FVBrewerFan

I have pretty strong opinions about this. I'm also in the Fox Valley Hammer, had two children go through HS- a HS with prominant athletic programs. (Yea, that narrows it down, doesn't it?) My first reaction is to warn you about burn-out. Happened to my daughter playing soccer. She was talented, and really enjoyed playing. So at an early age, soccer slowly but surely became a year-round thing. Traveling tem, acceleration training, camps, you name it. She burned by the time she was a senior in HS. Concussion, torn up knee, but mostly she just had enough. I use her as an example, but I know lots of other kids in her grade and in my other daughter's grade that went down the same route. A couple guys that were really good basketball players. Others, same deal with baseball. Just got burned out. Your son is 8, he loves baseball and that's all he wants to do. That's great, it really is. But he's 8. Ten years of this and he may look at it differntly. Hey, it doesn't happen to every kid- just a friendly warning that it's something to keep an eye on. I would encourage him to get involved with other activities- sports or otherwise. The other thing I've noticed from coaching a ton of youth sports is that talent is talent. Yes, it doesn't hurt to go to camps, join a team that's a highe rlevel of competition, etc. But I saw kids dominate a sport that they only played during the season, never had any extra coaching or training. I've also seen "good" players do everything possible to improve in a sport. Parent spending a ton of money. And they really just barely improved- if at all. Hate to be the wet blanket here. There is nothing wrong with a parent wanting their child to be the most they can be. In a sport, in the classroom, in life. Just be careful. And if he is a stud baseball player, just remember open enrollment- I know the perfect HS for him ; )

Or, it could be mis-direction from other teams. Easy to say you're interested, but would anyone actually claim him? Either way, it shouldn't matter. His stuff isn't special, even at his best I haven't seen any of pitches being plus pitches. I just see no reason to keep a spot for a guy that can't help a pennant contender win games. I would rather have another bat (Green, Gindl) or another reliever than someone who is only used when you're down 17-1. The last arm in the bullpen can be used beyond mop-up duties. There are extra innings games, games when a couple guys aren't available due to high workload, etc. If it's the difference between winning or losing one game, makes no sense for Wang to waste a roster spot.

As long as that plan includes putting a shovel in the ground for a new arena ASAP.

Classies going down tonight too

10 games above .500, didn't realize that....feels like 7ish

Ask and you shall receive stache, DP right on cue

Can't we have a nice relaxing win at least once a month?

Then there's the ever-so-original "Your Name" #69.

Burba...Nice. Glad you had a pic, otherwise no way anyone believes you spotted that jersey.

Yes, I have no problem with the Tobias Harris pick. Again, he has done very well on draft day, not defending his moves the other 364 days of the year. Besides Hammond IS running the draft, so that ship has sailed. Get draft day right, then take some time to find a new GM and dump salary- as much as possible. Hire Bo Ryan to coach, WHOAA SOLLLVD. (Yea I know Bo Ryan isn't an option.) Agree with you pick and roll is the best way to score consistently in the NBA, and Wolters ran it better last year than any PG they've had in years.

Instant Replay go back where you came from

Should we start a pool on the date Will Smith is named the closer? I'm not advocating removing KRod yet, and I'm sure the Brewers aren't anywhere near ready to make that move. I just believe at some point this year, KRod will not be the closer any longer- at least not full time closer. Henderson may not be back this year, and even if he is you can't count on him. KRod started out lights out, obviously he couldn't keep that up. Were his last few outings a blip or a trend? Ideally, I wouldn't want a named closer. Let the game dictate who closes (tough righties or lefties coming up in the 9th), who is rested, who is throwing really well, etc. But since I know they feel the need to have a named closer, it almost has to be Thornburg or Smith if KRod falters, and if there has to be a closer Smith is probably the choice. I could see them making a move to bring in a reliable arm in the bullpen for the stretch run, something I would have never thought they needed a month ago.

If they pass on Olajuwan to to get Todd Day it will also put the franchise farther behind. Emdiid is not the huge project some of you are saying he is. His game will be solid on both sides of the court from game 1. He will be better on the offensive end than Larry Sanders immediately. Yea, not saying much I know, but it seems like some of you are saying that's the level he's at offensively. But again, doesn't matter because he is the #1 pick- period. Finally, you say the Bucks picks have been mixed results. Not really. Hammond has gone with raw talent guys that need development as you said, and they've all pretty much performed above where they've been drafted. Joe Alexander is an exception, but everyone else was a good pick. Jennings, Sanders, Harris, Henson, Giannis. Not to mention how well he's done in the 2nd round. That's why I'm confident the Bucks will get this right. As horrible as Hammond has been managing the roster, he's been very good on draft day.

Well, 100% of the mock drafts were wrong last year on the #1 pick, so I wouldn't put too much stock in that. I guarantee Embiid is the #1 pick, and I don't go out a limb very often like that. All these teams have cleared him medically, and every work-out he's add wasjaw dropping. Nobody is going to pass on an athletic 7 footer. I can see many here would not take him, that's fine, just saying he will be #1. I would trade down and take Exum and James Young in minute, but the Bucks need all the PR they can get- they will keep the #2 and take Wiggins. And I would be perfectly fine with that.

Same thing as Oshkosh, Eau Claire, a lot of these state campuses. But the athletes are there to play, and whatever time is left....study. Don't need a whole lot going on beyond that. And again, not that different from most other schools in WI in terms of having lots of stuff going on. They actually recruit atheltes, not sure how many other D III schools i nthe state or elsewhere do that. But any way you slice it, astronomical odds to win all 3 major sports the same year.

Yes, and both men's and women's wheelchair basketball.

Gennett needs MLB ABs, and he needs them against LHP. 20 PA means almost nothing, very definition of small sample size. It's the classic problem, the only way he can better vs LHP is to see more LHP at the MLB level. Numbers won't look too good for a while. And, yes, there's no guarantee he will improve. Right now, I would continue the platoon as long as Weeks is hitting. If Weeks starts to look lost again, or if they can manage to trade him let Scooter play full time at 2B for a while. See what happens. I have never been a believer in Scooter, but now that he'sup I would like to see what he can do. Ditto for Davis for that matter.

Thanks for taking the time to do this Reilly. First reaction is wow, what a difference between this list and the top top 20 when I first found this site. (Early in the minor league careers of Fielder, Weeks, Hardy, etc.)

Just got back from the Championship game, what a dominant run they had in this year's tourney. On top of that, rather amazing this is historical now that they won the title in football, basketball, and baseball in the same year. Whtewater, WI- the new Titletown USA!

They can have any/all of Sanders, Sova, Mayo, Delfino, Pachulia. That is $35MM of the $47MM cap!!! Hard to believe isn't it? Then again, yea, not that hard to believe. Would love to have the #8 pick, and get rid of as much of this dead salary as possible at the same time. I don't mind Pachulia or Delfino as much, they can add value and don't cost as much. But still, would be willing to trade any combination of the above for the #8 pick in this draft. Then they will have a ton of money to get a really good vet- after Hammonds is gone of course.

So we've talked at length about the bullpen fiasco last night. Frankly, I don't care anymore. Epic fail, nothing more to say really. What bothers me most if RR comment in his press conf last night. Q: "Ron, your decision to play the IF in, in the 7th?" A: (RR almost amazed it's even questionable) "Yea, you always try to prevent the tying run from scroing when you're on the road." This worried me much more, because unlike the bullpen brain fart, this tells me he will continue to play the IF in whenever he's in this situation. Why would you care more about the tying run than the winning run? Everything is risk/reward right? You play the IF back, worse case game is tied and you have 2 outs. Best case you get a hard grounder, and you can still gun the runner at the plate. Play the IF in, worst case is you not only give up the tying run, but the winning run. Plus, you open the door for an even bigger inning. Not to mention this was the 7th inning, not the 9th. The game is tied, you still have 2 innings to take the lead back. So would the strategy by the same in the 6th? In the 4th? While I'm not a fan of this, even intential walk would have been better to set-up DP. Really makes me wonder if he read the manager handbook carefully. Just a runner on 3rd only, IF in in that situation makes sense. Runners on 2nd and 3rd, makes no sense. I don't know the success/failure rate on brining the IF in, but it seems to fail more often than not. Which would add even more evidence it is a horrible strategy. Finally, I find this interesting. If playing for a tie at that point in the game on the orad is unacceptable, then why does he do it on offense? If they were down by a run, he would have everyone bunting like crazy to get that one run to tie right? Instead of playing to win. Think about that. He's not even consistent with his own strategy of "you never want to play for a tie on the road." Maybe it's just that I'm still fired up after the loss, it was a tough one. But would love to hear other thoughts.

Here's another thing. If ATL challenged the substitution play, and it was upheld, how could they challenge the Segura play?

Still standing behind this statement?? In his defense, he never said MANAGER talent.

Yea, that has fired my rockets more than the Smith fiasco.

This just in. Instant Replay in MLB is a horrible thing.