PeaveyFury
-
Posts
12,809 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by PeaveyFury
-
To be fair, those ladies are clearly tanked. But that's pretty funny. -
I appreciate the sentimental value of re-acquiring guys that used to be on our farm, and I acknowledge the feel-good aspect of bringing a guy back and making a trade seem less costly, but there has to be some acknowledgement that it's possible that the reason those players were traded in the first place was that our fairly sharp front office may have determined that they weren't going to reach the projections that we and others may have had for them. I'd imagine that the FO looked at the 40 man projections for this offseason back in July, and traded away the guys they didn't want to protect in the first place. That makes it unlikely in my mind that they'll want to re-acquire them to take up said spot again this offseason.
-
I think this is a pretty big conclusion to jump to. Isn't it at least PLAUSIBLE that they saw enough of him as a WR to feel that he wasn't a player that would stick there long-tem? They certainly had more of an opportunity to evaluate him there than you as a fan have. Perhaps they felt that the H-back/slash-type role was his ceiling with the team. I don't consider that 'jerked around.' Is it possible that they did him a disservice? Sure. It is more likely that they felt that the shift was in his best interest? Seems more probable than not to me. They've been short on WR for basically two seasons now and don't play him there. Which seems a clear indicator that they don't feel he's an asset there.
-
David Stearns must do's for the offseason
PeaveyFury replied to brewmann04's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
Yeah, I remember that Moose note and the conclusion that it meant Shaw was on the block, but as we saw this season, perhaps the correct conclusion if that rumor was even true was that they were already considering playing Shaw at 2B.... -
Game thread: Green Bay vs LA Rams, 10/28/18
PeaveyFury replied to nodakfan17's topic in Other Sports
Good lord guys. -
Yeah, that's an odd story. As noted at the bottom, you'd probably think the Packers were more in the market to acquire a safety, rather than giving up HaHa, who has played much better this year after a mediocre 2017.
-
Sending Gags out there for the 51 yarder down 2 TD's and a 4th and manageable is about as bad a decision as I've seen from Chryst. Good grief. Evanston has been horrendous to the Badgers that past 20 years or so, and that apparently continues....
-
He wasn't fired. semantics Speculation, not fact.
-
Option/Arbitration decisions for 2019
PeaveyFury replied to adambr2's topic in Transaction Rumors & Proposals
I forget the specifics regarding what is allowable following a non-tender and what isn't, but I do wonder if you could non-tender Schoop and sign him to a much more modest 'prove it' deal for a year or two. Seems like that's an easier use of capital to try and address 2nd base rather than acquiring someone else. None of us will ever know what happened to him this year to cause such a terrible season, but he seems like a decent bet to rebound to at least modest numbers with very good defense. -
Follow the formula. Get a lead early, get Chacin through 4-5 if you can, they ride Hader and the pen to the freaking World Series. The offense just has to cooperate...
-
I think at this point it's safe to say that those are going to be negative have cemented their rationale for why they're negative, and those that are optimistic have done the same. Expecting to bring some new revelation to either group this afternoon that swings them to your side doesn't seem likely, IMO. Me, I just plan on seeing what happens tonight.
-
Seems like we're debating semantics a ton here, but I think it would be hard to debate saying that though Braun hasn't hit for power, he certainly has contributed more than most of the others on offense the past few games.
-
Guys, we'd like to keep this a discussion of the logistics surrounding possible WS tickets and obtaining them. There are plenty of other threads where you can discuss your thoughts on whether or not the Brewers will be involved. Thanks!
-
Yeah, I don't think that decision is anywhere NEAR as clear-cut as people here would have you believe. You put the go-ahead runner on base, and probably allow them to let Kershaw bunt and stay in the game. Counsell decided to face a weak hitter, knowing that if he made an out they'd have to PH. Woodruff just didn't get the weak hitter out.
-
Well, we've scored our alloted run of the day. Now let's hold on to this lead!
-
Crooked number, please!
-
No, I was refunded the $3 parking fee. I received two credits back on my statement- $23 from the parking, and $112 for the tickets. The $3 I'm missing is apparently the 'order processing fee' shown at the very bottom of the invoice that was e-mailed to me.
-
Yep, that does appear to be the case. I'll retract my claim to the contrary, but I won't retract my belief that it seems like a money grab.
-
Yeah, I specifically remember language that said all funds, including fees, would be credited back. Seems crappy to make people eat a $3 handling fee for literally no work on their end. I'd buy that if they still printed and mailed tickets, as there's a cost to that, but otherwise, that just seems like crappy business.
-
Gave them a call just now, and they do NOT credit back the handling fee.
-
Anyone else get shorted in their refund? I paid $138 for two game 5 tickets and general parking, but got a $135 credit back. Looks like they didn't pay back the $3 'order processing fee', but I was under the impression that all fees would be credited back?
-
Feels like whoever hits one out wins this one.
-
Good thing the staff has been so amazing, as a lot of our big bats have been MIA this series.
-
I think this post is spot-on, save for the last sentence. The NCAA stubbornly clung to the crappy BCS system for far too long while everyone else was clammoring (correctly) for a playoff, and now the playoff is making gobs of money, to no one's surprize except the NCAA, apparently. I have zero doubts in my mind that an 8-team playoff would make even more money, would solve many of the issues of 'who gets in and who doesn't', and will only create more interest in the game. 5 conference champions get automatic spots, and 3 at-large spots can include teams like UCF last year to avoid the disaster that is 'dual national champions', which the system was designed to eliminate.
-
Worth noting that the series started with a 60/40 Dodgers win/Brewers win probability, and as of this morning, that has flipped.
