Gopher74

McClung pitched 7 2/3 innings before today, I'm sorry but you can't really formulate an opinion on him either way. You can't make a definitive statement on 8 innings pitched, but you sure can formulate an opinion and you very clearly see why the Brewers decided that he was worthy of keeping.There's never been any mystery to Seth McClung. Great, out of this world stuff, no control. Well, he's showing control. You can say that it's only been 72/3rds innings, and of course, it has, but so what? I don't think anyone's said we're out of the woods, only that he's shown enough in that time to start earning a larger role in this pen. Hard to argue with that. And I put the HR to Helms more on Rivera than on McClung. NO reason to throw a 3rd fastball in a row to him there when McClung's got a fantastic curve.

Is this any difference than a manager saying a pitcher was throwing well in a bullpen session? This is a rather vanilla statement that really doesn't strike me either way. Just kinda...meh...alright...

Longterm the Brewers cannot afford Prince Fielder, which makes Laporta the first baseman, which makes Gamel the RF if his defense doesn't improve. That runs in direct contrast to what Mark A has said, and the Brewers current bottom line. In fact, Mark A has almost guaranteed that the Brewers sign him. I think it's be wise to not re-sign him, but I think the fact is that they will. This is the way things work, prospects thrive in one area, and have defiencies in another. That's the way it works with some prospects. Certainly not all. Every single player has a hole in their game... when they don't you get a Bonds/Griffey or similar player in their prime, and they just don't come along that often. A true 5 tool player that excels in every aspect of the game... that's hall of fame type stuff, and if that's expectation, the expectation needs to be changed, because it's not realistic. Wait, so you're honestly suggesting that a player who doesn't have a huge hole in his game with either the glove or the bat must be a HOF type prospect? Corey Hart? How about Troy Tulowitzki? Jocoby Ellsbury? The list goes on and on. How about dozens of prospects every year that are solid both offensively and defensively? This suggestion that every player comes up with a huge hole in their game simply isn't true, and using Bonds and Griffey as an example of players that didn't have holes? No, those were players who were great in every aspect of the game, not just players who didn't have a hole in a particular area.

What's the deal with this guy? I've heard almost nothing about him and he's absolutely blistering right now in AA hitting .429 with an OPS over 1.000. Is this just a fluke, or does this kid have anything? He's 23 in AA, so he's not young for his level, but he's also not that old. He's starting and he's got 20 games, so while it's a small sample size, it's not THAT small. Any hope here for this kid or is this just a hot streak that end up defining his minor league career most likely?

There's no "push". We're not saying you have to move up a guy who's hitting .220 with 0 HR's. He's killing the ball. Again, why WOULDN'T you move him up? What's the argument other than there are other OF'ers who will never have a prayer to make a tenth of the impact he will on the Nashville roster? And the argument that if you move him, you have to move every 1st rounder to the 25 man is an incredibly hollow one. Very, very few 1st round picks have the type of success that he's had as early as he's had it, and obviously the fact that Jeffress is still in Low A renders that point totally moot. For the life of me I can't understand the argument to not moving someone up who's ready just so he can be league MVP. I mean, who cares if he's league MVP? Was Prince ever league MVP? I ask because I don't know. Moreover, when he hit 50 HR's last year, I didn't care. I think it's a given that he's not going to make the big league team until next year at the earliest. The question continues to be why wouldn't you move him when his OPS is almost 200 points higher than Corey Hart's when he won league MVP? If he has nothing to gain from playing in AA and does have something to gain when he moves up a level, I simply don't understand the desire to provide the AAA OF'ers jobs this much to want to see a guy who has nothing left to prove in AA stay there. Of course, this argument, like yours is dependent upon him continuing to wear our AA pitching like he has been.

i'm sure. also taking creatine, which i know is mostly useless, but i'm totally fine with a water-inflated false bulk for the summer season, and i'll go off it next winter. That's absolutely not true at all. I'm not sure why you have this perception of creative, but it can be a very effective tool for building muscle strength. I also don't understand why your goal would be to gain body fat. Especially if you're goal is to develop abs. Honestly, and I mean this respectfully, but I think you may have the wrong idea when it comes to getting bigger. I mean, just saying that you can't do cardio or else you have to eat more in order to get stronger is just not true. I don't know, maybe it's just a different way of going about things, but after spending so much time trying to get my body fat down and build as much muscle as possible, but I've just never heard of anyone trying to get his body fat up.

Yea, that's about the only way I could envision it happening.

If the pitcher's a good pitcher, that's not a bad deal at all. If the pitcher is a Oldenhorf, Horne, Brackman, that'd be a very good deal for the Astros. I don't know that they'd get a deal that good from many other teams. Tabata is a top 100 prospect, Melky's a very good young player who's 23 years old. Throw in one of those pitchers with very good stuff, and I don't know what more people think that Oswalt is going to net Houston.

Its funny how you gloss over the fact that he was so bad that he had to get sent down to the minors just to get some confidence. Was that the reason? I thought it was because his swing was off because he was starting his bat too early because of his wrist injury? Huh.....confidence you say? Hadn't heard anyone associated with the team say that. Yeah, .374 is a good (23rd in the NL) OBP, but its nice to get a hit every now and then. He's a leadoff hitter. How many hitters had a better OBP while in the leadoff spot? Weeks was in the top 5. That's what matters. He also struck out 116 times, which was good for 30th, despite spending time on the DL and in the minors. So what? I mean, seriously, so what? So his outs weren't as entertaining as if he'd have hit the ball right at someone? Strikeouts are incredibly overrated. I don't care if he strikes out 300 times in 600 PA's if he has a 500 OBP. Of course, some people would still complain about that. The comments about BA and K's REALLY sheds a light as to why you honestly believe that Hernan would be a better option right now at 2nd than Rickie. Great, he may hit .285 with a .300 OBP and not K as much. We could get Johnny Estrada to play 2nd base as well. Doesn't mean he'd be better than Rickie Weeks. You need to cite more than OBP to convince me. Quite frankly, I'm not all that concerned if you are convinced or not. I mean, OBP is so much more important than any other stat from a leadoff hitter(and saying you need to show me something other than that, is like saying you need to show me something other than ERA to convince me a pitcher is a good pitcher), but again, you can think what you want about Weeks. But when you say that he's never done anything in the big leagues the in April of the year AFTER he was one of the top5 leadoff hitters in the game in SLG, OBP, OPS, HR's..., then I think you're going to get an argument. Putting the ball in play can certainly have its benefits. Of course. But again, Johnny Estrada put the ball in play all the time. And I honestly don't think you've seen enough of Hernan to make the statement than his approach is better(and if you've followed him around the minors, my apologies). Weeks gets on base. Yes, he needs to improve other area's of his game, but bottom line, he gets on base. That's the only thing that matters with him.

Capuano was not better than Barry Zito in any way. Zito's having a very bad year, there's just no question about that, and it was a terrible, awful signing. Again, no question about that. But he's also not going to stay terrible. He'll bounce back and become a solid pitcher again. He's still not quite 30 years old and has a career ERA of 3.73, and averages well over 200 IP a year. Again, I wouldn't want him for 6 years even at 8-9 million a year(assuming the Giants ate about half that), but to say that Cappy's better than him because of his awful start is waaay overstating it IMO, and it's a bit of a knee jerk comment to an atrocious start to the season. His ERA the second half last year was 4.11. He hasn't totally lost it since then.

I've banged the Derek Lowe drum myself. Along with the Jon Garland drum(though not nearly as much as Lowe's a 2 and Garland a 3 imo). I think Lowe gets a Jason Schmidt type deal in most years, but this next year I could see him getting a 3 year 35 million dollar deal which is well within a respectable number. Now in a dream world, we deal Suppan saving us 2 and 25, and we re-sign Sheets at 4 and 60 and then sign Lowe for 3 and 35 only spending about 4 million more a year than we are right now. Of course...not gonna happen, but it'd be great!

I respectfully don't agree with this. The suggestion that you can work out TOO long to get stronger and bigger to me is a complete inaccuracy. Hell, look at body builders? They work out for about 6 hours a day. And yes, you're literally correct in saying that muscle doesn't build while you're working out, but it doesn't build at all if you don't tear the fibers, and force it to repair itself. And again, respectfully, but I've never heard anyone say that it's bad to do cardio in order to get stronger. Cardio is absolutely always a great part of a workout. You do have to make sure that your diet is complete and you have the required calories to have energy and to build muscle, but you don't stop running or whatever in an attempt to get stronger.

I'm pretty impressed if you're doing this while getting stronger. The no carb diet is about the worst diet for someone who's competing in a sport that requires any cardiovascular endurance. This is a big of an extreme example, but when I was a frosh before I took any classes about nutrition, I tried this diet for about a week. I literally couldn't even make it through one practice at the end. If you don't really need any stamina other than just your daily life, this isn't a bad diet, but it's also one that's not likely to last. You're most likely going to put the weight back on UNLESS you reintroduce carbs to your body SLOWLY. What's going to happen is your body is going to store the carbs once you go off, so most people who love bread, or just crave bread or noodles, or whatever, they go off the diet and they just start eating a ton of it and then they gain that weight back so fast. Now if you only eat maybe 50 grams of carbs a day for a week, then 75 until you get up to a normal level, that may be alright, and you may maintain if you keep working hard, but otherwise, it's just going to be frustrating.

yeah, Gopher, i'll say i respectfully disagree with you on the not eating part. it's that starvation mode thing again, your metabolism is just going to slow down, thinking you're going to be a while without food. so maybe you'll lose some in that day or two, but the next few meals you eat are going to be stored right away and not really burned as energy. but yeah, it's hard to argue with the results you've got, though losing that much weight that fast might be ok temporarily, but it couldn't be good for someone trying to change a lifestyle. First of all, it's absolutely a terrible lifestyle. You could always tell the guys in college and in high school who "cut the wrong way". The guy who'd make weight, and then just gorge themselves, and then go Wed to Sat without eating and just be gassed. My point was, if you want to get a good start you go a couple days without eating, and you shrink your stomach. It's absolutely amazing how much smaller your stomach gets after not eating for just 48 hours. You go from being able to eat a whole pizza to being able to eat two slices and being full for example. So no, I'm definitely not suggesting that you do that even on a regular basis, only as an extreme measure to start your diet. And going back to those guys who you could tell did it wrong as they were the guys who'd come in at 200 trying to cut to 174 at 12 pct body fat, and then get down to 74 and still be at 10 pct...meaning they didn't lose much fat. But 2 days isn't going to change your metabolism. And to that end, whoever said you eat a lot of small meals was dead on. You eat 5-6 times a day and you don't ever eat at 7 at night. And you pound as much water as you can. Water's always a good thing(expect on the friday before you make weight, but I don't think anyone here is worried about that, right?). though to everything else that was said, i couldn't agree more. i actually haven't come across that drinking water strategy before, but that really makes a lot of sense--fill the stomach up before you start eating the calories. Yea, I still do it now when I'm not trying to lose weight. Trying to live your life dehydrated as most people do, and living it fully hydrated is about the same as trying to operate at your best when you've been awake for 24 hours. People don't realize just how important water really is to how you feel. So you not only feel better, you don't eat as much. i wasn't exactly big to begin with, slender but with a beer gut, and for just 5 months of regular lifting, it's already made a world of difference. i know it was mostly a come-on, but when a random girl at the bar grabbed my left arm and then said "oh, you must work out," it was the coolest feeling in the world. Another thing the average person simply doesn't understand. Yea, you can, and it'll help to lose weight by just riding a bike, or whatever cardio you like, but you're not going to lose it as easy as you do if you're lifting. First of all, take a guy who's 250 and just yoked and then a guy who's 250 with 35 pct body fat. The guy who's got the muscle is going to burn about 50 pct more calories a day. So lifting, you may really be getting stronger, but you're probably not going to lose much weight unless you were real healthy to begin with. so for all the pills and all the gimmic diets and all the other stuff, it's just all about regular exercise and everything else falls into place for getting in shape. At BEST they're all supplement. Meaning they HELP you with your physical appearance. They don't do the work for you. Taking them or not talking them, at beast it's only going to help a little bit most likely(unless it's roids, but even then, it's still only going to HELP). Good old fashion hard work and will power is the way to go. It's the only way that works.

Let me start by saying it's always a pet peeve of mine when someone says that everyone who doesn't think like I do is going to be sorely disappointed. I've yet to read anyone say that they thought Mike Cameron would be Albert Pujols. I think what people expect is a steady influence in the clubhouse, a steady influence in the lineup, and a guy who hits for a little pop, can run and draws some walks. Second, it's real easy to simply point to his numbers from last year and say that he's not a good offensive player. One year does not mean he's on the decline. He's a solid player who should surpass those numbers as A-they were low for his average year, and B-because he's no longer in the NL West and namely Petco park. He's a good player who could give us a boost, and this has nothing to do with the fact that he's had a nice game so far. Using tonights game is more absurd than pointing to last years BA to say that he's not the answer. I expect .265 or so, .350 or so, 20/20 and great defense, and that's not enough to carry this team, but it's a nice shot in the arm over Gwynn and Kapler as it's turned midnight on Gabe, and Gwynn just isn't a big leaguer starter at the moment. Edit-I didn't see the 2-hole comment. Exactly who do you want in there? No I only read your comment, so I'm sure someone else has made this argument, but who do you want hitting in that 2 hole on this current team? Of course who other than Corey Hart as he's too valuable in the 5 spot and really not much better if any than Cameron in the 2 hole.

It happens. It happened to me. I was sitting behind the dugout on the 2nd exhibition game and there was this family of maybe 6 who were suppose to sit in row number 2. Now I don't actually know that the other family had the same tickets because I never saw them, and they looked pretty shady, but my friends and I just got up and let them have our seats(I forgot to mention, one of the women was pregnant and just kinda bending down in the isle the entire time) and we moved up to the Loge level.

Take Cameron, Gallardo, and Stetter off the current roster, add Gross, Bush and Dillon.

It's funny how the only thing that matters for a leadoff hitter is kinda glossed over there. "Although it was pretty good". Yea, "although" he had the best OBP for a leadoff hitter the last couple months, because a stat that really doesn't matter much anymore wasn't great(.273 BA), I'm just going to keep my head in the sand and say he wasn't good last year, and I'll play it off as people overreacting. Hmmm...

Well that certainly contradicts many of the reports right now. It also doesn't have any reasoning behind it.

Not really. He's been pretty bad vs us save for today obviously.

He absolutely was. The numbers aren't exact, but it was something like a 1.55 ERA in 70 of his outings, and a 77.40 in 7 of his outings. When he blew up, he blew up pretty bad, but for the most part, he was very good. Led the league in scourless outings as well. Great BAA... Saying you wouldn't want him as your SU, fine. Saying he wasn't good enough to be on the team at all? Like I said, a bullpen that the 07 DT wasn't good enough for is a great BP. Sadly we do not have a great BP.

Wow. You've got the most impressive bullpen in the game then. However, the Milwaukee Brewers don't. And as such, they could very much use the 2007 Derrick Turnbow.

He may return to his 2005 form! At least in their minds. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/frown.gif His 07 form wouldn't help this team? So the argument is really 06 and a couple games from 08, not the ridiculous suggestion that they're still hoping he'll return to 05 form.

Personally, I wouldn't waste the air it takes to boo on Wes Helms, but I guess some people felt compelled.

I thought he was just going straight down. That he didn't have to clear waivers.