tmwiese55

True. But especially with the extra wild card I like our current route better than the old Marlins way of doing things. Most important thing is developing your own pitching as a small market club and somehow we've managed to compete without that due to how many position players we hit on at the same time (who were all cheap at the time). For all the genius that was Moneyball, if he didn't happen to have 3 Cy Young level pitchers come up at the same time at pre-arbitration or free agent pay, none of that would've been possible. If Peralta, Nelson and one other young guy all become good at the same time while they're cost controlled we can keep this going for a while longer. If they all flop, we're looking at a really rough stretch a few years from now.

Wow I forgot they went 81-81 already in 2005. Starting in 07 they've been competitive but still only one division title. I agree with your last point, if sub .500 on the year I think they start over at GM and manager. I think Melvin is inching towards retirement regardless so they'll probably just call it that. As most have said though, slow start this year and RR is probably gone. I get your points on Melvin. But personally I remember how bad it was from the late 80s to mid 00s so I'm fine with this life of shooting for 75-85 wins most years and hoping to catch some breaks and make a run at it when the opportunity presents itself. Considering the limitations of being the smallest market in a rigged system like MLB I accept this. And from an ownership perspective, I don't think they trust the fans to show up for a 2-3 year stretch where we have no shot, causing the owners to lose money. I get why they've been doing it this way. Really, if Braun would've continued to be the top 10 superstar (on a relatively cheap contract) he was supposed to be this strategy would've looked even better. Here's hoping he bounces back this year and that thumb surgery was the key, that offense looks so much more potent with a .310/.390 35hr, 110 RBI guy in the middle of it. It would've won the division last year.

I get your point. But I think some perspective would be needed on it, he took over a dumpster fire in 2002/2003 with no reasonable chance at competing until what maybe 2007 or 08? So really he's had 6-7 years to reasonably have a shot at winning, came damn close once and has been competing for the playoffs in most of the years. The same points you're making could be made about the last 6-7 years since we've only gotten one division title and no NL pennants or WS. I just think that's a little fairer way to look at it.

The Davis thing was just an example of what I was saying about player development and my point that it's better in the NBA. No way he'd be this good right now if he'd stayed in college. I agree on everything you said about Dekker needing to improve on a ton of things, almost all players going into the NBA need that though. I can't believe how much his shot has regressed since he got to college, usually that's a strength of UWs development, for some reason he's gone backwards. Aaron Gordon couldn't do anything on the court other than dunk and play hard defense and he was drafted in the top 7ish. Anthony Davis averaged like 12 ppg in college and couldn't shoot beyond the FT line in college. I think my argument has been proven time and again by the fact that underclassmen almost always go ahead of the 3-4 year guys and usually pan out better in the league. Doug McDermott averaged like 28 a game his senior year and got drafted in the 20s. Did he really have anything to prove his senior year? Everything he's learning now in a bench role for the Bulls could have been done last year. Jabari couldn't play defense. Wiggins couldn't handle the ball and couldn't shoot at an NBA level. Of course you can point to the flameouts like Alexander but like I mentioned, it's on the kid at that point and his personal responsibility to make himself better. Really you could argue that going pro was the best thing Alexander did, he got paid before going back to college and potentially having everyone figure out he wasn't that good or didn't have the drive needed to make it. For every one like him though you also have to remember the countless number of HS, Freshman, Soph players that have become stars or at least multi year successful pros. I know this isn't an exact science and of course arguments can be made many ways. I was just pointing out another way to look at that noone seems to bring up. Everyone just makes the financial, take your money point and I never see this view pointed out.

I don't like when so many people frequently say it's a mistake for someone to go pro. You're playing for free right now and every year you stay in college you lose a year of earning potential, year of actual bball potential and upside, and increase risk of injury. I think everyone generally gets that basic point. But what I don't think people realize is how much more someone can improve while sitting the bench but practicing in the nba and/or just playing 10-20 minutes. This isn't the easiest to explain but I'll give it a try. In college you're forced to waste time going to class and there is actually rules preventing how often you can practice. In the NBA, you have no responsibility other than practicing basketball, with the best coaches in the world helping you. It's really up to you at that point. One way to look at is like this, yes a player after 4 years of CBB will be better and more prepared than after year 3. However, it's logical the same player would be better after 3 yrs of college + 1 year of NBA than he would be after just 4 years of CBB. So at the same age the second scenario would create a better player. One could also make the argument that after a certain point some players could plateau and not really able to improve any more in CBB without new challenges/coaches. Now factor in that you'd be getting paid by going pro and I think it's a no brainer. The only time it makes sense to stay for me would be if there is a good chance you can drastically improve your draft position to get a much larger guaranteed rookie contract. This could make sense for some freshman to stick one more year, say a Kevon Looney type, instead of going at like 11th this year maybe he could stay and be top 3 next year. Once you get to 3-4 years the nba starts looking at as a bad thing, plus with a couple less years for them to develop the kid. With Dekker do you think no matter what that he's going to jump into the top 5-8 picks next year? Plus if I'm him I'd be really sick of getting benched any time I missed a shot or made a turnover, he's Bo's whipping boy. I know it's kind of a long rant but I hope it makes sense. Another way to look at it, if Anthony Davis had stuck in college for two more years and then gone pro (making him a rookie this year), do you think he'd be putting up the 25, 14, 4 stat line (or whatever crazy numbers it is) this season or would he be putting up normal rookie averages of 13 and 8. Plus he's now only a year away from a 100 mil max contract.

I see what you mean. If Dekker is gone and Stone doesn't come then I definitely agree the FF hopes are a long shot. To me that all hinges on Stone, would be shocked if Dekker stays. I think we're the B1G favorite no matter what just based on Koenig/Hayes both being juniors and first team pre-season all B1G next year. Obviously not as drastic of favorites as this year though. I think MD would be the #2 assuming their guys don't go pro. OSU always recruits well but I assume their super frosh will go pro.

I see the Payton point, everyone knew that was just a half year thing for him and he wouldn't stick around. I would argue that Mason ultimately was the cause for Allen leaving though, if we never signed him they might have kept that core together for a while.

Interesting topic, most hated buck? I go with Anthony Mason all day, ruined our only good team in the last 25 years. Still surprised to this day that Karl couldn't see his game would mess up their fast paced style, especially when you factor in he was an attitude problem guy.

Yes I think that's what that article said, they don't have to reduce the cost, it would just be cutting him then. Like what happened with Josh Smith. However, the team would be stupid not to at least try to save money buy negotiating it lower (Amare Stoudemire) and then using the stretch provision. I think it's a tough call if they can't get him to walk away for say 3/4 of what he's owed. It's not like they're up against the cap or anything, might be better to eat paying him to stay home for a while and getting it off the books sooner.

Yes very true on lack of guard depth. They swung and missed on several PGs in this class and will be their primary focus in the next class. If Dekker were to stay it would help as he can get minutes at the 2 and is a competent ballhandler. They can handle an injury anywhere except to Bronson. Could probably say this with any team other than the blue bloods of UK, Duke, Kansas etc though. Word is Pritzl will likely start right away. And supposedly Jordan Hill will be really good at D and able to handle the ball, maybe a Flowers type, but he won't be able to score which he likely won't be needed for anyway. Schowalter can't competently handle the ball or shoot so I'd expect Hill to get PT over him. I've been saying all year they should be finding ways to get Dearing some real experience with all these blowouts, you might need him at some point. Instead we're up 19 yesterday with 2 minutes to go and the starters are still in. Even when guys like Dearing, Showalter, and Brown get in with 90 seconds left they're just running the clock. Why not throw Dearing out there with like 15 minutes left for a 3 minutes stretch and see how he does, assuming you have a comfortable lead.

I don't know for 100% either. But if they're calling it a "buyout" then I think they would negotiating for less than he's guaranteed. Essentially, he'd be giving up some money in order to buy his freedom. If they cut/released him then yea they'd be on the hook for the whole thing. However, teams should have insurance to help them with the cost in situations like these. saw this in an ESPN article though: "While it’s common for a player seeking a buyout to take a discount to get out of his deal (for example, that’s what Amare Stoudemire will do for the Knicks) there is no motivation for Sanders or his agent to give the Bucks a price break. They will pay full price to make him go away. Next summer, if he does show he’s not smoking anymore, some team will take a shot on him. However, it’s going to be for far, far less than the $11 million he was set to make this year." If I'm the Bucks there's no way I do this unless it saves a bunch of money. Just pay him to stay home if that's what it takes, better than letting him play somewhere else while we pay him. Plus they could use his contract for a future trade once he gets to the expiring year.

somehow you'd have to write the rules to allow only extra positional players, not allow the spots to go to pitchers. Otherwise teams would definitely load up on relievers, especially in the AL. Not a bad idea actually and kind of a simple tweak. another simple way would be to lower the mound. I've seen expansion mentioned in order to dilute the pitching pool a bit. Financially the league seems strong but I don't know what markets could handle a team. Maybe Charlotte, Vegas, Portland.

I'm basing my ellenson guess off what is being reported about his attitude, seems extremely full of himself. If he puts up 20ppg next year it wouldn't surprise me if he bails right away to get paid. Really any player that will be a first round pick it should be a no-brainer to go pro. Last year you even saw tons of guys that were borderline to even get drafted go pro just so they could go play in Europe rather than playing for free. MU could make a run at the tourney for sure but I'd call them bubble. I'm no expert on them though. I like what I see in Wilson and Fischer to go with Ellenson. I just have this feeling Ellenson might be a me first guy that doesn't fit well when it comes to winning games (like what people say about Melo). UW is the B1G favorite no matter what next year. If Stone comes though they'll be a likely 1 seed. Bronson and Nigel will be a force. Happ should be able to step right into Dekker's role, Stone right into Frank's if he comes. I would be shocked if Dekker stays, he'll be a first rounder. The way it sounds the only reason he might stay is just that these guys really love playing together and living the college life in Madison. That being said, living the NBA live with 10 Mil in the bank is a pretty good life too.

"In general I agree it would have helped his marketability this off season but there was no way the Brewers were going to let him get enough plate appearances to vest that option." Obviously they didn't want that to happen. But as I said, if Scooter would've gotten hurt with says 40-50 games left and Rickie had all those ABs already in place they wouldn't have had a choice (since they were in the playoff hunt) and MKE would've lost an arbitration ruling on it if they refused to play him. I suppose I agree with everyone else. He felt he was being shafted and it was an ego thing and thought for sure he'd get a starting job this offseason. Really I'm surprised he didn't end up somewhere he would at least have a chance at competing for the 2B spot in spring training, like a Tor or San Fran.

Well MU has Ellenson coming in next year and a couple other very high recruits so I won't feel too bad. Especially since some of the reason they'll be light on scholarship players is the new coach seemingly pushing people out. I'd expect Ellenson to shoot and score a ton while not winning enough to make the tourney, then he'll be gone after one year. If UW lands Stone as they're expected, they'll be primed for a likely 1 seed and legit chance at the FF again.

Yes Sacramento is one of the worst run franchises, you'll usually end up ahead by trading with them. That being said, there's not a whole lot they have that we'd want. Derrick Williams is the exact same skillset as Parker but has flopped in the league. Off the top of my head the only two guys I'd want (obviously Cousins is untouchable) would be Stauskus and McLemore. Overall I agree about not dumping assets because we're not making the Finals anyway. They've spent the last few years acquiring assets though, now is the time to start cashing them in for right pieces. Key is that the pieces have to be young guys that they expect to keep around. Guys like Kanter and Stauskus fit that description. Can't be giving up picks and Tobias Harris for 2 months of JJ Redick again, what a bad trade that was. Almost as bad as signing Anthony Mason, who is another example of a reason not to add a guy like Stephenson. Just saw a headline that the Bucks are discussing buyout with Larry. This is still year one of his deal isn't it? Unless he's willing to take much less than the 40 mil he's owed I'd rather tell him to go to rehab for the rest of the year and come back fresh next year and give it another go. It's just going to anger me to see him sign with someone like Cleveland or Dallas who get his head on right and he starts playing well again.

I think it's correct that his contract expires at end of season. Can't disagree with the original post that a bad start could be a quick trigger on him considering how the last season ended. I've generally liked him over the years as it seems the players always played hard for him. My biggest 'evidence' on that were the two seasons which we were out of the race very early but finished both seasons as one of the hottest teams in the league. One of those years (I think Segura's first year) we managed to get within like 2 games of the WC actually. Problem of course is that last year seemed to completely flip the other direction and the team was just lost at the end and seemed dead. My biggest complain as i think someone else mentioned is that he's still a little too old school in setting up roles and such. Also, in spite of this old school approach there is still way too many brainfart baserunning mistakes. This shouldn't happen under an old school manager.

I'm generally a Weeks supporter and usually defended him as people bashed him over the last few years. I just hate it when fans boo the home team/players, as David Puddy would "you gotta support the team". However, i wish he would've been willing to try some other positions last year. Since we were limited with having to carry Wang all season it really could've helped. The thing that didn't make sense is that he had big financial incentive to do it. He had a PA clause in his contract that if he hit would have gave him a one year extension at like 12mil(not sure exactly but it was real money, not the 2 mil he's getting now). If he would've done well in LF early in the year when Davis was struggling he could've gotten a lot of ABs there. Then when Ramirez went down he could've gotten some more there, and if Scooter would've went down then all of a sudden he would have had enough ABs and made a bunch of money. On top of that, as someone else mentioned, it would've made him much more desirable to other teams if he'd proven that he can play the corners or 3B at an adequate level.

I wouldn't touch Stephenson. That's the type of guy that could ruin a team with seemingly great chemistry like they have now. Juice seems to have cleaned his attitude up from last year and is fitting in well now. Look how his crap attitude last year infected the whole team, Stephenson could do the same thing. Plus hasn't Charlotte been winning again lately and are back in the playoffs, they'll probably stick him out now. If OJ keeps his attitude and keeps shooting well until this time next year he'd be a great guy to flip at next years deadline to a contender. Also, he's not really that old, if he'll take a reasonable extension why not keep him around as a good scorer off the bench. Or you might really need him next year if Middleton or Knight don't come back. Not sure what Bayless's contract situation is either, if he's a FA next year, they'd really need Mayo more. Really, Bayless would be a great guy to flip right now for some picks to a contender that needs a backup PG. He's playing amazing.

I think they can upset anyone in the first round. Unless Cleveland and Chicago get their acts together by then, those two could be on a different level. Either way, they're not getting blown out in 4 games like last time in the playoffs. They might lose in round 1 but will win at least a game or two and battle in all the losses. If Sanders sobers up and Irsan gets consistently healthy they could definitely win a round or two. I thought Kanter could be an ok option too. I obviously haven't watched Utah much, but have to remember he's only around 23. Things like D and passing could be improved with better coaching and onto a better team like ours. We have tons of draft picks to pull it off. Thing with him is he's a restricted FA at the end of the year and will likely command 10+ mil per year. Obviously we have cap room but will also have to sign Knight and Middleton. Could lose Henson this year and Zaza the year after so this would be good add in my opinion if they're committed to resigning. I'd rather have Kanter than Henson, but Kanter will be double the money. It really hurts having Larry's 11 mil clogging the books, there's no way anyone is taking that salary back unless we throw in #1 picks. Utah wouldn't want him either, biggest reason they're not interested in resigning Kanter is they have Gobert and Favors already, and a solid backup I think named Booker. No need to pay another big 10+ mil.

well, it was tough to be any worse than last year for him, haha. The guy is a superstar, he read the internet bashing him for his D and focused on it this year. It's really just about effort for him on that end. In spite of that he's probably average at best, which is all they need from a guy like him who expends so much energy on O, and it's much better than not even trying like he did last year. I hate Howard, don't think you can win a title with him unless he's the 3rd best player, not #1 or 2. Harden trade out of OKC could go down as the worst trade in NBA history, especially if eventually leads to Durant leaving after next year. And subsequently Westbrook right after. Go from from 6-10 year NBA title contender window to a joke of a team if that happens. Joe Schmo fan like us probably couldn't have known he was this good because his minutes were limited. But they should have known, they see him every day in practice. With the cap going way up soon they probably could've kept him and only paid the tax in one season, for a team that sells out every game should have done it. No way they wouldn't have won a title in the last two years or the coming 4 years if they kept him.

Good info, I totally agree that we should get that over them but would we. I generally think the committee will be smart enough to know we were without Frank and TJ in that Rutgers game, whereas joe schmo writer at this point isn't doing that much research. I'm just a little concerned as it seems whenever a lower level team like Gonzaga, Wichita, St Joes has an undefeated or 1 loss year they still throw them a 1 seed and the predictably don't make it out of the sweet 16. I think it would help the committee also if Duke were to end up with 5 losses, like one to UNC and then again in the conf tourney. They can give the #1 to Gonzaga and put Duke in their bracket as the #2 making it really irrelevant as to who the #1 is. I would just hope they're on Kentucky's side of the bracket. Duke and Kentucky are the two teams I would fear the most in the tourney.

Well it's semantics I guess, not a big deal. Most folks don't know how complicated the NBA cap is so I thought it easier to just say cap reasons. If it wasn't for salary cap they'd still have those guys, at least Asik and Lin, for this year. Might have let Parson go anyway since he got so overpaid and Ariza is like half the cost. But Parson is probably the better player long term since he's so much younger. Beverly is average. Hits 3s at a respectable clip and plays hard D which they need to make up for Harden being a poor defender. You can't have a star at every position, plus Harden handles almost all of the ballhandling so it he fits ok. I guess it's helped them to have walked into Josh Smith and Corery Brewer too during the season. Regardless, the main point of it all was that in spite of a so-so roster (especially with Howard hurt all year) they're still winning and it's fair to argue the 3pt/ft strategy is a big reason why. I agree with Barkley that they're not a real title contender this year though. Well unless Howard turns into Howard from 5 years ago all of a sudden. If they would have gotten Bosh and Parsons they'd be a legit contender. I'm a big Spurs guy too. Been telling people for the last several years how great they are to watch and everyone said I was crazy, not the old boring Spurs from the early to mid 2000s when they were winning and only scoring in the 80s. The motion offense they really pushed the last 4-5 years or so is the best style of bball and it's spread to the rest of the league (including MKE other than when they get too bogged down in iso plays usually in the 4th qtr). Too bad most of the country didn't realize until last years finals. I'd love to see a Spurs/Hawks finals (assuming the Bucks can't make it, haha).

If UW wins out you have to think they get a #1 seed over Gonzaga. But what about if they lose one more game? I really want to get the #2 or 3 overall seed in order to avoid Kentucky until the championship game.

But the Giants can afford a 150 mil + payroll so can absorb the screwups of Zito, Lincecum, Rowand, and a few others over the last few years. Teams like MKE and KC can't take those risks. I laughed at the Votto contract as soon as I saw it. Combine it with the Phillips and Bailey and Cincy will soon be the worst team in the NL Central. Milwaukee has avoided those long term albatrosses so far so we can consistently be competitive. I'd rather toil away in the 75-85 window that we appear destined for most years and then hope for the right situation to present itself and then go for it, like we did in 08 and 11. Beats the heck out of what they did from the early 90s until 2005.