TheCrew07

Jinx!

again I say that trading Hardy isn't a 1 for 1 trade with Escobar... comparing their offensive numbers doesn't take into account the total net result of the move, the net change is more than Escobar's offense vs Hardy's offense.

I have an affinity for the Rays pitching depth, so they've been a favorite of mine for a long time, not to mention they compete directly with my 2 least favorite teams in the AL. Sort of like in football how whomever is playing Minnesota is my second favorite team...

Valpocrewsader you rule, I thought I knew that damn song but I couldn't place it, I searched it in Napster, see the album cover, and immediately curse my little sis, cause that's where I heard it. I do think that one part has highlight film potential if I'm desperate.

Hmm, a #3... seems a bit premature after just rookie ball with 2 plus pitches already. Interesting analysis of his mechanics none the less, I really love the side by side fastball/curveball analysis.

I really hate Yuku maintenance eating my posts. I'll quickly summarize my lost post. I wish we'd be more judicious using MLEs, they are projections, nothing more... sometimes they'll be spot on and sometimes they'll be off. What did MLEs have to say about Braun's rookie season? Puljos? I think projections in general work much better for players of average talent because they are based on the average MLB player, players of great physical talent typically have higher peaks and valleys as they settle in. When's the last time any of us saw a projection that projected a break out year from a player? I look at Escobar's power explosion this season differently than those who prefer MLEs... it's a difference perspective. In a purely offensive context, Escobar for Hardy makes no sense, in the same way that moving Fielder makes no sense. The problem is that the trades aren't 1 for 1... they'd include improved pitching and defense which is difficult to quantify. I think we get hung up on the offensive numbers/projections because we don't have any names so instead of debating the hypothetical net gain of a trade, we get hung up debating what we know in offensive numbers between 2 of the key participants. I'm not concerned about an offensive step backwards in 2009 because I think 2010 and 11 could be the start of something special. Gamel, Green, Salome/Lucroy, and possibly others will more than make up the difference offensively down the road. I want the best possible team, but getting the best possible team doesn't necessarily always mean choosing the best option between 2 players at the same position, it's not that black and white. The Seligs are only relevant in this discussion because they never raised revenue for the Brewers in the same way that MA's ownership group has done, they've found many more revenue streams for the team, which allows for a greater payroll. Regardless, MA doesn't pay the Brewer players out of his pocket, the Brewer Franchise pays the players (a business), and the business is on a budget, which I'd ballpark around 80 mil. Suppan + FA pitcher is roughly 27.5 mil the next 2 years, or 3/8 of the payroll for 2 declining players. In the other post I listed all of the contracts the Brewers will have in 2010, here I'm just going to say that I'm more interested in the Brewers being fiscally responsible than I am FA acquisitions. If they do play in the FA market, I'd rather get Teixeira whos similar to Fielder offensively and worlds better defensively, making a Fielder trade very painless. If they don't move Hardy or Fielder for pitching I'm okay with that too, I could live with Yo, Parra, McClung, Bush, Suppan in 2009 but I'd rather acquire another stud pitcher. None of us know who's truly available or what the deals would be, I just sincerely hope the Brewers will do their due dilligence and listen to offers for players other than Yo and Braun. I like that Melvin has said he doesn't know what the team will look like yet, keep those options open Doug.

It's just you. Trading Hardy or Fielder has nothing to do with a loser mentality and everything to do with addressing the hole(s) in the rotation. I personally believe in building from the pitching staff on down, but since the farm system isn't producing pitchers and the FA market stinks in my opinion the only way left to acquire solid pitchers is via the trade route. The system has a replacement in Escobar (regardless of what other posters here on the site think about him) for Hardy, and in spite of Fielder's offensive prowess his defensive issues are difficult to ignore and there is no way he's signing long term Milwaukee. Their is no 1B prospect even close in the system because LaPorta was burned for Sabathia, so 1B would most likely have to be addressed through FA, and I'd rather spend money on bats than arms. I don't want to repost 8 months worth of ideas and reasoning behind my opinions, and I don't expect you to agree, but these ideas have been thrown around so much in the minor league and transaction forums that the hypothesis that we'd rather sabotage the team and keep losing irritates me. If you don't agree that Hardy or Fielder should be moved that's fine, but that doesn't mean those of us that do are losers at heart.

Sarfate had every opportunity to make it in this organization, he never threw enough strikes, he needed the change of scenery.

Hmm, I meant to post my comment in the other thread where Peavy was mentioned. Hardy and Parra for Peavy? That's a fantastic deal for the Padres with the MLB talent we'd be giving up. People have ACE pitching on the brain after Sabathia. I'm all for acquiring pitching, but a deal like this creates multiple holes without filling the hole the rotation. Peavy and Yo aren't going to carry this team to the playoffs on their own, it takes more than that. While Peavy is a huge upgrade over Parra at this time, we're still short a pitcher in the short term, and if Jeffress would go we'd be short a pitcher long term. Again I point to teams with good offenses but little pitching this past season in Texas and Detroit. I believe in building from the pitching staff down, but Peavy would simply be way too costly to acquire. The Brewers cannot afford to make trades at "any cost".

How does trading pitching for pitching help us in the short term or long term?

Al your expectations are unrealistic for this idea, if Fielder is moved, he'd be moved for pitching, so there isn't going to be run production coming back, it would be run limitation in a better starting pitcher and improved infield defense. The Brewers don't have another power hitter to replace Fielder with, but they could sign one if that's the route they take. They don't even have to make up for the loss of production in 2009 to be better off, the Brewers will however be a significantly more talented team in 2010. As the second wave hits and begins producing the team could easily make back the "28 runs" as you put it, and have a very good rotation to go with the offense. The alternative is standing still with the position players and signing an overpaid FA pitcher to plug the gap in the rotation which is horrible value for the dollar. Fielder will never be more valuable than he today, he'll have less value after 2009 because he'll only be around for 2 years, and after 2010 the return would be prospects as he'd basically be a 1 year rental for the team that acquired him. The only way he stays with the team long term is if he's traded to one of the AL teams that has a hole and can afford is contract. That idea really limits the possibilities in regards to players coming back. If you're against trading Fielder that's fine, but you keep arguing points that are irrelevant in the context of the discussion, and have a pretty narrow view of the trade, it's not about 09, it's about 10, 11, 12... Teams that build from the offense on down aren't very successful... look at Texas and Detroit... The most pressing issue isn't 3B, 2B, CF, or RF, it's the ROTATION, the other positions can be addressed in house in time. If the Brewers can put a very capable pitching staff together they can compete regardless what happens with the position players in 09, and will be very competitive in 2010. I still say the Brewers should target Shields with Fielder, David Price made the post season roster and is pitching very well, and if they upgrade their offense the Rays will be even better next year as their pitching staff wouldn't suffer any drop off after losing Shields.

It could be a space problem, but I'd guess it's more of a corruption issue. Double Click the My Computer Icon Right Click on the C drive Left Click Properties Left Click the Tools tab Under Error Checking Left Click Check Now Under Check Disk options Select Both Boxes and Click Start You will get a message telling you the system will be checked the next time you restart. Do a restart on your computer and let computer check itself for errors, this will take some time. When it finally boots back into Windows XP try the automatic update icon again. If it still fails I'd download it directly from microsoft and run it so you can see exactly what the error is. edit. grammar

I'm surprised you dislike OPS+ but support PAP... I guess like anything else this comes down to personal taste.

Trading Verlander makes sense the same way trading Fielder or Hardy makes sense instead of letting them walk in Arby. In addition the Verlander deal makes sense for the Tigers because he's only under contract for 2009 and Porcello is already 2 years into his MLB deal and needs to break through, they only have team options through 2012 on him.Getting Which makes me wonder why anyone would be dumb enough to sign a pitcher to a MLB contract to get them signed? If you have to get him signed using a MLB contract (deadline type deal), why not go more years because you know he'll spend at least 1 and maybe as many 3 years in minors? Back to Verlander, because he's only under contract through 2009, I wouldn't want the Brewers to acquire him using Hardy or Fielder... he'd be a great stop gap in the rotation but I don't see acquiring him without giving up pitching. Unfortunately for the Tigers, the only top pitching prospect that pitched well in the organization was Porcello, so they'll need pitching help coming back. As I said in the other thread I really liked Detroit's SP depth coming into the season, but Rogers was poor, Willis was horrid, Bonderman got hurt, Robertson didn't turn the corner, and they had to pickup Garcia who hasn't pitched well in a couple of years. I don't think Rogers and Garcia will be back, and Miner and Galarraga did pitch well, so they still have some limited depth. I would really like to see Willis turn his career back around as well, I always liked him.

I typed out a long post and accidentally hit Add Reply instead Quick Reply and lost it. I think on paper Detroit had a very solid rotation coming into the year so I have a difficult time agreeing that their rotation is poor because 2 of the top 3 underperformed and the other got hurt. They weren't good in 2008, but I don't see why they wouldn't be better in 2009. With the additions of Miner and Galarraga to the rotation and likely Porcello replacing Rogers (Porcello has a MLB deal already so he'll be pushed) there's reason for optimism in Detroit if Bonderman will be healthy. Even if they trade Verlander who's only signed through 2009 they still have Willis and Robertson as depth for the 5th spot (and I sincerely hope Willisturns it back around) or they could sign a FA pitcher. Hopefully for their fan's sake Garcia and Rogers will not be back. A rotation of Bonderman, Verlander, Miner, Galarraga, and Porcello excites me much more than a rotation of Yo, Parra, Bush, McClung, and Suppan.

JJ. I think AA is the top of the pyramid in the minor leagues. When you get to AAA it's mostly the same names from AA with minor league vets who know how to play the game. The pitching is another step up in AAA, but it's small, not like the jump from A ball to AA. Not to diminish the significance of the steps up from AA to AAA to MLB... it's just that I get pretty comfortable with a prospect when they excel at AA. Obviously the little things matter more as players move up and the relative talent level reaches MLB quality, but I'm not worried about Escobar making adjustments, he has gotten better pretty much every year. The one thing that really got me excited is that he improved statistically across the board, every single number is his line was better than last year's with the exception of his 3B (which is going move around, 3B are a function of luck in many cases) and SO total. Hits, 2B, HR, BB.... right down the line. I get why Ennder is questioning his high BABIP, I just don't think that's the primary indicator I would use in this case. He had 13 doubles in 2007... he had 24 this year, 1 Hr in 2007 and 8 this year... that's a power explosion in my opinion. I would like him to be more disciplined and walk more and SO less, but all in all there's great reason for optimism in my opinion.

I would guess because of our suckitude on defense and his stuff was never that great to begin with and may be getting worse. His control just wasn't good, which doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy regarding his future.

Their staff isn't good? Huh? They had some major setbacks in that Bonderman got hurt, Verlander had a down year, and age may finally be catching up with Rogers. However Miner looks to be pretty decent and Galarraga was very good this year. Robertson still has only put it together for 2006 and was poor and Willis was horrible, but going into the season they had the makings of a good pitching staff. They don't have much minor league depth outside of Porcello as the other top pitching prospects in the organization faltered this year, but I could still see them moving a Verlander if they think offense if their biggest issue. I just looked at Bonderman's stats, for some reason I thought he was better than a 4.74 career era, his stuff is pretty wicked, that's disappointing. Furthermore... Willis... as bad as I felt for Turnbow, I feel just as bad for Willis, he's putting up worse much numbers now than he did at the same minor league stop in 2002. Funny thing is that his AAA line this year is almost identical to his A+ line... how do you go from a sub 3.0 ERA in MLB to a 4.5+ in A+ in 2 years?

Well then you're better off keeping Prince and applying the money to signing a pitcher.To each his own but I'd much rather pay 18 mil/year for Teixeira (which might be a tad high) than I would for Sheets, or 15 for Lowe, or any other free agent pitcher. I've said all along I'm not against spending money, but if they're going to spend it I'd rather they spend it on a bat than pitching, there's simply far less risk with a bat. To me this is the year to sign a "name" if they are going to do it, because we'll have 4 draft picks coming back to compensate for the 1 we lose. We have no in house super prospect at 1B anymore, and Fielder will never be more valuable than he is today. We'll have a hole in the rotation and our closest in house solution is Jeffress (top of the rotation quality, McClung probably wouldn't be bad, mid 4s era). Instead of spending money on declining pitchers who have a tendancy to get hurt (most pitchers do), spend the money where we get the most bang for the buck. Also, assuming Prince gets traded, what better way to lessen the blow than to sign Teixeira? The offensive drop off becomes irrelevent. Is it likely? No way. I'd much rather go the extra 3 mil for a hitter than hope to get value from a Burnett type (who's no better than Bush at 4 times the cost). I'm not a big PR guy, but I will grundingly concede the Brewers would have to do something to "soften the blow". I agree with others that Lowe doesn't make sense in relation to the rest of the team... no ground ball pitcher (didn't we have this same conversation about Suppan?) is going to do well with Prince at 1B, Rickie at 2B, and our current platoon at 3B. However if the pieces change on the infield, Hardy to 2B or 3B, a different 1B, whatever... then a Lowe type acquisition makes much more sense in the context of the current makeup of the team. That being said, they'll probably acquire Lowe putting him in a position to fail, because he's the most affordable FA option (relatively speaking), much like Cameron this last off season. Not that Cameron has failed, he did exactly what I expected him to do, I mean that he really wasn't a solution in relation to the team, like many of us said at the time he's just more of what we already had, except he plays D.

Hardy was excellent this post season but it was only 4 games, that screams sample size alert... JJ can definitely help carry the team for a short stretch, much like Braun and Fielder. However I don't weigh his success against the Phillies anymore than I do Fielder's lack of success against him.

Who said anything about acquiring 3 FA pitchers? I don't even want to sign 1.

"unsustainable BABIP" might be my least favorite phrase that's tossed around baseball forums, like how rluz hates "big game pitcher". All a high BABIP really means to me is that a guy got hot and hit the crap out of the ball for an extended period of time. It may be luck in your opinion, that's fine, I just don't see it that way. Did I expect Gamel to hit .380 all year? No... but then I didn't expect Salome to hit .360 either for the season. Are either of their BABIP sustainable on a MLB level? Of course not. To me the point isn't their MLE or a BABIP that regresses to the mean, the point is that these kids have the ability to put the bat on the ball. All 3 kids have warts, there's no doubt, but they also have talent, and there is simply no way that Escobar tops out as Counsell with better defense. If you mean next year... then maybe? I don't expect him to come in and be a run producer, I would expect him to come in and hold his own and continue to raise up his game. I'd be happy with a .270/.320/.400 line next year as batting 8th I think he'd pickup a couple of extra walks. If he spends all year in AAA I'd probably be looking for something better in 2010. He could use work in the plate discipline and power departments, but he's way too young to be nearing the top end of his offensive potential. Again in no way has Escobar been rushed, he's spent 5 full seasons in MiLB, he has more ABs in just AA (772) than Weeks does in his entire MiLB career (771) and he's starting to put it together in my opinion. Mass uses this statement all the time, but Alcides has done exactly what he's supposed to, he's made incremental gains each year with the exception of 2006.

Well lets play what if... If Parra continues to mature he's a top of the rotation pitcher and then there's always the possibility of acquiring another young pitcher via trade. Yo, Parra, random pitcher would be 3 pitchers... all at approximately the same place in their careers. I'm not saying it's going to happen, but it's not as far fetched as you make it seem, there's plenty of names from around the league that could be inserted into that random player slot, that idea is addressed daily on this site.

The point is that you can pay 3 Yo types through arbitration for 1 Sabathia... I get what you're saying, but it's hard to claim Arby pitchers are overpaid.

I don't want to get into another circular debate with you, but I'll answer your question about expectations. People that were skeptical of Escobar looked at his 2007 line and wondered if he could do it again, myself included. This year he literally blew last year's numbers out of the water, and he's starting to develop some power and could realistically be a 15ish HR guy when he's done filling out. He's made a believer out of me and I suspect many others. He's not a 5 tool stud, he's a 4 tool stud, but that's good enough for me.