Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

tmwiese55

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,313

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 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 tmwiese55

  1. tmwiese55
    Why the preference of Broxton over Santana at this point? Seems you're writing Santana off since he's been just mediocre so far, while Broxton has frankly been awful. Santana is two years younger too, and has more of a track record than Broxton. Unless you're talking all about D, then I get it. Overall play both a ton and see how they do. Broxton looks way more likely to flop though and free up a spot for Brinson to me.
  2. tmwiese55
    Good point on this. I kind of view at just something to hate on people about and give them grief. And with social media, internet, ESPN Stephan A type shows there's just tons of avenues to do it now or to get people fired up about something. For the most part most fans don't care specifically about the cheating/integrity of the game or even know which players are tied to it, other than superstars because they're famous. Then they can pick on them about just like they would about if the guy got DUIs, got dumped by a kardashian, or any personal life drama bs that gets out about athletes if that makes sense. To the old school writers and old timers, yea I bet they care legitimately about it but to a degree that's just a "back in my day" type take for some of them. Hope that makes sense
  3. tmwiese55
    And really a hot streak like this isn't that uncommon at all. it's just that it's at the start of the season. 12 game stretches with similar results happen all the time.
  4. tmwiese55
    [sarcasm]Missed an opportunity to take control of the division and give a knockout blow to the Cubs the last two days. Sweep would've set us up for pennant chase.[/sarcasm]
  5. tmwiese55
    Didn't Stearn more do that move with Davies in order to help whoever the minor leaguer was get a few more days of service time to get him to a certain milestone to help out the career minor leaguer? If anything it shows he's aware of these things and tries to do right by guys.
  6. tmwiese55
    67 pages of this and it's still at the same point. If another team expects to just give him away for blah prospects and/or take a bunch of salary back, then just keep him. We can afford him and he's still great to watch. If someone makes a you a legit deal with good prospects, sure do it as it's best for the future. So far it still seems teams expect us to give him away like he's an albatross contract or something, just keep him then.
  7. tmwiese55
    Exactly, said the same thing when they were on the witch hunt to catch people who didn't even fail tests, buying witnesses in very shady ways, etc. It's keeping the negative story alive so then everyone thinks it's a massive problem. It's just bad PR to be making such a big public deal about it. And
  8. tmwiese55
    Right but Braun and A-rod and those other guys that got suspended in that group didn't get caught by the testing. The league nailed them by an outside investigation. So it would seem to be reasonable to assume that plenty of drug use is still going on. Unless you think Dee Gordon and Marte used just that one time and just happened to also get caught. But if what they're doing is so small that it doesn't even trip the strictest testing in the world, is it really that big a deal or something to be up in arms about acting like the game is fraud? I'd grant there's probably still plenty trying to find a way to beat it, but my main point would be that people with this concern should be much more concerned about other sports who have way laxer testing process. Logic being: If you're going to assume it's a massive problem in a sport with the strictest testing (which is also the least physical), then you better assume it's a much more significant problem in sports with less strict testing (and are much more physical sports). I don't get the obsession about baseball PEDs but when an NFL player gets suspended nobody bats an eye or cares. And in the NBA almost no one ever fails a test because their testing is laughable.
  9. tmwiese55
    Edge sure, but that could come from just working hard, diet, different training techniques. Braun did what he did full well knowing it was illegal. He didn't even claim the "i didn't know" like this dude did today. Can disagree on whether you think it should be illegal, but he knew it was and did it anyway. 20 years ago I'd guess the majority of players were doing PEDs that would now be illegal (though they weren't banned at the time). Definitely nowhere near that anymore or when Braun did it. I still root for him without hesitating as I don't care about PEDs, he almost won us a series by doing it, and frankly he's just an incredible hitter. When healthy he's amazing to watch, he so rarely hits a weak ball.
  10. tmwiese55
    Agreed completely. This is always my argument to the jackasses who boo Braun. Everyone is on something and pushing the envelope, that's why players today don't look like Ben Ogilvie or Robin Yount. Agree on the not caring. But you have to remember MLB has the strictest testing in the world, if the public generally assumes everyone in baseball is doing it (in spite of so few failing tests in the most stringent testing system) then they should assume it in all other sports as well. If anything, 3-5 players per year of significance that have been getting caught the last few years shows the testing is working. Would be a bigger red flag to me if no one was getting caught. Personally I don't care and think baseball should lighten up a bit and allow more things to keep the best players on the field while doing their best to hold back the anabolic Canseco muscle building stuff. Obviously that's a fine line to balance though and tough problem to solve.
  11. tmwiese55
    Whoops, somehow misread it as the classic bidding just $1. My bad.
  12. tmwiese55
    this has popped in my head too. That pic eases some concerns of course. But do they do any legit testing overseas?
  13. tmwiese55
    Somewhat feel the need for the classic "small sample" reminder. I mean we're 12 games in and we're talking about 4 years from now. I love everything we're seeing as much as you, but he's not going to hit 365. Let's pump the brakes and be a little realistic, if he finishes above 275/340 with 25+ homers I'll be happy. Let's just say if he'd hit 200/250 with 0 HR so far we'd all be saying, 'small sample give him time.' Works both ways.
  14. tmwiese55
    Nah, i love it. If i ever get on the show and get to guess last I plan on saying some other small number, like $11 or $17. The actual bigger screwjobs would come in betting $1 more than someone else's bid, thus making that person have to get it exactly correct.
  15. tmwiese55
    Not really a fan of Arcia's approach at the plate. Seems way too upright and a long swing that he has to start early, seems like anytime he takes a pitch it's a check swing. No way I'd put him at 2 right now. Villar will be fine at leadoff and then there will be plenty on in front of Thames. However, if someone else does start hitting well (say Broxton) to warrant a move to the top then sure move Thames to 4th. Otherwise why rock the boat. As of now the only person that would warrant that would be the C Pina. Also, if Santana keeps doing well he could be a good #2 actually. Takes a ton of pitches so gives Villar a chance to steal. Should take enough walks for a good OBP in front of Braun/Thames. Basically, I'm not in favor of putting a guy #2 who's hitting badly just because he was listed as a top prospect. At least as of now when the team is competing. Get to later in the year when they're way out of it then do whatever you want to experiment with.
  16. tmwiese55
    Are there any signs that he drastically fell off last season or anything? Best of my knowledge he was still very good. If so I'd do it, he's signed for 2 more years and fixes the biggest glaring weakness. Like I pointed out in an earlier post, they've been 10 mil under the last few years, I think we can find 3 more. Also, Nick Perry got 10 mil per year didn't he? As long as Sherman was still good last year I'd definitely rather him at 13 than Perry at 10. I know it's not an either or, I'm just saying value-wise.
  17. tmwiese55
    Just have to get some D help. Ted's been great on WRs later in the draft, sure do that if you want but barring something weird happening with someone dropping at WR. Just have to get CB help or pass rush help. Dumb thing about the Mixon media obsession is that it's primarily a bigger storyline because they have a video they can replay over and over for clicks and ratings. Look up what the Chiefs Tyreek Hill did, he still got drafted and made a team with no one talking about him. Then he was talked about glowingly as he did well last year. His wasn't on video though. My guess is if Mixon stays healthy and gets on a team with a QB, that team is going to get a steal. Probably most talented NFL back in the draft and you can get him late. Amazing receiver too so a great fit for the NFL, why I'd prefer him football-wise over Fournette. Less miles on his body too due to the suspension, sharing carries, and being in a spread system.
  18. tmwiese55
    I'd love to see the percent on how many domestic violence incidents involve alcohol. I bet it's a shockingly high %. Also, what goes along with watching Packer games, drinking. I don't see how one can deny alcohol is a factor in domestic violence. Maybe root cause was the wrong term though, I'd grant that. I also can't really see an argument to spend 100s of millions per year because we don't like the smell of it. The negatives of booze drastically outweigh the negatives of weed, but since it doesn't smell it's no biggie? Makes me think of the Seinfeld Kramer bit about Hennigans and walking around drunk all day with the odorless vodka. ETA: turns out they do track this and it was easy to google, I actually thought it would be slightly higher, but close to what I thought. Among victims of domestic violence, alcohol played a role in 55% of the cases, while drugs played a role in only 9% of the cases; for spousal violence, alcohol was a factor in 65% of the cases, versus only 5% for drugs. Alcohol is a factor in 40% of all violent crimes today, and according to the Department of Justice, 37% of almost 2 million convicted offenders currently in jail, report that they were drinking at the time of their arrest. https://www.ncadd.org/about-addiction/alcohol-drugs-and-crime
  19. tmwiese55
    According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 35,092 people died in traffic crashes in 2015 in the United States (latest figures available), including an estimated 10,265 people who were killed in drunk driving crashes involving a driver with an illegal BAC (.08 or greater). It's only logical to think that weed-impaired drivers cause accidents too, and that would likely go up if more people smoked, but with basically everyone who wants to smoke already doing it, it's tough to know how much more it will go up beyond what it is now. Though I'd think at least somewhat because the legality of it will make people a little more brazen about it. Alcohol is also pretty intrusive to other peoples lives in the sense that it's a root cause of thousands and thousands of domestic violence incidents per year. Again, I'm not a smoker and don't plan on becoming one and only fool would act like it's good for you. Just seems to me the battle is lost at this point, we might as well save our money. For things that bug me, yea i'd agree the propaganda about it being good and completely harmless is false yet it's pretty much presented that way in the mainstream media. Also, weed guys in general bug me. You know the types, always have to talk about it, where pot shirts, etc. I mean, if it's no big deal then act like it's no big deal.
  20. tmwiese55
    I don't think anyone here is claiming it's good. We're saying it's not worth the hundreds of millions we're wasting on trying to stop it. Especially since it's clearly not working, anyone of us could probably get weed in under one hour. We're flushing that money down the drain. And I do believe you're wrong when it comes to basic weed and physical addiction. Maybe what you're getting at these synthetics lined with chemical stuff. But again, we know 100% that alcohol is. Also, weed has been commonly smoked for like 70 years now, there's plenty of research and info on it at this point.
  21. tmwiese55
    I even had it argued to me the other day that we can't legalize weed because then people will be high all the time. As in, people working at a factory, nurses, truck drivers, whoever, will just be high all day long. First, it ignores that basically anyone who wants to smoke weed is already doing it, they're not waiting for it to be legal. Second, it implies that potheads can't use it recreationally at night or off hours like people do with alcohol. You know, in spite of marijuana not being addictive while alcohol is addictive. He then tried to claim that alcohol is not addictive because he drinks and isn't an addict, but he thinks marijuana is addictive. You know, contrary to all scientific study. Basically, right wing radio talking points are more trusted than science. I tried to avoid the argument and just said it's a big leap to believe/worry that people will constantly be high causing public safety problems if you don't have the same fear about alcohol. Keep in mind this discussion was in the parking lot on opening day. Around 25K vehicles that were going to be operated by people after drinking alcohol.
  22. tmwiese55
    The loonies who try to act like weed is good for you are full of it. That said, I firmly believe it's less bad than alcohol and cigarettes. And not nearly the big deal it's been made out to be for 50 years and we shouldn't be spending hundreds of millions trying to outlaw it when we could be making hundreds of millions taxing it. Two hypocrisies going on in the argument. From the left: weed is great and should be legal but they try to ban soda, corn syrup, etc. From the right: weed should be banned and is evil, but alcohol is ok and viewed as a cornerstone of society.
  23. tmwiese55
    I'm guessing they're referencing his diving attempt at that jam shot that he dropped that would've been a double play. Instead Rocks got their big inning. I can't really fault him for that, he did everything right but the ball popped out. Still only 2 games in, nothing to freak out about. Just seems the trend is continuing for him, hopefully a month from now he's settled in and there's no need to talk about it.
  24. tmwiese55
    And to look like he's never played the position before, which is what he's looked like the first 2 games, is not an lol for a professional The camera's showed Counsell after a number of Villar's lack of plays or being out of position and he had that look like *** is he doing out there. I think its something to monitor Especially when it's in addition to so many issues last year at the other two positions. He has all the physical tools, there's no reason he can't be a solid defensive player once he settles in as long as his head is in it.
  25. tmwiese55
    Have to think this will just be one start from Milone then Garza gets his crack doesn't it? Has there been any news that Garza is actually hurt, last I saw it was pretty much panned as a made up injury.
×
×
  • Create New...