RobertR

If 43rd Street is the standard, that would be a tremendous failure for downtown. Honestly, I'm not totally against a new arena with public support, I'm just very skeptical of the numbers on this one. Especially with the apparent choices being made in the budget. The UW system is also a world famous institution. Of course, I think it largely comes down to politics. It's not hard to imagine a budget where the Governor at least checked if the Menomonee where serious about paying for an arena or accepted Federal health care funding by setting up a State exchange. Then we wouldn't have they choices. As it is, my priorities are on infrastructure and education, which have proven to be the best kind of economic stimuli while sports entertainment hasn't.

The jock tax is the least of the reasons to do that. There will be entertainment replacements. Concerts (pop, symphony, or just the local bar), vacations to the Dells, additional trips to theaters (of which there are a lot in Milwaukee), museum visits, comedy shows, etc. Players' salaries are paid by entertainment revenue from fans, and a lot of that revenue will simply shift to other forms in Wisconsin. Yeah, I don't expect that there will be 41 concerts at the Bradley Center just as big as the Bucks, but I don't think entertainment expenditures in SE Wisconsin are going to decline by 100% either, most of it will shift forms and be spread around. I'm more open to the argument that a new arena will be a catalyst for new investment in downtown Milwaukee. But, I also worry that excessive tifs and other subsidies are going to starve the city of needed revenues for things like police and fire services. Does a slew of new restaurants near a new arena hurt the Third Ward? Are you creating new demand or are you just shifting demand from one area to another? In short, I'm skeptical of a sports entertainment district being an economic panacea. Especially since nobody can really point to a large population migration as a result. Especially with the State budget as it is and education and roads being shortchanged in the current budget. If given the choice between infrastructure, education, and sports entertainment, I tend to think you get more bang for your buck from the first two rather than the third. If given the choice between the UW system and the Bucks, I'll take the former.

I bet a lot of major acts also could also book better dates if they weren't competing with the Bucks for space at the Bradley Center. Something will fill those nights. Would there be a dropoff from the Bucks? Probably. But, it wouldn't be a 100% dropoff which is the assumption that they're trying to use to justify this deal. Heck, more money may just end up being poured into the Brewers and Packers. If the income tax hit is only 50%, is the deal a good one? But, we're drifting into politics here. Regardless of my thoughts on the deal, I do think that things are looking up for the Bucks.

I think it's a crummy deal for taxpayers all the way around. What will make up for the Bucks if they leave? Something will. Maybe more concerts or arena shows will be brought into the city. Maybe more people will go to the movies or plays. But, those entertainment dollars won't just go away, they'll go into something else. Yes, a nicer arena would help the Bucks and downtown, but I think people expecting it to be astronomic improvement are going to be disappointed. You're not going from County Stadium to Miller Park here. The experience will be better inside the arena, but I haven't seen a basketball arena yet that's not reliant on the quality of the team to be the draw. Heck, expanding the convention center, and bringing out of town dollars into the city, might be a better option. Honestly, I kind of wonder if chasing the return of Gen-Con might be the better option.

The problem with Taylor was more of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. The team scuttled all of its OBP strengths when he arrived, got hosed on the trades of Cirillo, Vina, and Valentin, kept Burnitz for some unknown reason until his value was done, signed Hammonds disastrously, and his choices of managers were terrible. He showed no ability to find major league pitching. Oh, and signing Eric Young? Trading for Glendon Rusch (who predictably got knocked around by the right-handed hitting NL Central)? The payroll increased with the coming of Miller Park but the big league results plummeted. Taylor was pretty much anti-sabremetrics right around the time when progressive teams were really taking advantage and the Brewers missed a real opportunity. Was he better than Bando? Worse? Who cares. Taylor, imo, would never have succeeded as a GM as he didn't have a vision for where the game was evolving. Then there was the fact that his right-hand man was scumbag extraordinaire David Wilder. Frankly, I buried him after his opening press conference when he uttered "I'm not a talent evaluator".

Which is why it's a mistake not to have an ownership stake in a minor league affiliate. How does having an affiliate in Colorado Springs help you develop and evaluate talent? Maybe it made sense, when there weren't 30 teams, to not worry about stability of your affiliates. Given the premium on developing young talent these days, especially for a team like the Brewers that is reliant on a steady supply of cheap, young talent to compete, I'd say it's time to change the model.

Yeah, at this point, I'd much rather see the Brewers lose games with guys that may have a future than see more of the same old, same old trotted out.

Heck, can't Matt Clark play some outfield? I'd just ask Braun if he wants to move back to left or stay where he is, with the understanding he'll be back in RF if the team needs him. See what he's comfortable with and go from there. Given the way that Davis was playing, this might improve the team. Not that it matters.

If there's one thing I don't want to hear ever again it's front office excuse making when Baseball America, or whatever other credible outfit is rating farm systems, comes out with a rating of the farm system as bad that "they don't know what they're talking about. Our system is underrated." Yeah, BA may miss on an individual prospect level, but, for the most part, the system rankings bear out over time.

Fielder and Aoki, with free agency being a concern, don't belong in the same conversation as Escobar, Odorizzi, Cain, and Brantley. And Cruz is something of a special case as well. I'm surprised the initial post doesn't mention Grienke as well. I don't care what Prince is doing this year. I want no part of that contract. He's been paid nearly $100 million over the first 4 years of his contract and been worth it maybe 2 so far, assuming he doesn't breakdown before this year is over. He's owed $120 million more over 5 years. No thanks. Sabathia had a couple of fine years with the Yankees, but that long term deal is going to end up a disaster and nothing I've seen to date convinces me that Prince's deal isn't going to be just as bad. Aoki is a nice complementary piece, but given his age he's not someone you build around. And, again, with free agency pending moving him was probably a smart choice. And I expect for him to regress to being a mid .700 OPS guy by the time the year is over. I think we all would have been frustrated with the first 5 years of Michael Brantley, who probably would have been a 4th outfielder on the Brewers. There really wasn't room on the roster for him to develop at the big league level. Certainly between Braun, Gomez, Hart, and Aoki, Brantley would have been riding the bench a lot. Really, I don't see how you can list Brantley and Aoki at the same time as it seems like an either/or choice to me.

Wait, they traded away guys that didn't have any real trade value for Sabathia and Grienke? Melvin must have Jedi mind powers. Or, Melvin traded away something of real value to get something of real value. I'm okay with trading future value for present value if you're making a run at the playoffs. And the Brewers were. Now, I agree that the state of the farm system is on Melvin. The Cardinals aren't drafting early and their farm system blows away the Brewers while they have been able to compete at the same time. The Brewers have blown draft after draft / failed to develop talent. At some point, the buck has to stop at Melvin. We always say that the Brewers had a limited window. They took a shot while the window was open and got 2 playoff appearances out of it, once advancing to the NLCS. Now the window is obviously closed and they have to rebuild. Nothing wrong with that. Frankly, I'd say that the struggles with the big league club this year are the least of the reasons to replace Melvin. But, the sorry state of the farm system, even taking account the trades to compete, is why the axe should fall. There are teams that find talent late in the first round and in subsequent rounds. The Brewers aren't one of those teams and there's no reason to expect it to change without radical action at this point.

"It's a great day for hockey!" - Bob Johnson's hockey dynasty.

Why buy out Lind when you can just trade him again? The reasonableness of his contract should improve his trade value.

I'd think the accomplishments of Eric Heiden could warrant a good look.

I went through all of the Mad Max films again prior to Fury Road. And, yeah, The Road Warrior is every bit as lean and mean as I remember it. The other two have their moments too, especially the third act of Mad Max. But, of the originals, The Road Warrior is the one that is most required. Fury Road is great, btw.

It would have helped in Lohse's tenure if there weren't historically awful first baseman on the team. Honestly, I've no issue with the signing of Lohse. He performed well the first two years and he might still turn things around and fetch something at the deadline. Meanwhile, it was a weak draft. I don't see much on the board where the Brewers would have drafted that looks like its going to make an impact. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Major_League_Baseball_Draft Arguably, the Brewers gave up not much in value in that draft pick.

Is there evidence that Bonds was on PEDs the prior year? As far as I know, the muscles just don't disappear. Especially if you're not just an unathletic pile of muscles. Bonds at 42 was much, much more talented that Sammy Sosa and a whole host of aging DHs. Yeah, he was 42, but was one of the top 10 hitters in baseball the prior year. I'll take that talent over an already collapsed Sammy Sosa and a rapidly fading Matt Stairs, Frank Thomas, and Mike Piazza. Heck, 47 year old Julio Franco got a job that year. The upside of Barry Bonds is far and away better than any of those players. If nothing else, Bonds had proven that he still had quite the eye at the plate. It would be one thing if he was looking for a 3-year deal or something, but as a one year flier, the potential upside is hard to argue with. Heck, a deal structured around performance bonuses, like ABs, would be a fair way to protect a team. Anybody have Bonds's PECOTA or ZIPs projection for that year? That's a reasonable argument for what you could expect from him. The defense is about the off the field stuff. Bonds, even with the risk of collapse, had far too much upside to argue he wasn't qualified for a job in MLB.

Just for the record, that same off-season Texas signed Sammy Sosa to DH for them. Coming off a .671 OPS.

Of course there was collusion going on. Problem is proving it in a court of law.

We only need about 100 pitchers on other NL teams to need Tommy John surgery. It's possible.

I found John Wick to be a lot of fun. Ridiculous, to be sure, but full of well choreographed action, colorful characters, and some fun world building. Also, it knows how to relay information without resorting to a ton of exposition. Sometimes, you just want to see a lot of bad guys get shot in the face. John Wick delivers that.

I have limited space, but a south view, and I tend to concentrate on stuff that grows vertically, like cucumbers, peppers, tomatoes, and a brussel sprout or two, saving herbs for containers. In between, I tend to go with spinach, radish, and lettuce that like cooler conditions. If you're going to be there a while, I recommend setting aside space for asparagus. Especially at the price per pound it is. Rhubarb always seems to thrive. Horseradish grows like a weed. I haven't had good luck with carrots, I suspect that the clay soils in the area aren't as conducive as sandy soils. Beets I haven't had a problem with though.

I suppose I should mention that I'm running my own podcast on Matt's website called Still Watching the Skies centering on science fiction films. If interested here's a convenient link. http://wherethelongtailends.com/category/features/podcast/still-watching-the-skies/

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1642&position=P Yes, this one. The last 3 years he has basically combined to be a replacement-level pitcher according to it. Apparently the league is full of a lot of pitchers that are way worse than replacement level then. I don't think KRod is great, nor am I really buying into the "proven closer" pixie dust, but I question Fangraphs methodology if that's their conclusion.

Ratings would be helped if one of the two frontrunners made over $100 million at the domestic box office. "Suspense" over the winner only works if a lot of people care for at least one. Oh, and maybe if they didn't gush all over movies about acting and how special movie-making is. The Artist, Argo, and Birdman all fall into that. Even The King's Speech is ultimately about coaching someone to give an important performance. 12 Years a Slave at least has that going for it.