Could Escobar or Hardy play 2B?

[Baldkin]

His value goes down if he plays third.......his value to who?

His value in general. Its much easier to find a 3b who hits .280 and 25 HRs and OBP's .330 than it is to find a SS who does that.

 

Corey Koskie was doing that before he got hurt.

[paul253]

Well who is it? Youre going to end up overpaying Glaus or Beltre and watch their numbers decline every year, or you could move Hardy, who is in his prime. You upgrade the offense at third base and the defense.

[endaround]

Yes Glaus might age and become as bad as Hardy. Of course you still have what you got from Hardy to push it up over the top.

[TooLiveBrew]

That's the thing that people keep ignoring -- the value Hardy brings back in a trade. I can't believe people (in this hypothetical) would rather waste the AS-caliber production of a Branyan/Hall platoon & take not only inferior offense at 3B & SS, but forgo the kind of pitcher Hardy could net. Confusing.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

I can't believe people (in this hypothetical) would rather waste the AS-caliber production of a Branyan/Hall platoon

That might be a little bit of hyperbole. Branyan would have to stay healthy and Hall would have to agree to only playing once every 4 days or so.

[PrinceEatMeat]

Why do people even mention Hall and Branyan when talking about 3b? They have both proven that they suck. Branyan may hit some hr's, but he offers nothing else. Hall is pretty much the same, except he hits less hr's. We need to steer away from being a hr hitting team and focus on OBP. Neither of those guys bring that to the table.

[logan82]

Why do people keep talking like a Branyan/Hall platoon would be bad?

 

Hall vs LHP .278/.355/.493/.867

Branyan vs RHP .234/.335/.491/.826

[paul253]

If Hall/Branyon is back for next year, the offense is essentially the same as this year. Are you ok with that?

[endaround]

How is that the same? Branyan got a whopping 152 PAs last year. You could easily double that. Hall got 448, you can remove 150 of those.

[paul253]

So instead of a Hall/Counsell platoon, we have a Hall/Branyon platoon, and everything is better?

[trwi7]

So instead of a Hall/Counsell platoon, we have a Hall/Branyon platoon, and everything is better?

Hall wasn't platooned the first two months of the season and yes, Branyan is better than Counsell, so yes.

[And That]

In regard to "everything being better" Milwaukee had the 6th best OPS in the NL last year. We don't need to make significant changes to the offense.

[PrinceEatMeat]

Why don't we need to make significant changes? Our offense sucked for most of the year other than hitting home runs. It's impossible to get anywhere with a team that relies on the home run as much as the Brewers do. The reason our OPS was that high was because of purely the slugging percentage. However, we had no one on base in front of our slugging. We need good OBP to win games, and much better situational hitting. We need to steer away from our do-or-die offense. Living and dying by the home run ball is not the way to go. We need at least 2 more lefty bats in our lineup, preferably people with high OBP. Our offense couldn't score runs down the stretch, that was our downfall. OPS doesn't define an offense. If it did, we would've had a lot more run production this year, and won a lot more games. Maybe if we had more runners on base, and could actually drive them in, we would have a good offense.

[And That]

Why don't we need to make significant changes?

Because our offense, while not dominant, was above average. If you don't want to use OPS, we scored the 7th most runs in the NL (3 runs behind Atlanta, the 6th best run scoring team). I agree the offense has its problems. I'd like some more OBP certainly, but even then we were .006 below the NL average. However, its problems are not significant enough to make significant changes. I guess it might vary on your definition of significant. The Nationals and Giants need to make significant changes. We just need some tweaks.

 

It's impossible to get anywhere with a team that relies on the home run as much as the Brewers do.

 

We got to the playoffs whilst "relying on the home run" as much as the Brewers did. I'd personally call that somewhere.

[logan82]

Our offense couldn't score runs down the stretch, that was our downfall

 

Nobody was hitting down the stretch other than Weeks, Durham and Fielder(only the last 2 weeks). All our players matching last year with Hart hitting closer to his 2007 numbers than his 2008 numbers(not much of a stretch in my opinion) and replacing Hall's .174/.242/.316/.557 line in 270 PA with Branyan's line against RHP should give us a pretty big improvement. Man did Hall suck against RHP last year.

[reillymcshane]

It's about scoring runs. If a team hits 200 HR and scores 750 runs, or hits 100 and scores 750, the end result in the same over the course of 162 games. One team got their runs with more power (SLG), the other (we'll assume) through higher OBP, BA. But in the end, it's the same number of runs.

 

We were 7th in NL last year in runs scored, as people point out. We did this with Fielder, Weeks, Hart, Hall and even Braun hitting worse than 2007. Only Hardy was better. We didn't have Cameron for a full season. We can, without being too optimistic, hope to see some guys improve in 2009 - and hopefully that will mean more runs.

 

Of course, you could argue that the dominance of right handed batters will allow more and more teams to stack righthanded pitchers against us through the course of the year. Perhaps this could happen to a small degree, but on the whole, I believe things like that tend to even out over the course of such a long season (a short playoff series is another matter).

 

But to say we lost because we only hit home runs just doesn't fly. The Phillies were first in HR, 7th in OBP. They won pretty similar to how we did - only they got hot when we didn't. I'm not saying the offense is perfect - far from it. I'd love to see a reliable lefthanded bat to balance out things. But I think wholesale changes are premature. Let the young players continue to mature - see if they step up. That, more than anything, will mark how this team does in 2009.

[valpocrewsader]

In regard to "everything being better" Milwaukee had the 6th best OPS in the NL last year. We don't need to make significant changes to the offense.

6th out of 16 in OPS and 7th out of 16 in runs scored is nothing to be proud of. That's barely above average.

[logan82]

Sorry, I just can't get over how bad Hall was against RHP last year. I had not looked at his line until a little while ago.

[PrinceEatMeat]

Ok, so we made the playoffs. Keep in mind that we barely made it in as the wildcard. And that was only because the Mets choked it up. The Mets had a much more balanced offense then we did. Without CC we don't come close to the palyoffs last year. We wouldv'e been at least 5 or 6 games out. Our offense is nothing to be proud of. It especially would look bad without CC next year, and without any changes. 6th in the NL in OPS won't cut it if we wanna make the playoffs next year. We will need to rely on our offense a lot more to win next year, which worries me if we keep up with our do-or-die philosophy. The big difference between us and the Phillies was the ability to get the big hit. We hardly ever did it last year. They seemed to frequently do it, which is important with a home run hitting team. I mean sure, we had a few big hr's from Braun which saved our season, but we never would've needed those to get there if we could've beeen just average with RISP all year. We could've beaten the Phillies if we had any timely hitting at all. We don't need guys going up there swinging for the fences every time, we need a better approach up there. People can blame Skaalen all they want, but it's the hitters mentality that does it.

[And That]

6th out of 16 in OPS and 7th out of 16 in runs scored is nothing to be proud of. That's barely[/i] above average.

 

I agree that's it is nothing to toot your horn about, but it is not something that calls for a major overhaul, either.

 

This is why I don't think we need any major changes... Brewers' NL OPS by position (compared to league average):

 

C: .663 (.712)

1B: .876 (.837)

2B: .759 (.747)

SS: .804 (.734)

3B: .726 (.774)

LF: .869 (.802)

CF: .804 (.760)

RF: .765 (.786)

 

Catcher, third base and RF were the only positions where we were below average, and we were well above average at 1B, SS, LF and CF. So basically we have three spots to look at.

 

-I'm pretty confident that Hart will bounce back to somewhere around league average or better, and if he tanks it by midseason, there is time to salvage the position via trade, or from the farm system.

-The Brewers won't make a switch at catcher. Kendall is what he is, though I think the OPS at catcher will improve marginally if Kendall doesn't start 140+ games next year.

-That leaves third base to make the most improvement, IMO, and in the opinion of many others. Just a smart platoon with Branyan/Hall or Lamb/Hall or even Gamel/Hall probably gives you suddenly average or better production at third base.

 

There are other ways for the Brewers to get better OBP from outside the organization, or by trading Hart, etc., but until the pitching situation is figured out, I don't think they'll worry about it too much simply because they don't need to.

Keep in mind that we barely made it in as the wildcard.

The key words in the sentence being "we... made it in as the wildcard [sic]."

 

6th in the NL in OPS won't cut it if we wanna make the playoffs next year.

 

There is no way to know this. I'd like to see how the pitching staff shakes out here, and how other teams are put together before I'd come close to crawling out on that particular limb.

 

The big difference between us and the Phillies was the ability to get the big hit.

 

Well...

The Phillies' 2008 high leverage situation team batting: .247/.332/.423 (754 OPS)

The Brewers' 2008 high leverage situation team batting: .253/.344/.434 (778 OPS)

 

The Phillies' 2008 late & close team batting: .249/.344/.420 (764 OPS)

The Brewers' 2008 late & close team batting: .267/.353/.462 (815 OPS)

 

What's the big difference?

[silversurferr]

I agree: we had plenty of late inning hits to win games. But, maybe if earlier in the games we had more people on base for the sluggers, we would not have to win so often with ninth inning homers.

[PrinceEatMeat]

The bottom line is that we aren't a playoff team without CC, unless the offense improves. Without CC we would've been out of the playoffs last year. If we don't improve our offense at least in one area, we will not make the playoffs without CC. It's as simple as that.

[And That]

It is more likely we will have a better shot at the 2009 playoffs if Sabathia is on the roster, but "we will not make the playoffs unless" statements strike me as too absolutist at this point in the offseason. It is impossible to tell on 11/22/08 what will or will not push the Brewers into the playoffs in '09.

[PrinceEatMeat]

I said we won't make it without CC unless we improve our offense. If we improve our offense within this offseason, and acquire another solid starter, we can easily make it again. If we fail to re-sign CC and don't acquire another starter, our rotation will lack depth and experience. If we have that rotation and the current offense we have, we will be lucky to get a .500 record, much less make the playoffs. I have faith in Melvin to pull something off though. I think we will compete again, even if we don't make the playoffs. I think we will for sure be back within the next 2 years, you can count on that.

[Ennder]

The bottom line is that we aren't a playoff team without CC, unless the offense improves. Without CC we would've been out of the playoffs last year. If we don't improve our offense at least in one area, we will not make the playoffs without CC. It's as simple as that.

 

Not true at all, we can re-sign Sheets and have Gallardo put up great numbers and improve in the bullpen and improve at 3B and make the playoffs. CC had a great run for us but he isn't the only reason we made the playoffs. We were on pace to be wild card contenders before we ever traded for him and if we hadn't had a complete offensive meltdown the last month of the season we would have cruised into the playoffs and he wouldn't have been the reason for it.

 

You are assuming none of the players improve and we don't do much outside of signing SP.