paul253

Pick an item then. Ice cream? Brats? Cheeseburgers? What are you going to find at Miller Park that is cheaper, or even modestly more expensive than the same item at a restaurant? How much do you think that very same $8 dollar burrito would be at Miller Park? I guarantee it wouldn't be $8. That's my point. Whether it's unreasonable or not at a restaurant it's going to be even more expensive at the stadium. Again, I've never suggested they sell hot dogs for $1 all game every game. You can't just change my argument to make it worse. I understand the math. I get that if you sell it for less you have to sell more of them to make the same profit. Like I said, the Atlanta Falcons just slashed their concession prices. Let's see what happens with that before we claim either of us are right or wrong. I don't think you do understand. I don't "hate" anything. It's not my money they are spending so I couldn't care less what they do. I just thought that it was a very underwhelming announcement. And I'm apparently not the only one.

It is different than bobble heads because I'm sure they still make a profit on $1 hot dogs. I can go to Pick N Save right now and buy an 8 pack of hot dog buns and an 8 pack of hot dogs for $5-$6. If I turn around and sell them for a dollar each I'd still make a profit, albeit a small one. But surely the people who sell concessions get a much better deal because they buy in bulk. I think $2-$2.50 for a hot dog at a stadium is a reasonable price. At that price I think the profit would still be reasonable on each hot dog sold and I think you'd sell a lot more hot dogs. As you said most people don't pay the current prices because they are not reasonable.

It's the Atlanta Falcons by the way: $2 for a hot dog, unlimited soda or a pretzel $3 for pizza, fries, nachos, or peanuts $5 for beer or cheeseburger I can honestly say I'd buy something every single time I go a game, unless Itaklgate ahead of time and just can't eat or drink anymore.

You never know. Making a small profit off of something is better than making a large profit off of nothing. There was a franchise that just recently announced a huge cut in concession prices. I can't remember who exactly, or even what league, but it will be interesting to follow them to see how they are doing profit wise.

62.73%. Seriously how the heck I am supposed to give you an exact number? I'd say the majority. I say because when I go to games I do not see half of the fans with something from the concession stand. And a good percentage of those that do have beer only. Whatever analytics you are talking about are skewed by the fact that Miller Park has a monopoly on food sales so they can charge whatever they want. That doesn't mean they should nor does it mean that charging $4.50 for a hot dog and selling less is a better idea than charging $2 for a hot dog and selling more. I get it. THe Brewers are a business and businesses are out to make money. But again, don't act like you're doing some great service to the fans by telling us you're going to to give us more overpriced food options. Your point? Whatever the price is I think it's safe to say it'll be much more expensive at Miller Park than it would be at the regular restaurant that sells it. Just like every single specialty item is. Come on. Restaurants are much more reasonably priced than ballparks and you know it. Would you pay $4.25 for a soda at a restaurant with no free refills? I sure wouldn't. Would you pay $4 for a bag of peanuts at a restaurant? Or $4 for water? Or $4.50 for a hot dog? If you saw those prices at a restaurant you'd walk out. That's the difference. Yes they do. And I bet they sell a heck of a lot more hot dogs and soda those days. And I also bet that a much larger percentage of fans buy something from the concession stands those days. I have no idea why the profit margin is but maybe it's a sign that charging outrageous prices for food just because you can isn't always the best business practice.

Awesome. More choices of food for me not to buy. I don't understand why teams can't figure out that if they simply lower the price of food more people will buy it. I went to a Brewers-Twins game in MN a few years ago and just happened to go there on a dollar dog night. Between my bro in law and I we bought like 10 hot dogs. I'm sure they weren't the same quality hot dogs you get for $4.50 or whatever on a regular night but who cares. Had they not been a dollar I can guarantee our total bought would have been zero. Back when MP first opened or sometime not long after they had one stand way up in the left field area by the kids zone or whatever that sold dollar hot dogs all be time. People would walk all the way up there from all over the stadium to get them, so much so that they ended up ending that deal. Again, not the same quality hot dog as the regular one but good enough for people to pay a dollar for. Adding more overly expensive food products and acting like they are doing the fans some huge favor shows me how tone deaf professional organizations are when it comes to concessions. Other than maybe beer, the average fan is just not willing to pay what they are demanding.

Important to note, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, that Bud and Miller are NOT going to be made by the same company. I believe as part of the deal SABMiller was required to sell its stake in MillerCoors. So MolsonCoors now will entirely own the Miller brand.

It would be nice for once if they could actually develop their own pitching instead of trading away the farm to get it. No matter how you look at it, trading for quality pitching will gut your system and it's usually for a very short term gain. If we wanted to go after a Chris Sale for instance we'd probably have to give up at least four of our top prospects. It could be doable but then again you need more than Sale to win. So now you have to give up even more top prospects to get another decent pitcher. That guts your system even further. Last years team and this years team is what happens when you gut your system too much. I get the whole "best player available" argument but at some point you have to address pitching. The acquisitions of Hader, Ortiz and Bickford has been a wonderful start. But we need more, much more. Next years draft is strong with pitching at the top. If we take yet another outfielder I'll be furious. Being able to develop your own pitching solves so many problems, especially for a small market team. I'm a little annoyed we waited until last trade deadline to start thinking about it (thanks Melvin).

We don't have anyone left to trade that can bring a TOR starter. We have no Gomez or Lucroy anymore. Braun isn't getting you a TOR in my opinion. We did well in obtaining Hader Ortiz and Bickford. Hopefully they all work out.

I guess that's what happens a when you throw out a team that finished like 60 games under .500

I agree, but, and I don't mean to sound like a jerk, that doesn't really answer my question. I guess I could have been a little more clear. Any chance we can grab a pitcher who projects to be a TOR starter? Are there enough of them available? Obviously a guy drafted in the 18th round could turn into a TOR starter but if he projected as a TOR started he wouldn't have lasted to until the 18th round.

I know next years draft, at least at the top, is supposed to be better than this years. Any chance we can grab a potential #1 or #2 starting pitcher with the #10 pick, which is where I see us ending up? Any chance we'd actually select a pitcher over another toolsey outfielder?

Like I said it's about when you win and when you lose. No matter how bad we think this team is there's always the always the chance they could overachieve and make the playoffs. If you win 10 in a row in May it helps put you in a position to make the playoffs. If you win 10 in a row after you have been mathematically eliminated it means nothing because you have no hope of making the playoffs. People want the Brewers to win. But some of us don't mind if they lose when winning accomplishes nothing. Let me put it this way. If the Packers go 13-3 this year people would probably say "if you told me at the beginning of the year the Packers would be 13-3 I'd take it". But if the Packers start 13-0 and then finish 13-3 a lot of people would probably be a little disappointed, even though the record is exactly the same. Same goes here. If the Brewers are on pace to have the 5th pick then at the very end of the season start playing really well and finish with the 11th pick people are probably going to be disappointed. Well first off I didn't say "shut down". But he didn't have to play 6 games a week. Just like I didn't say KRod should never close a game in September. You keep referring to it as "tanking". There's a difference between tanking and playing for the future when the present is already lost. That's what we want, although truth be told I wouldn't even care if they tanked. Playing for the future is getting closer experience for a guy who is likely going to be your closer next year. Or starting someone who you think might compete for a starting position next year vs playing he same vet who is likely gone. Or resting an older vet like Lucroy or Braun more often to lower the likelihood serious injury (just like Lucroy sustained last year). We don't have to keep throwing out the same lineup or rotation to go from 68 wins to 71 wins. At this point wins do not matter in the least bit. If you consider that tanking, so be it. But this season is lost anyway so why not see what we have for next year?

Not really. If the Brewers win their last 10 games this year then when we say "they finished strong" we are referring to the final 10 games. If they finish the 13-2 then we are referring to the final 15 games. a "finish" can be two weeks or six weeks as far as I'm concerned. When you lose matters. If you start 25-10 and are in the division lead until mid August but then finish 10-25, people are going to mad at the terrible finish because up until that finish you probably had a very good chance of making the playoffs and/or winning the division. However if you start 10-25 and are out of contention by mid August, then finishing 25-10 does nothing more than get you a much lower draft pick. Either way you go 35-35 but the repercussions of WHEN you win your games are much different. Take 2014 for example. We certainly weren't rooting for losses on August 25 when they were 15 games over .500 because they were still in it obviously. But had they started 9-21 rather than finished 9-21 and we never really close to a playoff birth it would have been a different story. We want them to play for the future rather than chase meaningless wins. If they play for the future and win, so be it. Last season I was all about calling for them to sit Lucroy. They didn't and look what happened. He got a concussion and there were all sorts of questions about his health coming into this season. I was also calling for them to let Jeffress or Thornburg close out a game every now and then for the experience. People said "but KRod is the closer", as if he HAD to close games. Well of course KRod gets traded and Jeffress is given the closer's role with zero closing experience. Both instances worked out fine in the end but there was no guarantee of that. This year is a bit different because pretty much everyone other than Braun is auditioning for the future. Can you at least understand the frustration? When your one hot streak is when it not only least matters but actually may hurt your future people are obviously going t be upset.

In what way were we competing in 2012? You can't remove the biggest piece of evidence we have then claim there is no evidence. If we were competing in 2012 we wouldn't have traded Zach Greinke. We were 9 games under .500 heading into August. Still 5 games under .500 heading into September. Then we went 20-11 the rest of the way. If you are going to even begin to argue we were competing then you have to acknowledge the only reason we were even close is because of the fact that we played significantly better in September and October then we had all year. In other words, because of the hot streak Also, in 2013 while September may not have been a typical "hot streak" in terms of record, playing 3 games over .500 in September was quite the improvement from playing 17 games under .500 like we had been all season long. Again, if you compare the final month to the rest of the year then id say that we did in fact go on a hot streak at the end of the year. Finally, while this season isn't over yet we are 6-2 so far in September. Even playing .500 ball for the rest of the way would be a bit of a hot streak considering that, even taking out our awful August, we would still have been 7 games under .500 this year. I think there is plenty of evidence that we have played significantly better towards the end of the year lately. It's happened twice in the last four years and has started happening so far this year.

Or it could be a very bad thing. While I certainly root for young guys to get experience and play well, i don't buy that two or three extra good starts by guys like Garza or Guerra are going to have any positive affect on their trade value. People know what those pitchers are. Three good starts isn't going to change that. I'm all for winning. But by "winning" I mean overall. Competing for playoff spots and division championships. We have this frustrating tendency of playing like crap all year long then when wins actually do more harm to your future then good we go on this tear, costing us 4-5 draft positions, draft pool money and maybe even a pick if we make another dumb signing like Kyle Lohse. I can't say that they should TRY to lose but man is this frustrating to see the same scenario play out year after year after year. I think by now we know that momentum doesn't carry over to the next year so I have faith that this little streak were on means anything.

Brewers are going to end up with the 10th pick. They always pull this crap. Lose all season long then when it doesn't matter in the least bit they'll start winning like crazy.

I'd rather just see college kids play because I don't want to watch a bunch of professionls who are more worried about getting injured and losing money than winning. For some reason only professional hockey players seem to care enough about the Olympics to actually want to play in them. And I love Olympic hockey because of it. But I don't care to see a "dream team" of USA baseball where, for instance, James Shields is the ace of the staff. I'd love to see baseball players care as much as hockey players but as the WBC as shown its just not happening.

I doubt Thornburg will bring back an Andrew Miller type return but I'd hang onto him, hope he stays this good, and pray the relief market is as strong next year as it was this year. I've always liked Thornburg and do not want to see him go but just like anyone else if it makes sense to deal him you do.

Add another top 5 pick to our system and it only gets better. Unlike our last rebuild we don't have as many of the all star caliber bats like Braun Fielder and Weeks but we do have more pitching depth, and more depth in general. I think this rebuilt team won't have as high a ceiling as the last but will have a higher floor, if that makes sense. Obviously we're not done yet but the additions of Ortiz Brinson and Bickford were huge IMO. If Hader and Ortiz match their potential and Looez turns things around I think we could have a solid rotation. Hopefully next draft we get that ace or another all star caliber bat to go with Arcia and Brinson.

They don't necessarily have to add an equal number of women's scholarships. They could cut another men's sport or two and keep the total number the same.

So a number of years ago I opened an account with Scottrade. I made some trades and buys and what not. Now I am thinking of selling all my stocks, which are worth a few thousand dollars. Assuming I do that, how do I collect my money? Do I just go into a Scottrade store and tell them I want my money and they'll cut me a check? I don't want to close the account, I just need the money.

Tons of pitching in that top 15. Good to see

I just hope they don't call up a bunch of big names just to placate fans. I don't think Arcia should have been up and I'll be upset if guys likes Hader and Brinson and called up. We have plenty of other guys who can fill those roles.

I'd drop: Barrios Boyer Capuano Cecchini Cravy Elmore Flores Hauser Liriano Pina Scahill Wilkins Nieuwenhuis Add Brinson Hader Coulter Taylor Phillips Wang Williams M Diaz I'd like to see them give Wren a shot this season and if he does ok then add him and let him battle for CF next season with Broxton and Brinson in what should be another lost season.