Brian the Automator

[ I don't claim to have an answer for that, but I suspect DM does. Ahh heck, it doesn't matter. they have enough gusy that they will score some runs in the years to come. Its ultimately all about pitching anyway and that is where Doug's focus needs to be. ] My guess is that everyone will stay in Nasvhille for one last hurrah. That would be nice momentum heading into spring training... As anxious I am to get the kids up, I think that might be the smarter move... Anyone know when's the latest the AAA world series goes?

[ I don't think so either, but if you are Attansio and melvin your focus has to be 100% on the success of the major league club, now and in the future. If they feel getting guys up here a couple weeks early would benefit the big league club over the next year or two, you have to do it. I don't know that it would make any difference, but if they think so, get 'em up here. ] Ok, but does being part of a championship team benefit the kids more?

[ At this point, calling up anybody you consider part of the future would be a good idea. ] I don't think the team's going to leave Nashville hanging like that when they're making their playoff push.

Well, that game was a big bowl of crap.

[ Hart just pinch hit in Nashville..... ] Kremblas must be a member of the site, and is just playing with people's emotions.

[ Too bad he didn't do it earlier because Magruder may have cost us the game again tonight with that defensive miscue. ] You know, it's not like Corey Hart would exactly be Willie Mays in CF.

[ Wouldn't it be nice if the guy stirring all this up would just leave. ] Doing this for 4 years now, i've learned that you can't please all of the people all of the time. You appear to be one of those people. If I need to irritate even 5% of our user base to do what I feel has made Brewerfan.net successful, believe me, I will. If you want to pretend that the site is censoring all negative posts, I guess I can't stop you. However, if you look in the major league forum, there have been PLENTY of negative threads that have gone off without a hitch or a censor. I'm sure i've even chimed in on some of them. [ Someome just said that a person who doesn't agree with everyone else, makes this place worse. ] Your overgeneralizations do not hold any water with me, and will not change the way I direct this site, so don't bother with them.

[ Almost as sad as the response I got that this is brewerfan.net, we run this ship they way we want, not the way America is run. ] We're with the terrorists.

[ Has Coshun ever done play-by-play before? ] fly ball................caught.

[ You just made my point. Censorship should be limited to concrete and specified targets. Judgement should not play a role. I'm a student fresh out of a Constitutional Law course. Our Constitution keeps grey arwas and judgement calls out of the reach of censorship. Anything that is a judgement call, should be kept away from censorship. That's precisely a slippery slope. ] This isn't America. This is Brewerfan.net. We've been doing this since 2001, and for the most part and until recently, people were civil. I fully believe it's been our rules and the type of moderation we do here that has kept this site successful. If we limit peoples' "freedom" in the name of preventing anarchy, that's what we're going to do. There are other places where the rules aren't so strict, and I think it's because those rules aren't so strict that people have come here.

[ When censorship targets "judgement" calls...yes it's a bad thing. ] Outside of a pre-determined set of "naughty" words, isn't EVERYTHING a judgement call?

[ 4 words... topic of this thread ] That implies that censorship is ALWAYS a bad thing, doesn't it?

One important split: vs. Lefties: 13 K in 20 AB (65% strikeout rate) vs. Righties: 52 K in 142 AB (36% strikeout rate) Given the concept that Branyan should be strictly a platoon player, I don't think a 36% strikeout rate is the end of the world.

[ I will say that his high number of non-productive outs in run scoring position negate most (if not all) of the production you'd expect from a player with his kind of OPS. Strikeouts are never productive; that's why some of us hate watching Russell play. ] If you're of the opinion that strikeouts are detrimental (I'm of that opinion, but my guess is "less so" than others), the quesiton is how many points should we "subtract" from Russell's OPS to account for these things? I agree to the notion that if you took Branyan and his .900 OPS and swapped him a guy with an equal OPS and less strikeouts, obviously I would go with player B... The question is, how much of a detriment are Branyan's K's, and how do you quantify that?... because to me, a .900 OPS (and more importantly, a 1.001 OPS against righties) can't be nullified THAT much by k's.

[ Personally I'd like to see somewhat of a reversal, since a single, "negativity" thread is going too far already. Time will tell. ] I think that's an over-generalization. It's a "venting" thread, not a "negativity" thread. While venting IS a form of negativity, not all negativity is venting. Venting is: subject: ARRRGH! body: "AARRRGHH.... I CANT TAKE IT NO MORE!$!$" Negativity is: subject: Changes in the rotation? body: Brewers have now lost X games in the wild card hunt. X pitcher has now had X many bad starts in a row. Perhaps it's time to insert player X and X in the rotation, as player X has been getting shelled as well. In between those two is the gray area where i've asked the moderators to use their judgement. If your thread was more type B than type A, I apologize (and it sounds like this particular moderator already did). When i'm available to moderate, i'll also do my best to make sure others don't do things like call you a "drunk", as that's certainly not appropriate either.

[ My sense is that the staff here tends to frown on negativity and welcome any postive topics even if repetitive. ] I think the case here is that you get more repetitive negative topics than positive ones. I know i've closed down a few "player X is hot" threads because there were other ones going. Now, unfortunately, I wasn't able to view your specific thread because it was deleted before I got a chance to read it. What I _did_ see from you was a post that said "FU to the person who deleted this" (or something to that effect). That's against the rules of the board, and no matter how upset you were, we can't have that. I also saw some posts in the "Back to my own self" thread that I had to delete as well, because they were protests about a previous thread deletion. In the future, these things need to be taken up with the moderators or in a post on the Issues forum, rather than a passive-agressive style of protest. Again, I can't comment on what happened last night, because I came in after things were deleted... I saw that you and pogokat had some type of dialogue, so I'm hoping things were hashed out.

[ First of all he said that the A's went on to beat the Angels and then beat S.F. in the world series. That never happened, so he lost a lot of credibility right there. ] Forget it. That's just proof that you only skimmed the article. I'm outta this argument.

[ Brian, I did read the article. It is one guy's point of view. That is like watching a Michael Moore documentary and thinking it isn't biased. ] So, what do you say about the facts he presents? What in particular do you disagree with?

[ But you guys will never understand that because you probably haven't seen an article on the internet ] Did you even READ the link I posted, or did you just dismiss it because you didn't like the source?

[ Whether or not a player has "Icewater in his veins" can only be determined based on observation. ] or using: IORV (Icewater over replacement veins)

[ Wouldn't that chance be his batting average. Last time I checked I haven't seen a batting average so high that I would say it is a good chance (i.e. 80% that he will get a hit) ] That depends on your definition of good chance. By good chance, I mean a modest batting average. I should have been more specific or used a number, I guess. The point of my earlier reply was that there are some batters who aren't good at moving the runner over (i.e. a righty who can't go the other way), and in those cases, you're better trying to pull for a hit than go the other way for a hit or productive out. [ Ashlee Simpson ] ...and his username's rluzinski. Calling him Ashlee Simpson comes across as being sort of condescending, don't you think?

[ I think that we can all agree that if the batter leading off an inning gets a double that at the very least he should be advanced to third by the next batter. ] I think that might depend on the hitter... If the hitter's a pull hitter and trying to go the other way isn't his forte and he has much success with it, shouldn't that player just pull the ball and roll the dice? While it's quite possible that the hitter grounds to SS and the runner on 2B can't advance, there's a good chance that the hitter singles (or doubles, triples or homers) and drives that runner in.

Please read this very interesting article: www.hardballtimes.com/mai...tive-outs/

[ Do we get extra credit for running UNIX programs under OS X? ] Unless it's something like grep or tail, you should get a straight jacket, not extra credit.

I just got home tonight, so I wasn't able to see the fireworks outside of the in-game thread. Let me just mention the fact that moderating's a very tough job, and since it's often a judgement call, is definately open to scrutiny. With that said, perhaps we should develop several "canned" phrases we can use when locking down threads or deleting posts. That way, if a moderator's really irked, a message won't come off as "short" or "elitist". This forum has grown by an alarming rate over the past year, and every high and low in the season is amplified. Every 4 game losing streak is the end of the world, and every time the team strings a couple of wins together, wild card mania sets in. While the enthusiasm and interest is appreciated, I urge every one to keep level heads when writing posts. I find myself often with several posts and replies that I decide never to post because they're rash and/or in the heat of an argument. The posters who've earned the most respect (I think) are the ones who take the high road... not "fighting fire with fire". These things escalate horribly out of control in a hurry, and what's even worse is that writing electronic messages doesn't allow for voice inflection or nonverbal types of communication that makes things more clear. These are just things to keep in mind as you go about your day-to-day posting. I think we have a maturity level here that few other forums get (for the most part). I'd really like to keep the site a place for well-thought out discussions rather than knee-jerk posts and "flame war 2005". None of us get paid for this gig, so let's take it easy on the moderators. That's not to say that if you don't have a legitimate concern you shouldn't raise it (which was done politely in this post, and I appreciate it), but we're human beings... and we need to make judgement calls to make sure threads don't spiral out of control and escalate into forest fires which infect subsequent threads. Thanks for reading this, and thanks for making Brewerfan.net successful and an awesome way to waste time. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif