TheCrew07

I'd rather have fly ball pitchers than ground ball pitchers right now, we have an athletic outfield with good speed... on the other hand our infield defense stinks, and no I don't care what metrics say about Hall, he's flash over substance. I've read numerous accounts that put Floyd's fastball in the 91-93 consistently with a deceptive delivery, though I haven't seen him pitch personally. The upper 80s fastball you mention is actually a sinker I believe. The Hardball Times doesn't think much of him though as this article from the season will attest to. The thing about young players though is that there is rarely any sort of consensus about them, a guy like David Price is the exception rather than the rule.

I'm not sure Floyd is attainable but he's not a bad target. With the injuries to Toronto's staff (lame!) the 2 best trade partners pitching wise still seem to be TB and LAA, both of whom need an impact bat and have pitching to spare. Seattle might trade some pitching depending on what Z wants to do with the franchise, but the pickings out there are going to be pretty slim. It's going to have to be the right deal at the right time to a get the top of the rotation starter the Brewers need. I still think to acquire one we're talking Hardy or Fielder... guys like Hart/Hall/Cameron are just not going to get it done, they don't have enough value. You have to give value to get value (unless you're trading for Kazmir) and while Hart is one of my trio of favorite Brewers, his trade value is probably at it's lowest point right now.

Actually Balfour was pitching well before his career was derailed by injuries, so it's not like this is the first time he's had success in his career. If he continues to locate, I see no reason why he wouldn't continue to have success. That was a good trade both ways, McClung bailed out the Brewers so many times last season and Balfour was great for TB all season.

How is that the most likely scenario? Posting the same thing about Escobar over and over doesn't make it any more true than the first time it was posted.

I thought either of those 2 should have been the organization's pitcher of the year, but I will always rate a SP ahead of a RP though Bramhall did get a fair amount of starts as well. I didn't have either player in my top 20, Cody gets great results but I expect that to diminish as he moves up, better hitters adjust more quickly to guys like him who don't have dominating stuff but know how to pitch. I'm not sure what to make of Cody going forward because he profiles like some of the players ahead of him that are now considered bullpen options for the MLB team. I'm not sure what to make of Bramhall either as he's done well in both roles, but he's smaller and probably won't fill out his frame much more. He's a LHP pitcher which helps of course, he actually pitched a little better as starter, and has had success at every level thus far (not counting his 1 appearance for 2 innings at WVA in 2007). He was a late round pick, but played for a College power in Rice, but again mostly as a reliever. He had a great curve and a decent fastball for a lefty in the upper 80s, but he wasn't included in any of the pregame audio segments that discussed prospects that I remember, so I'm unsure if he's developing a 3rd pitch or not? 2 pitch guys seem to make better relievers than starters (Ben Sheets aside), and was labeled as a LOOGY when drafted, but his splits don't suggest that he'll only have success against LH batters, he's actually done better against righties thus far in his young career. Both players will likely start 2009 in AA, so I think we'll have a better idea of where they fit in after the season.

It's obviously we've never agreed on the whole deadline deal thing, it would be easier if you would just agree to disagree with me... :p I'm not sure how you feel about Frederickson, I know how you feel about Dykstra, but best case scenario for both of those players is probably 2012, that's a long ways off on both the production and injury front to be penciling in starters. As far as roster construction, yes we have players we can move, but the moves would only create more problems going forward. I'm not looking at the roster in 2009, I'm looking at '10, '11. I don't see how breaking in talent in '10 will be a problem, this next group of young players hasn't been rushed at all, not like Weeks or Hardy. While there will be growing pains I'm sure (Braun's level success doesn't happen all that often), I believe their potential struggles are greatly overstated. Salome/Lucroy alone would be a huge offensive upgrade over Kendell and Lucroy would provide similar defense. At any rate, you're coming from the "more picks=more prospects" angle which I can agree with, but I think you ignore the very real fact that it pushes our top prospects farther away from MLB. Will the comp picks be better than Iman/Garrison/Thatcher? Maybe, that's far from fact at this point in time, and will debatable for every single deal that is made. I'd rather acquire quality than quantity... lets trade a MiLB hitting prospect for an MiLB pitching prospect, or a Hardy type for a pitcher, an established player for established prospects, or multiple prospects for a long term solution. In other words let's trade for tangible value, not the promise of a future draft pick who's value is impossible to define. I don't see the value in acquiring Sabathia, I wasn't concerned with making playoffs I was concerned with the hole in the rotation after this season. I still would have rather acquired a long term solution for the rotation, that's just how I feel about that particular trade. In terms of our other prospects like Green, he can fill 2 different positions of need so while he has trade value, I see him as critical to the future roster construction. If you trade redundant players that's one thing, but again why wouldn't we move the move valuable pieces trading one of Hardy or Fielder to get a top of rotation starter instead both Escobar and Gamel to acquire the same player? Too often I feel that contract length and cost are left out of these discussions. I believe Hardy/Fielder will not sign with the Brewers, in that scenario what's better... 2 comp picks or a top of rotation starter? I'll take the sure thing over the 2 picks every single time. Trading established players also leaves enough prospects behind to fill other holes as the need may arise. I'm not against moving prospects at all, I'm just not into moving them for rentals when the same deal can net greater value to the big club. For example I have a time believing that the players the Brewers gave up for Sabathia wouldn't have been enough to get a player like Morrow from Seattle. Like anything else, this all comes down what each of us personally believes in. As far as Brewer goes, my point was that his defense was bad on an epic scale, which you are free to disagree with. He's also too much of a free swinger for me personally at this point in time. I've broken down his stats on the minor league forum many times so I believe you get where I'm coming from on him. You know I like him, but at this point in time Escobar is the infinitely better prospect.

I guess I can see where people would be surprised by this, but I've criticized the Brewer's training staff on numerous occasions. I do understand that it is much more difficult to diagnose kids today, they just aren't as tough as they were even 10 years ago, most of the boys I coach in football don't know the difference between an owie and and an injury... it's the unfortunate byproduct of kids getting together to play games on video consoles instead of play the games for real in the play ground or in the yard. Every bruise is a big deal instead of part of the game, we've had 2 female trainers and most recently a male trainer and it's pretty consistent that in 2/3 of our "injury" cases there is nothing really wrong with the young man, just a sore muscle or a bruise. That being said, I don't hold the Brewer's medical staff in much esteem, which is why I'm already worried we'll be writing off a guy like Braddock who seems to be on a similar path to Rogers. I don't mean to suggest the staff is negligent, because it doesn't make sense to intentionally devalue your assets, but I don't think they are particularly good either. Pitching doesn't lend itself to playing injured because it's too easy to compensate and create more issues elsewhere (the same reason I didn't want Yo to pitch last year). It just seems to me, and maybe because I care way too much about the system, that they take way too long to accurately diagnose the issues, and the recoveries rarely seem to go well. There usually seem to be complications and additional surgery required for anyone with a serious injury. For example I see no good reason to push a kid so that shoulder surgery leads to Tommy John surgery... while some of that is on the athlete, shouldn't someone within the organization notice a change in delivery mechanics? I also wonder if the team physician does the majority of the surgeries or does the team send the player to the person who's considered the best? I also wonder who is in charge of the rehabilitation program, the head trainer, someone in the front office? I view the medical staff like I do defensive improvement in the system... if a kid is hurt, that's all he's ever going to be... just like if he's a bad defender, he'll likely reach the majors with poor defensive skills. I don't expect them to work miracles, but there's a stunning list of top pitching prospects in this organization that have flamed due to injury rather than performance. The smallest market in baseball needs to have an edge on the farm and the system really isn't able to absorb the loss of prospects like Jones and Rogers and still get enough quality pitching to the MLB team. I don't necessarily agree with the "drafting philosphy" angle on the pitching injuries either, I'm basing my comments on the last 15 years, this goes back much longer than Jack Z, so I'm not willing to pin this solely on drafting HS pitchers in the 1st round.

Quanity doesn't make up for a lack of Quality... not a single top 100 prospect for Greinke, KC fans would riot, any team's fans would riot if they gave up a good young pitcher for that, and rightly so. Salome may not stick at C which would severly limit his value and why he doesn't make any top prospect lists. I agree the team would likely look to include him, but the value of his bat is directly tied to how well he does behind the plate. Brewer is toolsy but a good 3 years away defensively if he sticks at SS. Gillespie is a 4th outfielder with a bad arm, he's solid but unspectacular. Green has value, but he fills 2 positions of need, he'd be another guy the Brewer's would dangle as they could potential live without him regardless of how much I like the young man. Gindl I really like, but he's only an A baller with size concerns and doesn't have much trade value at this moment in time. Nelson would be a throw in, he's very solid depth. Irribarren is similar to Nelson, a solid depth guy with limited defensive flexibility.

I'm not saying he's not a good pitcher, I expect Yo to put up similar numbers next year. I'm just not into guys with "mental" issues. I'm not making light of it, I hope him well, I just don't trust him, he's closer to FA than I would like, he's KC's ace pitcher, and why would KC trade him for 2 years of Hardy and 2 draft picks. Maybe they'd deal Hochevar, but I don't feel as good about him, not just his performance albiet a 1 year very small sample, but his draft antics as well. I think for the Brewers to acquire a pitcher the buyer obviously has to be motivated, so who's got pitching, is in their window to compete, and desperately needs another bat at SS or 1B/DH? That's a pretty short list of AL teams... the Rays seem like a perfect fit, they've made a couple of trades in the past, but they probably want to move Neimann and there's just no way a package for Fielder wouldn't include one of their top 4 pitchers... now some teams with excess pitching that may be looking to rebuild, that's another story, but again outside of Salome whom can the Brewers really part with? The Sabathia deal simply limited the possibilities going forward.

You don't build around a single player in football, it doesn't matter how good your QB is when your O-line doesn't make any blocks... The QB has no more influence in a football game than a pitcher in baseball... both are in the driver's seat, and both are good places to start building a franchise. The big difference is in football you have 24 different starters with the kickers, in baseball you only have 9, so in football you actually need a larger "core" group of players. However in both sports the team is built the same way, you start with a core of young players and add to it. In baseball I believe a team should build around it's pitching staff first, I believe all things being equal pitching wins, in football I'm not sure I'd build from the QB, it seems that good QBs can be found later in the draft. You keep going back to NE, but NE is much more like Oakland than the NYY, they've been ahead of the curve getting the most value out of their signings, they sign valuable 2nd and 3rd tier players, like Beane and Money Ball was trying to do back in the day... similar concept, different game. NE doesn't operate like a large market team in baseball, Washington and San Franciso tried to, but it blew up in their face and crippled the franchises for years. Your blatant disregard of the fact that the best players do stay with their teams in the NFL is appalling. Cleveland would have never traded Sabathia in a salary cap system, because in those systems the only major difference between the teams is attendance because major revenue streams like TV revenue are split equally. Favre was a Packer for more than 15 years while arguably the best player in the game... this in a town of 100,000 people... Who was last the MLB icon to stay with his small market team even 10 years? Salary cap systems build in retention so that the team that drafts the player has a legitimate opportunity to keep him for his entire career if they wish. Star players do move around, but it's due more to certain players being malcontent babies like Ocho Cinco and TO or they salary isn't keeping pace with their production than players in Free Agency like Sabathia. Over paid vets used to be cut on June 1 (different date now I know), but that has been slowly tapering away as teams sign players to better contracts. Another excellent point which you glossed over was that small market teams tend to trade the star players before they hit free agency as it's the only way they have to get some immediate return out of losing the player. In what other sport does that happen? In what sport does a team know it has absolutely no chance to sign a player and trade him? The last player I can think of was Shaq in the NBA and that doesn't really fit the example. The NHL was similar to MLB for a long time, all of the best players ended up on the same 6 teams, but that's gone away now that they have instituted a cap. If the system isn't set up so an icon has a realistic chance of staying with his team regardless of who drafts him, then how do the fans ever truly bond with players? I have my favorite Brewer players, but I haven't bought a single item of memoribila for any of them... in fact the only item I have was a Xmas present (very cool framed + autographed Hardy picture). I support the team, I go to games, watch on tv, post here, and buy merchandise, but the items I get are all generic Brewer stuff, nothing player specific. I don't form attachments to any Brewer players because I know eventually they'll be gone, and while that's the reality in any sport that has free agency, the clock ticks that much faster in baseball. We get 6 years with a player, maybe as many as 8 if he signs a deal that buys out a couple of FA years, and then we move on. Maybe that 6 or 8 years seems like a lot, but percentage wise it's not, not when MLB players can realistically player until their late 30s. In more demanding physical sports the athletes wear down quicker and have significantly short careers. No one is saying that MLB should do it the same way that the NLF, NBA, or NHL has done it, but there has to be a better way... like Sam pointed out, the Yankees have been largely incompetent in the front office, yet they remain competitive, that's where the injustice in the system lies. Teams like Milwaukee have to be perfect, and even then their best players will leave for greener pastures, while teams in large markets just reload, acquiring sure things (known quantities in established players) for prospects or having to give up draft picks. Again what do the Yankees care about giving away 3 draft picks when they get Sabathia, Teixeira, and Burnett? I don't like Burnett, but I'd damn sure trade a 3rd round pick in next year's draft for him... which is essentially what happened.

You mean a guy like David Price? or Prior? The best talent is usually drafted out of High School and those players are typically making an impact by 21/22 years old, the time they would be eligible for the draft. The whole international FA situation must be addressed though, those players should have to declare for the draft and be part of the process like any US born player. The Red Sox may not have a grossly obscene payroll but I'm surprised how quickly people forgot the obscene amount of money they paid to be able to negotiate with Dice K, it was over 51 million dollars... money that's not considered part of Dice K's contract but shouldn't it be? I believe with incentives the deal was for around 60 million, but the total cost of the commitment was 6 years and 110+ million... still better than Burnett but that was significant sum of cash that gets hidden in terms of revenue sharing/luxury tax. MLB is the only major sport that's still more of a Free Market... only US players have to be drafted so he who scouts the most can spend the most, basically your talent pool is only limited by your resources. The larger the market, the larger the resource base... The flip side of course is parity. I like parity, I get that others don't, but I'd rather the team I root won because it was managed and coached properly than because they used every other team in the league as a talent resource and signed all of the best players from around the league. The Yankees may not win a World Series, but they'll win games, alot of games, and that will keep fans in the seats and interest high.

How exactly do the Brewers remain competitive year in and year out without a farm system that is producing quality MLB players? And this talk of another deadline deal doesn't make any sense... with what prospects? Who can we trade outside of Salome that we won't need and is at AA or above? If Hardy doesn't sign a deal there is no way the Brewers can afford to trade Escobar and Gamel is a huge upgrade offensively at 3B or over Hart, and would probably make a good 1B as well. Gillespie? He's a RH Gabe Gross with a pigeon arm, what's his trade value? I understand trading Hardy, but not Escobar when he's so inexpensive and will have to fill the hole at SS. Why would Hardy sign now that he's only 2 years from a huge payday? Hardy will get around 15 mill per if he has another season like the last 2, unless he doesn't care about the money, but when was the last time a player didn't take the money in MLB? It's too bad really, Hardy came up too soon and then lost more time with the horrible injury, it would be nice to have JJ for an extra year right now. The only other SS option at this point in time is Brewer, and while Brewer is a 5 tool prospect, his defense is a liability and we already have too many players with his plate discpline on the roster. Brewer will likely start in AA, but he's still so raw it's hard to gage what kind of player he will be, his defense is Braunesque at a traditionally defensive first position. I could see Brewer moving to CF at some point, rather than sticking at SS. X will probably crucify me, but Brewer barely made my 20 prospect list for the farm system, because I still think he can go either way. He's a guy I'm intrigued by rather than a guy I'm excited about. The only way the Brewers can realistically plug holes with quality (impact) players is through the farm system... I would think anyone that was holding out hope things were different would have learned from the last 2 off seasons. Deadline deals for top prospects will cripple the franchise in the long run, the Brewers can only afford to make a deal every couple of years, the rest of prospects will be needed to plug holes. It's not like the Brewers have an entire team of quality players at each level, there are a couple of guys that can plug voids in the MLB roster and 1 who's doubled up with an MLB player with significant value. The big difference between the Brewers and the teams that make all the moves and grab the headlines is that said teams can afford to make impact acquisitions through free agency, and the Brewers will never a significant player in that market. Look at the Yankees, they can give away draft picks and sign impact players now, they can always focus on winning now vs the Brewers who have to keep 1 eye on the future and 1 on the present to remain competitive. Dunn makes sense because he's a significant upgrade over Hart offensively, and if he can be a competent receiver at 1B he would allow the team to move Fielder for an area of greater need such as starting pitching and improve the entire IF defense in one shot... according to Fan Graphs coming in to 2008 Fielder is equal in value to James Shields.... how good would a pitcher of that quality look in our rotation? I don't think signing relievers makes sense, and no I don't buy into the shortening the game to 8 innings theory. This is a team with limited financial resources which was stretched to the max last year at 90 million... take away Suppan and look at the other 24 players... how do we get the best 24 players we can for around 72 million? (I think the budget for player salaries is around 85 mil) How much bang do the Brewers get out of their buck for a closer? The guys left on the market will get around 7 mil per... that's Looper type money for 120 less innings of work. That's SP money for 1/3 of the innings...where's the value in that?

I'm not sure why people around here are so fascinated by Greinke... I really wish guys like Marcum and McGowan (both of whom I had in mind before the Sabathia trade) wouldn't have gotten hurt because Toronto has much better pitching than KC, as does TB, Seattle, and LAA. At any rate, there's no way a pitcher with Greinke's history is worth an All-Star SS and a top 25 prospect (guessing on BA's rank). I'd be mildly disappointed if Hardy was traded for Greinke straight up.

My problem with how the system works is this. Basically the Yankees just traded their first 3 picks for All-Star players, though Burnette is at least likely to get injured again. The point is, who wouldn't trade 3 draft picks for 3 sure things and 3 of the best players in the game? Where's the cost to the Yankees here? They essentially gave up the top of one draft to drastically improve their overall talent level. 1 draft for 3 players is nothing, that's as many MLB players as most teams hope for out of a single draft. Maybe the Rays will look to move Shields now as this is their window to compete, that's only good thing that can come of this that I can think of. Getting a 2nd round pick for Sabathia and probably Sheets is disheartening.

I would submit that's your opinion and not a statement of fact. They are on the same level as the guys that came before them, maybe BA won't have them ranked as high, but what has that ranking done for Weeks? I'm not sure when AAA became the level where MLB players are made but AA is the true test. Both players have been in the system long enough that they are past the point of being rushed, 1 more year of MiLB experience won't make that big of a difference either way. At some point the young kids are going to have to play and are always going to have to play for this team to remain competitive. There isn't enough money to do it any other way.

Marginal quality invader... like maybe no tangible gain at all over who we have for the sake of depth. If Looper is acquired that will be our rotation until Suppan is gone, there's no room for an upgrade, and that's a very average MLB rotation. Where can we improve if our 4 and 5 are signed to multi year deals? I really like Parra, LHP that can run the ball up there at 95mph are pretty rare, but he's not a top of the rotation pitcher yet, so who else do we lean on if we make the playoffs. This is the point I've been trying to make all along, people are trying to instantly plug holes and get back to the playoffs... to what end? So we can get bounced in the first round even if we get there? What's the point in that? To put up a playoff banner? I say again that the talent level begins to pickup for the MLB team again in 2010, so '10, '11, '12 should be very good seasons. Yo, Parra, Bush, Looper, Suppan is very underwhelming to me, I'd rather have Yo, 1/2 Pitcher, Parra, Bush, Suppan... then if any of the young kids take off maybe they can eat Suppan's salary and just dump him for '10, or maybe shift Bush to the pen, whatever they do we have options. In my ideal little world Bush gets pushed all the way back to the 5th starter at some point before he walks. Signing Looper would mean no trade for a different SP and what we see is what we get until those contracts run out. Maybe if Looper was acquired and the team traded Fielder then Bush would be included in the deal, but I'm unsure how much interest a team would have in him as 1 year rental. I haven't even touched on Looper's stuff or his age, but our infield defense is horrid, so I'm not sure how another extreme ground ball pitcher is a good idea for the way this team in currently constructed. How many DPs are we botching in a season for no other reason than dropped balls and poor throws? Gamel might get to be a league average defender at some point if he sticks at 3B, Hardy/Escobar are solid, Weeks has range and not much else, and Prince doesn't really offer anything positive defensively... I just don't see how all of the pieces fit here. I'm not saying Looper isn't a valuable piece for someone out there who needs a 3/4 type pitcher, I already said he may be the best value of any FA SP out there. I'm just saying I don't feel he's a good fit given his salary/production, age, the pitcher he's replacing, and the environment he'd be playing in.

So we should spend 8 million on insurance? The team has plenty of arms than can come up and throw if need be. The issue is quality...

When will the Brewers ever be the highest bidder for a top of line of starter? The answer in this current system is most likely never... now we can acquire one via trade but that's another topic entirely. Looper might very well be the best pitcher for the money who's out there, which means he's good value, I won't debate that. However, I don't really see the point of Looper over McClung, we're paying more for essentially the same production run wise. I actually like McClung's overall numbers better, and granted they came in a much smaller sample but McClung K's almost 1 guy per inning, where as Looper is down around .5 guys per inning. Looper's K:BB ratio is obviously better, but McClung's isn't bad even though he gives up more BBs. How many wins is Looper worth over McClung? If the answer is less than 3 this deal doesn't make much sense, this is a very marginal upgrade of the rotation on paper for a 7 million dollar difference salary (I think Looper will get 8ish) which doesn't strike me as good value to the Brewers. So, while Looper may good value as far as FA pitchers go, I don't see him being good value as FA signing in this particular case. I don't see any point in spending money on the bottom of the rotation, especially with Suppan already eating up 12+ mil of payroll to be the 5th starter. To me it seems that signing a bottom of the rotation starter is just spending money to spend money, which is never a good thing.

Like when we were silly to bank on Fielder, Weeks, Hardy, Yo, and Braun? I get that many people around here don't follow MiLB and don't seem to respect/value prospects, but I wonder why? In the current economic setup of baseball prospects are the only way the Brewers can compete. We aren't going to sign any high priced, proven, top tier FA talent so we have to deal from a position of strength to plug our holes. Right now we are thin on pitching, in the future maybe we'll be thin on hitting., either way we'll need to move one for the other. The team needs to evaluate who will sign long term, get them locked in, and determine how to get the maximum value out of the rest (when to trade or let them walk for compensation). If the talent is cycling down then draft picks aren't a horrible idea, but as the team currently is constructed I'd rather see hitters moved for pitching when their return will be the highest. I'll dispute the "creating a hole" notion as well, especially when trading Fielder... what's the bigger hole, another top of the rotation starter (with only an inconsistent Jeffress on the horizon) or replacing a premium offensive talent who negates most of his offense with his horrible defense? Defense that is so bad that it negatively affects the value of the other infielders and the pitchers? Consider for a moment how valuable Fielder would be if actually made his teammates better by saving them errors and getting more outs, instead of actually causing errors and giving outs away? I'm definitely a trend and maximizing value kind of guy, that's what I get into, and I realize that my way doesn't seem to work for other people. I just don't see the value in trying to trade Hardy as a 1 year rental, or Prince when he's only 2 years from FA and likely 2 years closer to being a DH, that's minimizing their trade value to other small market teams. Taking away possible destination will only decrease the possible return and I'm into keeping my options open. Offensive production will be replaced as other positions like C get upgraded down the road, a replacement doesn't necessarily have to be found for 2009. These trades aren't 1 for 1... for example it's not Hardy vs Escobar... it's Hardy vs Escobar + a top of the rotation young starter. Runs prevented count just as much as runs created, and think many people disregard that portion of the deal. In Fielder's case his defense is so bad that I feel even Nelson at 1B + pitcher would be a vast improvement in the team long term. Yes the offensive production might drop off some in 2009, but as Salome/Lucroy, Green, and Gamel start contributing the offensive production will easily surpass what that one player we moved would have given us. If the roster is constructed properly then all of the other things people want like Division Championships, Playoffs, and World Series appearances will take care of itself. Signing the pitchers on the FA market that the Brewers can afford to multi year contract limits the overall talent in the rotation and in a very real way limits how far the team will go in the playoffs. Good pitching > Good hitting, we should be building from the rotation, to the hitters, to the bullpen.

I'm not opposed to sinkerball pitchers in general... but I wonder why Doug is signing another ground ball type pitcher with our crappy defense. We need Ks and FBs, unless the infield gets overhauled... Then again if he's the best value for the money, other than I hate to sign FA pitchers it wouldn't be a bad signing.

I know I'm in the minority around here, but I think any poster's opinion of that deal hinges largely on what the playoff appearance meant to him/her personally. To me, if we made the playoffs only to get bounced in the first round it wouldn't mean that much, and unfortunately that's exactly what happened. 2008 was never "the year" for me, the team had a couple of holes that they couldn't fill and we would have needed every break to fall our way, and that just doesn't happen often in sports. For me personally, acquiring Sabathia severely limited what this team could do going forward, I always have and still favor long term solutions vs rentals.\ I appreciate that a great many people just wanted a post season, but I'm concerned that making the post season will end up limiting our rotation possibilities going froward. I think if DM has a major failing, he throws money at average players way too quickly... Turnbow, Clark, Hall, Helms... Hall actually put up 2 pretty good seasons in a row, but he was one of those guys I could just never get behind because I dislike how he plays the game, but the other guys were sort of 1 year wonders when they got their money. He also seems to overspend on the bullpen, which is another area I wish he wouldn't spend money on. I realize that the system hasn't helped him on the pitching side with Sheets, Villy, Parra, and Yo being the only homegrown contributors on the staff but in general I would prefer the team's payroll to be tied to it's greatest contributors.

Yes you'd give up production in 2009, but you get it back with the second wave prospects who will all be at AAA and AA next year. I'm not one to get hung up on 2009, and I don't see it as creating a hole, I see it as the best way to manage the team's assets long term. We have hitting but not pitching, so it makes sense to move hitting for pitching, MLB players have the greatest value... Fielder negates most of his offensive value with his horrid defense, Hardy has a capable replacement, and we have to give value to get value.

Hart, Weeks, and Hall don't exactly have much trade value. Outside of Cameron, most of the players that actually have value and could be used to acquire a missing piece are players that people around here don't want to move. They have about 10 million the way I see it, and if they make a move that takes on significant salary that will be it, there won't be money left for a significant upgrade anywhere else. The can upgrade 1 of the rotation, bullpen, impact bat, or bench, but only 1 with the money they have. It's obvious they aren't spending any more money on the bench with Hall already there, so really we're talking about 1 player for the rotation, bullpen, or position player. I don't see the value in in paying 8 million for 1 inning at a time for top back of the pen guy, they can get more bang for the buck out of a starter or position player. So then it comes down to what starter would be worth it for 10-12 million per year, what 3rd tier guy should we add to make our rotation better? I'm curious because I honestly don't see it, unless Sheets doesn't find anything and we can get him back for that sort of deal, which seems highly unlikely, what 3rd tier guy is a significant upgrade over what we have? Then it comes down to a guy like Dunn who's probably undervalued around the league, but the team would have to make a trade to find a spot for him, and once he's signed that lessens the trade value of player that would have to be moved. A similar situation to Fielder/Overbay... everyone knows Overbay was going to get moved to make room, which hurt his value on the trade market. I would trade the player first and then sign Dunn or Burrell, but I don't see that happening, that's my little pipe dream. I guess my point is what move should Melvin have made that he hasn't, people keep saying he's not doing anything... but what should he be doing? Give me a name for 2009 and beyond that's gotten away and makes sense for the team? I don't think the Brewers will be in the position where 1 or 2 marginal wins will make a difference in 2009, so what exactly would Melvin be spending on money that he wouldn't be able to address next off season if the need persists?

Something coach said about Salome has been bothering me for a while... he mentioned Angel's 60 time and it was significantly faster than what we've seen reported recently in the press. If his injury took 25-30 points of speed from him (scouting scale), I don't see him being able to play adequately anywhere on the infield. If he didn't lose his speed or quickness, why so many passed balls and stolen bases? X mentioned his hands, I don't know anything about that but to me Angel is a catcher or DH based on what we know. His bat will play, I have no doubt in that, I just don't know about his defense, or a position change for him. Fryer doesn't seem like he'll be a MLB catcher, but he had a real nice year at the plate and I find him intriguing. Lucroy is the C I feel best about... solid at the plate and solid defensively, he's a guy who's easy to like because he does pretty much everything at an average level or better. Maybe he could make the move to a corner IF or OF spot if Lawrie or Salome would be become the everyday C. Lawrie... I'd rather he move to 3B and start in Appleton since Trejo will probably go back to Helena given his ACL injury and so few ABs. His bat will likely carry him faster than a defensive progression at C would allow, and if both Salome and Lucroy make it through the off season in the organization, I'd hope he'd start next year someplace other than catcher. Either Salome or Lucroy will be a huge offensive upgrade over Kendell, so I'm comfortable with the offensive promise of the position. Defensively Salome worries me, even though he's one of my boys, however seems like Lucroy is more of a natural defender/game caller. Going into 2010 I'll feel very good about the position regardless of what happens, it will no longer be a black hole at the bottom of the lineup, and I'm curious to see how things shake out.

I don't know, maybe all of the venom is because there are people who actually believe the Brewers can afford to be significant players in the FA market because of how the payroll has grown. There's the long term health of the franchise to consider as well, and sometimes it's the moves the team doesn't make that end up being the best moves. The farm system has not produced enough pitching and that's pretty much the end of the story. The Brewers can afford to sign pitchers like Suppan to market deals in the 12ish million range, but does that make them a significantly better team in 09, 10, 11? I would/will argue that simply isn't the case. There was a very large portion of the membership here at bf.net that supposedly just wanted a playoff appearance and then let the chips fall where they may. Well now the chips are falling and the same people are bitter? It's like people around here have aspirations of cheering for a large market team when in reality we're the smallest market in the game. Instead of being pleased with a mid market payroll people bemoan Melvin's inaction as "penny pinching". You people got your way, the Brewers acquired Sabathia, what's left to acquire another long term solution for the rotation? Can the team realistically deal 2 or 3 more top prospects away? What pitcher out there would be such a significant replacement over who we currently have that it would justify the extra 8-9 Million per year to have him? Where does the money come from for a closer, a starter, an impact bat? The only move I want to see is a trade for a quality, young, SP, that's it. There's offensive help on the way and it doesn't make any sense to sign players to long contracts for 1 or 2 years when there are more talented players that will end up being blocked behind them. Melvin doesn't have the luxury of just looking at 2009, he also has to look down the road and make the pieces fit together there as well. Again, last year's team was 2-3 players away, next year's team looks to be about 3-4, and there's not 45 mil lying around to plug all those holes. We just need to patient enough to let the second wave of hitters arrive and see how the young pitchers develop. While TH made some lame comments about Mike Jones, there was truth to what Melvin said... how different would this team look if any of the other promising young pitchers had remained healthy or been effective? The list of promising arms that never produced for the big club is astounding. While I thought Jack Z was very good at what he did, all of the current issues with the team go back to the farm system, and there's no instant fix available to plug all of the holes. This is an issue of expectations vs. what's actually feasible... Melvin is doing exactly what he should be, acquiring low risk/high reward pieces to fill in the "role player" positions on the team. These guys aren't going to be expected to carry the load, and if they do, then key pieces got injured and it wasn't going to work out anyway.