Dmiles23

I also got my opening day tickets today, and read the memo before looking at my ticket locations as well... and got kind of worried. I got Obstructed View Loge Diamond Box...they are row 2, so I'm guessing there is a rail in the way. But what has me puzzled is how they charge full price for obstructed view seats. I'm paying $65 for tickets with a rail in the way, where the guy a couple seats over is paying $65 a perfect view. Oh well... I'll still have fun. And it sounds like a couple others have MUCH worse situations than me. But my question is... and I'm sure someone here will be able to answer it for me... but why do the Brewers offer free Opening Day with every 10-Pack offer, but not with every 20-Game Pack? Wouldn't it make more sense on their end to offer it in every 20-Game Package, and only a couple 10 game packs?

To add to that, the March 7th game against the Cubs is on WGN I believe.

Any updates for Thursday? I'm supposed to drive from Madison to Milwaukee and back tomorrow night and am wondering if I should cancel.

In the quote from Macha about this, he said something along the lines of "it's less than a 50% chance he will start opening day." The "less than 50% chance" part is what puzzles me. Ok, say it's a 40% chance he starts opening day. Doesn't that leave each of the other 4 starters an approximate 15% chance of starting... thus Gallardo being the favorite?

MadGrad- I don't understand the regret for making this post. One person makes a snide comment, and it was a bad decision to make the post? In my opinion, the more posts this thread gets, the better chance you have of finding one. If nobody replies, it just sinks to the bottom and page 2 quicker. The longer it stays on top, the better for you. But I agree with BHF somewhat in why should someone sell something for maybe $100 less that what they could get for it? Asking to pay $50 just seems like you're wanting to rip someone off. And because this is a Brewers fan board, where many here collect bobbles and know what they are worth, I doubt you are going to find anyone to rip off. BHF- I'm just laughing because where in the world does it say anywhere that collectors aren't fans? You go into your whole rant... but there wasn't one person in this thread that said anything about what you are ranting about. Good grief. Do you think you're the only collector on this site? Actually, probably most people that read this thread are collectors... so we probably realize that we aren't low lifes. He didn't ask you to sell him your bobblehead, but you make a snotty remark and then go into a rant about how people think you're a low-life. It just makes you sound like one of those really old people that sit around and find some reason to complain about everything.

My ticket rep gave me her email address at one point, but I seem to have misplaced it. I'm thinking it was firstname.lastname@milwaukeebrewers.com... but I'm not sure if that is correct. Can someone help me out with this? Thanks a ton.

I was thinking the same thing. I haven't gotten a reply yet either.

Same here. I was a volunteer coach for the local American Legion summer baseball program here, and that game just happened to be American Legion day at the park. The head coach was given 12 free tickets, and he decided to split them up between the 2 assistant coaches. I couldn't find anyone else besides my dad to go, so we had 6 tickets. My dad thought I was crazy going in and out of the stadium to collect 6 bobbleheads, but I was glad I did. I didn't end up getting a powder blue one, but I sold my 5 extra regulars which paid for my powder blue plus some. I think that was actually the bobblehead that got me addicted to them. I had picked up a couple here and there at Brewers games... and my first one was actually an Elton Brand I picked up at a Bulls game during the 00-01 season... but the Molitor was the one that got me addicted.

I've been trying to take a break from the Bucks up until the deadline because they are waaaay too frustrating. I didn't think there was a chance they wouldn't make some sort of deal at the deadline... and I am furious that they didn't. I don't think there is any way/reason why Kohl goes over the luxury tax next year. Going over by just a little costs him a lot. Say he goes over by $1 million, that really costs him $5 million (the $1 for going over * 2, and then the approximately $3 million the teams get paid for staying under). And why should he go over the luxury tax when the team is horrible and nobody shows up at the games? Right now the Bucks have $64.6 million tied up in 9 players for next season. Most likely, Redd won't be healthy for the beginning of the season, so that's pretty much 8 players. So that means, they have about $5 million to sign at least 4 players. Mbah a Moute is not counted in that salary number, and I know he's signed to a multi-year deal... but I can't find the details. But I'm guessing he'll get a slight raise from the $757,000 he made this year, so maybe around $1 million. Then, you'd need to sign at least 2 more players to minimum salary contracts, which comes out to a little less than $1 million. Add that to the salaries we already have, that's $66.5 million, leaving about $3 million to the to the salary cap. That is not going to be enough to sign either Sessions or Villanueva. So, to sign Sessions or Villanueva, I'm guessing the Bucks will be forced to trade either Jefferson or Ridnour for 3-4 players that combined add up to their salary... and they STILL won't have enough money for both Sessions and Villanueva, let alone their first round pick. Robin Lopez was the 15th pick last year, and he's making $1.6 million. So there really isn't any way the Bucks can clear that salary... unless they let Villanueva AND Sessions walk. So they'll either have to sell that pick off, trade it for a future pick, or pick a foreign player that can/wants to play over seas for a couple years. I just don't understand what's going on with this team. Is Kohl really dense enough to think that if the Bucks make the playoffs this year, the fans will come out in droves next year even if they are terrible? A starting line up of Sessions, Bell, Jefferson(if they keep him through the offseason), Mbah a Moute, and Bogut is fairly decent. But the bench will be HORRIBLE... and it's the Bucks, so you can pretty much count on 2-3 significant injuries. I know a line up if they were able to trade Jefferson at the deadline would be pretty bad too, but at least Bucks fans would have some exciting, young players to watch. So to sum it up, I just don't understand the thinking of Kohl/Hammond. Nobody really knows what deals were on the table but with how many teams were trying to get cap relief/save money at the deadline, if Hammond was ever offered either Raef or Wally straight up for Jefferson, he should have taken it. Maybe tried to get them to throw in their first(especially with Wally because we would have had to pay his whole salary this year), but not try for too much. And one last thing, if the Bucks do decide to sell their 1st this year, they better not be selling it to Portland!!

I don't know why some of these guys waited so long for LASIK. I had it done almost 3 years ago, and it is the smartest thing I have ever done. I had 20/15 vision, better than perfect, 24 hours after the surgery... and have kept it ever since. As for Gagne... It'll be interesting to see him without his goggles. I'll proably hardly recognize the guy!!

Reason for Parra's switch to 26.

I don't mind this at all. I guess, no matter if it's games 4-6 or 160-162, I want my best pitchers facing the Cubs. I'd go with the rotation of Bush, Parra, Suppan, Yo, Looper. That way you at least have Yo, Looper, and Bush facing the Cubs. I understand Looper may not be one of the top 3 in the rotaion, but you are setting up 2 of your top 3 to face the Cubs.

Weren't they talking at the beginning of last season that most of the '09 games would be in HD this year? I remember him talking about this too. I'm crossing my fingers and hoping things haven't changed. I bet some of the games that aren't televised will be early in the year when the Bucks are still playing. And looking this up, because of the WBC and the late start to the season, only 3 games interfere. 1 is a Cubs game(April 11th), so there is a good chance it will be on WGN, and then the 13th and 15th against the Reds. And I'm not sure if it works this way, but MLB Extra Innings may have its week long free trial period turning those games, so DirecTv customers may get them anyways... I think.

I'll attest to this, as I mentioned in the Winter Warm Up thread. Prince and Rickie walked right by me on their way to the autograph stange, and Prince was definitely slimmer. Both my friend and my first comments were "Prince has definitely slimmed down." And in my opinion, it was quite drastically.

I don't know about this. When I was first reading the article, I was thinking "Fine... this guy is a Cubs fan, but who really cares? I'm sure he'll be fine!" But then I got thinking what I would be like in that position. I consider myself a die-hard Brewers fan, and if I got a job with the Cubs, I don't think that would change. The difference between Powell being a Braves fan and Provus being a Cubs fan is the Cubs are our division rival, who many Brewers fans hate. It drove me nuts every time Daron Sutton used to gush over Eckstien, and that was just 1 player he was familiar with from his Anaheim days. In my opinion, it's just nice to have guys in the booth who have a passion for that team, a la Uecker and Jon McGlocklin for the Bucks. But all that being said, I'll give this guy a chance. He may be excellent, and I'm hoping he is because Uecker isn't what he once was and probably won't be around much longer.

This is my idea, and in my opinion, a way to make things much more fair. The protection would be the same as it is currently, with the top 15 picks in the draft protected (so if they sign a Type A free agent, they lose their second round pick). And if a team with picks 16-30 signs a type A free agent, they lose their pick. But then instead of giving that team's pick to the team that lost the free agent, that pick is just eliminated. So, for example, say the following teams sign a type A free agent: Mets with pick 17, Yankees with pick 21, Cubs with pick 23, Red Sox with pick 25, and Angels with pick 29. So instead of having 30 picks in the first round, there will now only be 25 since 5 teams signed type A free agents (so say the Brewers had the 30th pick originally, they would now have the 25th pick). Then, after the first round is complete, the compensatory picks would kick in. In Compensatory Round A, the players would be rated like they are now, and the team losing the highest rated player would pick 26th, and so on. Once each team who lost a type A free agent has pick, Compensatory Round B kicks in. In this round, the compensatory picks are given out similar to how they are now. So if the Mariners are the worst team to lose a type A free agent, they get the first pick and so on. Then in Compensatory Round C, teams that lost type B free agents get their pick, similar to how Compensatory Round A is conducted. If teams sign more than one Type A free agent, the same system as current is used. So the Yankees would lose their first, second, and third round picks, and those picks would just be eliminated from each round. No team would pick in those positions. And if a team loses a Type A free agent but also signs a type A free agent, those transactions wipe each other out, and the team retains their first round pick. Using Colby's work from the Draft Resource Thread, I'll try to use my system to show who would get which picks in the 2009 draft. First-Round: 1. Nationals 2. Mariners 3. Padres 4. Pirates 5. Orioles 6. Giants 7. Braves 8. Reds 9. Tigers 10. Nationals (unsigned '08 pick Aaron Crow) 11. Rockies 12. Royals 13. Athletics 14. Rangers 15. Indians 16. Diamondbacks 17. Dodgers 18. Marlins 19. Cardinals 20. Blue Jays 21. Astros 22. Twins 23. White Sox · Mets forfeit pick for signing Francisco Rodriguez · Yankees forfeit pick for signing Mark Teixeira 24. Brewers · Phillies forfeit pick for signing Raul Ibanez 25. Red Sox 26. Yankees (unsigned '08 pick Gerritt Cole) 27. Rays 28. Cubs 29. Angels (forfeit pick for signing Fuentes, gain it back for losing Teixeira) Compensatory Round A: 30. Brewers for losing Sabathia 31. Blue Jays for losing Burnett 32. Rockies for losing Fuentes 33. Angels for losing Rodriguez 34. Mariners for losing Ibanez 35. Dodgers for losing Lowe Compensatory Round B: 36. Mariners for losing Ibanez 37. Rockies for losing Fuentes 38. Dodgers for losing Lowe 39. Blue Jays for losing Burnett 40. Brewers for losing Sabathia 41. Angels for losing Rodriguez Compensatory Round C: 42. Rangers for losing Bradley 43. Angels for losing Garland 44. Brewers for losing Shouse 45. Diamondbacks for losing Lyon 46. Reds for losing Affeldt Second Round: 47. Nationals 48. Mariners 49. Padres 50. Pirates 51. Orioles 52. Giants 53. Reds 54. Tigers 55. Rockies 56. Royals 57. Athletics 58. Rangers 59. Indians 60. Diamondbacks 61. Dodgers 62. Marlins 63. Cardinals 64. Blue Jays 65. Astros 66. Twins 67. White Sox 68. Yankees (unsigned '08 pick Scott Bittle) 69. Mets · Yankees forfeit pick for signing CC Sabathia 70. Brewers 71. Phillies 72. Red Sox 73. Rays 74. Cubs 75. Angels Third Round: 76. Nationals 77. Mariners 78. Padres 79. Pirates 80. Orioles 81. Giants 82. Braves 83. Reds 84. Tigers 85. Rockies 86. Royals 87. Athletics 88. Rangers 89. Indians 90. Diamondbacks 91. Dodgers 92. Marlins 93. Cardinals 94. Blue Jays 95. Astros 96. Twins 97. White Sox 98. Mets · Yankees forfeit pick for signing AJ Burnett 99. Brewers 100. Phillies 101. Red Sox 102. Rays 103. Cubs 104. Angels I may have missed something, but that's the drift. I also didn't include any players that have yet to sign.

I'd agree with that. I don't think there is much of a chance the Brewers get to 3 million this year. Last year was just special in the fact that the Brewers hadn't made the playoffs in so long. To get to 3 mil, the team needs to attract the "average" fan. They know what they have with the hardcore fans, but it's the average fan that puts them over the top. And not being in the playoffs in 26 years, along with the HUGE hype from Sabathia, drew more of these fans to the park. This year, with the economy and after making the playoff run last year, the average fan may think that going to Brewers games isn't a "must have" thing. EDIT: And I see 2,800,000 fans as a success for the team. I'm sure they would be happy if they could get around that each year.

Ha... EXACTLY like the Hammonds bobble! Is it just me, or does that Hoffman bobble look really unstable? I could see that one being really tipsy.

This almost has to be the last year of the Brewers having 6 bobblehead dates, right? A question for people upset about not having bobblehead dates for Gallardo, Bush, Villanueva, and/or Parra... If those 4, or 3 of the 4, are given out this year, who do they give out next year? Do you want them to turn into the Bucks, who seem to give away Redd and Bogut bobbles every year? If they are going to do 6 every year, there are going to be some odd ones. I, myself, could very easily live without a Suppan bobblehead. But fans going to the game get them for free, so I'm not going to be one who complains. I just enjoy collecting them, and would rather have a wide variety of players than the same players every other year. I guess the Suppan bobblehead will give me something to look back on in 25 years and think, "Man... what a waste of money he was!!"

I laughed at his explanation for the Sox. Smoltz, Penney, and Saito? Come on!! I can see the Yankees, I can see the Mets, but the Red Sox? Wow! But as for the Brewers having one of the three worst off seasons? I guess I can see that. I don't necessarily agree, but losing Sheets, Sabathia, and Torres are all huge. But obviously they didn't take into account us getting Yo back, or that CC only pitched for us the second half, or that Sheets was hurt the last month of the year. On paper, I think it looks much worse than it is. But "on paper" is about all the Brewers are worth to ESPN.

I'm on the fence on this topic. I can totally understand why Braun wants to personalize everything, and he has the right to do so if he pleases. But I also think it should have been noted in the press release. It doesn't matter who the money for the event goes to. If a person pays money, they should get what they want. And like Crivitz said, some items (like a Braun Miami jersey) just would look goofy personalized. And if a person is paying for a personalized autograph, it should be stated in advance so the person doesn't waste their time by waiting in line for hours for something they may not want. I blame this more on the Brewers though than Braun. I'd guess they knew before hand that he was going to personalize everything. They should have put it up on the site, or at least told the people in line who had been waiting there for 4 hours before the event. If I'm understanding it right, they told people he would personalize everything when they handed out the vouchers. By that time, most of the other lines had their 250 people in them already... so you're screwed.

I also like the signing, as it adds depth. But the first thing I thought when I saw we were in the process of signing Looper, "Oh no... that means I have to stare at his ears 30 times this year!!" That guy rivals John Wooden in the biggest ears record book. And to make it worse, his ear lobes are attached... and it just looks goofy. Ok, sorry... that may have been uncalled for.

I may be wrong about the economy affecting the NBA, but that's my opinion. I just think that with the salary cap, NBA owners have a better idea of how much money they are going to need to spend. I think it will drastically affect teams going into the luxury tax, but I don't think it will make much of a difference leading up to that. But like I said, I may be totally wrong. Now on to Charlie Bell. Ok, fine... we'll take off this year since he's been hurt, but I don't see how anyone can say Bell has been worth ANYTHING since he signed his new contract. He shot 38% from the field last year!! 38%!! Not 38% from 3... 38% from the field!! That is brutal. But what does Bell actually do well? He can't play point. He doesn't shoot well. He isn't a great rebounding guard. He's not a great passer. He's a pretty good defender, but that's about it. Yeah, the money per year is fine. But signing a 28 year old to a 5 year deal after playing just 1 full NBA season is asking for problems. And poor play and injuries are those problems. And Redd should have been on the Olympic team... but does that mean he's a max player? Heck no!! Redd was GREAT to have on the Olympic team because he's best as a second/third option. And paying a second/third option max money is just ridiculous... especially when you don't have the first or second options already in place. He's the 16th highest paid player in the league... and in my opinion, he's not even in the top 30, maybe even 40, players in the NBA. If you want a shooter, sign Kyle Korver for 1/3 the money.

I personally don't think the economy will have much, if any, affect on the NBA mainly because of the salary cap. The owners probably have that cap amount set aside for salaries no matter what the economy. There may be fewer that want to pay the luxury tax, but I'd bet it won't have much of an impact leading up to that. I agree with trwi that the 2010 free agent class will have more of an affect than the economy. But the thing is, there are only a hand full teams that have a legitimate chance of signing those guys. There are still many other teams that have no interest in the '10 group who will be willing to throw money at both CV and Ramon. All it takes is one team to really like the player. In my opinion, there are 2 things the Bucks just can't do: 1. Throw money out the window by signing players to astrinomical contracts (Gadzuric, Bell, Redd), who don't deserve it. 2. Can't let their young players leave without compensation. And I just think the Bucks messed up by not giving both CV and Sessions big minutes thoughout the whole year. So now they are free agents, and you still aren't completely certain what you have in them.

Man, the Bucks look like they may be stuck between a rock and a hard place in the next couple weeks, as well as the offseason. The NBA trading deadline is 11 days away, and the Hammonds needs to get out his crystal ball and make some good decisions. Richard Jefferson: In my opinion, it is a no brainer that he has to be traded. If they keep him, there is essentially no chance the Bucks can sign Villanueva or Sessions in the offseason. But are there any takers? They need to get an expiring contract back... and it would be nice to also get a draft pick from a contending team... but I'm not holding my breath. Charlie Villanueva: Has been pretty spectacular in the '09 part of the season... but was pretty inconsistant in the '08 part. But his play of late, along with his MUCH bigger role in the offense, are making his price this summer go WAY up. But is his play of late going to be his future norm, or will he go back to his inconsistant play of the previous couple of seasons? Being a restricted free agent, the Bucks can match any offer made to him. But Hammonds needs to decide how high he is willing to go, and what the chances are someone will give him a contract offer higher than that. If he determines that there is a good chance a team will offer a contract higher than the Bucks are willing to match, CV should probably be traded before the deadline as well. Ramon Sessions: Very similar to Villanueva in that he has been very inconsistant throughout his career, but his massivly increased minutes of late and through the end of the season will jack up his price substantially. He has shown great ability at times, but others he just disappears. He has no outside shot, but is able to easily get to the rim... which is something the Bucks need. Similar to Villanueva, he is a restricted free agent, and Hammonds needs to look at the same things with Sessions as Villanueva. Do you really want to give big bucks to a player with less than 100 games under his belt? Call me stupid if you want, but if I was Hammonds, I'd almost look to gut this team... and trade all 3 of the above players. In my opinion, Villanueva and Sessions are going to probably get bigger contracts than they deserve, as they are still too inconsistant for my liking. If a trade offer is available where the Bucks recieve a nice, young player and picks... I'd take it. I'm just not comfortable offering either one of those 2 long term deals. It would have been nice if the Bucks would have never acquired Ridnour and allowed Sessions to run the point all year, just to see what they had in him. But it's too late for that. But my whole point is, it's stupid for the Bucks to let these guys walk for nothing. If they feel they are not going to be able to sign them long term, or they feel they will get overpaid, they need to trade them for something... because they have value.