TheCrew07

I can understand Anundsen as he's not projectable, but no Rivas or Schafer is complete garbage. I understand that Rivas is one of my guys so I might be biased but he was top 5 in most categories statistically and top 10 in all, by what measure is he not a top prospect in that league? Gutierrez ranked higher than Rivas, seriously? He only pitched 54 innings in the FSL and got lit up at AA in almost the same number of innings, not to mention Carlos' peripheral numbers stink at every level. Schafer won the batting title (AVE) and put up an OPS over .800 as a CF at 22 years of age, he didn't turn 23 until 9/8. He'll be in AA as a 23 year old, he's right on track. The list seems to be based on power projection until you get down to Galvis who's more of an Escobar type SS. Vitters is good, but how can he be on both the FSL and MWL lists? Shouldn't he be one place or the other, probably the MWL since he wasn't promoted until late in the season?

Has there been any word on DiFelice's shoulder? If he needs another surgery he's not a lock and his career may be over.

Why are just Braun and Fielder getting pimped here? McGehee, Counsell, Lopez, Escobar, Cameron, and Weeks all played well. Hardy, Hart, Hall, and Kendell stunk, but I think most every team will have a couple of players that are offensive liabilities. And really in the grand scheme we all knew Kendell and Hall stunk prior to opening day... I think Hardy and Hart were more than off set by the contributions of the other players. The Brewers pythagorean expected wins was 78 according to mlb.com, i have trouble believing Macha to be the root cause of an extra 2 wins over raw stats, 2 wins is well within the expected variance.

He's not eligible for reinstatement until May nor is he eligible for the rule 5 draft, so why exactly should we burn an option year on 2010? What does Jack Z or any other organization have to do with this? As I said I strongly believe the Brewers need this young man to be a successful pitcher, but if he doesn't care enough about his career to play by the rules he's never going to amount to anything anyway. It's not like if they add him to the 40 man he'll magically be able to control his pitches and get more advanced hitters out, he has to be willing to work hard at refining his mechanics... if he's unable to locate his pitches none of the rest of it matters, see Luis Pena. I suggest looking at the rule 5 thread, Minigoon has a post about the eligible players we'll need to protect in 2010 as well... 40 man roster spots are becoming very important for this organization, we're rapidly approaching the point where they can't afford to waste a single roster spot, we're going to be letting good talent go regardless. Adding Jeffress a year early when they don't even know how he'll perform on the mound means we're releasing a different player who's deserving of a roster spot for a hope and prayer. If Jeffress is successful in 2010 there aren't many players I'd protect in the entire organization before him for 2011, but for the 2010 season I don't see how Jeremy holding down a roster spot is in the best interests of the organization.

How do you know that Axford, Braddock, Aguilar, or someone currently on the 25 man won't out perform Hoffman next year? Reliever stats tend to be fairly volatile from season to season anyway. I don't know that they will and honestly I don't care if they will, but I'd rather not bank on a 42 year old closer to repeat a season and sign him so I feel "good" about the situation with the pen. Again the root cause of the issues with the bullpen this season start and pretty much end with the rotation. Fix the rotation, then the pen won't have to eat as many innings, and let the vets and potential younger candidates for the pen fight it out for roster spots next spring. At this point with the current rotation Hoffman's presence will not make or break the 2010 Brewers either way, so why the spend money if it's not necessary? Because Trevor Time is cool? For name recognition? Does he somehow legitimatize the franchise? Unless he signs a deal way below market value he's just not money well spent. He's a great guy who's an icon in the sport and had a great season, but if Melvin's approach is going to be to try and target better talent for the bullpen then how is this team going to improve in a meaningful way? What good is putting on a band aid on the symptom if the root cause is never addressed? Hoffman shouldn't be one of the first moves this off season, he should be one of the last.

The closer being in high leverage situations is a function of what happens in front of him, not that he's being used in the best possible way. I'm not one to go to the luck card as I think people are way to quick to qualify events they don't know how to explain as "luck". However with the number of close games the Brewers played and the relative lack of IP Hoffman had, it's not difficult to believe that his high number of appearances in high leverage situations had more to do with luck than his role as the closer this season. Spending money on 55ish IP isn't money well spent, there's just not enough value in so few IP. This is has nothing to do with Hoffman, just closers in general. The Brewers literally have a ton of options for the pen down the road, the pen isn't the issue, the number of innings the starters left for the bull pen this season was the issue. A closer doesn't stabilize the pen, in truth he limits flexibility because he's always the 9th inning guy. If the Brewers want to stabilize the pen then Melvin should put together a better starting rotation this winter in addition to hoping Parra finds himself, give them less innings to pitch and the results will be better. I wouldn't be shocked to see Hoffman retained, Kendell resigned because Salome didn't tear up AAA, Cameron retained in CF because of Cain's season, Looper's option picked up, and i won't be surprised if Melvin doesn't find a good deal for Hardy, Hart, or McGehee and both Escobar and Gamel start the year in AAA. Essentially, I won't be surprised if we have largely the exact same team going into 2010 as we had in 2009.

Wow, a sweet play and very nice camera work.

Scarpetta wasn't added to the 40 man to protect him from himself, he was added because a quirk in the rules and nothing more. The 2 situations are so totally dissimilar I don't even know why you chose to connect them together.

We can afford Fielder but then the Brewers have to stop paying for Pitching on the FA market. No more wasting money on the bull pen or Looper/Suppan acquisitions. The Brewers can afford around a 90 million dollar payroll, paying fielder 20 mil per season leaves 70 million for the rest of roster, subtract Braun's salary each year and we have even less. It would mean disciplined spending on the core talent and that's about it.

I have no problem with people placing the blame on Bush and Parra more so than Suppan. Suppan was about what I expected, I never had high expectations for him. The thing is that I still don't see the point in bringing back Parra before he had established dominance again in AAA. Why not bring up Narveson or Wright, what would the difference have been for the MLB team? I would think not much, and maybe Parra would have regained that mental edge he appears to have lost. At this point I think Parra is a safe bet to start in the rotation in 2010, but Yo might be the only current pitcher in the rotation who is still in the rotation for 2011. I'm ashamed to admit this but part of me hopes Suppan stinks if he does go on Sunday. I don't have anything against him personally, he is what he is, I just would like to reinforce the point that DM needs to aggressively address the rotation this off season.

If Manny walks the pitcher to walk in a run I'm probably not going to watch or listen to another Brewer game the rest of the year. I'm so frustrated with the pitching. edit. Cripes, on 4 straight pitches he walks the pitcher to walk in a run. I'm done.

Just so everyone is aware 2011 is Rogers last option year so I hope he opens the season in the rotation. Butler, Cody, and Rivas will be using their first options for 2010 if I remember the list form the minor league forum correctly. I have a feeling though that if the organization reaches down and grabs them for an injury replacement in 2010 that any of one of Butler, Rogers, or Rivas might pitch well enough that they don't ever relinquish their spot in the rotation. Rivas and Butler could realistically make the jump to 180 IP next year, Rogers probably not but I'll admit there is a small possibility that they push him. I think the more likely scenario is they'd probably have to send him back down to pitch out of the pen at some point, I hope gets another 20 IP or so in the AFL and ends the season around 85 IP. 130 - 140 would be a reasonable amount of IP for 2010 if they were looking at him for a rotation slot in 2011.

If our 2011 rotation doesn't include Rogers or Rivas then we're in trouble.

I just stopped in to say that some days Ryan Braun really pisses me off. Did anyone else notice he closed his eyes on that ball he misplayed in LF? It was topic of conversation at the restaurant during Wednesday Wings... then his base running mistake... If it wasn't for his offensive production I'd find it very difficult to be in his corner.

I haven't forgotten anything, there's no way that 51 IP of 1.76 ERA is anywhere near as valuable as 185.2 of 3.73 ERA is. This is about maximizing value, not about Trevor Time being cool and/or it's neat to have a pitcher of his caliber playing for the team. Can we really count on him putting up a similar season next year? How could he possibly be as good? He had the second lowest ERA in his entire career at age 41. It wouldn't be realistic to expect the same kind of season out of him at age 42. He's a luxury... if they have the payroll for him sure, but he's like Cameron in that he's not someone you build around, he's a final piece of the puzzle type guy. It doesn't matter if he's back anymore than it matters if Cameron is back if the 2010 team features the same rotation. The rotation is the main problem that has to be addressed here, our starting rotation simply isn't pitching enough innings, our best pitchers are leaving too many IP out there for the bullpen. This year in no particular order Looper has averaged 5.7 IP per start, Gallardo 6.2, Suppan 5.3(prior to this evening), Bush 5.1, and Parra 5.4. In 2008 Sheets averaged 6.7, Bush 6.3, Suppan 5.9, Sabathia 7.2, and Parra 5.7... Every spot in the rotation has pitched significantly less IP per game at a worse ERA in 2009... the problem isn't the bullpen, the problem is the load they've had to carry. Turnbow was a scrap heap reclamation project, as was Kolb before him, even Cordero wasn't setting the world on fire when he was acquired. The 9th inning usually isn't the highest leverage situation in the game anyway which is where I'd prefer my best bullpen arm. I don't care of it's the 6th, 7th, 8th, or the 9th, I want my best pitcher stopping the rally cold. Why should I care who's pitching the 9th with a 3 run and the bottom of the order coming up? Sure a lesser closer than Hoffman will blow more games, but how many games have we given away pitching lesser pitchers in bigger situations? Coffey has been run into the ground taking high leverage situations, but he's not our best reliever. Once you pay a closer, it's all about saves and the bullpen loses some flexibility. Who made this rule you have to pay for an expensive closer and he has to pitch the 9 inning? It's one of things that literally makes no sense to me, other than making more money, how is the closer the most valuable reliever on his team when he only pitches the 9th? Truth be told I don't like LOOGYs either, I don't care how good a guy is I'm not paying him fair market value to pitch less than 50 full innings in a complete healthy season. I've been on record forever as hating defined bullpen roles, it's what drove me nuts about Yost... why does 1 guy have to pitch the 7th, 1 guy the 8th, and 1 guy the 9th every single day? When you have 6 or 7 guys, use em and even out the workload as much as possible saving your best relievers for the toughest situations. If a reliever cruises through his first inning of work and his spot in the order doesn't come up, why not give him another? Nothing irks me more than a relief pitcher hitting his spots and taking the side down in order only to be replaced and have the following reliever struggle to get through an inning. When a guy has it going on, let him roll with it... it's no different than feeding the rock to the hot hand in a basketball game, when a player is on roll let him carry you.

Yeah, I guess if you expect every major trade or FA signing to guarantee a World Series Championship, you'll be disappointed more times than not. Or maybe like some of us have been saying all along, the CC trade only works in the short term, we didn't even get a 1st round compensation pick from him, and going into that last week in Sept it looked like the Brewers were going to miss the playoffs all together. It did work out in the end, and I'm happy for those that needed the validation of a playoff appearance. However, it seems very disingenious to me for people that supported that trade to be calling out Melvin now about the state of the rotation. You can't dump depth for a short term solution and then hope that a starter magically falls into our lap. The majority of the same people that supported the Sabathia trade didn't want to move Hardy this off season either... Melvin moved for a short term solution and kept the player most everyone wanted to keep even though he was at his peak trade value. Without going for a long term pitching solution in either situation, how was he going to plug the holes in the rotation? I've been extremely critical of Melvin's inactivity in regards to a legit high ceiling pitching acquisition since 2003 but even I understand that the preceding moves he's made have put us in the current position. He traded for a rental we couldn't possibly resign and kept our most valuable/replacable trade piece on the team... how else was going to acquire a good starting pitcher? I would have loved a Hart for Jackson swap, Edwin Jackson was the top pitching prospect when I first started following the minors, but I'm not sure Melvin was even talking to the Rays about who they'd be willing to part with. Again I say this pitching situation shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone, it was a very long time in coming and very obvious. It's not about injuries or bad luck, it's about making short term moves and not aggressively persuing talented pitchers. Everyone on this site knew that Sheets was going to be FA after 2008 and that we had no legit quality starting pitching depth in the minors. Either Melvin was going to address the situation in a long term manner or he wasn't, this isn't revisionist history, the majority of posters on the site welcomed Sabathia, wanted to retain Hardy, and no one cared when Jackson was traded which left Melvin with one move... the obvious averagish FA pitcher acquisition in Looper. All these topics revolve around the same root issue, what's the best way for Milwaukee to build it's team? What's the best way for the Brewers to manage the roster and payroll? Many people want Melvin to operate plugging holes through FA like the large markets do, prefer to go to year to year in arby and retain our players when they hit FA. I'm the opposite, I'd rather he identify core players prior to arbitration and lock them up with long term contracts buying out 2 years of FA, pay the most talented players on the team the most money, aggresively persue cost effective top of the rotation talent, and finally plug positional holes with averagish players in FA. I think signing FA pitchers to market value contracts is a horrible idea because it limits payroll flexibility as evidenced by Suppan, and signing relievers is even worse value, why should the Brewers spend 7 million on 50-60 IP for a closer? How many extra wins are we truly picking up in so few innings pitched? My only concerns are maximizing talent and value, and I just don't see how that's being done moving assets for rentals and signing FA pitchers.

Sure you can pay a closer, but to what end? A good closer will pick up 35-40 saves regardless how bad the team is, the closer doesn't make or break the bullpen or the pitching staff. I'm still of the opinion large sums of money spent on the bullpen are misspent, there's simply not the opportunity to have the same impact as a starting pitcher. I'm not into paying starter type money to any reliever let alone a closer to pitch 1/4 to 1/3 the innings of our best starting pitcher. Villy has the most IP out of the pen so far at 89, Hoffman has only pitched 51... it's just not good value to pay starting pitcher money to a closer. I'm equally against paying a FA SP fair market value. However, I just don't have much faith in Melvin's ability to swing a deal for pitching, so if he were to use some combination of Cameron's, Looper's, and Hoffman's salary to sign Lackey for example I'd probably swallow my pride and grudgingly accept that deal. I still believe a FA is the least best way to plug a hole in the rotation for a team like Milwaukee but at this point something is better than nothing. Hoffman is good, but is he money well spent on a .500 team with glaring holes elsewhere? I'm really not concerned about the pen, we have Wooten and Fiers in the system as middle relief, plus Axford, Aguilar, and Braddock have the stuff to close. We also have a plethora of young SP on the way and some of those players will end up in the bullpen like Villy did... guys like Cody, Dillard and so on. Many scouts also like some of our high ceiling starting pitching prospects such as Jeffress and Peralta to be relievers down the road. We literally have a ton of options for the bullpen on the horizon, but we desperately need guys like Butler, Rivas, and Rogers to remain healthy and effective as starting pitchers, and we could definitely use a player like Periard who's results have never caught up to his stuff to have a break out season as well.

Sure you can pay a closer, but to what end? A good closer will pick up 35-40 saves regardless how bad the team is, the closer doesn't make or break the bullpen or the pitching staff. I'm still of the opinion large sums of money spent on the bullpen are misspent, there's simply not the opportunity to have the same impact as a starting pitcher. I'm not into paying starter type money to any reliever let alone a closer to pitch 1/4 to 1/3 the innings of our best starting pitcher. Villy has the most IP out of the pen so far at 89, Hoffman has only pitched 51... it's just not good value to pay starting pitcher money to a closer. I'm equally against paying a FA SP fair market value. However, I just don't have much faith in Melvin's ability to swing a deal for pitching, so if he were to use some combination of Cameron's, Looper's, and Hoffman's salary to sign Lackey for example I'd probably swallow my pride and grudgingly accept that deal. I still believe a FA is the least best way to plug a hole in the rotation for a team like Milwaukee but at this point something is better than nothing. Hoffman is good, but is he money well spent on a .500 team with glaring holes elsewhere? I'm really not concerned about the pen, we have Wooten and Fiers in the system as middle relief, plus Axford, Aguilar, and Braddock have the stuff to close. We also have a plethora of young SP on the way and some of those players will end up in the bullpen like Villy did... guys like Cody, Dillard and so on. Many scouts also like some of our high ceiling starting pitching prospects such as Jeffress and Peralta to be relievers down the road. We literally have a ton of options for the bullpen on the horizon, but we desperately need guys like Butler, Rivas, and Rogers to remain healthy and effective as starting pitchers, and we could definitely use a player like Periard who's results have never caught up to his stuff to have a break out season as well.

Sure you can pay a closer, but to what end? A good closer will pick up 35-40 saves regardless how bad the team is, the closer doesn't make or break the bullpen or the pitching staff. I'm still of the opinion large sums of money spent on the bullpen are misspent, there's simply not the opportunity to have the same impact as a starting pitcher. I'm not into paying starter type money to any reliever let alone a closer to pitch 1/4 to 1/3 the innings of our best starting pitcher. Villy has the most IP out of the pen so far at 89, Hoffman has only pitched 51... it's just not good value to pay starting pitcher money to a closer. I'm equally against paying a FA SP fair market value. However, I just don't have much faith in Melvin's ability to swing a deal for pitching, so if he were to use some combination of Cameron's, Looper's, and Hoffman's salary to sign Lackey for example I'd probably swallow my pride and grudgingly accept that deal. I still believe a FA is the least best way to plug a hole in the rotation for a team like Milwaukee but at this point something is better than nothing. Hoffman is good, but is he money well spent on a .500 team with glaring holes elsewhere? I'm really not concerned about the pen, we have Wooten and Fiers in the system as middle relief, plus Axford, Aguilar, and Braddock have the stuff to close. We also have a plethora of young SP on the way and some of those players will end up in the bullpen like Villy did... guys like Cody, Dillard and so on. Many scouts also like some of our high ceiling starting pitching prospects such as Jeffress and Peralta to be relievers down the road. We literally have a ton of options for the bullpen on the horizon, but we desperately need guys like Butler, Rivas, and Rogers to remain healthy and effective as starting pitchers, and we could definitely use a player like Periard who's results have never caught up to his stuff to have a break out season as well.

This is basically a thread to nowhere, I don't mean any disrepect twobrewers, it's just I view this as a lose/lose situation and conversation. If he comes back and makes it, at the very least he's put his development behind a full season by being suspended for 150 games total thus far. The only reason I'm commenting is because I fimly believe the organization needs his arm in the worst way. I could get pretty excited about Yo, Rogers, and Jeffress at the top of the rotation some day. With Braddock moving to the pen and Parra struggling, we need all of the high ceiling starting pitching talent we can muster. I'm not into releasing him, nor am I into putting him on the 40 man roster just to avoid testing. At some point if he's going to become a player he needs to get serious about his career, if I'm Nichols and Ash, I'm looking to see how handles being up against the wall. If you bail him out, what has he really learned?

I second that, but I also don't think the competition between McGehee and Gamel is as clear cut as they make it. If Gamel doesn't go Parra us he'll be an impact player, McGehee is very good at his best, an .867 OPS is nothing to sneeze at, but I still think Gamel deserves a fair shot at the job.

I'll take an elbow injury and TJ surgery (Marcum) over a shoulder injury and surgery (McGowan) even though McGowan's stuff was better prior to their injuries.

Bush isn't the whipping boy, he's just one of the 2 most expendable pitchers we have. Suppan isn't going anywhere, for better or worse, neither are Yo and Parra, Yo because he's good, Parra because he has no trade value. Right now the biggest problem with the pitching staff is there isn't a single starter who's going to pitch into the 7th on a consistent basis, the starting rotation is leaving way too many innings for the bullpen. Melvin would be crazy to bring everyone back and expect to have a different result, health in the rotation or not. These guys just aren't that good, most days I'm hoping they can scrape through the 6th. To me Cameron is a Luxury... but if we go into next year with the same rotation and retain him, then we're just flushing money down the toilet, because the team isn't going to be significantly better unless Parra breaks out. With the roster having been constructed the way it was we have way too much money tied into our least talented players. It's fine for people to suggest Mark A will bump up the payroll, but it's not realistic. The Brewers are an investment, he's not paying anyone's salary out of his own pocket, the business pays everyone and to stand on it's own, thus the business is on a budget. Is it realistic to expect 3,000,000 fans against next season after a .500 season? Can the team realistically plan around that? The Brewers are already at their high water mark here people, how much farther can they be expected to go payroll wise? I don't think Cameron is one of the first off season moves Melvin should make, I think he's one of the last, pending how the rest of the roster shakes out. Is Cameron worth Bush + Looper by himself? No, I don't really believe that he is, pitching is at a premium right now in MLB. To retain Cameron the team has to get less expensive elsewhere in my opinion. As much as I want Melvin to do something about the pitching, I have a hard time believing he will. If the team goes young with Salome, Escobar, and Gamel then I think retaining Cameron is the smart play, if they don't and stick mostly with the same roster they had this season then I don't think Cameron is coming back. There's still way too much dead money tied into players who are no longer on the roster or are under performing for 2010. Going into 2011 it will be much brighter on the financial side of things, unless of course Melvin gets roped into another Suppanesque contract.

No, I'm being talent orientated. Bush, Looper, and Suppan have very little margin for error, Looper and Suppan are on the downside of their careers. Bush has never put together a full season of solid pitching, and even if he does he's a 3 best case. Parra has 1/2 stuff and is still young enough as a pitcher to improve, I'm not against giving him another shot in the rotation. Suppan stunk long before he hurt himself swinging a bat. What's the excuse for Looper? Bad luck would probably be it if I had to guess, something about his HR rate normalizing next season or some such... I'm sure you will get your wish and both Bush and Looper will be retained, but it won't be because they are good value for the money, it will be because it's the easiest route to 5 "proven" starters in the rotation. Looper isn't good depth, he's an aging averagish pitcher on the decline... Butler, Rivas, and Rogers are good depth, and could likely put up a similar ERA to Looper with better peripherals, Rivas and Rogers are going to miss bats near Gallardo's pace. The rotation desperately needs another top of the rotation pitcher to pair with Gallardo, then hopefully 2 of Butler, Rivas, and Rogers are ready for the rotation in 2011 but can give us some quality innings if needed next season.

I don't want to take this thread anymore off topic than it already is, but depth for depth's sake is pure nonsense to me. There's no argument I've read that makes enough sense that I'd bring back replacement level pitchers at 4-6 million. It doesn't matter to me that the salaries aren't horribly overpriced, the pitchers just aren't very good. Wright and Green weren't quality depth, they were worse than the pitchers we already had on the staff. Why waste money on mediocrity? There is no reason for this organization to make moves purely for pitching depth any longer. Our young men in AA and AAA will provide replacement level depth or better next season and they are actually talented and projectable pitchers. Butler, Rivas, and Rogers will be able to get MLB hitters out, and spare me the "they aren't ready yet" card. Until some one can actually give a definitive answer as to when a prospect is "ready" it's a meaningless and empty argument against prospects. Of course they likely aren't stretched out enough for a full MLB season but they don't have to be either if they are injury replacements, their innings can limited in the minors if necessary. Any of those 3 could come up and provide 3-4 MLB starts without impacting their season or hindering their development in any way. The organization is to the point where the Brewers really can't afford to waste roster spots on replacement level depth, we need to have enough 40 man spots to protect the truly talented players in the organization.