TheCrew07

I understand why people aren't high on Escobar and I'm not one to quibble over rankings as they are so subjective but I do take issue with Gamel being the lowest rated of the Brewer prospects and barely in the top 100. His improving defense/defensive shortcomings at 3B aside, how do we know he wouldn't make an excellent 1B or corner OF if he fails at 3B? His bat will play anywhere for goodness sake. Salome who has similar upside but no defensive flexibility, does everything unorthodox, and is arguably a worse defender is 15 spots ahead of him? It makes no sense and anyone who follows the minor league forum knows how much I like Angel. As far as impact prospects go, Hardy was usually viewed in the middle of the class... Upton and Greene seemed to always be liked more, some lists had guys like Crosby in front, Ramirez was seen as a boom or bust guy by many. I'm probably forgetting the some other big propspects in that SS group at the time but those are the names that always stuck out for me, and I think Hardy has turned out pretty favorable by comparison. The point is that prospect ratings basically mean nothing because they are done mostly on upside, and it's impossible to know how far any given player is going to progress. I'm very comfortable with our next wave, I just wish we had more pitching in it.

Yes but what are you basing that on, run differential, because you're basically talking about 2 different things. The team can win more games than it should have if measured by run differential, but if the players didn't play to expectations it's also reasonable to think they may improve in the future. I don't think run differential and an individual player's projection have anything to with each other.

The more I think about this, the more I like, there is no harm in it if the Brewers can pick up either guy on a minor league deal

You keep acting like the Brewers are constructed anything like those teams when they aren't. Yes anything can happen if a team gets hot at the right time and rides momentum through like the Cardinals who then played an inexperienced Detroit team that basically handed it to them. Sure history could repeat itself and likely will at some point, but the Brewers don't really compare with that Cardinal team, which was an offensive machine with poor pitching; Marquis, Mulder, Reyes, Ponson, Weaver, and Sosa all had ERAs over 5 with very solid defense behind them. The Cardinals won big and lost big that season, I'm not sure how that's adequate proof anything other than getting on a run as you move into the playoffs can matter. The Phillies have been in the top 3 in the NL in runs scored since 2004, the Brewers best showing was 5th in 2007 when the team tanked badly. The Philies won the world series the year their pitching matched their offense, in the past the Phillies had been towards the bottom of the league in total pitching. When Colorado made their run they were 2nd in runs and 8th in pitching (very good considering Coors). In 2008 the Brewers were 2nd in the NL in overall pitching narrowly edging out the Cubs and Phillies, (3.85 to 3.87 and 3.88) and if the offense had performed like they did in 2007 it would have been an even better year but the pitching/defense wasn't good enough come playoffs. Both St. Louis and Philly play excellent defense as a team, by all accounts the Brewers are not in that same class. I think a team needs to be defensively sound to take it to that next level, and the Brewers as currently constructed just don't stack up to the teams you're trying to compare them to. Teams that make the unexpected run typically are sound foundamentally, and again that's just not how the Brewers are currently constructed, it's very difficult to win playoff games giving runs/outs away in the field or at the plate. I don't know if you'll buy that notion or not, as it's sort of like Hall's defense... watching the games would lead you to believe he's not a good defender, but defensive metrics have always liked the plays he makes at range so people that are into defensive metrics believe he's a good defender. You can get to the playoffs with any number of different combinations, but I think winning baseball playoff hasn't changed all that much over the years it still comes down to pitching and defense, and the year the Cardinals won they had both in the playoffs. I realize that you don't value prospects as much as I do and that you'll always trade for wins now, but I feel your logic is flawed. The Brewers will never be in a place where they are always in "win now mode" because the system is so critical to their success. The Brewers are not going to be plugging holes through FA, if they could and MLB was a level playing field, I could accept trading for wins now year in and year out. In my opinion where your logic breaks down is 2 fold... First, the top of the system eventually gets bled dry leaving voids that cannot be filled on the MLB roster which in turn leads to an unnecessary crash as the team cannot replace it's losses through FA. Secondly, just because a prospect has no MLB value to you today, doesn't mean they won't in the future. I've been around long enough that I remember people wanting to trade Hardy, Fielder, Yo, and Braun on teams that were more flawed than the 2009 Brewers will be. Acquiring 3 wins this season might actually cost 12 wins long term, we just don't know the net result. This gets messy depending on if the trade actually helped the club reach it's goal or not, how the prospects dealt in the trade turn out vs the prospects aquired via the draft picks, and so on. It's easy for you to say that the player we traded might get wins back in a 72 win season, but that player might also be the piece that puts the fictious team over the top. The 2009 brewers will be competitve but without more quality pitching and improved defense I'll argue that they are not in their window to compete, but rather between windows. I actually think the team will get better offensively and defensively through natural attrition as our 2nd wave of position talent comes up. I don't see how trading those prospects in the 2nd wave other than maybe Salome (because of Lucroy) helps the team in '10, '11, and '12. The problem, both in the short term and long term is the rotation, the idea should be to push our 3,4,5 pitchers down the chain, not insert marginal quality between them. For example I'd be much happier with Bush as our number 5 than Bush as our 3... the question at hand is how to best to accomplish that feat, and I don't feel it's feasible to get there thinking 1 year at a time. Guys like Wolf and Looper may fill a void now but they also do not siginificantly raise the talent level in the rotation. Sheet's declining value on the FA market has definitely caught me by surprise and he absolutely makes sense given he doesn't cost us anything to acquire. However, as has been stated ad nausuem, it takes 2 to tango. I'm not against trading for pitching, I advocate it all the time, I'm just against trading for short term solutions. I didn't like the Sabathia deal because I didn't care about the playoff appearance (trading for him never guaranteed a play off spot like some were claiming, without a Mets collapse the Brewers were on the outside looking in even with him) and he was a rental, it had nothing to do with the prospects. I just would have rather obtained a lasting solution for that same package, that's just how I roll. I'm always looking down the road at '10, '11, or '12 and thinking about how to make pieces fit and plug holes without overspending in FA. I view FA as a trap for small market clubs because they would typically be locked into longterm contracts with too great a percentage of the payroll tied into one player. I also think it's much easier for a team like Milwaukee to stop gap a position spot with an average caliber position player than a spot in the rotation, so I favor signing position players over pitchers. edit. Holy crap that got long, sorry for the book.

You seriously don't have any issue with all the games he played at 1B? Playing at 1B helped his development?

Ahh I see, you're just responding randomly then.. Why is he crazy? Because he doesn't agree with you? Again I could care less about the WC, I don't know how I can be any more clear, my ultimate goal is a WS appearance and hopefully championship. I get the arguement that the more shots you take at the post season the better your odds are, but I simply don't agree, I think Oakland is a prime example of that. This team is flawed, I'll take 3 more wins if the pitcher is signed for 3 years because I still think this team will be really good in the near future... if we're talking another rental I'll pass, for all of the reasons I've previously stated. That 2nd round pick could become Yo or Hardy, we really don't know, but for a 1 year rental I'm not risking anything for a single player that doesn't really put this team over the top, we aren't 1 player away. If you don't agree that's fine, but continually posting about it doesn't make you any more right than it does it me, just like continually posting your opinions about Escobar doesn't make them any more true than the first time... let go man.

Where did I say a first rounder? I said "a draft pick".... I said if the script were flipped I'd be upset with Melvin if he signed a 1 year deal for an often injured pitcher and we lost our 1st or 2nd rounder in the process. A 2 year deal or 2 year with a club option/buyout in the 3rd would be fine if Melvin was going to sign someone of Sheet's quality

I think you misunderstand my stance. Injuries are a part of sports, especially for pitchers as there's nothing ergonomic about throwing a baseball overhand. My issue is with the incredibly slow diagnosis and seemingly poor recovery from injuries. Elbow tendinitis... really? In a pitcher? Shoulder strain... again really? Chronic soreness in any joint is more than tendinitis or a strain. I realize NFL teams go with "knee sprain" and the like because they have a very good idea what the problem area is but aren't certain about the severity. The difference is their players have an MRI immediately and the diagnosis is changed appropriately. Take Jones for example, why should shoulder surgery lead to Tommy John surgery or vice versa? Look at Sheets and the elbow tear that got worse last season, Rogers needing multiple surgeries on his shoulder.. just because pitchers flame out due to injury doesn't give the team a free pass. It's not even limited to pitchers, Weeks played on a bum wrist for months, Gamel played hurt the most of the second half... Again I never suggested they need to work miracles, I just don't think they are particularily good in the injury department as an organization.

Those of you that keep suggesting Ben could get a 1 year deal anywhere, why is that true? The market is down and how many teams would give up a draft pick for essentially a 1 year rental? If Sheets were a type B I would absolutely agree he could get a deal anywhere but if Melvin signed an often injured pitcher to a 1 year deal dumping our first round or second round pick in the process I'd be ticked off. At least a multi year deal allows the team to mitigate the risk some over a couple of years. I don't see how it's good business to sign a FA pitcher for 1 year, only to be back in the same place the following year with no guarantee of a depressed market next off season. On a 1 year deal if the pitcher is down for a significant length of time you've basically given your draft pick away for nothing. The Brewers have significantly less risk than the other teams in baseball because signing him wouldn't cost us anything but our contract, so we could do a 1 year deal. The only problem is that Sheets has to want to come back, and I don't think we've see any concrete evidence on that either way.

I guess I was looking at it from a Brewer perspective where I'd expect to be paying less money in the end for giving more money up front with the security of a 6 year deal. If you're Baltimore and you have a history of over paying players who are declining, this deal is like manna from Heaven. what's an extra 8 to 10 million over 6 years?

Brantley doesn't profile anywhere other than CF unless he finds a power stroke and Sizemore is such a stud he has flexibility. I'm not saying that's the way Cleveland will do it, I'm just saying it's plausible, and I have hard time understanding why people think Brantley and Sizemore can't co-exist. If Cleveland thinks Brantley makes the team better, he's going to play, and I doubt he'll play in a corner spot, but he may play in LF and Sizemore in CF. IIRC Brantley doesn't have the arm for the RF though, so it's LF or CF for him . Also, Sizemore would instantly be one of if not the best defensive corner OF in the game so that position would be upgraded defensively. I guess what I'm trying to say it is all comes down to what Cleveland feels his potential and skill set best fit. If they think he'll become an above average CF I don't see the risk in the move, Sizemore isn't going to be around forever. The Brewers played Brantley out of position for years, I hope the Indians don't make the same mistake, putting a square peg into a round hole. If Brantley cracks the lineup in 2009 it will be interesting to see what the Indians are thinking because Sizemore has a very team friendly deal through '11 with a club option for '12. Oh how I wish real life was like OOTP 8 where I could trade Sheets and Hall for Sabathia and Sizemore every time I started a Brewer's sim.

I agree with End... the dollar amounts don't exactly even out, I thought Braun's deal was right on the money. I'm not sure what Baltimore gained here financially, they definitely locked up a good player for a fair amount of years which is a step in the right direction.

I still think Sizemore would move to a corner spot, he hits well enough to do so. I agree about Seidel

I get why athletes make proclamations about what they are willing to do, yet I have hard time truly understanding why the intentionally devalue themselves. Are some of them just that delusional about their abilities? He's horrible in the field so by limiting himself to LF, he limits his value... wouldn't a good agent try to explain this to a player? 1B could extend his career... so he has to learn and care about the IF signals to know who's covering what, is it really that big of a deal in the end? edit. It's not like he's Hardy who's a very capable defender but the team has a better defender coming up behind him so it's in the team's best interest that he would switch positions to say 3B, not his own. Hardy will be able to get a SS gig when his time comes, Dunn on the other hand is jobless and is only making it harder on himself.

If Salome makes it, I wonder if Lucroy would hit well enough to play 1B, or move well enough to play 3B or the OF? I'm really high on Lucroy, and I feel better about him as prospect than I do about Salome, mostly because of Angel's defensive struggles. I think Salome has the higher ceiling but doesn't seem to have any position flexibility, which is why I wonder if Lucroy could play elsewhere if it came to that. I'd be shocked if Lucroy didn't start in AA... unless he blows up in ST and they jump him past Salome to AAA but that's a long shot at best. The AA team should be fun to follow again, and AAA will be worth listening to as well. The Link Report seems so far away in Jan...

Well at least BA thinks Hardy and Fielder will sign deals into their FA years... I wonder what their 2008 lineup for the Brewers was.. it's my least favorite feature on the site, because it's so inaccurate. I do like their top prospects of the last decade though, Neugy... what could have been.

Precisely my point. I'm not sure how Halladay is a lengthy option if acquired during the season, he's not even a lengthy option if acquired today. I'm looking for 3 years minimum for a player in a trade, that's my idea of a "solution". Peavy isn't a realistic target either, now that the team acquired one of the best pitchers in the game people act like it can happen every year. It took Jack Z 9 years to get enough talent to the MLB club and in the system to pull off that one deal, it's not going to happen year in and year out. This team is not 1 player away or even 2 players away. Acquiring Sabathia last year wouldn't have meant anything if the Mets didn't choke it away again for the 2nd year in a row, it's like people forget how bleak the playoff picture looked even a week before the end of the season. We don't have a playoff cailber rotation, and the offense of this current group of players is very up and down. Maybe Macha can have some impact on consistency, but I'm not holding my breath. I still haven't seen a solid plan out of anyone who's suggesting we trade more propsects to plug holes other than to sign Hardy. If Hardy signs I'll be estastic, he's one of my guys, I just don't think it's realistic. Outside of C where we have 2 prospects in Salome and Lucroy, 3B, SS, 2B, 1B, and CF will all need to be addressed in the next 3 years. Many people around are more than willing to mortgage the team's future chasing the playoffs 1 year at a time, chasing something that may not be attainable if the team gets unlucky with injuries. I'd rather look down the road and make all of the pieces fit, making some tough choices along the way, building a solid team with solid depth behind it, than maing moves 1 for 1 filling holes on a yearly basis.

One of the guys I work with is named Noel and his wife is named Holly, both born on Christmas day.

The first problem is that's a very short list of talent that would have to be available. Second who would the team be willing to part with? It's fine to suggest Escobar, Gamel, or both but that's probably not realistic. We already have a lack of pitching talent between MLB and AA, why would they do the same with the hitting talent? Trading away all of our prospects for rentals will just make the inevitable crash that much worse. It's the surest way to make our window to compete as short as possible. This team will lose players to FA in '10 & '11, Cameron will be gone next season... what impact players would be left to replace them with? I really like Green and Cain but I wouldn't call them "impact" at this time, Lawrie maybe but he's never taken a professional AB yet. With so many holes and positions that will need to be addressed in 1B (FA), 2B (upgradable), SS (FA), 3B(Hole), RF (depending how you feel about Hart), and CF (FA) how does the team get over hump making rental player deals? If they keep talent and make shrewd deals they can maximize the competitive window, and I'd like to the team to remain competitive as long as possible. I'm not against trading prospects though it may seem so because I've been arguing against trading them this offseason, but why burn them in rental deals? Why not get some lasting value out of the players? I would have much rather seen the team use the Sabathia package to acquire a Marcum, McGowan, Morrow type pitcher. I know Toronto's whole staff got hurt in the 2nd half, that's not really the point. Seattle and Toronto weren't going anywhere and could have used some bats that were close to MLB ready. Why does our target have to be Sabathia or Halladay when it costs so much to acquire a pitcher of that caliber for such a short time? Who's going to give up a good young SP for 1 year of Hardy + 2 draft picks next off season when Escobar is finally deemed ready? Flip the script would we give up a guy like Parra for 2 years of a premium offensive player who's a Boras client and best suited to play DH in Fielder? Which teams around the league have surplus pitching, need bats, are in their window to compete or looking to rebuild? Right now it's a very short list of AL teams, and TB already signed a bat and traded pitching so we can pretty much cross them off unless we want Niemann.. If we're talking about trading Hardy or Fielder next off season the destination likely becomes a large enough market that can afford to extend either player right away. The closer our guys get to FA, the tougher they are to trade because years are so valuable to mid and small market teams.

I'm not picking on you, I keep seeing this posted though and don't understand the logic here. Many fans want the team to lock up Hardy, the team may want to lock Hardy up, we don't know for sure... but why would Hardy want to sign now? He's 2 years from big money, maybe being the best FA position player in his class if he keeps hitting. If he was a WI boy I could see it maybe, but he wants to stay at SS, Escobar will be ready by the time 2009 is finished, I'm sure he can see the writing on the wall just like anyone else. It's been pointed out many times but he's probably in the top 5 SS in the league at this point in time, and he'd be the best player at the position in the entire AL. He'll be a highly coveted player and he knows it. It doesn't really matter what we want, or what the team would like to do, it comes down to what JJ wants to do and if he'd be willing to change positions to stay in Milwaukee long term. Exactly like how we the fans might want Sheets to resgin, Melvin might want him back, but it only matters if Sheets wants to come back to Milwaukee and it appears he doesn't. Unfortunately the players hold most of the cards as they approach FA and become FAs. If a player is going to be signed it's typically going to happen early like with Braun, but the Brewers missed badly with Hall and by signing some relief pitchers after 1 good season.. TB has done it a couple of times and some think they did it too soon with Longoria, but that Shields deal is looking pretty darn good right about now. I really admire what TB's new front office has done, they've had the midas touch, everything they've done has worked out very well for them. I think if Escobar was going anywhere it would have happened in the Sabathia deal (+ rumors leading up to) and there were quotes that basically made it known that Escobar was untouchable. Trade wise Escobar doesn't carry anywhere near the value of Hardy or Fielder, and while we do have some depth at the position with Brewer, I don't think Brewer is a SS long term. I'm done arguing that Escobar's talent is greater than his stats suggest, there's just no changing opinions when people care more about projections than talent. I just don't see Hardy staying with the Brewers beyond arby, I want better return for him than draft pick compensation, and the clock is ticking.

When have we ever been able to take Melvin's comments at face value? I find it very difficult to get worked up either way because of the rumor mill.

PAP is bunk. The system is flawed in that the best pitchers, those that are healthy and effective will always be the most "abused". Since pitchers get hurt all the time, and no one really knows why other than throwing a ball overhand is not a natural motion... this is just another theory. A theory that only appears to be accurate because sooner or later every pitcher in baseball is going on the DL for significant time, I give no credit for a system that basically has all the cards stacked in it's favor. Once a pitcher has built up to the 200 innings threshold, teams are probably better off trying to maximize the pitcher's value while he's healthy. I find it humorous that people blame Yost for Sheet's injury last season because Sheets was up around the top of the league in PAP... he's was pitching fantastic for goodness sake why wouldn't he be? I find it hard to believe that anyone who wanted a post season appearance would go back and trade what Ben did in any of those games knowing that that the bullpen blowing just one lead might have meant no playoffs. Then when Ben gets hurt, which some might consider inevitable given his injury history, obviously it is Yost's fault because of PAP. I'm sorry that's just garbage. It's like blaming Yost for Ben pitching hurt, that's the decision of the training staff and the player, not the coach... I will agree that the coach has the ultimate decision but who among us would tell an All-Star pitcher in a contract year to sit down even he insists he's ready to pitch? Coaches only have the green light, they have nothing do with diagnosis or rehabilitation, not at any level of professional or college sports all the way down to high school. It's a liability thing, the changing disclosure laws have even made it so the players must a sign a waiver so the coaches can even discuss the injury with the trainer. What happened to Sheets last year has been happening to our minor league pitchers for years, it's an organizational flaw, not a problem with Yost. Maybe instead of Yost or the coaches being the issue our training staff is just below average across the board?

I'm not sure how that's mathematically true Ennder and I would really like to see a statistician prove that mathematically. The less hits a player gets, the less chance of a runner on base scoring or moving up an extra base. Maybe I just had too much calculus/physics in college but I haven't seen proof, just educated guesses. I'm still waiting for integral type proof that casts away all doubt and proves to be an indisputable fact. Hypothetically speaking Player A gets 200 singles, Player B gets 100 doubles, no other hits on the season... they could have the same OPS, but wouldn't the situations be the determining factor in how valuable each player is? Who's the more valuable player for the season? How about for their career? Is a double with 2 out and no one on as valuable as a single with runners at 2nd and 3rd and 2 outs? Is a double with 2nd and 3rd and 2 out truly more valuable than a single if the next batter makes an out? Maybe this is why I have such a problem with the notions of luck, variance, and noise... because it's very difficult to account for the situation so instead we try to heap enough data into a sample that the situations even themselves out.

logan nailed it. I don't know if that's necessarily a flaw in the draft process making it a Jack Z issue, to me it's more of a Reid Nichols issue. Players in our system generally don't become better defenders until they reach MLB and to me that's a player development issue, not a drafting issue. I have so many issues with where the Brewers have had their prospects playing in the field I could go on forever. For example, I understand that Cain and Brantley spent most of their MiLB careers with true CF prospects, but why not give the kids equal time in all of the OF spots? Brantley never profiled as 1B, it was such a waste playing him there just to get his bat in the lineup everyday, it just didn't make any sense. It's almost as if they just did what was easy, instead of coming up with some sort of rotation that got every player experience at the positions they profiled best at. Cain may develop enough power to play a corner OF spot, but what's the harm in him moving around a bit in the OF? I don't understand how that hinders development in any way? Why wouldn't they want their players to be as well rounded as possible? If anything it makes position moves later on at the MLB level easier. The Bryson assertion that the team is slow to react to injuries has been bothering me as well because I've been of that opinion for some time and have openly expressed it in the past. What's the deal with that? Who's ultimately responsible for that in the front office? Is it penny pinching in the truest sense because MRIs are so expensive? I guess the whole situation just seems backwards to me because Milwaukee relies so heavily on it's farm system. It seems to me that the more money you spend on player development and injury prevention, the better the long term health of the franchise. The more healthy and productive players they have, the more options they have. It seems to me that down the road the investment would pay for itself in better attendance/merchandise because the end product would be better. Not to mention if guys like Jones and Rogers were healthy there might not be a glaring hole in the rotation right now, so we wouldn't be discussing the merits of signing a FA pitcher which would save the club a significant amount of money. I use those 2 players as an example because their rehabs have gone so poorly. I have no evidence to prove they wouldn't have gotten hurt in another organization, but these aren't isolated cases either. It's just my gut feeling. Gamel has started to make significant improvement defensively, I'm not willing to write him off before he ever fields a ball for the big club. Is there a site that does advanced defensive metrics for MiLB players? I don't how else we judge defensive progress other than error totals, fielding percentages, first hand observations from posters like pogokat, and what front office personnel and coaches say about the players during pregame audio sessions. It's pretty difficult to take a sabermetric stance on MiLB players when there isn't enough data and many of these kids haven't quit growing mentally and physically yet. I was a vastly different person comparing where I was at 18 to where I was at 22, and I don't think I'm unique in that respect.

my 3rd try at this as Yuku is testing my patience today... I didn't mean to suggest that it takes 3 years to covert a SP to a RP, I was using a young man like Jeffress as an example. I think if he's going to be converted that it's 3 years away, that he'll be given every opportunity to make it as a starter. This year in AA, next year in AAA, the following year in MLB... unless he absolutely tanks it and they decide to move him earlier, but that's a worse case scenario in my opinion. With the lack of top of rotation talent in the upper minors, the Brewers need Jeffress and Braddock to make as SP and be healthy. I'm sorry if I gave the impression that it's always slow conversion from SP to RP. My point was supposed to be that drafting relievers very low in the draft is a classic low risk/high reward type of move and is a new wrinkle in addition to the tried and true practice of converting SP to RP, which the Brewers are still utilizing. I didn't make my entire post clear enough.