strawbossisevil

Isn't it ironic that you are trying to do exactly that? That is exactly what the purpose of this thread is, trying to create a moral guideline when booing is ok, when it is not ok, is essentially trying to create a community "law" on which you can feel entitled to judge the social behavior of others. Hey, if it makes one feel better about him/herself. Trouble for you is, even if you are able to come to some Brewerfan "law/rule" in regard to booing, people, like myself (who, like I said has booed an extremely limited amount of times in his life) will just choose to ignore said "social rule". So all creating said rule accomplishes is stroking one's ego, nothing more.

Except I´m not the one setting up the standard of conduct (in my point above), if a customer's expression of pleasure/displeasure becomes violent, then it is now a legal matter where the US/State governments already have set up a standard of conduct. Your argument is a strawman, plain and simple. I just don't think a message board has any place in telling people how to act in ways that are within their legal rights.

An example of the Brewers "abusing the system", would be if they drafted a college Senor, and try to offer him a completely unfair compensation for his draft location because they know that his only other option is to play Independent ball the next year, likely dropping his draft ranking. As far as I can tell, the Brewers have been more than generous with their draft picks. And have not been greedy pigs when approaching their draft prospects over whom they control a significant amount of leverage. The point is, just because a system is in place, doesn´t mean that any abuse of the system is justified. I think it is entirely fair to point out where a player or an organization has acted greedy, even within the way the system currently is constructed.

That isn´t what I heard. I heard on numerous occasions that the Brewers tried to settle. It sounds like they gave him a deadline on their top offer, and when he passed the deadline, they never offered that again. Even reports from the day of arbitration included information that the Brewers offered him something in the middle but he passed. I think what AJAY said hits the nail on the head, I have far more respect for those who did well last season and yet chose to make a deal in the middle with the Brewers.

I can make the comparison if I like thank you very much, I don´t feel it has to be completely analogous in every respect to be worthy of consideration. I think Hart was a greedy pig for demanding more money when he was offered what was recognized by most was more than generous considering his production the previous year. I wish him the best this season, but if he struggles you better believe I´ll be emptying my lungs of all oxygen bringing down the boos on him. If it means he doesn´t want to sign with us after his arbitration years, good riddance. I hope he enjoys his new home where he can go bank his hard unearned dollars.

Let's say you worked at a business where you sold paper, where your salary is decided year to year. Now let's say you had a real bad year at your job, but despite that your boss offers you what most consider to be more than fair of an offer (despite your poor work). With you knowing full well how poorly you did at your job, would you think it is right for you to demand more? That's essentially how I view the situation. He knows full well after how poorly he performed last season that the offer the Brewers were making was more than fair (the consensus with most people was that the Brewers were being more than generous, especially considering they did go over their arbitration number at least to a certain extent in negotiations), but yet despite that he demanded more. That costs us, the fans, as more of the money we pay for tickets goes into his coffers, somewhat undeservedly. Add to the fact that it could mean having less money to upgrade at the deadline, and I think the resentment is at least somewhat understandable.

Right, before last season he would have potentially gotten that. Last season was arguably his worst since becoming a fulltime player, and so that should have some effect on the salary he makes in arbitration. Even the number the Brewers offered was the equivalent of ~7 million per year. I think he would have been hard pressed to find that type of deal this offseason. There is no way he should be given a deal that considers him as valuable as Mike Cameron. He isn't even close to the same player. I think this is a case of you overvaluing one of our players, end. Fangraphs back it up that he would be no where near the value of an 8 million per year salary.

So, you post a study that looked at an extremely small sample in college sports (not pro sports, which I'd argue is different) and I can't point out how ridiculous of a small sample they used in it? I don't care what University it comes from, if you use as small of a sample as that article did it's not something you can claim to be absolutely true. As far as the dead ball player, people make excuses all the time for their poor performances. It's human nature and it can hardly stand as the proof you try to make it out to be. As far as why some try to get a sense of superiority over this issue, it's human nature to try to feel superior to those around you. It's why Cardinal fans griped and complained about the untucking of the jerseys, because they wanted to be perceived as the "superior" and "more classy" team. It made them feel better about their pathetic selves as they were getting crushed by a team they didn't like. Brewers fans do it too, in some respect when talking about the team that plays directly south of us. Sure feels good to know that we are somehow "better people" than those northsiders.

No, I think the biggest thing we recognize about the situation is that arbitration is supposed to keep players at below full market value in order to benefit the teams who drafted said player. For example, this being Hart's second arbitration year, he is supposed to be getting 60% of what he would get on the open market. That would place his market value at 8 million per year (based off the arby he was rewarded). There is no way that Hart has that market value. In fact, if he were to be placed on the free agent market, I doubt he makes what the arbitration committee just gave him. By players, like Hart, demanding far more that what their true market value is, they are hurting the small markets in the long term that depend on the arbitration process to keep the player's salaries below market value. If players, like Hart, continue to push the salary envelopes as he did this year, it'll be much more difficult to persuade players like Ryan Braun to sign below market long term contracts that go through their arby years, especially if said players know they can already make market value (or more) by their second Arby year, and quite likely an above market value contract in their final Arby year.

It sure seems like that study is looking at an extremely small sample. As far as the deadball player, I'm sure it's easier passing off the blame of one's own faults onto a collective fan base.

It's $200, but you can do the skeleton for $50 (from the tourist start, which I imagine is not the place the Olympians begin the race). Link.

I'm guessing you haven't seen the video. Having a plexiglass wall (or better yet, a padded wall) would not cause him to go from 90 mph to 0 mph on impact. It would absorb some of the impact and send him back in the direction of the ice. A steel beam, however, would and did stop all of his forward progress in an instant. You think the Olympics would have learned from the last time somebody died on the luge when they flew off the ice and hit a tree. Putting a series of steel posts right outside a turn with nothing to cover them up has to be one of the most stupid construction decisions I've seen.

The reason Cam was loved is because he is/was one of the best defensive players in the MLB. Hart is a below average fielder. So, Cam put up equal numbers at a position higher up the defensive spectrum while playing elite defense. There really is no comparing the two. To put it another way: Cameron: Offense: Above average for CF Defense: Elite for CF Hart: Offense: Below average for RF Defense: Below average for RF

I would like some proof that it has a detrimental effect on the team. Please provide statistical evidence to this "fact" (I bet you can't). That is what we call an opinion http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif. I could point out the fact that the city most known for booing, Philly, has been the best team in the NL as of late so it sure doesn't seem to be hurting them. No one here, however, is stating that booing makes players play better. Part of attending a sporting event is the opportunity to express pleasure and displeasure. That is the right of any fan to do so as he pleases as long as it is done in a non-violent manner. It's part of the game, and any player who gets upset about it clearly needs to develop a thicker spine. They are paid to play in a public arena, the people in the arena are (via their ticket sales) employing them. Part of working for the public, especially in sports, is dealing with both positive and negative feedback. As I've pointed out, I do not boo often, I can count on one hand the number of times I did. But I reserve the right to express my displeasure as a fan, especially if a player squeezes out every last dime and goes on to play horribly (remember, in some respects, we as fans are paying his salary).

An educational discussion requires more than subjective opinions, which is all this thread can offer.

In your opinion, it shows a lack of class. I don't think you can categorically state that booing is a classless act. You have the right to think what you will about booing and when it is justified to boo, and when it is not justified to boo. When it is classy, and when it is classless. So much of this, however, looks to me as if it's a simple case of stroking one's ego. Look at how much better of a fan/person I am, I don't act like.... I can count on one hand the number of times I've boo-ed a baseball player, but I don't try to go around puffing up my ego because I boo less than others. If it's within their right to do it, who am I to judge?

So, Brewerpride, if I'm understanding you correctly. You will violently show your displeasure to those who choose to express displeasure in a non-violent fashion. So good that you can show us all how to properly show our displeasure. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif Kudos. (and excellent use of all caps, it adds to the threat of violence).

As OldSchoolSnapper stated, it is well within the right of the paying customer to express his pleasure/displeasure with the performance of the team or a certain individual on the team. No one here has the right to try to lay down ethics on how a paying customer expresses their pleasure/displeasure as long as it remains non-violent.

Wow, one poster brought this up in the thread, and suddenly it´s the "large part" of why the majority in this thread think he wasn´t due the raise that he got. Can you try any harder to misrepresent the viewpoints of those in this thread? All I will say is this, Hart better earn that extra money he got, or else he will be booed mercilessly, and he will have no one to blame but himself for it. I am normally not one to boo a player, but if he plays horribly again this season I will join my voice to the chorus. Part of me hopes the Brewers cut him on the spot, right now. Sign Dye for 3.5 million or so, and use it as an example for those players who demand a raise they know full well they did not deserve. The message being, if you try to game the system, you´ll end up on the street looking for a job that pays far less. To be quite honest, I expect that if given the full time starting role Gerut will put up far better numbers this season. As far as what Hart must have done to earn his salary bump, the only thing I can figure is he must have flashed his newly formed six pack (since he just lost 20lbs) at the two female arbiters. One other question I had about the process. Can we even be sure the arbitrators even fully understand baseball statistics?

I don't think you'd have to add any teams. Top 20 stay in MLB-Premier League - NL has two 5 team divisions (EAST/WEST), AL has two 5 team divisions (EAST/WEST). Playoffs would be top two teams from each division (8 teams total). NL East 1 vs NL West 2, NL East 2 vs NL West 1 etc. The Bottom 10 form the MLB - League A, with two five team divisions (EAST/WEST). Top two teams from each division enter a playoffs, the winner of which goes to MLB-Premier League. Some additional rules: I think the team that drops from the Premier League should be like Mexican Soccer, in that they look at winning percentage over a three year period (if a team has been in the Premier league that long). What that does is it prevents a series of injuries/a quick rebuild in one season to lead to a team's demotion. Doing it this way would drop the team that has been consistently the least competitive of the group. Why it would be cool: Teams that quite often have nothing to play for by April (bottom 10 in the league) now have a reason to cheer as their team fights for ascension. Also adds a playoff atmosphere to four cities that may not normally get to experience the playoffs. A team from the NL could drop down and end up in the AL upon returning, bringing fans a different style of baseball. Here is how the league would be set up this season, going off of last year's records: MLB Premier League: AL East: Yankees, Boston, Tampa, Detroit, Toronto AL West: Minnesota, Chicago, LA, Texas, Seattle NL East: Philly, Florida, Atlanta, St. Louis, Cincinnati NL West: Milwaukee, Chicago, Colorado, LA, San Francisco MLB - A League: East: Mets, Baltimore, Washington, Pittsburgh, Cleveland West: Kansas City, Houston, Oakland, San Diego, Arizona

Exactly, plus, it wasn't like he was an offensive force that was forcing us to put him on the big league team. It was different with Fielder and Braun, where their bats made it unjustifiable for the Brewers to leave them in the minors any longer. Escobar, as many have pointed out, lacked plate discipline heading into last year (still does to some extent) and (as was shown during his time in the bigs) was still growing into his potential defensively at SS. Escobar improved at AAA in the hitting department and was rewarded with a call up. But waiting until he forced his way up gained us a whole year of service time in his prime years, that's HUGE for a small market. It is of extreme benefit for a small market baseball team to not bring up their prospects when they still have something they can learn in the minors. You make them force their way onto the ball club with their play at AAA. It gained us a whole year with Escobar. If Gamel is down long enough this season it may gain us another year of him too. Also (although a bit off topic, but I know it's a subject you go on and on about), just to give an idea of what young, pre-arby pitching costs in trades. Remember what the Reds got for Josh Hamilton after he broke out in Cincinnati (complete with .922 OPS)? For an All Star power hitting CF the Reds got Edinson Volquez, who has essentially been the equivalent of Randy Wolf so far into his career. That is the price of solid pre-arby top of the rotation arms, with very few exceptions where a GM was an idiot (Steve Phillips - Kazmir).

This can not be overstated. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

I´d rather do what is best for the team. But, I know it is unlikely that they do a full platoon situation with Hart. At the very least I´d like a 50/50 split of playing time in RF. That would give Hart the chance to swing the bat against RHP, but not at the expense of what is likely to be better performance from Gerut/Edmonds.

I just don´t see how it is anyone´s right to say how others should feel about the situation. If what Hart and his agents actions in the arbitration process don´t bother you. No one is saying you have to change that tune. But there are those of us who desire that a player be payed in regard to his performance, and for Hart to get a significant raise after how he´s played the last two seasons would not be fitting given his performance. And it is, after all, in the best interest of the team that our players are signed to deals that are of a decent value, because we do have a limited amount of resources. Because of this fact, can you not see why some of us are a bit annoyed that Hart is asking for a raise he has done nothing in the past two seasons to earn? And how his asking for said raise makes competing as a team with limited resources that much more difficult? Like we´ve said all along, he´s entitled to ask for as much as he can get. But in doing so, we are entitled to our opinions of how he goes about doing that, especially when he is overvaluing himself and looking for a contract that would be likely supersede his performance - and how asking for said contract puts the team as a whole in a bad spot.

I think anyone is capable of putting in more effort in their job. He should recognize that with a higher salary comes higher expectations and work even harder than he´s ever worked in the past. I have cheered for Hart since he first came up, and was at his first game when he crushed that foul ball. That said, it has been frustrating the last couple of years to see him fall short of expectations. He has left a lot of talent and potential on the table IMO. Why that is, is anyone´s guess. It could be that he doesn´t have the capacity of making adjustments. He was an All Star player the first half of 2007, and since then he´s been a platoon player at best (which I feel he should be to start out this season until he proves otherwise).