paul253

that seems like an awfully simply answer, and quite honestly I don't believe it. The Brewer's system is full of hitting and barren of pitching. If they can acquire a guy like Lincecum, i don't think they'd hesitate. Same with the giants, they are old and need an infusion of young hitters. I dont think they'd completely forget about the idea of trading on of their young pitchers.

I recently bought a new computer and forgot to burn all the songs from my Itunes onto cds so i could put them onto my new computer. Does anyone know of any programs or anything i can download (preferrably for free) that isnt bad for your computer and will allow you to put the songs from your ipod onto your computer?

I too would love to Gamel stay at third. Imagine a lineup in 2 years with Gamel, Laporta, Fielder Braun and Hart. But then again, I'd be for a trade for Lincecum as well, and Gamel would make a good centerpiece because its unknown whether he can stay and third and our outfield has prospects galore. I still think Laporta eventually moves to first to replace Prince Fielder. Hopefully Taylor Green continues to hit his way through the system because he would be a good thirdbaseman for our lineup. Even though he lacks power, with all the power listed above, we need some guys who will be able to hit .300 as well.

How much longer are they going to go before being promoted to Nashville? I realize that defense is not exactly a strongpoint for either, but both of them are just mashing the ball. With the way our offense is going in Milwaukee, you never know when we might need them. If by some miracle we are still in the race for the playoffs in septemeber, calling them off for some power off the bench could be a big help. Plus, you never know, if we aren't in it and someone wants Cameron, we could trade him, slide Hart to center, and let the Laporta era in rightfield begin.

How is LaPorta's defense in right? Is it progressing all right? There is no point in bringing him up this year. I am not willing to trade Hart and hope LaPorta's offense and defense are comparable. Hart is a solid contributor, and so far has been the most consistent hitter. Braun, Fielder, Weeks, and Hart are leaving a lot to be desired so far.

With Gamel and Laporta in the minors ready to fill a corner spot this seems really quite logical. The only problem is that Gamel has yet to play the outfield. For all we know he may be worse in left than he is at third. Plus, if he could stick at third, it would significantly help the outfield logjam. You also have to consider what will be done with guys like Cain and Gillespie and Brantly. I disagree with those who think Hardy and Weeks need to go first. The way I see it, you can either keep Braun and Fielder, or you can keep Weeks, Hart, Hardy and Gallardo. Right now Weeks and Hardy have little trade value, and I think it will continue to go down. They should be easier and cheaper to sign. Ideally LaPorta and Gamel could slide right into the spots Braun and Fielder are occupying, and the return we'd get by trading Fielder and Braun should be huge. We could really stock up our farm system by trading those two, kind of like what the Marlins typically do. Fielder is not coming back...he just isn't. Scott Boras will not let him, not when he could be a DH in Anaheim, Boston, or New York making $18 million a year.

Do you think they are more likely to go the route of high risk-high reward type players like Jones, Rogers, and Jeffress, or go the safer, less high ceiling route in a college pitcher? Personally I'd be interested if there are any good solid college arms available at 16. The other route has landed some duds so far.

I wouldnt mind seeing them spend 4, or even 5 of the top 6 picks on pitchers. Their system is loaded with outfielders, and the system is almost completely bare of pitching. All the good pitchers they do have are very young. We need some good quality arms to catch up to the bats. I dont want to see them take a reliever because i think relievers are much easier to come across, even by trade. You can sign a good reliever for 5 or 6 million a year, whereas a good starter is now going to cost at least 10-12.

Thats all good and well, but again, tell me what he has actually done to make you think he will be consistently productive. He was in the top 5 in all those categories because he is a completely different hitter than most leadoff hitters. Most leadoff hitters dont concentrate on HRs or RBI's or slugging %. If you put Fielder in the leadoff spot he'll lead in all those areas too, but that doesnt mean you could claim he is a great leadoff hitter because he leads them in HR's, RBI's, Slugging and OBP. The fact is, if Weeks hit anywhere but leadoff his numbers would be well below average, so claiming he is a top five "leadoff" hitter is, in my opinion, a cop out because overall he is not a good hitter and has shown nothing to suggest he ever will be. I realize its not even a month into the season, but a .325 OBP for a leadoff hitter is nothing to brag about. Even his slugging is low this year so far. Maybe he heats up, maybe he doesn't, but you can't blame the wrist anymore. Also, I dont really know where the comparison to Johnny Estrada came from, but Weeks putting the ball in play is a little different than Estradra because Estrada took 10 minutes to get to first, whereas Weeks should be using his speed to beat out hits, like Corey Hart seems to be able to do. No, I haven't seen Irabarren hit much, but I have seen Weeks hit alot Weeks doesn't know how to do anything but swing as hard as he can and try to pull it. 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. Well if thats what you want to say to make it better, thats fine. His wrist was hurt, his swing was off...whatever it was...he was terrible. Has his swing always been off? Does that explain why his highest batting average in a season was a cool .279? He had a good month...one good month...and you seem to think thats good enough to claim that there is nothing to be worried about as far as his hitting ability goes.

What about bringing up Brad Nelson?

What about Brad Nelson? He had a good bounce-back year last season and is tearing the cover off the ball this year. He's a left handed power hitter and could give Fielder a day off or two.

If his arm is so bad, why did they move him to the outfield? This is just the stupidest, most baffling decision the Brewers have made, as far as I am concerned. Now that they moved him, Nashville doesn't even have a 2nd basemen listed on their roster, Weeks is stuggling, as usual, in Milwaukee. Meanwhile, the outfield is crowded from Nashville all the down to West Virginia. Just complete nonsense.

oops, i see its been posted already...my fault

I forget which UW campus it was, Lacrosse maybe, but there was a string of drownings of college students there. There have always been conspiracy theories about a serial killer, but those have always been dismissed, mainly b/c these kids have been ridiculously intoxicated. It appears now, though, that there might be something to it. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,352960,00.html Appartently smilely faces have been found at the scene of 40 drownings, nationwide, include some in Wisconsin.

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. 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. Yeah, .374 is a good (23rd in the NL) OBP, but its nice to get a hit every now and then. He also struck out 116 times, which was good for 30th, despite spending time on the DL and in the minors. I just dont understand what he has done to make people think he is capable of consistently being productive. You need to cite more than OBP to convince me. And the reason I'd prefer Irabarren is because his approach seems to be much better. Weeks is always trying to pull the ball, even when he doesnt have to. Putting the ball in play can certainly have its benefits.

You must have missed last year then. Apparently I did. I remember him getting sent down to Nashville because he was hitting below .200. I remember everyone getting all excited when he came back up and hit like .273, although his OBP was pretty good. His power for a leadoff guy is above average, but I think it has more to do with the fact that he's not a typical leadoff hitter. Most leadoff hitters dont hit for power, so his HR's and Slugging are going to be higher. This year he is again hitting below .200. I'm wondering what he has ever done to make people think he will be consistently productive. I can say with absolute honesty I would rather see Irabarren playing 2nd base right now than Weeks. As far as Stewart goes, I'd love to have him, but as was mentioned, Colorado is going to want pitching, which we don't have.

I think I'd rather have Clement. All things being equal, LaPorta is probably better, but we havent had a good catcher in years, and with about 4 or 5 minor leaguers that could be in the outfield in 3 years, we don't really need him. I can see him moving to first though to replace fielder when he bolts for anaheim or new york.

I dont think we have the ammo to get Stewart. Our farm system isnt very strong anymore, and is really weak in pitching, which I am sure what Colorado will be looking for. And if we did manage to get him, I'd rather move Hall to second and get rid of Weeks. I dont see Weeks ever being overly productive.

I guess we werent talking about about the same thing. You are talking about about a development called "The North End". When I referred to entire north end being empty, I meant the entire north end of downtown. Parking would be tough, thats a given. Like I've always said said, Downtown would have been better for the city, and the current location is better for fans. I just think it would be interesting to how downtown would be different if the stadium were down there.

The entire North End is under construction. Its actually not. Those big parcels of land west of the river surrounded by Juneau and McKinley and from I believe 3rd to 6th are all untouched. They have plans for them, I believe, but not under construction yet. Even that though proves my point...there was plenty of land to develop bars and restaraunts and hotels and whatever else. You have to think in terms of back then, what.....5 years ago when it would have been built downtown. All that land that is finally being developed now would have been available for development back then.

I wonder where people think new bars and parking structures would be built downtown. There is not empty, available land and if they could find places willing to sell, it wouldn't be cheap Um....have you been downtown in the last 4 years? All there is is open land. The entire North End is empty. The Freeway was torn down and NONE of that land has been developed yet. That same freeway would have been torn down for Miller Park, so the same land would have been there. Just off of Water St north of downtown is a big empty warehouse. Not to mention all of the condos built recently that could have been made into something else. My first instinct when I hear all these blanket thoughts about having the stadium downtown is to question where the poster lives - I'm not sure if that's presumptuous, but I feel like if someone were at all familiar with the Park East area or the area around the stadium (Bluemound, State, Miller Park Way, National) they wouldn't/couldn't question the choice. If you are referring to me, as I pointed out, I work downtown and I live about 5 minutes from there. Thats how I know how much land is still available. Do you know what a TIF district is? Milwaukee has given them out to pretty much anyone that's asked - except for the original Pabst Brewery developers. I dont mean to change subjects, but you seem kind of bitter about this. You forget to mention though just how much money would have been involved in the TIF for the Pabst Brewery. IIRC it was between $70 and $80 million, just an absurd amount. It is more or less a grant too, b/c the city would get the money back through property taxes, meaning they basically wouldn't be receiving any tax revenue from it until the loan is paid off 20 years later, and who knows if it will even have been around 20 years later.

I am getting real sick of Rickie Weeks. He has absolutely no idea how to be a situational hitter. No matter what the situation is, he is swinging for the fences.

That was before they tore down the Park East Freeway right? So that would to have been part of the deal. That would have been a nice location. Right on the river. Not far from the lakefront. I think with the tearing down of that freeway they could have made some pretty decent streets right to I43, meaning freeway access wouldn't have been terrible. All those bars on Water St would have gotten a major boost in business, and i think you'd have seen more developement to the north of that area, where right now there are some empty warehouses and a few little bars and shops.

I am not advocating having put it downtown, i think there are major advantages and disadvantages to both. Obviously the current setup allows for tailgating and easier access to parking and to getting there. And those mentioning traffic are absolutlely right. Milwaukee's freeway system is a disaster right now. Most directions have one way in and one way out. I think for the fan, the stadium is better where it is, but for the city it would have been much better downtown. From what i've heard, Cleveland and Balitmore's downtown were helped out a lot by the stadium. I disagree that there wouldn't be more developement downtown. I think there would be a ton of bars and restaraunts opening up by the stadium. I also think public transporation would become more popular as well, bringing in more money for the county. From where I live right now, I would not drive to a game if the stadium was downtown. Parking would be tight, but you know more structures would open. Like I said, downtown is bare sunday-wednesday. There isnt even any traffic down there. Like I said, I am not trying to suggest it should have been built downtown, but I like where the discussion is going and I'd like to play devil's advocate.

I was thinking about this the other day and wanted to bring it up. Anyone who has ever been to Miller Park knows that it is literally in the middle of nowhere. It is surrounded by acres and acres of parking lots and frewways. Is this the only stadium in the majors that was built like that? Also, before it was built, I know many local politicians wanted it built downtown and actually had a site picked out. Does anyone remember where the site was (as specific as possible, including street names). i know it was on the river somewhere...was it right around where they built that new Manpower building? I wonder why it was never built downtown. The only 2 advantages I see with its current location are parking and the ability to tailgate. But just think how different the city would be if it was downtown. I have a job where i work downtown at night, and downtown on Sunday nights-Wednesday nights is just bare empty. The local ecomony would have taken a big shot in the arm if it were down there I also think downtown would be much more developed, with a lot more hotels, bars and restaraunts.