TooLiveBrew

I guarentee Yost was giving McClung the 5th so he could qualify for the win. Must... find... constructive... thing to say... http://www.bohemianscientist.org/images/blog06/headexplode.jpg

Is there any cogent explanation for why McClung was still out there after the Teixieiriai HR? Come to think of it, is there one for why he was still out there at all? Or do we just have to settle for having an incompetent manager & all that comes with it?

I'm going to go instigate on the Madison forum...

I remember as a kid thinking a bike helmet made me look like stupid. It's pretty obvious now that the dumb thing is to not protect yourself. I can't recall where this happened, but recently a biker had his/her head run over by a truck (tire), and came away basically unscathed (somehow) thanks to the helmet. Seeing motorcyclists without helmets makes me so worried -- my childhood friend's mom worked in an ER, and she told me the nurses always call those bikers "donors". Ick.

Does that apply to something like a throwaway, though? I can't see that not getting ruled an error.

I was involved with this discussion. Personally, I thought it was a great thread.

Just want to instigate & point out the Madison team's 4-0 record. I know talks were begun about a showdown, but never finalized. How 'bout a round-robin? I'll get my former teammates roped into something they didn't start. They deserve it. BF.net uber-team to be crowned -- bragging rights?

Those are some horny snakes, then.

WOW What is the draw for them to cluster like that? I thought that snakes were solitary animals... doesn't that tend to include being territorial? I've never seen anything like that. Is it mating that draws so many together?

Ditka.

That's a nice thought if you're playing the game on paper, but in the real life situations where the games on the line, the top pitcher has to be the closer, or at least you have to have a very reliable pitcher as your closer. Well seeing as how the majority of higher-leverage situations are not limited to one inning (the 9th), locking your best RP into specific situations that many times aren't the highest leverage ones seems to be the 'if it were played on paper' approach. Yes, it sounds sexy to be "The Closer" -- but the reality is that the higher-leverage innings frequently don't go to the closer. This is not new knowledge, and it is not some wacky opinion. The 9th inning can sometimes be high-leverage. Unfortunately, if you freeze your best RP to only working under a certain set of circumstances, you cancel out much of the benefit of having a 'best RP'. What good is he if you don't use him whenever he's most needed? Having a reliable closer is not the same as having your best RP as closer... but might as well just say that he "has" to be the closer, right? Playing the game on paper is crafting a set of predetermined rules under which the best RP shall only be used. The reason I want the best RP not locked in is that the game isn't played on paper (no kidding). Gagne has shoulder soreness... it's not like he just magically doesn't know how to pitch anymore. If he's healthy, he is a reliable RP. If not, we're lucky to have some other good choices. But taking the best reliever, and setting him in some iron-clad rule structure so there are many scenarios wher he can't be used when needed most, is not good strategy.

No conflict? I don't see that. He clarified his feelings (which he openly admitted were not objective facts) quite eloquently, and you still felt the need to name-call -- "flimsy" I don't know why everything has to be "debated". He discussed it, and explained his stance quite well. Can't someone have a feeling on something without being called into question? I don't see the harm in that. You don't agree with him. Fine. Great. Why is it necessary to call it "flimsy" and elaborate on how unfounded you think it is? He's had a lot of experience seeing once-promising prospects not pan out, so he's leery of getting too excited. No harm there. I didn't agree with him, but once he explained, I could respect it. Honestly at this point, no I don't feel like I'm being overly dramatic. You seem to feel that you should be allowed free reign to pick apart posts and belittle people's opinions without being challenged. I think that's counterproductive to a fair discussion, and am fully frustrated with it.

There were definitely people that worried letting Vargas go would be a risky decision -- in case of injuries, etc. I know personally I felt he was not a good SP option, but was a bit concerned when he was flat-out released. I don't think I argued that we should keep him per se, but releasing him made me worry about our depth. Unfortunately the injuries to Cappy & Gallardo have magnified that the old 'You can never have too much pitching' is true. I agree that McClung looked good in his start, but I also have to be honest & say that I'm concerned that it was a fluke as opposed to a sign of things to come. However, I stubbornly remain optimistic that Seth has really figured something out about his delivery.

As for the comment about proper grammar/writing, I'm a big fan of grammar, spelling, writing etc. but my "enter" key is broken on this laptop so I apologize to all of those who read this http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif That's awesome -- the first thing I thought when I saw (not read... saw) your post was, 'Whoa, pargraphs!' Well played.

Why did he have to explain his second post any further? It seemed fairly clear. (just mo)

Whoever our most effective RP is... that guy should be the #1 non-closer option. If that's Torres, so be it. The closer's 'job description' puts him into some of the lowest-leverage situations. I'd be fine with Gagne there. I'd prefer just playing matchups, but the Save has become such a moneymaker that I know that's just a naive hope.

He expanded very well on how he's felt snake-bitten by the lack of success, and admitted it's not necessarily 100% logical. Why drag him over the coals on something that's just his personal reflections? He didn't make any sort of absolutist statements, just expressed some pent-up concerns/frustrations. "Now, that the organization is headed in the right direction long term, it's gonna take some time to adjust to the possibilities like a low level prospect who is more than just a body. It's an exciting prospect to be sure."

What is your argument against what he posted?

Ned Yost: managing for the least likely outcomes since 2003

Just worry about trying to find something that you enjoy doing and could see yourself doing for the rest of your life. The money and everything else will follow you. This is excellent advice, and I've received the same advice from a few people that certainly don't have any worries about money. Very few people know exactly what they want to do with their lives when they are 18. You will change as a person and with that what you want to do with your life will change. Just try a bunch of different things and make the best decision you can at the time you are making it. More great advice. When I went to college, I was going to graduate with a poli-sci major & go to law school immediately after. After two semesters of poli-sci courses & realizing that they bored me to tears, I decided I didn't know what the heck I wanted to do after all. I recently graduated with a degree in English... I still have no idea what I'm going to do 'when I grow up', but I know my English degree (strong writing & analytical skills/training) is going to help me a lot more than that poli-sci degree would have. Follow your passion. That's the most important thing.

The discussion is on if the Brewers should trade him and you are the turning this into "all the fans are on his case, thinking he sucks and wanting to trade him this year". No, that part was in direct response to twobrewers's post. Here is what I wrote: "He takes flak every day for people's perceptions -- he's fat, he's a stupid vegetarian, he's lazy, he had his career year already, & on & on. I can't blame him for not being a bit more visible. I'm not singling anyone out, just observing the comments made on a daily basis." That was discussing how much of a 'leader' he is/isn't. That didn't have anything to do with whether or not we should trade him, unless the argument was, 'Trade him bc he's not a true leader'. The discussion went a lot of ways at once imo. The talk around trading him primarily is because he has tangible value due to his breakout year, because he isn't likely re-signable, because the team has a ton of depth, because he isnt versatile, and PRIMARILY because he can get us good pitching. Once again, I point out that the only portion of that to which I took exception was that we should look to deal him this season. If it were Laporta that had come to the bigs with Prince in the minors, I'd be saying the same thing about dumping Laporta. But Prince is the proven commodity, can net us more, and is less part of the long-term plan I think. Right -- that's fair. I have no objection to trading him, just think that to do so this season (or even next) would not be the best play.

But when you are unable to articulate your thoughts clearly - people will make inferences based on the comments you do make. Very true. Must be doubly frustrating. Wanted to include that I don't think we should trade Prince now. I just think it is worth exploring in the off-season. If the opportunity is there, I agree with taking a look. I just don't think we should count on LaPorta being definitely ready for 2009.

Toolive, you suggested that since JJ had his best year last year that he does not mind batting 8th. You were right that he did have his best year, but he wasn't batting 8th. He was batting second. When he did bat 8th, he was very good, so in a round about way you were both right and wrong. Thanks for clarifying -- I didn't mean to indicate that I was talking about his overall production... just what he did @ #8. Hardy was best last season at #8, right in front of the P. I see how you read my post now -- sorry for not being clearer! I meant, he was at his best at the #8 spot in 2007, based on how good his line was: .314/.330/.581/.911. For comparison's sake, at #2: .274/.322/.449/.771. I wasn't trying to be combative or snarky, sorry shelmark. I was just unclear.

Sorry, shelmark, trying to keep things straight here. Do you mean the info I provided was not supportive of my argument? I have no problem admitting being wrong... plenty of experience being wrong. I'm not trying to cherry-pick. I'm confused by your most recent post (#36). It also isn't useful to look at player population as a whole and then determine that every individual will conform to that standard. You also didn't mention that 3 of his 20 BBs are IBBs, and since you are using last year as an example, he had one. Good point -- I missed that. Even still, 17 BB over 170-ish AB is a nice improvement from his 2007 rate. I don't think everyone performs to the community standard, I just prefer the larger sample to the small individual ones; I disagree that it isn't useful. Imho, the only thing Hardy hasn't been at his norms with so far is the SLG, which (again, imho) will come. EDIT: So although you were correct the information you provided was not entirely appropriate in support of your argument. I admit I am wrong, but at least you could admit to your mistake as well. Ok, gotcha now. As far as I can tell, the argument was that Hardy is not comfortable batting in front of the P. I pointed to his success hitting in front of the P last season, which seems to refute that, as does (imo) his OBP this season. I didn't point to anything more than what he did in 2007 batting 8th -- I didn't refer to his season as a whole. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

But my main point, put really poorly on my part, is that I love it when organizations throw their own minor leaguers at a problem--giving each one of them a chance to stick, to show their stuff. I want them to give lots of guys chances. I want to see want Hernan can do. What is Nelson capable of? If the Crew would first dip into the minors when they had a problem, rather than heading directly to the trade or free agency, then I'd be a happy guy knowing full well that most wouldn't work out, but, and it's a big but, some might surprise us. Some who really shouldn't be in the majors based on projections might turn out. I find that a really exciting prospect. So really I'm totally about Dillard in a bass ackward way! Well put! I like it too, and am adjusting to the concept of having a farm system, too. I think your expectations are good, too -- most minor-leaguers don't pan out. The hope with Dillard (I guess) is that he can do what Thatcher did for SD in 2007. Obviously it'd be great to see him turn out better than Joe has in the second season, but cross that bridge when it's reached, right?