paul253

Well that makes sense. I can't blame you, though. Your job is to do whats best for your clients. But when you are worried about your player being blocked, only to find out he'd be blocked by more of your players, your arguments kind of fall by the wayside. Especially when you say stuff like how you can't get an impartial opinion from a scout because its a business or stuff like "for whatever its worth i think i know what i am talking about", an obvious reference to your apparent inside knowledge, yet you don't share any of that knowledge. I'll be the first to admit, I have never seen Brewer play. All I have to go on is his defensive statistics, yet with that many errors in such an important position i don't think its unfair to wonder outloud how long he should play there. How is Brantley not being a CF in the minors any different than Brewer not being a CF in the minors? Brantley profiles much better in CF. That's fine, but how come when someone says Brewer profiles more as a centerfielder than as a shortstop, you jump all over them? Is it ok to say it about Brantley because he is one of your guys?

ok so the only way he can possibly have any value whatsoever in the organization is to have him play shortstop....got it. How is moving him to centerfield devaluing him, and don't say because he'd be blocked. I already went over the "organizational need" quandry a few posts ago...in 3 years, the depth might not be there. Look at how many first base prospects we had 3 years ago, and how many do we have now? and there isn't "zero" reason to move him...when someone stuggles that much fielding their position, thats all the reason you need to move him. I'll ask again, are you willing to say you think he will make it to the majors as a shortstop?

56 errors last season? 9 erros in 14 games this season? Thats not enough to think maybe shortstop isnt working out so well? Yes he is very athletic, but tell me why that means he can't play centerfield. I realize you are his agent and you think the best way for him to get to the majors is at short, but his defensive stats make Rickie Weeks and Mat Gamel look like good defenders, which of course they aren't. Do you honestly think he will make it to the show sticking at shortstop? He may have the "ability" to play short, but if he doesnt improve he doenst improve.

Mr. Brewer is going to be just fine at SS. I dont see CF as an org need and obviously his value is maxed out at SS so why the overwhelming sense of urgency to waste a top prospect and bury him in the OF. Who the hell cares about winning games in the minors. Its about player developement, not winning. You're right, it is about developing a player. Thats why i think its better to move him sooner, rather than later. Does anyone here really think he is going to be a majorl eague shortstop? I doubt it. So why have him continue to play there. I understand it's your job to give him the best chance to succeed, but its in the teams best interest to put him in a spot they can actually play him. Shortstop is premium, but you can't just stick just anyone there, they have to be good at it. The Brewer's last season plus have shown how bad defense can ruin a season, and we don't seem to have all that many solid defenders in the minors. I'm sorry, I just think keeping someone at shortstop who can't handle it is a bad idea. Get him as much experience in the outfield as possible, or move him to second. As far as the outfield being crowded, yeah it is...now. But Brewer is at least 3 years away, and a lot can happen in 3 years. LaPorta may be at first base, Braun may be on the verge of leaving, Hart may be gone, Hall and Gwynn may be gone. 4 years ago we had Richie Sexson, Corey Hart, Brad Nelson and Prince Fielder all at first base. Minor league depth seems to work itself out.

Brent Brewer seems to have quite a bit of upside, but his defense at SS is terrible. So far this year he has 8 errors in 12 games, enough to make Mat Gamel look like a gold glover. Why hasn't he been switched to centerfield yet? It seems inevitable, and i would think it makes sense to do it as soon as possible to get him the most experience possible. Any thoughts?

DEF2 pled out but DEF1 got off on self-defense. In that case, I would think that they wouldn't just want DEF2 to get out just because DEF1 got self-defense. My assumption is that if they police/prosecutors really think this guy got away with murder, they'd be more likely to find some other, lower charge him than to take it out on a co-defendant who pled. But then again, I really have no first-hand knowledge, so you could be right.

So they (police, prosecutors, etc.) will do whatever they can to make sure DEF2 stays for the duration of his plea deal. I'd like to know why you think that. Believe it or not, this isn't personal to most police and prosecutors. They are just doing a job. As far as doing what they can to make sure the guy stays in for the duration of his sentence, all they can do is answer questions from a parole officer in front of a parole board. Its not like they are investigating anything...their job is done.

and most of the time they are but when they believe they have the right person under arrest, they will do whatever they can to make sure they are convicted, which includes trying to get a confession and not providing a lawyer unless explicitly asked for one. You say it as though it is a bad thing. As a detective you gather evidence and with that evidence you find suspects. The problem only occurs if they are trying to get a confession from someone who they know did NOT commit the crime. The statement you cited above is simply a detective doing their job. If your family member were murdered, I'd be willing to guess you wouldn't be too happy if they were not doing all they could to make sure a suspect is convicted. I'll give you the Beatles comparison, but only if 4 lines a of beatles song were played every single time someone got arrested in the past 42 years. I still think comparing the Miranda rights to a song is a little overboard. Finally, it's been brought up numerous times here that, well, they trust the police to do whats right and they don't know what they're rights actually are. I don't know. As a U.S. citizen, you are guarenteed certain rights, but it is also your responsibilty to know what those rights are. Kind of like how ignorance is not a defense in crime, ignorance of the law isn't really an excuse for making a false confession. It is your responsibilty to know you have the right to an attorney, you can't expect the police to lay out all of your options for you when they suspect you of a crime. Their job is to get enough evidence for a conviction, not to hold your hand throughout the process.

Im sure it also baffles you that people are born to crack addicts, or that people are discriminated against for being female or handicap, or that if baffles you that kids drop out of school when they grow up poor and with one parent. How is that not a personal attack? When you say "I'm sure that it also baffles you that...", you can't say that that wasn't directed specifically at me when it obviously was. I'm not looking for an apology or anything, just don't say something like that and then try to explain it with the phrase "not necessarily you". As far as the comparision to Maroon 5 lyrics, thats just an absurd comparsion. First of all, Miranda Rights have been around since 1966, over 40 years. It's not that I have watched a lot of movies or law and order, its that anyone who has ever watched tv or gone to school past, say, 6th grade, or watched a law type movie, or been involved in the criminal justice system, etc, has more than likely heard them at least once. The Miranda rights are the most common, basic protection we have when we are arrested. And you're right, there is a big difference between deception and coercing a confession. But I'd like to know how saying "we know you did it" or "we have witnesses telling us you did it" is coercion. I see coercion as "Tell us you did it or we are going to make sure you're family is deported", something along that line. If they said that, then I don't blame the guy, but based on the interview, I didnt get the sense that it was anything like that.

So it happens. You can sit there and say that "it baffles you" that people would confess to murder, but it is the truth and it happens more often than you think. Im sure it also baffles you that people are born to crack addicts, or that people are discriminated against for being female or handicap, or that if baffles you that kids drop out of school when they grow up poor and with one parent. This seems to be getting a little personal, and off topic here. You are making very uncalled for generalizations about me based on me saying that I don't understand why someone would confess to a murder they didn't commit. You go and claim i am denying discrimination and that people are "born to crack addicts" (not even sure what you are implying there)...i don't know, just seems a little over the top and unnecessary. I am not going to comment on discrimination or crack addicts or kids dropping out school b/c it has no relevance to this topic. I feel bad for the guy, I really do. But I don't know, I guess I just still don't understand. I don't know if he was under arrest or not, he made it sound like he was at the pizza hut and they came in and asked to talk to him, not place him under arrest. I guess I do take my education for granted, but at this point I am not sure how anyone can not know their miranda rights. You have heard it probably a million times. Who here can't recite "you have the right to remain silent....anything you say can and will be used against you...yada yada yada." Just like i said in the other post, I am not denying that police sometimes use shady means to accomplish they're goal, but deception is allowed. There is nothing wrong with saying "we have enough evidence to put you away". My guess is if all you say is "I want to talk to a lawyer", eventually you will either talk to a lawyer, or be released.

I've never really understood the point of it since if it's murder, it's murder. I know Dickey's not a fan of it either cuz it just doesn't seem necessary. The point of felony murder is to have a more serious charge for someone who commits a felony, and while in the process, someone dies. Its not your typical murder. For instance, if you are shopping in a store and the guy next to you dies of a heart attack, obviously there is no crime. But if you shove a gun in the guy's face and he dies of a heart attack, thats where felony murder comes in. The bad guy didn't physically kill the guy, so 1st or 2nd degree intentional homicide isn't an option. I hope that clarifies it felony murder as opposed to intentional homicide ( i hope even more that you were talking about that in that statement otherwise i wasted everyone's time) Cops tell suspects what they want them to confess to all the time, and guess what? People confess to things they dont do...all the time, even "smart" people. I graduated law school with a guy who was convicted of murder in Texas, mostly because the cops did terrible detective work and then went to work on this guy (who found the body) until he confessed. The Wisconsin Innocence Project got him out, and he graduated law school with me. So that being said, he could think it was self defense, but he is just a kid, and if he thinks the police think it is murder (which they do think, and it likely is) then he thinks it is murder and wants a deal to save his life. The idea of confessing to something you didn't do, especially something as serious as murder, just baffles me. Short or torture, there is nothing a detective could say to me that would make me admit to that. This is still America, and as soon as you say "I will not answer any questions until I speak with a lawyer", theorhetically they cannot ask you anymore questions. Now I am not ignorant enough to believe most detectives will stop there, but I do believe if thats all you say, eventually you will be ok. If they do keep asking you questions, it violates your rights guarenteed in the constitution, and any confession should be thrown out.

Even so, we have more than enough people that can play in the outfield. I think he'd be more valuable if he could play third base and shortstop than centerfield.

As was pointed out before, D2 agree to plead guilty of 2nd degree, which essentially is him admitting he is guilty of 2nd degree murder. He decided to risk being convicted of first degree and spend the rest of his life in prison. As soon as the judge accepts his plea, thats the end of it...no recourse. The thing that i wonder about is this. D2 saw what D1 did. If D2 actually thought it was a legitimate case of self-defense, I wonder why he pled guilty to 2nd degree instead of using the same defense as D1. If it wasn't really self-defense, then D2's testimony should have been enough to convict D1. Strange case indeed.

I know this is off topic, but i still think moving Irabarren to the outfield is a stupid move. Weeks isnt exactly tearing it up, and we have zero infield depth, both at the majors or the minors. I am not all that elated with Dillon and Counsell playing everyday if Weeks or Hardy goes down. We also have a logjam in the outfield, going all the way down to Brevard County. I don't think, this move makes zero sense to me. That being said, I would like to see Gwynn in the majors all year round. He's the best defensive outfielder we have, which pays dividends late in games. He can steal bases, he works the count, he can bunt. Unfortunately, we have a plenty of outfielders and he's the most likely to go down. I think if he does, he should play every day and get as many AB's as possible.

I figured I could pose this question in this thread. I just got a new computer. Is there anyway to transfer all the songs on the itunes program on my old computer onto the Itunes, same disk, I put on this new computer?

I just hope they don't go cheap because of so many picks.

Well i think its no doubt going to be Ric Flair's last match. Its sad to see him go, but i think its definitely time. I'd love to see him come back and start up the horsemen as a manager, with Shawn Michaels leading it, but you know Vince Mcmahon will never do that. He's too interested in making stories about a little irish midget being his son. WWE has become such a joke. Elsewhere, I've noticed the Champion always seems to lose at Wrestlemania, so my predictions are the Undertaker and John Cena will come out champs.

I think there is a big difference between fighting in hockey and fighting in other sports. In 99% of the fights in hockey, its 1-1. The two players stand in there until they fall down and it usually breaks itself up then. The other players don't get involved. The other players actually knock the players' gloves and helmets away so the don't fall over them and get hurt. Basically, they know how to handle it. You watch the punks in basketball fight, and it is always started by a cheap shot. Then 4 guys come running in. Players are throwing wild haymakers b/c they don't really want to get hit. Players come in off the bench. its just a mess....not like hockey at all.

it was a playoff game no less. I am looking at it wondering what that other goalie is doing. Roy is coming right at him and this guy has his arms resting on the goal. what an idiot. at least defend yourself

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ESHa9-Czv_A Did anyone see this clip? This is one of the biggest hockey brawls I have ever seen. I've also never seen a fight between a goalie from one team and a regular player from another

Miller Park

how much?

I do not have an ebay account, and quite honesty don't want to open. If anyone has opening day tix, preferably terrace reserved, that they are willing to sell at a straight price, send me a message. I already have my tickets, and I am just looking for tickets for some friends, so I am not going to be paying like $100 a ticket, but if you are willing to negotiate a fair price ( I realize the supply demand and will not make ridiculous offers) then let me know

Hey I sent you a message...check your box

When I said Brook before, I meant Robin. Hes the bigger tool. He also cant keep his hands off the ball after a made basket. The refs need to warn him about pushing the ball away because it is taking away Marquette's oppurtunity to inbound it right away and get a fast break chance.