-87. I wonder where the national prospect guys get their information from as I don't expect them to be perfect with so many prospects across baseball, but velocity seems like a pretty easy measurable to nail down. As far as an organizational philosophy towards pitching goes, I hope they don't get hung up on the measurables too much and still select some players here and there that can pitch, regardless of their size or body type.

The Indians didn't see winter ball as the best way for him to grow as a player? I'm shocked... I've always liked Brantley and I hope he continues to do well on the big league level.

The Indians didn't see winter ball as the best way for him to grow as a player? I'm shocked... I've always liked Brantley and I hope he continues to do well on the big league level.

Ack my bad, I meant on 4 days rest... no idea why I typed it the way I did. The end result here would be that he picks up another 2 starts or so by years end? Maybe 36 starts instead of 34? I hope Peterson reigns Macha in, but an average of 6IP over 36 starts is 216 IP, but I would expect Yo to improve over his 6.12 or whatever from last season and be around 6.5 or so which would put him at 234 IP for the year. That would mean in consecutive years he'd go from 24 IP to 185ish to 234ish, all before his body has finished maturing as most men reach maturity around 24-25 years of age. I could see bumping up Rogers 60 IP per year because they already used an option on him and only have 2 remaining, but is it necessary with Yo? He's already here, he's already established, and we need him to anchor the rotation for years to come. Every pitch past "fatigue" exponentially increases the risk of injury and the fatigue point is very difficult to pinpoint as all athletes will have a different threshold. The organization needs to be concerned about it from 3 angles; total pitches in an inning, total pitches in a game, and total pitches in a season. I sincerely hope that Yo is one of those rare players that can just plow through without a serious injury, but the evidence to the contrary when it comes to abusing young arms is overwhelming. If we were talking about an established arm in his 26-28 year old seasons I would agree with you, in fact I wouldn't care how many IP he would get in a season, but that's just not the case here. I have no faith in Macha to look out for the best interests of the players, he needs to win and win now to get renewed, he doesn't have time to be patient with our youngsters, which he already proved last season.

Is going every 4th day in Yo's best interests though? He pitched much better making every 5th start and staying under 110 pitchers last season. Every time Macha pushed him his next game and in some cases multiple games were below average from a Gamescore standpoint, at least early in the season. He didn't have a game with a score over 70 after July 25th... I'd rather not ride Yo into the ground chasing a goal that might not be attainable, especially after how hard he was pushed last season after barely pitching the year before. Why not let him get into that 26-27 year old range before we start riding him? It seems that teams will always talk about doing the right thing with young pitchers but when push comes to shove, they'll still ride them into the ground then bemoan the lack of pitching after the fact. He pitched 185+ plus innings in less than entire season, getting pushed to at least 110 pitches 12 times by my quick count, after only pitching 24 innings in 2008. It was irresponsible management by Macha and I'm shocked how long Melvin let it go. Why wouldn't we all want Yo to be healthy and effective for as long as possible? Or any of our young pitchers for that matter? I'd rather not end up with the Brewer version of Cole Hamels... Hamels made a huge IP jump, then was ridden hard 2 straight years, then pitched well below the standard he had previously set. Was 2009 just an off year? Was he injured? I fully understand that many people around here think the window closes when we lose Fielder... but he's not the franchise at this point, Gallardo is. If we lose Yo we're done, we have no way to replace him, the only youngster with enough IP to step into the rotation and maybe enough talent is Rivas and he's never pitched above A+. Melvin hasn't shown any sort of willingness to trade for a high ceiling arm with any longevity to headline the rotation and we don't have the depth to trade for rental pitching every year ala Sabathia so where would our best pitching come from if not from Yo? I'm sorry but I don't see a rotation headlined by Wolf and Davis getting us to the promised land, with or without Fielder.

Even if Suppan picks up 1 MPH on his fastball the velocity separation between his pitches still stinks. I've learned a ton from listening to a former big league pitcher spin his yarns, but one of the stories I found most fascinating that he's told was about velocity differential. I'm sure there are differing opinions on this stuff but he always looked to have at least a 12 MPH difference from his fastball to his primary off speed pitch (not talking about sliders here). He also mentioned something that I had never thought about before.... one of the teams he played for brought in a physics professor to talk to the pitchers and he opened by asking how many revolutions a 90 MPH fastball makes before reaching home plate? Well numerous players raised their hands with guesses, some as high as 20... the answer: the average fastball only completes 2 revolutions before reaching the catcher, the best pitchers can get 3... crazy stuff. No point really other than to highlight that most pitchers of average talent have very little margin for error, after all, what's the difference between a good start and a bad start? 6 pitches that fall for hits? (and no, I'm not looking to debate luck with anyone) With Suppan's declining skill set, as his pitches approach each other velocity wise, and his total reliance on pinpoint command to be effective, I really don't hold out any hope that he'd be a solid pitcher over this entire season. He'll get hot and have a good stretch or maybe a couple of good stretches but it won't be enough to average out the other appearances, bullpen or otherwise. I have nothing against the guy even though I despise the idea behind his signing, this is just what happens when guys get old...

There were 2... Ben Hendrickson, Dana Eveland. Both of them directly led me down the prospect/pitching path that I'm currently on.... and who can forget Ben's crazy dad blasting the whole the site the day his son was traded to KC? Eveland... cripes... Parra is like a return to Eveland for me. There's absolutely no good reason he shouldn't be able to get MLB hitters out, but he doesn't. 2009 was by far his worst season. My first season really following the minor leagues on this site was 2003, I thought Hendrickson and Jones would rule the world in a couple of years, then Mike got hurt and the wheels started coming off the organization's pitching prospects again. That summer of 2003 though... Jones and Hendrickson tearing up AA, Eveland and Taubenheim were monsters in Helena... Sarfate, Wilhelmsen, and Parra were tearing up Beloit... The future looked so good from a pitching standpoint at the end of the June, then as I said above Jones got hurt for the first time and the dominos started falling. Wilhelmsen got the big adios during the off season, Sarfate never learned to throw strikes, Parra got hurt, Eveland and Hendrickson couldn't stick with the big club, and finally Taubenheim was traded but hasn't amounted to much yet. At least when compared to our current crop of pitchers, the current players generally speaking are all much more projectable than little Ben and Taubenheim were, so at least we have that going for us.

Even though I talk quite a bit on the MLB forum about pitching upside, there's more to sports than pure athletic ability. Sheets is/was a very good pitcher, and he's about as unathletic as a professional gets, he runs like a duck waddles. The Badgers might not be super athletic, but they play as a team, stick to system, and master the fundamentals so they win their fair share of games. The Badger team that it made it to the Final Four was much less athletic than this current Badger team, so I don't see what high flying aeronautics have to do with college BB games. This isn't the NBA where it's all isolation and 2 man games... it's still basketball and a team like the Badgers always has a shot to win given their tempo and style. The tempo and style may not be for you, but to dismiss the team because they don't blow you away with athleticism seems pretty short sighted from where I'm sitting.

That was just awesome, great find Battlekow, and I'm not even a country music fan.

I posted my thoughts about the catching situation in WI a couple of times over the course of the season. I have no idea why McCraw was a good idea... if he was depth sure... but he ended up the everyday C. He seems like a good guy, seemed to get along with his teammates alright from what I saw at games, but he didn't really bring anything to the table offensively or defensively. His CS% got better over the course of the season, but way too many balls got through all of the catchers I saw play in WI. It seemed to me that the line between a PB and a WP is pretty liberal at best.

and also good for Verlander, I've always liked him, a good deal both ways I think.

Go minor league splits, look at his career numbers, especially the last 3, you'll see a pretty familiar pattern. There's more to this than MLEs and what national publications have to say about prospects, the best information we get is generally gleaned from audio interviews or local newspaper features. Clever but beneath you, once again I was responding to Straw, and there's whole lot more in that post than Hardy/Escobar/DM Once again you just assume that it's idle speculation. Furthermore no just about every MLB team doesn't do thins... quite the opposite in fact, usually one of the players is moved in a trade. Sometimes, like with Howard, the team intentionally buries a player behind another elite player, it's more the exception than the rule. Buchholz also comes to mind, but the whole situation there is a bit weird and difficult to dissect given his talent and the crappy performance of the FA pitchers signed for their rotation. I'm still not sure what to make of that whole deal, why the organization kept him in AAA and largely limited his IP is sort of a mystery, and only makes sense if the intention was to try and trade him all along. Maybe the difference here is that I took the time to do a ton of research on every organization baseball starting in 2007 and finishing prior to the 2008 season so I see the inefficient way the Brewers have used up their resources and spent their money. There are some GMs around the game that are doing more with less, and in fact I was literally shocked to discover a team I had always dismissed had some true genius in TB. Not just at the MLB level, but organization wide in contracts to pitchers (the Shields contract is brilliant), position players, and team/organization building. Other organizations have followed suit, like Toronto this off season. Some have spent money very efficiently going back 4-5 years like Colorado, even some of the large market teams spend their money very well, like Boston (one pitching contract aside). It's pretty easy to see the holes in what's been done just using Cots.... salary against wins. It's not about spending money, it's about spending money efficiently, something the Brewers just haven't done under Melvin. Fielder wants to play for a winner... well sure, who doesn't. I don't think his perception of an organization will matter at all in the end, he'll sign the longest contract because it has the most guaranteed money. I honestly believe for the Brewers to remain relevant over a longer period of time they will need to start to get 8-10 years out of the stud players we develop. There's no way Milwaukee can afford to build a team paying market value for every starting position on the 25 man, so they need players to be willing to sign Braun type deals early, and they damn well better start locking up our top pitchers to Shields type contracts. This is where perception matters... and it's not what you, or I, or how any other fan sees the organization, it's how the players see the organization. The Hardy situation was handled as poorly as it could possibly be from a player's perspective and I worry about the long term fallout of this last season. Maybe it won't matter at all... I don't know. Will a Lawrie want to sign here for 8-10? Or would he rather go the Hart route and be gone in 6-7? This is the crux of the issue... what's a player's perspective of the Brewer organization? Are they penny pinchers who fly by the seat of their pants? Are they a committed organization with a long term plan? Does the perception lie someplace in the middle? It's too late to lockup Fielder to a team friendly contract (which by the way the team assumes all the risk on), and we aren't going to be able to compete with the years a larger market can offer for him. Going forward how does the organization do better than it did with this first wave of players? Is the organization even interested in longevity or is the idea to depend solely on the farm system to keep churning out players draft after draft, then play whack-a-moles with FA to plug the remaining holes? If the organization is willing lock up players then will the players be willing to sign? MLB is a business sure, but relationships still matter, regardless of the type of business we're in, and I know a former player who played for quite a few teams including the Yankees and Brewers but the only organizations he'd consider getting involved with in his retirement are Cleveland and Arizona. It's an old boys network like anywhere else, word gets around beyond a player's personal experience with an organization. The idea behind the Hall contract and Hart offer were sound, just not the choice of player, though I'm still hopeful Hart will turn things around. I think you can avoid those pitfalls though by asking if the player is someone the organization wants to build around, someone elite, and not just signing him because he's good? With so many talented offensive players who are also defensively deficient at this time in the organization, is it wise to lockup any OF who isn't elite ala Braun? When I say a core, I'm talking about 3-4 position players and 2-3 starting pitchers under long term contract at any one time. Keep those 5-7 players locked in and keep the rest of the roster flexible and fluid. If the team would want to move player via trade, the contracts wouldn't have any impact at all. Kazmir is expensive, but TB still had suitors when he started to under perform because he has significant talent and there's hope he'll turn it around. I don't see how eating up 30ish mil between just Braun and Fielder is a solid fiscal plan, Braun starts to get expensive right as Fielder is hitting FA. Instead of signing Fielder I think the organization needs evaluate how it operates and change it's business model, because I think operating as they have, this 1 and done in the playoffs is as good as it's ever going to be. We'll be competitive sure, but that's just not enough for me anymore.

What evidence do you have that suggests his MLB lines wouldn't have followed the same exact pattern? As I've said numerous times in the past, he was clearly an ascending player, and he tends to start a bit slow at each level and progress as the season moves along. Feel free to search my previous posts regarding Escobar, it's all been said numerous times before. I think when it comes to Escobar people are just going to believe what they want to believe. I was responding to a statement made by another poster, I had no intention of derailing this thread with Melvin/Escobar talk. A year or years of any players service time can easily be bought out via a Braunesque deal. Contracts are largely handed out based on offensive prowess so it's not like an Escobar deal would set the Brewers back anywhere near a Fielder deal. Even if the Brewers signed Escobar to an extended cost controlled deal and say Prince becomes a better all around player, said contract wouldn't be an albatross when moving Escobar. It doesn't matter if we're talking about Braun, Fielder, Escboar, Gamel, Lawrie, whomever.... the longer we have the controlled with cost certainty, the better off the organization is. Longevity + cost certainty = flexibility. Please don't confuse service time with cost certainty, arby isn't cost certainty by any stretch. I'll say it one last time, it's not good business to keep prospects buried in the minors for service time. It creates unnecessary animosity on the player's behalf. Once a player hits MLB his earning potential is largely controlled by his performance, he has no one to blame but himself. However if he's stashed in AAA for "depth" as people around here are fond of preaching about, his earning potential is being severely limited by the organization. Say Gamel turns out to be the hitter some of us think he will be, what will his incentive be to sign a deal if he's stashed in AAA again? How well did the Howard situation turn out in Philly? The Brewers aren't in any position to spend market value to retain any FA stud they develop in the current MLB revenue system. To retain players the players have to be willing to sign early and the team has to be willing to accept the risk, and players with a chip on their shoulder will be less likely to sign. Finally, I'm not sure where this notion came from that all prospects should be finished products when they arrive in MLB when it's quite clearly the opposite all around baseball. Every player will be different... Escobar wasn't Hardy, he wasn't coming off of major surgery and being thrown in the fire. He's not Weeks/Fielder who were seen as offensive powerhouses with defensive liabilities. Neither is Gamel similar to Braun, they are similar offensively, but defensively they are worlds apart tools wise even though the stats may suggest otherwise. Very rarely is a prospect a finished product when he's called up, typically when they are you're getting a hall of fame type talent... Griffey, Bonds, Arod, etc. Most of these young men will get incrementally better in the minors, but they are always the best players at their level, which isn't a great incentive to get better as success truthfully comes too easy. Furthermore I think people vastly overestimate the time that is spent on individual instruction outside of ST and Instructionals in the fall at the minor league level... in season there just isn't time for that sort of 1 of 1, it's alomst entirely on the player to "want it" bad enough to put extra time in. At the MLB level there is actually time for individual instruction on a daily basis, simply because there are more coaches per player, so there are more man hours available to work on issues, and not all players will require the same level of attention. Fielder wasn't a finished product, he'll leave right in his prime, and that doesn't mean the organization made a mistake bringing him up when they did. The organization needs to be aggressive, both in retaining and trading assets to remain competitive long term. No team has perfect drafts and has players lined 4 deep at every position through the minors to MLB, it's just not possible to hit on that many draft picks. It's a tremendous waste of resources to have a super prospect in AAA with an expensive MLB player also at his position. In a perfect world the decision would be based on who's the most talented and productive, however in the case of Milwaukee service and cost are probably just as important if not more important. I think the results last year speak for themselves, I've been very consistent on these points over the last couple of years. Escobar could have produced similar or better to what Hardy actually did and 1 pitcher would have made a significant impact on the rotation, maybe allowing Parra to stay in AAA and actually get his confidence back. It's easy to reclaim a year of time with a contract extension, but the trades we don't make we never get back. The above is why if the right deal comes along for Fielder and the club is struggling, Melvin should at least consider it. I don't think it's likely he gets traded as I hope the team is at least .500ish, but I'd want the door to remain open in DM's mind. I don't want any closed doors or lines drawn in the sand. edit. I want to add none of this had anything to do with Hardy struggling... I said I thought he was a 4 WAR player, which meant that Escobar + Pitcher just had to be worth 4 WAR combined to be as valuable in 2009, but I thought going forward into 2010 and beyond the 2 players combined would blow Hardy's value away as they matured. I've never just looked at the roster year by year, I'm interested in longevity and building the best possible organization. Many people around here thought keeping Hardy in 2009 and 10 made the team better, I never saw it that way as I saw and still see impact pitching as the biggest need. The pitcher was/is more important than the position player, that's just how I see it.

This is exactly why I have pointed out time and time again to you that it would have been foolish for the Brewers to bring up Escobar at the beginning of last season. It is in our best interests to wait as long as possible with our prospects in order to maximize the amount of "prime years" available to us before they hit free agency. If we bring up our prospects super young, as we did with Fielder, they´ll end up spending their top prime years in some other organization, or signed to extremely expensive deals that we can´t afford. I don't want to take this too far off topic, but what made Escobar significantly more ready in August than he was in April? Who gets to determine this readiness? What if Escobar is already all he's ever going to be? The earlier the team brings up a player, the sooner the team should evaluate where are the player stands... is he a "core" player the organization wants to build around? A role player? etc... You don't keep players down in the minors for the sake of keeping them down. I completely understand what you're saying, you're trying to maximize their value by having them in team control through their peak. I've always understood that point of view, I just simply don't agree. From a player management perspective, the organization also has a responsibility to let a player grow. Would Griffey have been better served playing in the minors till he was 23 just so Seattle could control him into his 30s? Is that fair to the player? How would you feel if you were the player? Would you sign a team friendly deal after they buried you in AAA for multiple seasons seriously limiting your earning potential? It goes both ways... If you're dealing with a player of Fielder or Braun's offensive potential the idea should be to lock them up as soon as possible. The Brewers missed the boat with Fielder, and it's quite possible he never would have signed a deal regardless given his agent. Prince has no incentive to sign a team friendly long term deal once he reaches arby. Maybe Hart being forced to repeat AAA and then ride the pine is the reason he didn't sign his contract offer? Was Jenkins or Mench really a better option than him? The organization had/has some glaring pitching needs, those problems don't fix themselves sitting on our hands letting one player play out a contract and burying a different player behind that one in AAA. We needed impact pitching and instead DM took the conservative FA route. We now have a worse problem in McGehee and Gamel... neither one is close to FA soon, and Macha seems to favor McGehee over Gamel even though Gamel is the much more gifted player. I dread watching this situation play itself out...

Wow, I'm very surprised about Kemp, many of us wondered where he fit in but he certainly showed enough to keep progressing. Good luck to him in his pursuits and best wishes to his family.

If players are stupid and Milwaukee won't be able to sign any players to Braun type deals early... then what exactly is the point of being a fan? How do we as fans connect with the team when we only get to enjoy to 2 or 3 best years of a player's career? That's what's wrong with the system... if the Brewers aren't able to get 8-10 good years of a player they draft and develop, then the system is broke. If players won't sign early trading some money for security, then the Brewers have no hope of building around a core of players and 2008 is as good as it's going to get. It makes the fiscal arguments many of us posters have been making moot... I think there are certain scenarios in which the Brewers should consider moving Fielder, but they are sort of doom and gloom in regards to the pitching staff so I'll simply say that I don't believe in absolutes when it comes to building a baseball team, I can see the possibility of moving Fielder being a necessity down the road. If the Brewers would have made an offer to Prince like they did to Braun when he was financially motivated to accept it, the story might be different now. As it turned out, I think DM will ride Fielder into FA, offer a contract for public relations sake (just like Sabathia), and take the compensation picks when Prince gets slightly more money per year, but 3 or 4 more years out of a different team. In the short term the Brewers can compete with the money, but they'll never been able to compete with the years, and these FA contracts always seem to come down to the most years. If a player has 2 deals, 7/120 or 8/160, which deal are they going to take? I will also say that the handling of Hardy and Hall, regardless of what we might think, may have had a negative impact in the clubhouse as both players were popular with the team. I think the notion of the Brewers being competitive long term is also still in question, if you're a player do you see a long term plan? As a fan do we a see a long term plan? I know I don't and I'm curious what the players would say behind closed doors.

I believe the player should do whatever he can to maximize his salary, I have no issue with that idea at all. However I also expect people in general to be realistic about their situation and take some personal responsibility for what's happened to them. Corey turned down a Braun type deal from the Brewers in 2008, he passed on security to maximize his yearly earnings. He's certainly entitled by the CBA to do such and I hold no animosity towards him for doing so. I've said numerous times that my 3 favorite Brewers from this crop were Braun, Hardy, and Hart. I honestly thought that Hart had the potential to push the 30/30 mark in HRs and stolen bases while hitting for a high batting average. He was definitely one of my boys... I went so far as to argue for him to get playing over Jenkins and Mench, I felt at the time he was the superior player riding the pine. That being said, these arby dramatics with Hart every year have gotten under my skin, and yes I understand how arby works as a percentage of a FA contract and how the system works in general. This isn't about players getting screwed when they are cheap, that's the price these guys pay for being able to hit FA after 6 years, the lack of a salary cap, and market disparity. The system is what it is, I don't like it much, I think the whole system from the draft to FA compensation needs to be addressed and overhauled, but that's a different topic entirely. This situation gets under my skin simply because Corey is so sure he's worth the money.... I know multiple professional athletes personally from multiple sports, I've been very fortunate in that regard, all of them have tremendous self confidence, some would call it arrogance, but it's a necessary ingredient of their success. The whole situation smacks of supreme arrogance on Corey's part. I know I've been critical of Melvin in regards to pitching and giving a contract to Hall (as Hall wasn't a long term solution anywhere), but he's been very fair in arbitration hearings for as long as I can remember, and my gut feeling is that the organization has negotiated in good faith with Corey. The Brewer offer was fair, the counter offer was high but not outrageously so, just settle in the middle and call it a day. Is his financial situation so dire that the couple of hundred K over the mid point makes or breaks the deal? Come on Corey... look at your even performance the last 2 seasons and be reasonable, that's all I ask.

I have no problem with Melvin letting Sheets walk, I never wanted him signed to a contract extension, it was always my opinion that he let himself go a bit so his injuries were a result of age, conditioning, and just pitching. After Ben got hurt the second time i never viewed him as unlucky injury wise, I viewed him as a significant injury risk and was basically waiting for him to need one of the big 2 surgeries. Nor was I suggesting that the Brewers should have signed Sheets for 10 mil plus incentives, however if my choices were always limited to Sheets or Wolf/Hawkins, I'm taking Sheets every single time because there is simply no way anyone on this board will convince me that tying up money in the bullpen is fiscally responsible. My problem with the organization hasn't changed, we basically swapped Yo for Sheets, and the rotation is in the same general shape going into 2010 as it was going into 2006. We just needed 1 more pitcher of significant talent to go with Yo and this crop of position players and it never got done. Melvin and I are about as far apart philosophically as 2 people can be, and I don't expect that to change anytime soon.

I agree with this 100%, Macha has proven he doesn't know to handle young players very well at all, I would hope that they don't burn up service time with a top prospect riding the bench ever again. I don't care who is in front of the young man, if he's up, get him regular playing time or else leave him in the minors.

I have nothing to add other than that made me laugh... go Ken!

To your first point, I'm not ignoring anything. They "didn't" need an innings eater then, just like they didn't innings eater now. Yes there is quite a bit to be said about a healthy pitcher who gives you 34 starts, but Melvin is simply buying the best pitcher he can afford. I don't need to be told the player's virtues, anyone can pull up any number of sites and see a player's stats. I'm concerned about age, the type of the stuff the player has, and so on. Just because you agree with both signings doesn't mean those of us that argue against these midling FA acquisitions are wrong. There's always more than one way to get from A to B and I find it unfortunate that Melvin hasn't explored more permanent solutions through trades. I have the same answer to your first point that I always do in this situation, the options only look limited because you're limiting the possibilities. I say again the dominos did not have to fall this way in DM's tenure as GM, his reluctance to trade for meaningful pitching has limited his options. This outcome was predictable only because DM has established a familiar pattern of behavior, he wants to patch a rotation, not build one like Toronto or TB have done. True flexibility is dependent on options, when our options are limited to FA and spending significant money to acquire mediocrity, the team becomes limited both in talent and payroll flexibility. A team should be able to acquire MLB pieces from the farn system, trades, and FA... well we had no pitchers ready in the system, then we didn't trade for any, so that just left FA as Melvin's one way to upgrade the rotation. Talented pitchers get traded every year, and outside of a rental player deals those pieces don't end up in Milwaukee. I would have rather traded for Kazmir last season than sign Wolf.... we simply didn't have to keep every single position player to remain competitive. I understand that Kazmir would cost more the next couple of years, but at least he has significant talent, and it wouldn't have cost much in prospects to get him at the time. I would much rather take the risk of Kazmir returning to form because he has the ability to push Yo down a spot in the rotation when he's right, then spend money on trading out players at the bottom of the rotation. Going into 2009 I would have traded for Neimann or Jackson, whichever TB was going to move, the off season before that Cain was available for hitting, I wanted to move Hardy for pitching when he was valuable, I was willing to Fielder in the right deal for pitching, and we don't even know who else teams were discussing that could have been had for a reasonable price. To your second point I quoted, you need to get past the Suppan vs Wolf comparison, no one is comparing them as pitchers, we're comparing the pattern.... and it's the exact same pattern as before. Rotation is horrible, Wolf is the best FA pitcher the Brewers can afford, they court and sign him to a long term contract. However being the best FA pitcher the Brewers can afford means he's is his mid 30s and is average to above average, so while he's maybe even "good", he's nothing special and his skills are declining. Looking ahead to the end of the deal, 3 years down the road, he's now in his late 30s with even less margin for error stuff wise, he's still the highest paid pitcher on the staff, and we're hoping he has 1 more solid year left in him. Every single young pitcher we have in the rotation now or arriving by 2012-2013 has more talent than Wolf... every single one. Will they master the pitchability side of pitching? I have no idea and no way of knowing (though I do feel very good about Yo), so I have no way to predict how successful they will ultimately be. I do know that Yo, Parra, Butler, Rogers, Rivas, Peralta, Scarpetta, Arnett, Frederickson, Jeffress, and Odorizzi all have more talent, they all have more juice in their arms. As such it wouldn't surprise me at all if in 2012 Wolf is our #5 pitcher, who also happens to be our most expensive pitcher. It could actually happen by 2011 if the Brewers have some good fortune. Butler, Rivas, and Rogers could all be in the rotation to stay by 2011 and Parra could find his groove. Where was does Wolf go then? The bullpen? That would be great, spending SP money on middle relief.... We only need 2 of the 3 to make it for Wolf to be the #5 already in 2011... assuming success in AA Rivas actually has enough IP the last 2 years he could jump right into the rotation as an injury replacement and never go back and 2011 will be Rogers last option year. Of course the flip side is also true, all those youngsters could fail, and I realize we could play the "what if" game all day but that isn't my intention. My point is that any FA pitcher the Brewers can afford actually ends up hurting the team's flexibility on the back end of his contract. The team really isn't in a position to be able to just turn a guy loose and eat his contract, he's way too expensive to be long man out of the pen, so he ends up taking away an opportunity from a younger, cheaper, and more talented player simply because of his contract. I'll also add we're talking about a contract chewing up dollars that can't be better utilized on a different solution... like a productive position player. While the #1 thing any pitcher needs to do is stay healthy, I think trying to put together a rotation using FAs and basing your decisions largely on IP leads to a very predictable outcome, and if Wolf isn't our worst starting pitcher going into 2012 I'll actually be disappointed as we need this pitching wave to be successful in the worst way. If only to protect Melvin from himself. The idea shouldn't be to swap out #4 and #5 for slightly better pitchers, in my opinion the idea should be to target pitchers in that #2ish range, pushing your #3 down to your #5... and so on... that's when we'll have true pitching depth as an organization.

I saw Nieves pitch many times last season and he was always between 85-87 on the stalker. Maybe he was actually fatigued to start the season, but I certainly never saw him break 90... if he did I would feel quite a bit better about him.

If Gomez ends up just a platoon player then the Hardy trade makes even less sense, what a disaster that would be.

I hate how people go to the "he's basically league average" card when defending the Suppan signing. How many teams are spending the most money on their worst pitcher? It's a horrible plan economically and I think it's a horrible way to build a pitching for all of the reasons I've previously posted. The Brewers have way too much money tied into the bullpen and averagish starting pitching. I have no problem with DM spending money, but quit maxing out the payroll just to be average. There is very realistic chance of the same thing happening with Wolf by the end of his contract, he very well could be our least talented and most expensive starting pitcher. I think that pattern stinks and will continue to rage against it until I change my ideas on team building, which seems very unlikely.

I think that Escobar is limited only by how much work he's willing to put in. He's a very graceful and smooth athlete, I'm not talking about his fielding as much as I am about how he moves. If you expect him to remain over 6 feet tall and just 180 lbs his entire career then you're right, he's pretty much all he's going to be. His plate discipline will hopefully improve over time, but he'll always be a low to mid .700s OPS guy. His frame could easily support another 20-25 lbs of muscle without impacting his flexibility, speed, and lateral mobility at all, so it's conceivable to me that he could hit 15-20 HRs at his peak. Will he ever get there? I have no idea,... Macha and the rest of the organization have made it clear that he should be like Willie Mays Hayes and just keep the ball on the ground and use his speed, but he'll have to change his offensive game as he gets older to remain viable as a starting SS offensively. Personally I would never tell a player to limit his potential which is sort of what the organization has done with all this "use your speed" stuff. Do I want Alcides obsessing about becoming a better power hittter? Absolutely not, but I would encourage all of my players to become better athletes, and strength training is a critical pillar of athletic performance and injury prevention, regardless of the sport. I would think a small market team would have to be in the business of squeezing every last drop of potential out of every single player in the organization, especially the smallest market in the game.