Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

TooLiveBrew

Verified Member
  • Posts

    20,458
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings

Milwaukee Brewers Videos

2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project

2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by TooLiveBrew

  1. Hah! Well, at least their graphics guy is honest. I always chuckle when you can hear the announcers in the sixth inning of a ST game shuffling through their roster sheets to try & figure out who the heck that #91 guy is. The Brewers-Dodgers game from a week+ ago had "Edwin Maysonette" as Maysonet's name for his first AB. I thought that was pretty bad, but it doesn't come close to "Minor League Guy". That's awesome.
  2. I'm responding mostly to your first line here... I think the Jays are willing to take risks on talent, not necessarily me-first guys. Anthopoulos seems close to 100% focused on talent, not much else. I think a season or two from now, we could easily be talking about the Blue Jays having one of the best left-sides of the infield in all of MLB. I have to admit I'm a little envious of Jays fans; I wish Melvin would be more talent-focused than he is, but at this point I don't expect him to change. Anthopoulos sold incredibly high on Marcum & bought incredibly low on Escobar. Hard for me not to envy those moves.
  3. I think your recall on that is correct, endaround. And I definitely remember Melvin making a comment (after the Greinke deal) that the Royals were exclusively looking for up-the-middle prospects, so when the Brewers could offer Escobra & Cain, the Royals were sold.
  4. Yes, it's that bad. Painful to admit, isn't it?
  5. Neither one is a good option at SS, but I guess Theriot has at least played at SS & would obviously be better than Izturis.
  6. "Most scouts"? I really have never read anything that calls Schafer's defense just "ok". Athletic ability? Yes. Defense? No.
  7. Calling a pitcher with two seasons in which he hasn't reached the 200 inning mark in Petco one of the best in the game, a tad premature. Thankfully I called him one of the best young arms in the game
  8. We had a user P50 just three months ago or so. Results in post #32 here
  9. It was there for the taking, that's for sure. And I really am a fan of Badger hoops, I just get frustrated with Bo's approach at times. And I was sorry to see Marquette go, but Florida sure looks better than a 7 seed right now. Marquette can hold their heads high for this season. I'll be interested to see what Buzz can do without Crowder & DJO. Part of me wonders if this might be a perfect season for him to move to a different job, although I know his recruiting has been very good... so the cupboard shouldn't be bare.
  10. That pic does look like it's from a box suite
  11. They were outmatched athletically, I thought Syracuse played better defense, & the Orange were able to get their own shots by beating guys off the dribble. UW had flashes of effectiveness, but ultimately the reason they lost imo is that Syracuse has better players, & they played suffocating on-ball defense against Bucky.
  12. Exactly. And the final possession perfectly summarized why they shouldn't have been close. Aside from open three-pointers, the Badgers had/have nothing consistent on offense. Syracuse had a better athlete at basically every position, AND they were missing their best player. And I totally agree, Jack'74, the lack of any play drawn up for that final 15.5 seconds is pretty unforgivable to me. I'm guessing Traevon Jackson will be the guy. Physically, he looks like a smaller version of his dad, and maybe a smaller version of Jordan Taylor.
  13. In other words, he's basically Nyjer Morgan, but some people think his defense is or could be better than Nyjer's. And since Morgan is older, more expensive, & coming off a great season, he makes sense to shop.
  14. I think it was Wolf who called him Little Nicky. That was great!
  15. Nice! It is, after all, the cause of & solution to...
  16. Hard to have a discussion based around evidence, when the evidence is deemed out of bounds or a waste of time. People can't dismiss, based on evidence, that Young will be HOF-worthy, but you can dismiss facts & evidence that indicate he will not be. I don't get playing the "oh geez, gimme a break, I don't have time for this" card after you took the time to start a thread about this, respond multiple times, & lobby for Young. But, like you say, move on.
  17. I wouldn't say I'm upset, I just loathe that tactic in debates/arguments, because imo it's lazy. It'd be the same as dismissing praise of Young by saying, "You guys are just drinking the kool-aid". To be fair, the "debate" is based on whether or not people think the most important thing a player can do is hit singles. The vast majority of people in this discussion seem to feel that isn't true, so no I don't think it's a stretch to say that he's not a legit HOF candidate. It doesn't feel like a debate to me, that's just imo, to me a debate needs more balance & this seems pretty one-sided in the "no" camp. Well, if you don't "buy" that era is important, I don't know how this can be an objective discussion. Hitting today is also better than ever before, which means that singles specialists like Young no longer carry the same value they once did. He's solid, he's a 'ring of honor' type that his own club can recognize, but he doesn't belong anywhere near a serious HOF discussion imo.
  18. Well you could have just not listed it, since it's pretty meaningless. The guy is what he is, a solid player who's nowhere near being a HOF candidate in the era in which he's played. There's nothing wrong with that, and in saying that I'm not "hating" or calling him a bad player.
  19. All-Star Game MVP? Come on.
  20. I agree on calling it a "4", but imo that's a relatively minor gripe with the grade John Hart decided to give the Brewers' lineup. Fwiw, Hart also said he thought the lineup had a shot to again be a very "thick" (his phrase, I like) lineup. I'd imagine the uncertainty about Gamel, Weeks & Ramirez (injury concerns for the latter two) is what kept him from going with a 4, but that's just my guess.
  21. I don't think you should expect a return similar to what the Pads got for one of the best young arms in the game, since pitching is the commodity on the trade market. But I do agree with the more general point that Weeks, if shopped, should fetch a strong return.
  22. Some chain of custody issues?
  23. Yep, when Hart gave out his 1-5 (5 being best) grades at the end of the program, he went Rotation: 4 Bullpen: 4 Lineup: 3 Bench: 3 Mitch Williams amended his scorecard to have a 5 for the bullpen, based on Ax & K-Rod, but other than that agreed with Hart. I agree that they were very fair, overall. The main question raised that they all agreed on was the lack of power off the bench.
  24. Young's a singles & doubles hitter who has never been a plus defender. He's been a good player. Why am I not surprised that there are instantly people claiming that, if you say Young isn't HOF-caliber, you're "hating"? Yuni wasn't really that terrible, he was just misunderstood, just like Young -- he's a HOF caliber player! Think of it, Mantle, Aaron, Mays... Michael Young. I mean, who hasn't thought of that at some point while marveling at the durable above-average-ness that is Young's game?
  25. MLBN comes through, though you'll have to wait until at least tomorrow. http://mlb.mlb.com/network/promotions/30_in_30.jsp EDIT: Whoops, this only links you to shorter clips from the segment. Still worth checking out, though, once the Brewers' is up.
×
×
  • Create New...