valpocrewsader
-
Posts
2,651 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
News
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospects Ranking
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
Milwaukee Brewers Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by valpocrewsader
-
Definitely makes the Wolf deal look bad. One year commitment, only $7.5 million, and Harden is a special pitcher. Instead, we took on 3 years, $30 million of someone very unspectacular. Ouch.
-
My opinion on this has been well documented elsewhere. Bad deal. Too much money, too many years. Too much of our budget allocated towards an old, overhyped, Joe Blow pitcher coming off a career year. I thought our organization was smarter than to get irresponsibly lured into the promises of a career year. This makes the Cards' one year deal for Penny look amazing. 3/30 is the same deal that Hudson got ... but Hudson is a super star and Wolf is Wolf. Our interest in Wolf should have started and ended at 1 year, ~$11 million after incentives; 2 years, ~$18 million after incentives; 3 years, ~$24 million after incentives. (And only that high with INCENTIVES.) If he didn't want those deals, he wasn't right for us. There were plenty of other options, even the worst of which would not be improved greatly by going with Wolf instead -- even taking the money out of the equation. I don't think it's going to be very long until Wolf looks like an overpaid mistake and is being booed walking off the mound at Miller Park. I'll reserve a little bit of hope that when I see the deals that go to Garland, Harden, Washburn, Davis, etc I'll change my tune on this deal out of necessity. As it stands now, comparing to Penny and Hudson, this is not a good deal. I'd even call it irresponsible. I loved Russ' analysis at the bottom of page 3. Hope it didn't get buried and enough people were able to read it. -
If Garland can be had for two years instead of three, or even just a couple million less per year over three, he should be the Brewers' focus and they should forget about Wolf. Both players would have about the same impact on the Brewers, there's no good reason to give Wolf more money for more years. Furthermore, Garland is younger with less injury history. DM is working backwards on this one.
-
Isn't Penny listed as the #4 most comparable pitcher to Wolf on Baseball Reference? (Or the other way around?) I thought I saw that the other day. They're not identical, but the difference in quality and the difference in money doesn't add up at all. Reliability? How do we know Wolf is so dependable? His last two years, sure. The three years before that, absolutely the opposite. Tommy John surgery in 2005 and shoulder surgery in 2007, sounds risky to me. "Second-best FA avilable" argument. Three points: (1) If you were in the market for a car and the second best car on the lot was a 1995 Taurus with 100,000 miles with a sticker of $10,000, you'd go for it? I think you'd explore something else. (2) If Wolf hadn't spent so much time in the markets of L.A. and Philly, I doubt if he'd be hyped nearly as much as this next-best-thing-to-Lackey billing. If he'd played with the Astros last year, we'd be less excited to get him and he's probably be signable for less. There's too much emotion and unsubstantiated inflation in this deal. (3) I guarantee Wolf won't put up the second-best numbers of this FA class next year. Probably not even top 5. I think it's a much better idea to try to catch lightning in a bottle with multiple FAs and there are enough intriguing names on this year's list to make that possible. Cheaper, shorter term, and just as likely to succeed, in my opinion.
-
If anything, the Cards' 1 yr, $7.5 million deal for Penny should translate to a 3 yr, $18-$21 million deal for a guy like Wolf. We're committing to three years instead of one, yet I see no discount for that added commitment. In no universe is Wolf enough better than Penny to explain triple the length *and* 125% the yearly salary. Solutions I'd rather explore than giving Wolf the rumored contract: - Harden short term - Berdard short term - Sheets short term - Durchsersersauce short term - Smoltz short term - Garland up to 3 years - Beat the Cards' offer by giving Penny 1yr/$10mil or 2yrs/$15mil ... oops, DM missed this opportunity ... nicely done, Cards - Trade for Lowe - Trade for Johnson - Trade for Vazquez - Trade Hart for Maine - Break the bank on Lackey - Several other options I'm probably ignorant of since I'm not an MLB GM - Stand pat and sign some uninspiring and very cheap stop gaps until next year, a'la Vargas and Livan EDIT: Added Maine to the list after seeing that thread. And gives me a chance to implore one last time, "Walk away Doug!!"
-
This deal just makes the rumored 3/31 Wolf deal look all the more awful. We need three years of pitching not one? Fine, but then we shouldn't be penalized for guaranteeing more years by also paying more per year. It's not supposed to work that way. You give a longer contract, you get a better per-year price. A short, one year contract is supposed to come at a premium. If Penny is 1 year / $7.5 million, Wolf shouldn't be a dime over $23 million for three years -- should probably be less. So either the Cards got a super deal on Penny (ugh) or we're about to overpay quite significantly for Wolf (ugh). There isn't a quality difference between the two players that comes anywhere close to justifying the extra $3 million per year AND the additional two years. Ugh.
-
Not a fan. Commit three years and ~$30 million to this guy? He of the 4.60 ERA and 1.45 WHIP for the FOUR seasons leading up to 2009? Cardinals just picked up Penny for 1 year and ~$7 million. We're giving out more money per year for TRIPLE the years for essentially the same guy? And we're supposed to ridicule the Cardinals over in that thread? They nailed that deal while we're signing up for another fruitless regret. I would have rather taken that $30 million and gone for broke with three 1- or 2-year deals on high-reward question marks with potential to boost us to a division championship. Hope to absorb some of the risk with quantity. Randy Wolf just means more noodling around in the the land of mediocrity. Lame. I hope I'm all kinds of wrong about this. It feels like just another Brewers blunder.
-
Nah, what makes you say that? Every TSO show should be standard -- a narrated (and perhaps slightly abridged) retelling of the Christmas Eve & Other Stories concept album, an intermission, a second set consisting of songs from their other albums (both christmas and non-chistrmas), a teasing intermission, and an encore where they play a few more tracks (often repeating songs they've already played, like the popular "Sarajevo 12/24"). With lots of lights, lasers, fire, wonderful melodies, outstanding vocals, inspiring lyrics/stories, and frenetic, expert musicianship. Have fun! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif
-
Would it be feasible to have students check in with a manager/supervisor/senior before starting and ending shifts? The managers/supervisors/seniors could keep a separate log book on paper or Excel or whatever and then reconcile those numbers against the students' timesheets at the end of the week. Even if there are some days or shifts where there is no manager/supervisor/senior around, some data is better than no data. Without a timeclock, it's a little strange that an hourly employee would be able to just show up and disappear into a corner of the workplace. Seems natural anyways to have such employees stop by the desk of a superior to touch base, go over any special instructions, and -- unbeknownst to them -- keep tabs on their comings and goings to prevent undetected fraud.
-
Completely wasted by making every throw from his heels and not getting his body into it. He's one of the worst throwing outfielders I've ever seen, it's like he was never taught to do it properly. Add to that his maddening proclivity to stiffly swing two feet over the top of any ball pitched less than 30 inches off the ground, and you can count me among the group that's ready for an upgrade at RF.
-
Albert Pujols unanimous NL MVP; Prince 4th
valpocrewsader replied to Bikeage77's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
If a member of the Brewers were to win the award, would it be okay to care about it and get a little worked up? -
Is that a typo in the caption below the picture on the homepage? "game" >> "gave"
-
Let's not spread glaring misinformation. From my home, to my work, to my friends & family, I'm surrounded by a very large sample of Windows machines that have never needed reformatting, let alone "one every few months". Sounsd like Mac kool-aid.
-
Just read the article on channel 12's web site and got a little choked up. Inspiring and sad.
-
30" long, fabric-type material (felt?), very good condition, probably bought around 1990. It appears Will Clark, Matt Williams, and Kevin Mitchell aren't making a comeback, so time to give it a new home. Must pick up, 102nd and Greenfield.
-
Hey, even the best teams can lose to DII teams amidst the nonchalance of the exhibition season... http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif
-
Why didn't I think of that!? It's literally two minutes from my work. 5 dollars and 95 cents later I have the final piece to my Doogie Howser costume. Thanks Hoser!
-
For my halloween costume, I need the cheapest stethoscope I can find. Anyone know of any stores in the Milwaukee area where I could procure one for ~$10? Anyone have a used one they want to sell? Or rent for one night!? Walgreens has a blood pressure test kit that comes with a stethoscope for $17. I checked Walmart, Osco, and the large pharmacy inside my local Pick n Save and none of them carried stethoscopes. Don't want to order online and risk it not getting here by Saturday.
-
I thought they whiffed on a golden opportunity for hijinx and shenanigans with the listening device in Jim's office. Jim coulda messed with Dwight in ways that were 1,000 times funnier than was executed. They dropped the ball. My favorite part was when Michael defended his dating situation to Jim by saying something like, "But it's working out really good for me. She's right on my way home from work." Ha!
-
What's NOT bugging you? (2007 – 2013)
valpocrewsader replied to splitterpfj's topic in Off-Topic Forum
Nice mistake on the Arson line. That should be a +5.8, right? Good ol' Urinal-Sentinel. -
Just remembered the scene where Michael is talking to Oscar in the break room, trying to find out if there's anyway around his insurance purchase, and he quietly asks "cash for clunkers, maybe?" There were just so many great lines this week.
-
I totally forgot about that R quote! I liked Andy masquerading as an auto mechanic: "Sorry, long day at the mechanics .... store" "Yep, you got a leaking spark tube, car's totaled." Also, Kevin camping out in Jim's office, doing situps, making it his ... thought that was gold. The credit card thing was icing. All in all, lots of little things, felt like a Season 2 episode. I probably laughed out loud 5-8 times, which would easily double any episode in the last two years. Surprised to see anyone say otherwise.
-
Leasing is the single most expensive way to operate a vehicle. (http://www.edmunds.com/advice/buying/articles/47079/article.html) I don't think there's any scenario where it's a good idea. It's like advocating you rent-to-own a bunch of furniture and electronics you can't truly afford as a way of life. That's not a way to win financially.
-
I was pretty lukewarm on the wedding episode, although I enjoyed it more than most of the recent episodes. Tonight's episode, on the other hand, was a total gem and a classic. Funniest episode in years. The writing was actually creative and funny instead of phoned in.
-
On the topic of vehicles, I wanted to share this video/slideshow: http://www.daveramsey.com/etc/lms/drive_free/player.cfm It's a little over simplified, and I know some will have a major hangup with the cavalier attitude that tucking money in a mutual fund guarantees earning 12%*, but overall this presentation just does a fantastic job of demonstrating the wealth-building power you could be forfeiting by financing new cars or leasing. I think it really hits home. *In general, I see the 12% figure dogged a lot. Ramsey uses it, whereas I more often see 10% being the general consensus. Still, even if you take any piece of advice given under the guise of 12% return and immediately assume it's wrong and adjust to 10% or 9%, the counsel still holds up and you're still in a pretty great place at the end! In the above slideshow, I do think it's a little misleading to talk about such a high return in the context of a small window like 5 years -- things are just way too volatile in a small stretch like that, some 5 year periods could be 3% return while others could be 18% return -- but the general principle still applies and the over-arching point is to be investing for the long haul anyways where you'll get that 10%.
