thebruce44

I know, I feel like I have made that exact same post 20 times on here yet people continue to knock his offense or say he hasn't proven anything without a shred of evidence. Saying it doesn't make it true. I don't know what they want from the kid.

The hypothetical only makes sense if we already traded him away. If we didn't have him at all, who played 1B this last year? How'd we score these runs without him? So then you are suggesting we would trade a slugging LH 1B in his last year of arby for pitching to turn around and trade prospects for a slugging LH 1B in his last year of arby? If we were operating in your hypothetical wouldn't we just trade prospects for pitching since 1 move is easier to pull off than 2?

That would be terrible. One year of a guy who isn't even an ace and whose innings jumped by a tremendous amount this year. I would rather take the two picks for Fielder.

That's why a PS3 is nice http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gifTrue, but I am an xbox 360 guy. That being said I have looked at switching to Playstation from Xbox in part due to the BluRay, but neither the Xbox or the Playstation can match the mac mini (or any computer for that matter) when it comes to being able to play all file formats and the sheer number of things that you can do with it. I just wish Apple would get their crap together and put BluRay on the Mini. There is a huge community HTPC people out there that are dying for this. I know that Apple isn't catering to them, but I really think they are missing out on a big segment of folks. The Apple TV just didn't ever fulfill its potential, but a Mac Mini with HDMI and BluRay would make my setup complete. Personally, I have yet to run into a movie file that my PS3 wont play.

In this hypothetical, we'd still be trading away Fielder for a pitcher. Then lets say we deals McGehee and parts for a pitcher. Suddenly we have enough pitching, and we still have oodles of money available. 7/8 of the lineup is accounted for longterm. Dealing excess minors leaguers now makes sense. So lets say, hypothetically, the team we dealt Fielder to suddenly has money problems and puts him back on the market. It would make sense to take a look. No, in this hypothetical it was made clear we don't have Fielder so we don't trade him for pitching. We are still far from a 90+ win team.

X, It looks as though you ignored the part of my post as it relates to this thread. Even so, How would that [Weeks extension] increase next years payroll? If anything, it would lower it. Really? You think if Weeks is extended he will make less than $2.75 mil next year or are you saying less than what he would get in Arby? [Wolf at]$9.5 million, just like this year. He deferred $4.5 mil this season to next year, did he not? Its just not showing up on Cot's spreadsheet. Regardless, the point I was trying to make that you seemed to take exception with was: If you honestly believe that because we will be ridding ourselves of "$35 mil worth of mistakes" we could trade future cost controlled players to take on a 1 year rental for $15 mil then I strongly disagree with your assessment of the Brewers finances. I certainly agree that we will be in a better financial position entering next season than this season. I still don't think that means we should be taking on rentals or trading away future pieces to chase that 85th win. Hence, in this hypothetical situation, it would make little sense for the Brewers to take on 1 year of Fielder.

Can you explain the payroll isues to me? The only payroll issue I see for next year is finding enough players to spend all the money the Brewers will have available to spend despite only having a few openings on the roster. Few teams will be able to outspend the Brewers this offseason, because $35 million worth of Melvin's mistakes finally come off the books. If you honestly believe that because we will be ridding ourselves of "$35 mil worth of mistakes" we could trade future cost controlled players to take on a 1 year rental for $15 mil then I strongly disagree with your assessment of the Brewers finances. Additionally, and this is outside of the scope of this thread, I think fans that assume we are going to have trouble spending all of the money we will have available are in for a long winter. The payroll will likely fall back to $80 mil or lower given the drop in attendance that will occur. Then factor in raises to current players and a possible Weeks extension. Wolf will be getting $14 mil I believe. There are probably $5 mil in buyouts to players that wont be on the team. Hawkins at $4.25 may very well do nothing for us. I think they will either take on salary in a trade to get some extra pitching or they will sign another FA pitcher for $10+ mil. Hopefully Melvin goes the smart route and keeps a young bullpen but another reliever for $4-5 mil wouldn't be out of the question. Anyway, its way too early to start adding all of this up, but given past history I don't think $35 mil of past mistakes off the books means it just goes into new production.

He does become more tolerable when limited to 160 characters. Maybe the JS should take notehttp://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif.

You keep bringing this up. Yes, I get that its important to have a LH bat in the starting lineup. That doesn't mean that any LH bat or any elite LH bat is a fit for a team that needs several other pieces before being a contender and has payroll issues.

You really missed the point of my post. What good is trading for 1 year of LH balance if it costs you several prospects and doesn't put you over the top for a playoff run? The balance next year should be okay if they go with Gamel and a platoon in RF.

Fielder isn't a good fit for this team next year, hence the reason we should be looking to trade him. I wouldn't give up much because I don't see us in contention just because of his addition over whatever else we would put at 1st. Hopefully another team doesn't feel that way though.

Once again though, we're paying like $40 million for uselessness this year. I'd imagine if Lee or some other elite free agent were signed, we wouldn't be spending $10 million an offseason on the bullpen or an extra few million on the bench or $5-8 million for a #5 starter. Just looking at next year's obligations, we already are $2 mil in the hole on Soup, $11-13 mil on Wolf (depending on how he rebounds, that could be considered uselessness), $0.5 mil buyout on Hoffman, $8.8 mil on Hart (again, could be wasting or 5 mil if he reverts to being only a win above replacement level), $0.25 buyout on Riske, $1 mil buyout on DD, $4.25 on Hawkins that could again be uselessness, $0.25 on Zaun, and maybe another $1.5 mil waisted on hoping Gomez finally figures it out. Thats potentially $14 mil for no production right there not counting Wolf, would could bring the estimate up to $25 mil. And thats just what we are already on the hook for. Then there will be injuries and some other unpredictable ineffectiveness. It happens every year, and to some extent, every team.

Just like they did with Manny Ramirez. No, they were outbid by their hated division rival. Like they did for Carlos Beltran? No, they were outbid by their cross town rival. What does this have to do with the Milwaukee Brewers and Cliff Lee?

That wasn't the point I was trying to make. Because of where TH works, he has a very wide range of influence. His slant on the interview ends up going a very long way with a wide range of people. I feel as though the majority of people who read that will view Gamel in a negative light even though I don't think he said anything that should have caused that. My take on the situation is backed up by the majority of the comments being negative about Mat. Looking at the situation this way, it is aparent to me that Mat gave an interview in which he expressed his desire to learn and help out the MLB team but will be viewed by a large number of fans as an immature kid with a false sense of entitlement. The blame for this rests squarly on TH's shoulders. Again, thats just my take on the situation. I didn't take opinion out of the article myself, but I think most did and I can see why. Those two aren't necessarily causal. He may just be defending his reporting, which looks to be accurate. I disagree on the acuracy. You can see the direction here that McCalvy took with the exact same statements from Mat. I feel as though McCalvy's article is much more accurate given what Gamel said to reporters: http://milwaukee.brewers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100901&content_id=14183526&notebook_id=14183612&vkey=notebook_mil&fext=.jsp&c_id=mil

You might have a point about the title of the blog post not being Haudricourt's doing, though as it's just a blog post, my guess is TH is responsible for that. I doubt those blogs go through much of an editorial process.He wrote the title, because if you read the comments he came back on and defended the post when people started to question his slant. He said something to the effect that Gamel didn't say he wasn't excited about playing first but you could tell he felt that way by the way he talked. Isn't Mat kinda a shy surfer kid? He probably doesn't sound excited about anything. My kid brother and all his friends are the same way.

I seem to remember Randolph had Cameron take him aside too last year and talk to him about "what it takes to be a professional." To be perfectly honast though, a lot of kids need that no matter if they are working at an advertising agency or for a MLB team.

Does saying "Whatever they want me to do, I'll do" not count?

Judging by comments like "Play where your told" or "getting choosy about his position" or "He comes off like a big dumb ingrate," it looks like a lot of the people commenting didn't even read the post. If that's the case, should I really be taking their comments seriously? You are right, they probably just read the headline and got mad at Gamel. Thats what I was afraid of.

Really? The title Gamel Not Excited About 1B doesn't make it sound like he is being picky? That may be how you read it, but if you look at the comments you are in the extream minority. In fact, he didn't say he was not excited about 1B. He said he would play anywhere and be happy to have a job, just that he has more to learn at 1B than in RF. Saying an upcoming prospect isn't excited about something at the MLB level is always going to get fans up in arm since most of them would die for the oportunity to be even a groundskeeper. Gamel didn't say that and gave the right responses, but had Tom paint the picture of someone disappointed. I'd rather have a player give an honest but diplomatic answer than read another, "I'll do whatever the team wants", type of generic baseball response. The thing is he did say "Whatever they want me to do, I'll do." But that gets overshadowed by him "not being excited about playing first."

The past three years we've been spending $20 million+ on Suppan, Hall and Riske. Where's the value there? Add Hawkins, Davis and Hoffman this year. We've been paying for uselessness for years. If we are going to spend $20-25 million and I'm not sure I want to right now, I'd rather spend it on one elite player than on three crappy players like we have been the past four years. You are assuming we make no further mistakes on signings. That hasn't happened in a long time so I have a problem just assuming that will be the case going forward.

You're the only person I've seen question starting Michael Bradley, I thought he was tremendous, and I'm not sure who you would have started over him. Diskono, I strongly disagree that Maurice Edu didn't make that big of a difference over Ricardo Clark. He looked very match fit to me, and made the U.S look like an entirely different team. Agreed. Bradley was amazing and I wanted him on the field no matter how tired he was.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/102017398.html Another example of the JS writers seeming personal hatred of Mat Gamel. I am sure Tom asked Mat how he liked playing 1st base, to which he gave an honest answer where he said nothing wrong: "It was a lot easier for me (in right field) than first base. It's a lot less stressful...."It's tougher than people think. First (base) ain't easy. I have a lot more respect for those guys knowing what they do....Whatever they want me to do, I'll do. I've got another option left. If (Nashville) is where they send me, I don't have any choice...I'll deal with it like I do every year -- be happy I've got a job. A lot of people don't have jobs these days." Yet Tom manages to spin it and make Mat sound like a whiner with a misplaced sense of entitlement. The sad part is if you look at the comments, most fans continue to follow hook line and sinker.

Yes, this probably belongs in the designated JS thread, but another Tom and Witrado's personal bias against a player. If you read the quotes, Mat said nothing wrong: "It was a lot easier for me (in right field) than first base. It's a lot less stressful...."It's tougher than people think. First (base) ain't easy. I have a lot more respect for those guys knowing what they do....Whatever they want me to do, I'll do. I've got another option left. If (Nashville) is where they send me, I don't have any choice...I'll deal with it like I do every year -- be happy I've got a job. A lot of people don't have jobs these days." In fact, he sounds like a kid ready to work hard with no sense of entitlement. How Tom spun that to make him sound like a whiner is beyond me. And look at the first 2 comments. Some fans continue to bit hook line and sinker.

But that's not necessarily a good thing. Hart could be .750 OPS with Dickerson/platoon-mate at .760, in which case Well yea, thats why I wasn't really in favor of extending Hart, but at least the defense would be much less frustrating to watch in RF. Also, assuming Hart is at first that probably helps out the entire IF defense.

Maybe its just because we are all old. I figure that players tend to do these nice acts for kids and not for the adult who may be just collecting stuff to sell on ebay. I get the impression that Prince is especially good with kids. I am sure there are some great stories out there.