TheCrew07

Without a doubt it would be Davis and Hawkins - they are also cheaper.I don't agree at all... there's way better value in Sheets if he's truly healthy. I would rather have 2 pitchers around the level of Gallardo on the staff thant 1 sarting pitcher who always pitches with runners on base, who doesn't approach 90 mph on his fastball, and is in his mid 30s plus paying premium dollar for a friggen reliever. I realize WAR is imperfect, so please get past how it's calculated and look at what I'm trying to say.... WAR illustrates my point perfectly in this case. In every season Sheets has posted over 160 IP he's had a WAR greater than 3.7. Davis hasn't had a WAR above 2.4 since 2006 with the Brewers (2.8), he peaked at a 4.5 in 2004 and has been on a slow steady decline ever since. Hawkins hasn't had a WAR over 1.0 since 2004 because once again there just isn't tremendous value in relief pitching, they pitch too few innings. Sheets worst WAR min 160 IP... 3.7 Hawkins last season above a 1, 2004 with a.... 1.2 (.3 last season) Doug Davis maximum WAR since leaving the Crew.... 2.4 (1.7 last season) I might stink at math, but it would appear to me that Hawkins/Davis would have to find the fountain of youth to equal Sheets' value if he manages to get 160 IP.... 3.6 combined WAR best case vs 3.7 worst case. The wildcard here is that no one really can say with any certainty how well Sheets will pitch coming off surgery. However, if Ben is healthy he's at least a 3 WAR pitcher, in that I have no doubt and even if Hawkins bounces back to another .8 (as he's done in the past, not all that far fetched for a reliever) Davis would also have to pitch a full win better than last season for them to be even be close to outpeforming Sheets' approximate value.

I'm shocked Sheets got 10 mil up front, that is all.

If I agree will I get bashed for being a Melvin hater again? He's done pretty good with hitters over the years so it's hard to complain but I think what this means down the road is that the team isn't giving the Hurricane any sort serious consideration for a MLB bench spot. I'm still holding out hope Heether manages to make the 25 man out of camp, I realize he doesn't bat left handed, but thinking about Iribarren always makes me think of Heether for some reason. Hopefully Iribarren gets his shot with another organization this season, I've always been curious to see how he'd perform in MLB. I don't think the Brewers will miss him at all, but he's a home grown product and I tend to root pretty hard for those guys.

I'm not sure what to make of Peterson + young pitchers + pitchers that need to rebound. I normally put in my homework stats wise and have a good gut feeling about a guy, but I was so wrong last year about Parra especially that I'm 100% in wait and see mode. I'm very much fearing the worst and hoping for the best. Mass has been linking the Hot Stove audio on the MLB forum and I found it odd that neither Yo or Parra had talked to Peterson yet. I always try to put myself in the other person's shoes and if I were Peterson I would have watched a ton of film on Parra, then I would have compared 2007 to 2008 to 2009 to see what was different and put a plan together for Manny. then I would have made a it a point to meet personally to get his ideas on where's he's at and discuss it with him, all within a month of being hired, because Parra could be the one player with enough talent to swing the entire rotation if he goes from bad to good. Not the the plan should be set it stone, because it's never that easy but I like the idea of giving players a road map (for lack of a better term) to success. I was sort of shocked when Manny said he pretty much wasn't going to change anything else from the time of the interview going into Spring Training. I don't have a problem with his idea that his release point was the crux of his issues last season, I used see it all the time with young QBs. Once they lose confidence, and it could be the smallest adjustment like overstriding on a throw causing low inaccurate throws, but then everything else starts to come unglued as well. All of a sudden he's not following through properly, the arm is in a different plane (slot would be the baseball term) entirely, he's watching the ball fly through the air as if he's mentally trying to guide it home, some kids quit striding entirely, and so on. It's weird how one little problem so often snowballs into something bigger, I've gotten better at heading those issues off at the pass as I get older and have more experience coaching, but my varsity QB still did that to me last year. For some players, once they get an idea in their head it's very difficult to replace it with something else positive in nature. Manny worries me, and he's always been a favorite of mine, after all us lefties need to stick together.

I watched more than my fair share of games live and I would highly recommend the experience to anyone as well. For someone like me the game was enough, but they have plenty of entertainment outside of the actual game, like all MiLB teams, if you needs to keep the kiddies and whatnot occupied.

Isn't strange how Salome was mostly drafted for his defensive tools and years later we've been concerned with his defense? I wasn't knocking Angel, it was an observation. I'm happy he got significant work in defensively this off season and I'm excited to see what he does this year. He's always been one of my boys.

I thought this was off the mark... how are Rivas and Anundsen comparable as prospects?

That's a pretty narrow view of what happened.... Weeks hasn't lived up to the hype thus far, but the team had other productive options out of the line up, injuries aside Weeks has been basically average., not the all-star 3 hole hitter we thought he'd be... Hart and Hardy struggled last season as well, however contrary to what's happened with the position players, we only had 2 starters of significant quality so there is/was no margin for error, we needed both players to ascend rapidly (Yo has been great, the injury set him back). The lack of options for the starting rotation is precisely the problem I've been beating to death the last 2 seasons, we've had too few options for the rotation. This is precisely why Melvin's comments about pitching injuries bothered me so much. Of course pitchers, especially young pitchers are going to get hurt and flame out, that's why the organization has always needed more top of the rotation pitching. To blame the pitching situation on Jones and Rogers getting hurt is ridiculous... what team hits on 100% of it's super prospect pitchers? Hell, what team hits on 100% of it's prospects period? Even the best organizations have numerous high ceiling arms flame out along the way. I still think the Brewers are responsible for what happened to Neugy and Jeffress' issues with weed (personal politics aside) certainly haven't helped, but it's not like the organization wasn't aware of his issues and this 100 game suspension came out of the blue. Nuegy, Jones, Rogers, and Braddock got hurt, Jeffress got suspended but has always had control issues.... and what was done to address the situation in the last 5-6 years? We acquired Bush, Jackson, Villy, Cody, Capellan, and Butler... only 2 of those guys threw the ball over 90 mph and I still can't believe how bad Capellan actually was compared to his scouting reports on BA, that was just a horrible scouting job by the organization. Not a single player in that group has/had top of the rotation stuff, not one. The problem isn't Yo or more to the point Parra, the problem is a lack of viable options. In the end it's all just excuses to me, the situation could have been addressed numerous times and instead we end up with temporary FA patches which limit payroll flexibility and have declining skills. The only upside is that they didn't cost Melvin anything to acquire other than their contracts, as it appears that he's reluctant to trade for young pitching. The idea shouldn't be to try and slot pitching behind Yo, it should be to try and slot pitching in front him. Yo may never be more than a #2, I have no idea how good he will be, but I'd take 5 pitchers of #2 type quality in my rotation in any time, which is hopefully where we are headed as an organization in the next few years.

Sorry for the slow response TLB, I replied to your PM. I thought I made it clear that Escobar was the replacement player and said as much at the time (hence the Hardy vs Escobar debates all last winter) Escobar is not a significantly better player coming into 2010 than he was coming in 2009, that's not what AAA is really about despite contrary opinions floating around this board. Escobar was as ready at the start of 2009 and he was in August, in fact he's pretty much the same player he was at AA. He's still a flashy defender that makes some bonehead decisions who's aggressive at the plate and doesn't walk much. I didn't expect Hardy to flop, in fact I was counting on the opposite, I wanted any trade to be good value for both sides. I liked players like Buchholz, Niemann, and so on... players that would require significant value to attain and the team could use Hardy's services... I liked the options to acquire starting pitching much better before the Sabathia trade, but following that deal, we didn't have many options left to acquire said pitcher, the team does have a finite number of expendable assets to work with. The 2 holes in Esky's offensive game are his selectivity and power at the plate, but he was a player who was clearly ascending as I tried to point out numerous times (remember the MLE discussions?), all of the trends in his career stat lines were positive as he was moving up and facing better competition, that's not something that happens all that often with prospects. He wasn't rushed at all, in fact the organization gave him plenty of room to find his game as he's been in professional baseball since age 17.and progressed mostly 1 year at a time. It helped that Hardy was in front of him I'm sure, that made it easier for the organization to be patient with him. As far the AAA seasoning angle, AAA is a different style of pitching than AA, that's the only difference really between the 2 levels, it's a pretty linear progression from AA to AAA. AAA isn't a prospect proving ground, it's a storage place for depth. In addition I also thought that Escobar wouldn't make another significant jump in his offensive game until he faced MLB pitching and posted as much, and I still believe he won't develop power until he quits messing around with winter ball, if he wants to add more that is, something the organization appears to be discouraging.. I'd like to believe that his stay in MLB is the reason he was more selective in winter ball, but it could have been that the pitching was just that bad he couldn't swing either. I'm not a big believer in stacking up players in AAA awaiting playing time at the MLB level when there are obvious and glaring needs elsewhere with the MLB team (Escobar/Hardy, Gamel/McGehee). Looking at the rotation prior to 2009 it was clear we had a hole in the rotation and it was clear we would need to replace at least Suppan and Bush for 2011, so bye the time 2011 rolled around we'd have 3 holes to fill. Of our 3 most productive players in Hardy, Braun, and Fielder I think it was obvious who the most expendable player of that trio is/was, and his value would rapidly decline as he became a glorified rental. You have to give value to get value so I was willing to move Hardy and play Escobar to acquire a piece of the pitching puzzle as I believe pitching is greater than offense, and that AAA wouldn't sufficiently challenge Escobar enough for him to make a significant improvement in his game. The way I saw it, and still see it, it was a win/win... the only downside was trading my favorite Brewer. Fast forward a year to this off season and I was hoping a McGehee + package would be enough to land a young unproven starter with upside, instead we once again went the FA route, this time signing 2 FA pitchers. I wonder if when the organization talks about trading hitting for pitching, they really mean trading hitting for rental pitching, because we certainly haven't seen any trades for longevity in the rotation in quite a while. Obviously I'm not a fan of trying to patch the rotation 1 year at a time and/or the whole FA pitching market in general, I feel we just end up back in the same place, having the same discussions year after year. I want longevity because longevity ultimately creates the flexibility the organization so desperately needs.... my dream would be to end up where TB is with their MLB rotation, they had too many players and were able to move Kazmir and Jackson, and they still have Davis waiting for a rotation slot. Suppan is a league average 5th starter... great... but why would I or anyone else want him to be the highest paid pitcher on the team who happens to be our worst starter? Why would we want that money ultimately ending up in the bullpen where there is even less value on the dollar? Unfortunately this will typically be the cycle when we sign any pitcher in his mid 30s to a multi year contract, we can only afford 2nd and 3rd tier FA pitching, those players just don't have much margin for error late in their careers, they are only heading down in the rotation, they won't ascend towards the top.

Instructs this fall, all of the draft picks that didn't play participated with the exception of Hall... I think.

I don't think anyone will be surprised by my take. As far as what Melvin could have done differently? Is that a question that seriously still needs to be asked? The answer depends how far back you want to go.... if were going back 2 weeks it's reasonable to assume this was the best he could do. If we're going back 6 years the possibilities are limitless. The dominoes absolutely did not have to fall this way, it wasn't set in stone by a higher power, this outcome was predictable only because of how Melvin has operated in the past. As far as a deadline deal.... why? So we can be right back in the same place next off season? Why wouldn't we want some sort of permanent solution to go with Yo? Pitchers are fragile, we're years away from a home grown rotation, why not add pieces that will help today and tomorrow, instead of just today? I'll say this, if anyone on this site would have convinced me in 2005 that all we'd have to show for the hitting talent that came through the minors in this first wave was a 1 and done in the playoffs and the rotation would still be 1 marquee player and 4 averagish starters I would have been crushed. So it's not surprising that I look at the progress of the rotation over the last 5 years and I'm very disappointed, and by extension the progress of team has left me very disappointed. DM is a great patcher of the rotation, but he's not a great builder of a rotation. On paper the rotation looks better, but on paper going into last season the rotation didn't look as bad as it turned it out. All the same things were said about Looper (I even made some of the comments even though I didn't want him signed) about over performing his contract, being excellent value for the dollar, and so on. I think DM is a victim of his own success, he gets just enough production to get the team to brink and keep fan interest high, but I honestly don't believe we'll get over the hump patching the rotation after every season. DM is fond of talking about "payroll flexibility". am I the only who finds it ironic that he's actually done the exact opposite, signing FA players and maxing out the payroll every single year? Where's the flexibility in that? The truth is that Davis doesn't make this a playoff caliber rotation, the season hinges largely on the same 2 players it did last season, Gallardo and Parra. Yo needs to take a step forward and become more economical with his pitches, something he hasn't done thus far in his young career, not even in AA or AAA. Parra needs to start getting results closer to his potential as he's the only other pitcher with top of the rotation talent above AA in the organization. Without Yo pitching like a true ace and Parra ascending, we simply won't have enough innings in the rotation. I will also say that there is no way the Brewers have a top 5-7 rotation in the NL as someone predicted earlier, using last year's numbers the staff would have to put up sub 4.20 combined ERA to be in the top 8. Objectively that seems highly unlikely, Parra would have to be very good for the rotation to approach those numbers, he's the only pitcher we have with enough stuff and poor enough results to make a significant enough jump for that scenario to happen. We have 1 pitcher with a career ERA under 4, which makes it very difficult to have a team ERA in the low 4s. I don't see a rotation of Yo, Wolf, Davis, and Bush getting it done in the post season. We might compete for a playoff spot, but signing Wolf and Davis doesn't guarantee anything. In fact, I felt the team was an 86 win team going in to 2009, but that was based largely on the idea that Parra would start ascending and Bush would continue to pitch as he did at the end of 2008. With Parra faltering, Bush getting hurt, no trade for a player of front line ability at any level, I predict somewhere between 81-83 wins for this team going into 2010. I've always thought of myself as optimist but over the last 2 years I've lost quite a bit of faith in Melvin's ability to push the team over the hump to the next level, and I honestly have no use for Macha, and that's coming from someone who aggressively supported the coaching staff in the past (with the exception of Yost's defined bullpen roles). I just see the same pattern continually repeating itself... yes the pattern is better than 20 years of futility, but it's not enough for me anymore.

He's still only listed for 1 AB, I guess things didn't go as planned for Angel.

Perhaps I'm just not being clear. I think the best way I can put it is this... I think DM is interested in doing whatever it takes to put the best MLB team together for a single season where as I'm concerned with building the most solid organization possible. I'm probably different around here in that I'm willing to sacrifice wins with the MLB for a season if I think the organization would be better off in the future for it. I don't have to "win now", as it's been clear to me for a long time that the organization didn't have the pitching to go with this first wave of talent. It's not even about spending money, I'd gladly spend money on a FA position player, I feel they are infinitely better value on the dollar than pitchers are. What irks me is that in an effort to win today, Melvin continues to work through FA which is what is truly limiting his payroll flexibility. We have significant money tied up in the bullpen, we have significant money tied into our 5th starter... those issues bother me personally, and I don't see the trend going away, in fact I see it repeating itself as we cycle back around with Wolf. The rotation is horrible again, he's the best pitcher the team can afford, but he's an aging pitchability guy without much margin for error... I see a pattern of behavior here going back to DM's tenure in Texas. I think it's safe to say that while DM is captain of the ship, he's really only focused on the MLB team for a given season, and leaves the organization building to his scouting director be it Z or Seid. This idea of organization vs team building is probably the single biggest reason I'm into the minors and I didn't want to acquire Sabathia and wanted to move Hardy. It's not an "I told you so", it's that I feel the organization is limiting it's potential the way's it been operating. I would have sacrificed the playoffs in 08 to acquire a long term pitching solution, I was willing to sacrifice Hardy's 2009 production for a long term pitching solution, because I felt that long term solution would mean better things as other positions were upgraded. Was acquiring Sabathia in the cards all along or a reactionary move because Yo got hurt? I'd feel better about that deal if I felt it were Melvin's plan all along to blow prospects on a rental and "go for it", but I don't think it was. People vehemently disagreed with me prior and after the Sabathia trade and all last winter in regards to trading Hardy, continually turning my ideas into Hardy vs Escobar debates which they were never meant to be. I probably just don't express myself well enough to make people understand what I'm trying to say. Gomez could very well figure it out and become a good player but that's not really the point I was trying to make. In the end Hardy was moved as his lowest possible value, flipped for a player with potential but who's never even sniffed a .700 OPS in 3 seasons of varying ABs, who plays a position where the organization is already loaded. I'm really not concerned about the hole left behind from Cameron departing, I'm concerned about the rotation where we don't have enough impact talent now and the possibility of having to replace Bush, Parra, and Suppan for 2011 with only Bulter, Jones?, and possibly Rivas ready as internal options for 2011... does he sign another FA pitcher again in 2011? I'm a Manny Parra guy, I want to believe that in 2010 he starts to approach his vast potential as a pitcher, but when you look at the trends in his stat lines, he's descending as he matures which scares the crap out of me. I really felt that Hardy was worth a Buchholz type pitcher prior 2009, so to step down to Gomez, regardless of his talent, just doesn't sit well with me. Prior to 2009 Hardy was an impact talent and we didn't get impact talent in return, we didn't get an organizational need in return, we got a team need in return and we simply cut salary at 2 positions and lowered production at 2 positions to overspend money on our position of greatest need, which also happens to be the least best value per dollar in baseball. I realize the organization is judged completely on MLB team's wins and losses, and rightly so. However, is there even a net gain here replacing Looper, Cameron, and Hardy with Wolf, Escobar, and Gomez? Is the organization in a better a position now that it was prior to 2009? Someone posted a something about Looper winning 14 games and would Wolf really be an improvement in the transaction forum... I think we've gotten so used to bemoaning Win/Loss records in regards to pitching that an excellent point was missed... as bad as Looper was the team won more of his starts than they lost, somehow they found a way. Ultimately it's all about wins and losses, so while Wolf won't give up as many runs in his starts as Looper did (I hope), there's no guarantee the offense will do as well his starts either, so the net gain might actually be negligible in the end. While I fully understand that on paper Wolf should be at least 2 wins better than Looper, I'm not convinced the actual results will bear that out with a different lineup behind Wolf. Knowing Hardy would eventually be gone I was hoping for Buchholz type/Cameron and instead we have Wolf/Gomez... who would we rather have? I believe going year to year with the MLB roster and spending money in FA actually has had a negative effect on the performance of the MLB team in the end, the drop off from 2008 to 2009 didn't have to be as extreme as it was, and I sincerely hope the end result in 2010 is better than I think it will be.

To what end though? Cain has never hit enough to be an above average corner OF, he's a 5 tool prospect that hasn't put it all together, Schafer gets his first test in AA this year, farther down in the system we have Davis, Richardson, and Stang. We have decent enough prospects all the way down to Appleton. CF is an organizational strength at this point. I say again it doesn't make sense to trade from a position of strength (position players) to acquire the same strength (position players). How do any of these moves for rentals or position players help secure the short term and long term future of the team when the true weakness of the team is the pitching staff? Sure players will get hurt, flame out, can be traded, etc... depth is never a bad thing, but artificially creating depth makes little sense to me, I argued against acquiring depth for depth's sake last off season when we traded for Wright because he was no better than what we already had in AAA. I'll say the same for Gomez... he's talented sure, but is he more talented Cain, Davis, or Richardson? What would have been wrong with a stop gap CF as Cameron initially was meant to be? It shouldn't be stretch for others to understand why I'd be upset about flipping a top 5, at the very least top 10 SS coming out of 2008 into Gomez coming into 2010. A 1B prospect would have at least made sense (my dislike of moving a strength for a strength aside) since we have exactly zero all the way down to Helena, but another CF just because they let Cam walk? Where's the long term plan or thinking here? What if Cain or Schafer takes off and Gomez flops going into 2011? We've essentially flipped one of the better SS in the game for...? I realize that's a worst case scenario from a Gomez standpoint, but it's a realistic possibility given his career to this point, he was obviously rushed and hasn't exactly responded well. Hopefully we can start filling holes in the rotation with internal options starting in 2011 because it's become rather obvious that the only way the organization will add significant talent to the rotation is through internal upgrades. It's a realistic possibility that by the end of Wolf's deal he'll be our least talented pitcher and much like Suppan, why would we want to be paying our 5th best starter the most money? Note that I'm not comparing Wolf to Suppan as a pitcher, I comparing talent relative to the other pitchers in the rotation. Garland would be 32 in 2011, he want to sign a multi year deal as he's still fairly young, by 2012 or 13 the same could be said for him. Unfortunately our best case scenario is probably a Davis or Washburn on a 1 year deal... I've already made a case why I don't like either pitcher on a multi year contract, and honestly don't like acquiring them period. Simply put, I've been hoping for more, moving significant value from the Brewers to acquire a pitcher of significant value, but I don't see that happening now. Fielder won't be replaced by a single player, but the offense could actually be as good in the future with better production from spots in the order that have been below average in Fielder's tenure in Milwaukee... like C for example, even reaching average production would be a plus. If we can lock in some cornerstone players on Braun type contracts, some young pitchers to Jame Shields type contracts, I feel pretty good about the long term future of the club with the mix of bats and arms in the minors, we're well positioned for success if we don't have to replace more impact talent than Fielder. We just don't have many impact hitters in the minors at this time, I still think Gamel is an impact hitter, Lawrie looks to be an impact hitter, for the rest I'm just not sure at this time.

He's going to magically start missing more bats at 31? Where's the upside with any of the FAs? They are what they are this point, once someone has been in the league 6 years, they've pretty much established who they are. Upside is a player like Parra or Rogers or Rivas or Arnett... someone young, with a live arm, that hasn't harnessed the pitchability aspect of pitching yet. In other words, someone with the potential to be better in the future than they are today. If you're suggesting that Garland will be better going forward, what are you basing that opinion on? Soft tossers don't have upside, that's why only a few people around here really got excited about Chris Cody or get excited about Evan Anundsen even though they've gotten very good results in the minors.

When I talk about giving up prospects I'm not suggesting that any of the players will be sorely missed... What am I saying is that the team has moved a rather large amount of prospects in deals without addressing the single biggest flaw in the entire organization, a long term starting pitching solution. Every asset DM moves is obviously an asset that he doesn't get back. For example, as I argued at the time the team wasn't going anywhere with or without Lopez, so he basically gave away prospects for nothing. Furthermore McGehee/Counsel would have been a fine 2B platoon which would have allowed Gamel to actually play instead of wasting his service time on the bench. Those unnecessary moves like the Linebrink deal come back bite you when there isn't the prospect depth left to make a trade for a true position of need. None of the prospects outside of LaPorta could have headlined a deal but they could have added significant value as the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th players in the deal. Hart +, Gamel +, etc... but those deals aren't really possible now. I don't buy the "well Melvin was going for it" take either... even if it's true he needs to be smarter than that because the team has finite resources that should only be used fixing the actual root issue, and not the symptoms like in the case of Lopez and Linebrink. I still firmly believe that acquiring Sabathia hurt the organization long term as well, acquiring Sabathia in 08 directly led to the pitching debacle in 09, and we still have rotation issues coming into 10. Yes I know "playoffs", I realize that meant a great deal to the majority of fans, but it wasn't a solid long term plan on the baseball field, and it came within a single game of failing as well. To the point about the prospects in particular, I hope Bryson bounces back from surgery, he was one of my boys. LaPorta will be a fine MLB player, Brantley has a reasonable chance to be average or better, Gillespie will be a solid reserve for someone, Mercedes is a good BP candidate, Thatcher has been up and down with SD for 3 years, and Garrison looks to be a back of the rotation starter or BP guy. There's a significant amount of quality in that group that could have been packaged for a starter if things had fallen differently, but we'll never know now.

Davis' BB rate is horrid and always has been... FIP is fine and dandy, but it's weighted too heavily towards the K rate, and Davis has always had a pretty good K rate. It's the same reason Parra always has a decent FIP.

I'm shocked that people are posting that 1 of Garland, Davis, and Washburn need to be signed. Look past ERA.... look at the peripherals, look at the age, why would we want any of those pitchers on a multi year with those peripherals? I get that Davis seems to always pitch better than his peripherals, but sooner or later that's going to catch him with him like it did his last year in Milwaukee and he's going to be 34 years old next season. Garland's peripherals are putrid, he only averages mid 4s for a K/9 and is now the wrong side of 30, but he's still young enough he'll want multiple years. Washburn has a similar BB rate to Garland, however he does K 1 more batter per 9 IP, but he's going to be 35 years old and for the second time in his career he had his best season coming into FA. There are red flags every where with these guys, which is pretty much why none of them has signed a multi year deal yet. If Melvin can get 1 on a 1 year deal.... well fine, at least he's limiting the possible damage that way.

Good topic Nate, but I don't think the organization has any sort of well thought out long term plan. If they did the minute Macha claimed to be in a "zim-zam" with Gamel he would have come back down, Parra would have stayed down until he was right and they would have brought up another pitcher, they wouldn't have left Hardy down in AAA just to acquire a year of service time, they wouldn't have bounced Hall through 3 positions and signed him to a long term contract, they wouldn't have traded Hardy for young CF with 2 prospect CFs at AAA and AA respectively to start next season, and so on. To put the Hardy trade into context, it would have been like trading for a young C with Salome at AAA and Lucroy in AA... other than the MLB roster is CF an organizational weakness? Is C an organization weakness other than the MLB roster? It seems to me that as an organization we're just flying by the seat of our pants. For me it started with the Hall situation. Now I realize I was no fan of Hall's from the start, he just constantly rubbed me the wrong way... but If Hall was always going to be the odd man out at every position why sign him at all? If Hardy was the SS of the future, Braun the 3B of the future, Weeks the 2B of the future, then move Hall to CF right away and just ride him out through Arby. If he's not a long term solution anywhere, why are we signing a player at all? It just makes no sense. It would appear that Melvin just plugs holes year to year and lets the roster shake itself out. As far as Fielder is concerned I have no doubt that Melvin will ride him out into FA, offer a contract that some large market will add 60 more million to and 2 or 3 more years and the Crew will take the draft picks, just like Sabathia. The only way I see Fielder being dealt is if the Brewers are really tanking and out of the race. If he was going to be dealt I would have rather he was dealt at his peak value which is now passed us. I don't see the Brewers getting a Teixeira type haul for Fielder at the deadline... Prince isn't anywhere near as good in the field and while Prince is arguably a better hitter now, I'm just not sure any team will give up what Atlanta did.

I think this statement is Melvin's fundamental flaw. He wants to make moves if "we're in it" trading assets on marginal or unnecessary upgrades instead plugging holes with players with longevity who will likely remain above average for their service time in Milwaukee. For example the list of players we've moved in the past 4 years without acquiring a quality starting pitcher with some longevity is staggering, especially since pitching has been an organizational wide issue since Melvin took over as GM. I hate to keep constantly repeating myself but the Brewers are in a position where they can't afford to ditch 3 or 4 minor league players regardless of quality for a 3 month solution. Yes I know all about draft compensation but it's the value of a draft pick is nearly impossible to quantify. It's something that the large markets can do, because they can afford to bid on the best free agents, but because they do it and the press reports about the deals constantly people think it's just the baseball norm, when I think it's a horrible solution for a team in the position Milwaukee finds itself in. I think all Melvin has really done is make it harder on himself to acquire any sort of meaningful pitching talent. He's very conservative when it comes to acquiring pitching and his preference for deadline deals has led him directly down the path to the 2009 rotation, and as the 2010 rotation is shaping up I'm unsure if the rotation will pitch enough innings as currently constructed. Unless Gallardo takes a big step up we have a whole rotation of 6 inning pitchers and a manager who likes to push young pitchers too far... Wolf averaged 6.3 IP per start last year and Gallardo 6.18, every other returning pitcher was under 6 IP, Wolf isn't a spring chicken anymore, and color me unexcited if Yo is pitching 120 pitches to get through 7 IP every time out, I'd rather not have another Brewer version of Cole Hamels... My answer to your question is neither... I'm not into signing marginal quality FAs now or trading for rentals mid season. Going into 2011 we'll need another 2 starters as Suppan and Bush will be gone, there's a possibility that Parra never figures it out either and he's out of the rotation leaving Gallardo and Wolf. Is Melvin going to target more FA pitching after this season or will Butler and Rivas be ready to go? With all of the young pitching coming I'd rather not tie another declining pitcher into the rotation for multiple years because he's "established", and I'd rather not trade any of this pitching that's starting to mature for another rental player to make a push because Fielder may be gone soon. The long term pitching health of the organization is more important than trying to win now with Fielder. I'll lose though, I always do with Melvin, he'll make a mid season deal that I loathe if the Brewers are even remotely in the hunt, and we'll be revisiting this same topic next off season.

Heckathorn and Arnett are a bit puzzling. Heckathorn wasn't impressive and Tunnell made it point to let it be known that he through Odorizzi was a more advanced pitcher than Arnett. I would guess it's some sort of contractual thing?

I read that blog post a couple of days ago, I'm not sure where he's going to get 6-7 mph from... he was pitching 80-81 in Helena last season. He's a great guy, but something was up if he magically gets back into the 87-88 range. Maybe he just wasn't letting go if that's truly the case, however I've grown skeptical of self proclaimed radar readings until I hear it confirmed from an independent source. As far as multiple surgeries making him a starter, I disagree. He hasn't had shoulder surgery, and even guys with multiple injuries like Kerry Wood who "took forever to warm up" have made the transition to the bullpen. I like Cappy as person but if he positively impacts Milwaukee's starting pitching I'll be shocked given what he was doing last season. There is always a chance, but the odds are firmly stacked against him even making it back to MLB. It would be one heck of a feel good story though if he regained his velocity and made it back.

Colby I just wanted to thank you for taking the time to compile the lists every year, it's one of my favorite features of the site.

That's a pretty difficult question to answer with any accuracy as opinions will vary wildly, but I'll take a shot at it. Personally this is what I think is plausible in no particular order other than how they come to mind, not an absolute best or worst case for all of the prospects. The year for the younger guys would be the first year I'd think they'd possibly see action for the MLB team, for the AAA guys it would be the year they come up for good (if they make it, a player like Dillard is very difficult to project). Injuries/ineffectiveness will also take a toll on this group and I've already removed players that I feel are long shots to make it (Seidel for example, though I remain hopeful) Butler - Back of the rotation starter - 2010 Rivas - Mid rotation (2/3) starter - 2011 Rogers - Mid to Back rotation (2-4) starter - 2011 Scarpetta - Back of the rotation starter - 2012 Arnett - Mid rotation (2/3) starter - 2013 Odorizzi - Mid rotation (2/3) starter -2013 Jones - Back of the rotation starter - 2010 - Okay so this is a best case, forgive me one player, he's one of my guys Bucci - Back of the rotation starter - 2014 Lasker - Back of te rotation starter - 2014 Axford - Bullpen - 2010 Dillard - Bullpen - 2010 Cody - Bullpen - 2011 Aguilar - Bullpen - 2012 Braddock - Bullpen - 2011 Hand - Bullpen - 2012 Peralta - Bullpen - 2012 Bowman - Bullpen - 2012 Heckathorn - Bullpen - 2013 Wooten - Bullpen - 2011 Fiers - Bullpen - 2012 Periard - Bullpen - 2012 Meadows - Bullpen - 2013 Ritchie - Bullpen - 2013 Anundsen - Bullpen - 2012 Hinton - Bullpen - 2012 Tyson - Bullpen - 2012 Frederickson is another player that deserves mention, I'm just not sure where... Isom made some very nice comments regarding progress with his delivery during instructs, he's a guy who could fly through the system if he figures things out or he could be the guy who walks the yard every time out.

Yep, that's exactly what we mean, Melvin should see into the future and never make a mistake... Seriously is that what you people take away from our posts about this stuff because if so you aren't bothering to read the posts or making an effort to understand what is actually being said, I'm sure I'm not the only poster who grows weary of being misrepresented. I'll simply continue to say what I've always said... Melvin is a good GM, he did a great job turning around a horrid franchise, he's an excellent nugget miner and a very good judge of offensive talent. I'm not getting into people's subjective ratings of who's the best GM in baseball, or a ranking of GMs, that means nothing to me. I simply know that it's much harder to go from 82 wins to 100 wins than it is to go from 62 wins to 82 wins. As good as he's done with the offense, the organization (which he's ultimately responsible for) has done that horrid with the pitching, not just the last 2 years, but going back 6 or 7 years. This is not about what Melvin has done to make the team competitive, this is about taking the next step. Those of us that aren't high on these FA signings are looking beyond a hole or two in the rotation or the bullpen. Most posters around here just want to play whack-a-mole with perceived holes on the roster, see hole A plug it with FA player B because we can afford him. That's why people didn't want to trade Hardy and talk about how trading a current position player creates a different hole that needs to be filled instead of looking at the overall improvement in the team. I believe that pitching holds in the ultimate power in baseball, I want to build the rotation first. I realize it's more compelling to argue about position players, but I honestly believe many people are missing the forest for the trees around here. While trading for pitching may have the appearance of creating a hole, it's actually trading from an organizational strength to address an organizational weakness, which is what any smart team should be doing with it's assets. Instead we've continually wasted assets on acquiring rental players and position players, so we keep ending up in the same situation 1 year to the next, with the same holes in a marginal rotation. I'm struggling with what is so difficult to comprehend about wanting to acquire a starting pitcher with a higher ceiling than what the Brewers can afford in Free Agency? You get a Sabathia type when stuff meets pitchability, so far Melvin has acquired mostly pitchability type guys with lower ceilings and marginal stuff. Some of those guys worked out well, some not so much, nobody is asking him to see into the future, just to quit being so conversative with pitching and working only through FA or the scrap heap, especially since many of us view FA pitching as the worst possible value on the dollar. I'd much rather he takes a chance on a pitcher that has the stuff but hasn't mastered the pitchability, someone with some upside. Many posters have made good cases for various trade targets to this end over the last 2 years, it's not that hard to go out and find pitchers that have the stuff but haven't gotten the results, it just takes research time (which many aren't willing to do) or a good working knowledge of the minor leagues. However, the same people that want FAs are the same people that don't really seem to follow prospects or the minors and talk of trading for "established MLB pitching". By signing FA all Melvin does is limit the potential of the rotation because he's inserting averagish pitchers for multiple years and as I've stated many times I'm not into 1 and done the playoffs. We can make the playoffs with a very average rotation, but what teams are we realistically going to outscore in the playoffs? We might win a short series, but a 7 game series is a different matter. The rotation lacks a bullpen saving starter, so while Wolf is an upgrade, it's marginal because the rotation as configured will still leave way too many innings for the bullpen, the pen will wear down, and next off season people will again be posting about upgrading the bullpen, when the root cause of the bullpen issues is actually the starting rotation. If Yo becomes more economical with his pitchers and Parra figures it out we'll be in very good shape, but as much as I like Parra I'm not willing to bank on him. As far as Yo is concerned, he's had the same issue since AA, and I don't feel comfortable counting on him to give us the same innings that Sheets did when healthy just yet. It's very difficult to predict the learning curve of young players and I'd feel much better with another starter who has legit top of the rotation stuff in the rotation, if for nothing else just to even out the odds some. I didn't expect Looper to pitch as bad as he did, but I heard many of the same arguments around this off season as were posted last off season... time will tell of course but the team isn't necessarily any better off signing anyone this year than they were signing Looper last year. Anything from age to injury can derail the season any pitcher so while I think Wolf is a better pitcher, I'm not going to claim his acquisition has made the team significantly better for the 2010 season as anything can happen. On paper sure the team is better... but unfortunately we don't simulate the games. I'm a 30 something, but I'm hardly excited when the small market team I root for is spending signficant dollars on 30 something pitchers for the rotation or the bullpen... for all the reasons mentioned 100s of times in various threads on this forum. Wolf isn't Meyers, but Melvin didn't wait to see where the market would end up, he basically set the market, I don't find the idea that Melvin overpaid for Wolf outrageous at all, it seems rather plausible to me in fact that he did overpay by a significant amount. I wonder if his pitcher signings are largely driven by his "stats guys" as he's called them, they all profile in a somewhat similar fashion and a solid argument could be made about them being the best pitcher the Brewers could afford at the time fpr the money, regardless of age or stuff.