It would suck, but…. sometimes, shit’s gotta get done.

I WANT GALLARDO BACK.

Isn’t he one of the few pitchers to get hurt more often than Sheets the past few seasons?

Just casually looking at stats, our very own Dave Bush is better at keeping runners off the bases this year than Sabathia.

I’m with the Greinke fanboys over here. If you’re going to trade the farm, trade it for someone who either isn’t eligible for free agency or has a contract remaining for a few more years, not another Scott Linebrink case. I

This article from a couple days ago speculates-I don’t know how informedly-that the Brewers could be interested in either.

on management’s intentions with Sheets. If they think they can keep both Sheets and Sabathia together for a couple of years (unlikely, I know), I say whatever it takes. If not, I’d still like to see us go for it, but only if we don’t give up too much of our future. I’d be willing to part with either of the Matts, but obviously not both. Still not sure what I would make of a Sabathia/Fielder swap. I tend to think we would be giving up too much right now. In time, we could make up for the loss of prince with Gamel and LaPorta, but not this early.

Sheets
Sabathia
Gallardo
Suppan
TBD

Good lord, i’m salavating.

- Trade for this guy (or someone like him)

WC: What about the Brewers, and how does the potential loss of two ace-level pitchers to free agency factor in? Giving Jack Zduriencik that many picks sounds interesting.

KG: Giving Jack Z. a lot of picks is always a dangerous thing—for other teams. Milwaukee has some good fits potentially for Cleveland. They might be interested in mid-level catching prospects like Jon Lucroy and Angel Salome, a glove-first shortstop like Alcides Escobar who has shown some offensive sings of life this year, and the Brewers also have some decent arms they might be able to throw in. Don’t forget that with Matt LaPorta coming quickly and Mat Gamel mashing at Double-A but looking more and more like and first base/DH type defensively, the Brewers are close to having too many bats and not enough positions, so somebody is going to have to go.

“These other teams, (if you are talking about the Brewers), have no reason to even realistically try to get Sabathia. The Brewers are interested mainly to drive up the price for the Cubs & Angels. Most other teams won’t have the dollars to sign Sabathia. The Cubs have a unique combination of money & prospects.”

to target an elite reliever rather than a starter, assuming we’re looking to give up prospects? We already have an above average rotation anchored by one of the best pitchers in the National League (in the middle of a Cy Young season if he stays healthy and Volzquez falls back down to earth).

On the other hand, we have one reliever in our entire bullpen who doesn’t hemorrhage runs in every appearance. Our bullpen currently has a higher ERA than our starting rotation, which certainly can’t be good. If our defeat in 1982 has taught us anything, it’s not to rely on a single reliever!

Hey, folks, just stopping in from Let’s Go Tribe. Former MKE resident, big Brew Crew fan.

I won’t presume to speak for Mark Shapiro—as a general rule, we know which guys he’s going to trade, but not his targets. That said, what’s happened to the Indians is a minor failure, for various reasons, of a generation of position player talent that was supposed to be contributing now. (Let’s put it this way: Mildly talented guys like Francisco, Choo, and Garko were not supposed to be keystones in our lineup at this point.)

We’ve probably got the arms for 2009, but with Victor Martinez’s health in question, and Travis Hafner’s entire career up in the air, we’ve got some big offensive holes to fill at the ML level. So I can say with reasonable confidence that we’re shopping for high-ceiling corner bats ready no later than next year. I won’t pretend to be well-read about your system, but you’ve got to figure this will take at least one of your upper-level, top-flight bats. Otherwise, what’s the point? We’ve got some guys who should be ready in 2010, 2011; it’s next year we’re worried about.