Invader3K

Nope, not really. If he wasn't such a jerk I would leave that part out of my posts. Comparison: Would you trade for Milton Bradley without discussing his attitude/behavior?He's a jerk? Really? I hadn't heard that. I've certainly heard about his issues with his dad (which is no one's business anyway), and he's been quoted as complaining about his contract a bit...then there was the one incident with Manny Parra. If stuff like that qualifies him as a jerk, then quite a few baseball players are "jerks." Maybe we can field an entire team of David Eckstein type "good guys", though.

Exactly. We should celebrate our accomplishments. Or are we going to become self-loathing fans, similar to how the Red Sox Nation used to be? I'd rather not be a part of that scene.

I'd probably do this, actually. I like Saltalamacchia a lot, and he's only 23. Davis sounds nice, though I admit to not knowing much about him. As far as Blalock, we could always platoon him with someone if he under performs offensively.

Keep this in mind, too...the Brewers play in the only 6 team division in baseball, and there are two more teams in the NL than the AL. Makes their accomplishment seem a little more impressive, doesn't it?

I bet the Brewers would have to include some kind of option for a fifth year. Still, I think 4 years at 25 million per year would be amazingly awesome. If retaining Cameron is necessary to re-sign CC Sabathia, it's pretty much a no-brainer that you keep Cameron for one more year to get CC for four. The thing about CC is that the Brewers could probably easily trade him after that third year if needed. If he keeps performing how he has, it might be considered a bargain of a salary by then.

Well, I certainly hope we don't turn into the A's. Yes, they contend pretty much every year and have won some division titles, but haven't made the World Series in almost 20 years, and seem to always trade their top guys no matter what. It must be somewhat frustrating for their fans. Of course, if we only made the World Series every 20 years or so, that would be an improvement over our current pace. I find some of your other assertions ridiculous. If Mark Attanasio was "calling the shots" as you're basically saying (and others on the board have continued too assert, with virtually no solid proof at all), I doubt Macha would be the choice. Most casual fans wouldn't even recognize the name "Ken Macha". If Attanasio just wanted to go with a popular person, Robin Yount or Paul Molitor would probably be managing the team by now. Even someone like Randolph or Buck Showalter would be a "sexier" choice to entice casual fans than Ken Macha. I also doubt Melvin would have signed an extension if Attanasio had not allowed him to choose a manager for '09. He would have easily been able to find a position with a new team that would allow him to do things his way. Melvin does not strike me as someone who is just going to go along with whatever the owner wants at this point, judging by the quotes from other people actually working in baseball that have been quoted on this forum. As far as "going young", I am glad they didn't do that this time. Virtually every new manager the Brewers have had in their franchise history has been a young first time type of manager. Having said that, I would have been OK with Dale Sveum being brought back, but since Doug Melvin decided not do that, I am glad they appear to be going with someone with a few years of experience. I do agree with what you're saying about small ball, but I'm not sure why that's relevant to this discussion. A good manager should be able to maximize the abilities of his players, whether that's bunting or hitting home runs. It will remain to be seen if Macha or whoever else will be able to do that with the '09 Brewers...but hopefully our players will be able to keep improving so we're not continually asking stuff like "Why did that darn Macha bring in Shouse instead of Torres in the 9th with only a one run lead?" or "Why did he call for that bunt single in the 5th, which caused us to lose by one run after Parra gave up seven runs during his start?", etc. (edit: long quote --1992)

Yeah, I agree. I really don't understand why people keep suggesting we trade Hardy. I know Escobar is ready defensively, but the drop in offense would be significant.

He's pretty darn good. I doubt we could get him without giving up a lot, despite his recent injury issues.

My thinking is that the manager shouldn't matter _that_ much at this point. The "young guys" are supposed to be entering their primes. It's more and more on their backs to win.

Yeah, no kidding. I guess the happiness around here fades pretty quickly. Some people just enjoy being perpetual cynics, I guess.

I admit to not having read through all of this yet, but this seems to suggest pretty clearly that we did land on the moon: http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm As far as Bigfoot, if he is anything like gorillas and orangutans, than it is pretty unlikely his diet would be similar to a bear's.

Some great points. While I know a lot of us were glad to see Yost gone, I think you have to at least giving some credit for doing well with what he had, especially back when he first started as manager for the Brewers. Yost could be a good fit for the M's in that regard.

I think giving up Hardy for DeJesus would be too much, personally. Your Fielder trade idea is pretty interesting, though I kind of feel like the Red Sox won't be ready to get rid of Big Papi after having just traded Manny away.

I think you mean Jack Ruby. He was an admirer of Kennedy, and may have been under the influence of certain drugs when he decided to shoot Oswald. He died in prison, probably of natural causes. He was a small time nightclub owner, so I don't think there was probably anything more to it than that.

I would love to have Johnson if the price is right. He would fit nicely in the lower part of the rotation. I guess I have a soft spot for the big guy...I remember being at the game a few years back at Miller Park when he hit his first (only?) MLB home run.

BTW, I remember someone here who works for the Brewers posting a while ago that the '82 banner was going to be replaced soon with something a bit fancier? Any truth to that, or was that just a rumor/idea?

PM sent just a couple minutes ago.

Are you sure they weren't "eeeeeewwwwwww"ing at the state of the Metrodump?Could've been. This was a game in early '06, and they were passing around flyers trying to rally support for the new stadium.

Well, deciding whether to retain him based on one play isn't too logical either. I pretty much agree with joepepsi's take. Planning to find a better CF through free agency or trade doesn't seem to be too realistic at this juncture, given everything else Melvin has to handle this winter. Sometimes a bird in hand is worth two in the bush, you know?

That report doesn't cite any sources at all. I don't really believe it.

I don't know...I remember seeing a TV special where they did a computer reproduction of the shooting, and they pretty clearly showed that Oswald could have fairly easily done it himself.

I could live with either Brenly or Macha. I don't think Randolph would be a good fit at all. I'm still really intrigued by Bobby V, but it sounds like it's not a realistic possibility at this point.

Technically, wouldn't we be #3, since LA had fewer wins than the Brewers did? With the divisions aligned the way they are in baseball, the Wild Card is still worth celebrating. A playoff spot is a playoff spot. Calling it a "consolation prize" is short sighted, in my opinion.

I'd be fine with just the "2008" banner. I just think it should be recognized in some fashion.

I agree with the "draft the best player available" plan. The draft is sort of a crap shoot anyway...you could draft the best available pitcher, and they could just as easily end up being a bust like any position player. You can always trade for a pitcher to fill a need later...you can't always get a guy like Ryan Braun on the cheap, though.