paul253

paul, why do want to deal an above average 1st basemen with tremendous power and an under-market contact IN HIS PRIME to make room for a prospect that could be the next Mat Gamel, Kevin Barker, Joey Meyer, Alex Escobar, Corey Patterson, Brandon Wood, Sean Burroughs, Russell Branyan, etc? Morris could be a good 1st baseman, maybe even a star. But it would be foolish to move Hart for Morris until he's at least performed in AAA. If Corey Hart is in his prime he's at the very tail end of it. He can't move back to the outfield because his fielding took a huge dump the past two years out there. He is on the wrong side of 30 and I don't think spending $30-$40 million more on him is the best way to go with Milwaukee's limited resources and huge raises coming to Ramirez and Braun soon. And for the record, I'm not saying trade him because we have Morris. I'm saying trade him because we have Gamel. And if Gamel doesn't cut it there is Morris. I've also always thought Khris Davis would be a candidate. And then there is what we'd get for Hart (probably a #2 or #3 type pitcher). Yes Morris and Davis could flame out but couldn't you say that about every prospect? I just think it's foolish to trade an established all-star for a player that is more likely to be Brad Nelson 2.0 than he is Mat Gamel 2.0 That's not fair. Brad Nelson never really recovered from the broken wrist and his prospect status was almost nothing when he made it to the big leagues. Over the years, the Brewers have had many 1B prospects... but throughout the history of the franchise, only two have panned out The Brewers had like an entire decade with one TOTAL prospect turning out (Jenkins) and have obtained some pretty good 1B in trades (Sexson, Overbay) so they didn't really need to focus on the position in the minors. Beside, what has happened in the past has no bearing on what will happen to Morris. He is far from a sure thing but we shouldn't just write him off because he's just a prospect.

You think Gamel is going to come close to 25-30 home runs I think given a full year he could hit somewhere in the .275 range with 15-20 home runs and 70+ RBI. I'm not suggesting he'll put up Hart numbers but let's remember Hart's OBP was pretty average and he struck out a ton. And it's not like Gamel lost the job last season. This isn't Kevin Barker here. Let's remember that the Brewers offense was fine this year even with Fielder leaving and Weeks having an awful year. And the SS position was pretty pathetic most of the year too. And don't forget Lucroy was hurt for awhile. While Gamel likely won't product Hart numbers I don't expect the Brewers to all of a sudden go from a top 3 offense to one in the 8-10 range just because Corey Hart is gone, especially if Weeks returns to form. Corey Hart was a core player (still is) for a long time. But this is all about the future of the team. At some point he is going to need to be replaced. Is it worth signing a 30+ year old for three years at probably $11-12 million a year and blocking your top positional prospect? Personally I don't think it is.

Let me rephrase. I don't think that Corey Hart is the difference maker next season. I think that if the starters perform at or above expectations they'll be a serious playoff contender whether the 1B is Hart or Gamel. Unless of course the bullpen blows it again.

I wonder if Seattle would give up Walker Paxton or Hultzen for Hart. Obviously it would require Hart being willing to sign a long term deal with them. But Seattle has been hurting for offense for a long time and are even considering Hamilton. Their young guys (Smoak, Montero, Ackely) haven't quite cut it. But with that pitching if they get Hamilton and Hart in the middle of the lineup they could have a pretty decent team.

If I was Doug Melvin I would give it to him and not hesitate one bit. Keep the Brewers awesome offense in tact and have the quality SP prospects develop and we will go very far as a MLB franchise. I would. By the end of that deal he'd be in his mid 30's and pretty much limited to first base. That leaves no spot for Hunter Morris, possibly your top positional prospect. So they may as well trade him but probably won't get much. Also, extending Hart for 3 years will probably cost at least $30 million. The Brewers are already stretched thin and guys like Braun and Ramirez are due huge raises over the next two years. Plus, as much as I like Rogers, Peralta, Thornburg and Fiers they are unproven. Counting on them may not be the wisest idea quite yet. You could probably get another decent arm in exchange for Hart. The Brewers have proven over the past 4 years that all offense no pitching won't cut it. If the pitchers don't turn out the team will go nowhere. If you can get another #2 type pitcher, maybe even a #3 for Hart you take it. Hart has had a good run in Milwaukee. But recycling talent is the only way teams like Milwaukee can compete year in year out.

The Brewers need to decide soon if they plan on offering Hart an extension. The second the season starts his trade value drops dramatically due to the fact that the team who trades for him can't get draft pick compensation for him if he doesn't re-sign. I'm of the belief that they should trade him for pitching because the organization cannot afford to keep giving players in their 30's multiyear deals. One of our top prospects is a first baseman and they are plenty of other options should he not work out.

I'm surprised they aren't making you resign your two year contract too

Lane Kiffin is apparently fighting for his job at USC. No way would he hold Barkley out of this game if he didn't have to. A win over the #1 team in the country would surely give him another year (even though I suspect he'll get one anyway). I'm just glad Notre Dame won (did I actually say that?) The absolute last thing I want to see is another SEC-SEC championship game. Those folks are arrogant enough.

Some of the names on this list remind you of just how thing that Brewer's system is. Rivera was the pick at SS but I'd argue he doesn't even deserve a promotion. The Brewers really need to improve their depth and get some big names in the farm system. They've had too many wasted top ten round picks in the past few years.

MJ I think you misunderstood. I'm not complaining about a $150 monthly bill. My bill is now about $132. The $150 I brought up was to add an additional box to my house. RobDeer: I think you are right. If you know exactly what you want and know that will not change in two years then it is probably fine. But I've had both Time Warner and UVerse in the past and they've never had such ridiculous charges for adding a box. It's one of those things that you don't even think about because nobody else does it. I've just had too many bad experiences with DirecTV. Like I said, having to sit on the phone for half an hour while I speak with three different people just to get whole home DVR turned on, and then having it stop working within a week leaves a really bad taste in my mouth. And this insistence on the $50 service fee. Usually you can threaten to leave but with the 2 year contract DirecTV makes you sign it's not as threatening. I'm done with DirecTV once my contract runs out.

The thing that bothers me most is that I paid for the installation and they came and set up the dish. And maybe it's my fault that I didn't call the second I had a problem but I don't always feel like hopping on the phone every time it rains to talk to DirecTV. So then I do get around to calling because it's such a problem and they want to charge me $50 to have someone come out. Either the equipment is faulty or the person who originally set it up screwed up but either way it's not my fault and I shouldn't have to pay them to come fix it. I never paid ATT for service calls. And seriously.....$150 PLUS $6 a month just for an additional box? AND you have to sign a new two year contract? I was so baffled by that that I actually called a second time thinking the person I talked to the first time couldn't possibly have known what they were talking about. I figured they misunderstood what I wanted. But nope, not only did they confirm the price but they tried to play it off as a bargain. I can't wait til my contract ends. I'm going back to ATT even though I will probably lose a few channels I like.

I just wanted to make a few more comments on Directv quick. 1) I got around to calling about my reception issues when it rains. They had me check signal strength and stuff then told me to call back when it was actually raining. So next time it rained I checked my signal strength and it was way down. So I called but of course by the time I got around to speaking to a human being it had stopped raining. So they ran some more tests and told me they could send somebody out to look at it. I was like "finally". Then they mentioned "oh yeah we're charging you $50 for that". I told them to forget it. I have already lived with the problem for a year. I'm not paying someone to come fix a problem that is clearly not my fault. 2) I called back another time and asked about adding another box to my house. I have two and wanted to add a third. Here's what they told me. On top of a $50 service fee, I have to pay an initial $99 fee for the actual box. Then I have to pay an additional $6 a month for the box, for a total of about $150 up front PLUS $6 a month. I told them I didn't understand why I had to pay $99 to "lease" the box. I said "isn't that what the $6 a month is for?" The answer I got was "that's standard across the industry. It's still cheaper than if you buy a box". And if that wasn't enough, just to add another box I had to sign a new two year contract. Are you kidding me? 3) I then called and inquired about whole home DVR. They told me that all they had to do was switch it on while I was on the phone with them and it would start right away. Great. Half an hour and three transfers later I finally got it to work. It worked for all of one week. After that I got some message saying I didn't have an audio/visual connection or something like that. So I called back. I had thought about trouble shooting again to get it fixed but since I didn't have half an hour to spare I decided just to cancel it. So basically my whole home DVR lasted about one show. 4) And apparently the "hold until I delete" function on the DVR actually means "Hold until you delete or until there are more than five episodes of your show, in which case I will just go ahead and start deleting them for you even though you didn't actually watch them yet". So much for watching Season 5 of Sons of Anarchy. By the time I realized my DVR had started deleting episodes that I had labeled "hold until I delete" the first three episodes were gone. I was never a fan of Time Warner and I switched from ATT to Directv because I could save about $30 a month for the first year, but never in my life have I been less satisfied with a cable/satellite company. I know others haven't had the same issues as I have, but I would never ever ever recommend Directv to anyone.

The lodging in the Milwaukee area would be woefully inadequate for such a thing also. The Potowatomee are building a 20 floor hotel next to their casino and there is currently a Hilton Garden Inn and another hotel being built downtown. There is also a proposal out there for a hotel as part of that huge development on the lakefront (assuming that ever actually happens) Not sure how much it helps but it seems like Milwaukee is at least addressing the problem. I agree Miller Park should go for Wrestlmania. I also think they should spend the money it would take to upgrade the stadium to improve the heating so Milwaukee can make a bid for the Final Four. Those two would be absolute coups. Milwaukee needs to stop thinking so small.

The thing that really doesn't make sense to me is that we know, just by watching this team over the past 5 or 6 seasons, that we absolutely cannot win with all offense no pitching. I am high on our young pitchers but the fact is they are unproven. I'd be willing to go into next year with pretty much the same team as this season (albeit a completely new bullpen) just to see what we have. But IF you are going to spend big time money on a player I don't understand why it wouldn't be a pitcher. If it is either Greinke or Hamilton I'd take Greinke 10 times out of 10.

If they are going to sequel to ROTJ I'd have to imagine they'll use a lot of the same characters. I guess they could maybe get away without Ford but really I can't image a successful sequel without Luke and Leia. If they can't get any of them I'd rather they have a sequel set 100+ years into the future where all the original characters would be dead than to recast the characters. But for the sake of legitimacy and to ease concerns from the Star Wars fan base I'd imagine Disney will pay whatever it will take get Hamill Fischer and Ford.

I'd take a chance on him. Why not? Move him to the pen and have him focus on two pitches.

I think Obi-Wan was definitely meant to be the hero of episodes 1-3. TLB makes a good point though. The entire point of three movies was to show how Anakin turned. The cool thing about any future movies is that we have no idea what's going to happen.

What I'd like to see is Episodes 7-9 with a new Jedi Order headed by Luke Skywalker. I'm not sure what angle they can take with Han Solo and Leia but obviously they need to create a new evil character for them to fight. I'm interested to see what they do with those two, specifically regarding any possible children. Jacen, Jaina and Anakin were obviously huge characters in the EU and I wonder how close Disney will stick to that. I'd also like to see a weekly, hour long TV show that focuses on the old republic. Another poster mentioned how cool it would be to see groups of Jedi fighting groups of Sith and I couldn't agree more. One thing I'd also like to see though I'm sure it will never happen is either a movie or maybe an hour long special devoted entirely to Darth Vader's raid on the Jedi Temple. Obviously they'd have to cast Hayden Christianson to make it appealing (which is also why I'd dont think it will happen) but I just think it would be really cool seeing how Vader takes down all the Jedi and security forces there.

Episode 1 was awful. Episode 2 and 3 helped redeem the trilogy. I know Lucas originally planned 7-8-9...wonder if they'll use his original plans From what I read what he intended for episodes 7-9 was actually just put into episode 6. I guess episodes 7-9 were going to be used to kill of the emperor but obviously that happened in episode 6.

I'm actually somewhat excited about this. The "star wars universe" is so large now with all the books and video games that the movies could go in any number of directions. I'm actually curious to how close to the books they'll stick. Will Grand Admiral Thrawn be the evil character or will it be something entirely new? I do like what Disney has done with Marvel and all of those movies (Iron Man, Capt America, Avengers, etc). I anticipate that having spent $4 billion on this they are going to try to make as much money off of this deal as possible. Episode VII is the key because if it's a flop then there will be no excitement for Episodes VIII and IX. Because of that I think there will be a lot of thought put into the next trilogy. Beside, I can't imagine it'll be any worse than all of the animated crap they're putting out now. On a side not the article below has the line "Assuming that Disney can pull of this monumental film, in less than three years, viewers will be treated to “The Avengers 2,” “Justice League,” and “Star Wars Episode VII.” I know Justice League has been rumored but as far I as I could tell it was mostly an unrealistic goal. Does anyone know if Justice League is actually in the works or even being considered? http://www.examiner.com/article/disney-buys-lucasfilm-plans-star-wars-sequel-for-2015

I am agreement with RobDeer in that people are still looking more at his potential than his production. Let's face it, his "breakout year" still consisted of a .260 batting average and .305 OBP. .305 OBP is awful. Yes 19 home runs and 37 steals is good which is why I'd love to keep him. But I wouldn't offer him anything more than 3 years and $12 million. On opening day 2013 he'll be 27 years old. While that is certainly not old it's not exactly young either. If it's taken him this long just to get up to .260/.305/.768 I just wonder how much better he's actually going to get.

From my perspective there are a large number of posters on this site who would prefer Melvin to do nothing this winter so a couple of pitchers with a mid 4 ERA in AAA along with a journeyman who was dumped by the Nationals can be given every rotation spot behind Gallardo. There seems to be a large number of Brewer fans who were upset by our late season surge because it prevented an all our rebuild like they desperately wanted. What an ignorant post. I mean, first of all, the guys with the "mid 4 ERA" in AAA, namely Peralta and Rogers, both have top of the rotation potential. Peralta had a bad few weeks after he was recalled to Milwaukee and thrown in the bullpen then he came back and pitched like the top prospect he is. Rogers obviously has had some injury issues but his shoulder has been fine for three years now. What would you like us to do with these guys? Rogers has to be with the club one way or the other next season as he is out of options. Do you want to just throw him in the bullpen and go sign a 30 year older veteran for $5 million? And what are the alternatives? I have no doubt you'll throw out names like Greinke, Peavy, and Sanchez as if any of them are actually realistic targets. The reason people want to go with "mid 4 ERA in AAA and a journeyman who was dumped by Washington" is because A) All of them pitched REALLY well in Milwaukee last season B) They are a hell of a lot cheaper than the alternative, allowing the Brewers to spend their limited money elsewhere and C) Because we feel they are just as good or better than the REALISTIC targets like Ervin Santana or Kyle Lohse. The way I see it is we already have 5 options for the last 4 spots (Peralta, Rogers, Estrada, Narveson and Fiers) with two top prospects (Burgos and Thornburg) ready to contribute should something happen. And I'll admit it. I wouldn't have been all that upset with the Brewers finishing with a top ten pick in the draft. They still desperately need talented prospects to bolster their below average farm system. It was nice watching them do well in September but in the end it didn't accomplish all that much.

Have you even looked at the FA market or are you just assuming were gonna sign Braden Looper again? Theres plenty of arms that could give us 200 innings of sub 4 ERA ball. Guys like Greinke, Peavy, Jackson, Sanchez, Kuroda, Haren and Marcum. Marcum has already said its not gonna happen. Greinke is a pipe dream and probably always has been. So those are two names you can cross off the list. All the other guys you mention, especially Sanchez, are going to be looking for big money and multi-year deals. And anyone suggesting we blow our money on relievers can answer how well that has worked out for us in the past It worked out pretty well in 2011 when we had Saito and Hawkins. I'd rather take my chances with one or two year contracts on free agents than throw out what we have on our team now. I'd much rather use that cash on someone like Anibal Sanchez and move someone like Thornburg in the 8th instead of wasting him all year in AAA. So you'd rather sign a top tier starting pitching free agent (which is debatable as to whether or not we can even afford) and move our top pitching prospect to the bullpen than sign one or two good relievers at probably a tenth of the cost of a starting pitcher? That plan seems to go against everything that this organization should be doing. And for the record, I am all for moving guys as quickly through the system as possible, but having watched Thornburg in Milwaukee this season it seems clear that a year in Nashville would do him some good.

Anyone here that thinks the Brewers can trot out the rotation some people are listing and be competitive all season, well I have swampland in the desert to sell you I'm actually looking to buy some land. What desert is this swampland in? Seriously though, what kind of pitcher are we likely to get on the free agent market? Probably an innings eater that will put up an ERA around 4.5. Do you really think Mike Fiers can't do that? Or Marco Estrada? Even Chris Narveson. These are your numbers 4 and 5 starters most likely. They don't need to be aces. It would be one thing if he was going after a Zack Greinke or something. But why spend $5 million on someone who is going to put up similar numbers to guys you already have? He realizes it's fools gold, especially in the cases of Estrada and Fiers(neither with overpowering stuff). So Melvin is just supposed to completely dismiss 2012 and find someone to replace these guys? Sign whoever you need to sign Doug, you have PLENTY of money, and the lineup is set. The bullpen is a disaster though. That should be his number one concern. Depth should be another concern because he benches that past two years have been atrocious.

I didn't mean to pick on Santana specifically, just all pitchers similar to him. Jackson is good but I imagine he'll cost a a bit. What I was getting at is that I just don't understand why we have to sign a starting pitcher. As I said, we finally have enough home grown guys to fill a rotation and we aren't even going to give them all a chance? Peralta and Rogers don't need any more time in AAA. Actually Rogers can't go to AAA. But Peralta isn't going to learn anything more down there. His main issue is control. Fiers and Estrada don't need to go down there. There's your 4 guys. Then you have two additional arms in Narveson and Thornburg should one of them falter or get hurt. Yeah sign some depth but don't waste $5 million on an average pitcher just because he is "experienced". I think Melvin greatly over-values experience.