Point Beer Is Best

I was so consumed with the ridiculousness of the Peralta mention that I didn't even think about the other two "cheap" options he suggests: Given that data... why in the world would you think this guy would come cheaply? An innings-eater who's been throwing sub-4.00 ERA signed very cheaply through 2018, and is a LHP? A contract that averages $4.2 mil for that production "shouldn't scare off the Yankees too badly?" Seriously? That wouldn't scare of the Rays, let alone the Yankees. But I'm assuming that since he has a 4-9 record the writer thinks they could pull a fast one on the ChiSox. He then mentions Samardzija as the third "cheap" option. Given that the White Sox would surely offer him a QO if he's not traded, the compensation for a trade would at a minimum have to include prospects equivalent to a compensatory 1st round pick in what appears to be a very deep draft class next summer.

He's only on a one year deal? Gosh I must've missed the announcement that we were going to non-tender him after this season.

Maybe they're just taking a page out of the Diamondbacks' playbook and are looking to package Arcia, Broxton, Lohse & Garza so that a team will absorb that payroll hit for minimal prospects in return. *ducks*

I don't think it's sour grapes. It's people on two sides of this argument who have a different perspective on the team and how to value players (and their legacies), and both sides can be blind to points the other tries to make. My wife and Father-in-law were very pro-Favre early on. When I had heard how the fans were treating Aaron Rodgers in his first Training Camp as the starter (booing, cursing, treatening to fight him), I marched down to Pro Shop and bought a #12 jersey (and I hate paying full price for anything ). He was the annoited QB of my team, and that's who I was going to support. To me, the people that treated Rodgers so poorly had no business being Packer fans. It's one thing to think that Favre got screwed, it's another thing entirely to spew your hate on the new guy who had nothing to do with the situation. So we got a lot of laughs sitting at games that season, me in my #12 jersey and my wife in her #4. Both sides have, for the most part, moved on and reconciled. Some, like my wife, have finally seen the light. To address your points above: #1 - Favre DID quit. He had a hissy fit that the Packers didn't sign Randy Moss as a FA (the 2nd failed attempt to acquire Moss in 2 years). It was a knee-jerk, emotional decision on his part. He announced his retirement only like a day or two after Moss re-signed with the Pats. He was really upset and didn't think it all the way through. But it provided an opportunity for TT/MM to do what they probably really wanted to do - move on from Favre, who was tending to take even more chances on the field (who the heck was he even trying to throw that ball to in OT in the NFCCG anyways?). #2 - Technically Favre didn't leave. He was traded, which, with the benefit of hindsight, was 100% the right thing to do. Many people forget that Rodgers was entering the 4th year of his rookie contract (a 5 year deal). If they would have let Favre back in at that point, we're not talking about how that delayed the Aaron Rodgers era by a year or two. We're most likely talking about how a decision to bring back Favre led to there never being an Aaron Rodgers era in Green Bay. Heck, maybe he would have been significantly disgruntled himself to have signed with the QB-starved Vikings before the 2009 season. That is not a world I want to live in. Also, without the Favre trade, there is no Clay Matthews in Green Bay. The draft pick they received back the Jets was used to trade back into the first round of the 2009 draft to select Matthews. They almost certainly don't end up with Matthews without trading Favre, and almost certainly don't win the Super Bowl in 2010 (or even make the playoffs) without Matthews having a defensive player of the year-type season. Now, as far as "crimes" go, I'm not sure why Favre would even be mentioned with Rose & Braun. Favre was guilty of making a premature decision, trying to undo it, and then threw a fit trying to get himself released. He did more damage to his own legacy than to his team.

Cowell impregnated his best friend's wife. So that probably rules him out.

Agreed. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Sort of. Maybe the Cub fans are our... Frenemies? The "diehard" Cub fans that have stuck with their team during the last ten years of crappy play seem to be generally OK. They have some notable celebrity fans that are hard to dislike (Murray, Vince Vaugh & Nick Offerman). But when their team turns the corner in the next few years, there will be lot of bandwagon Cub fans that come back out of the woodwork that are some of the most insufferable fans you will encounter.

Trading a guy with #2/3 stuff for a 4th OF playing above his career norms and a broken down 3B (both of which are playing on the last year of the deals, and the latter is retiring) might be enough to get their GM fired within minutes of informing ownership. I think any deal with the Mets for pitching will have to include Segura and/or Gomez as centerpieces.

Taking all the information we have available, I'm not sure how anyone could come to the conclusion that trading Parra is not option #1. He's peforming above his career norms in a showcase situation filling in for injured starters. That's the exact scenario we needed for him to maximize his value at the trade deadline. And in my opinion, he has more value to the franchise as trade bait than to hang onto him. He will command more in FA than it would make sense for a team like the Brewers who should be rebuilding and not spending $7 mil/year (or whatever he may command) as a 4th OF. I would be firmly in the "Fire Melvin" camp if they were to make a move so questionable as to give him a $15 mil QO. The only scenario that I would be ok with a modest extension (2 years with a mutual/club option for 3rd year) is if you are able to land a huge haul for Gomez. But even then, as others have said, he's really not a guy you can trust everyday in CF, so that's not really even a realistic option either.

I had a similar phenomenon the past couple of weeks. An old coworker, who I haven't spoken with in a couple of years, suddenly showed up in my PYMK feed as the top result twice (and was using her first & middle name, not her last name). I have not searched for her, and I haven't exchanged texts with her since the last time I've purchased a new phone, and she's not in my contacts either. Yet there she was, with no mutual friends. I had no explanation for that, but if what others are suggesting is true (that these suggestions may appear if they searched for you), well then I'm going to be more flattered than upset.

That's what I'm thinking. Latest reports say this wasn't isolated to just one or two accesses. They went in to the system several times. That tells me that maybe it started off initially as someone just fooling around, and happened to find something (maybe some statistical models that the Cards thought were propriertary to their org). And then they probably told their boss & co-workers, who it's likely would have said, "Oh really? What else is in there?" If I were to come across some information about a competitor in my industry that I could use, I would be faced with an ethical dilemma. Do I "do the right thing" and ignore it? Or do I pass along the information and try to get more of it to exploit this opportunity? Based on the evidence showing multiple times of access, my money is on the Cards doing the latter. Someone higher up knew this was going on. As far as the Cards GM using the "I know nothing" defense, he should ask Sean Payton how that worked out for him in New Orleans.

At this point, the current season is probably a total loss. So the upside of keeping him on the roster to give him an audition is certainly better than exposing him to waivers in an attempt to send him down to the minors. If/when they find a trade partner for Aramis Ramirez (who I hope finds his way on to a contendor in his final season), that will open up even more playing time for all of the young guys that have been mentioned so far.

I would echo this. I have two young boys and there's just no way to have eyes watching them, the game, and unruly fans who may be sitting near you. At their ages (3 & 4), there's no way I'm going to put them too close to harm's way, but that means sitting far enough away that they quickly lose interest in the game. To me, the tradeoff is this: if you put up the nets, you'll have a few people get grumpy, but are they really going to stop going to the games because of the nets? I would tend to think they would gripe about it for awhile, but they're not going anywhere. I would argue that you would make those seats much, much more attractive to people/families that are concerned with safety. Maybe those people will now be drawn to field level seats behind those nets instead of roosting up in the terrace level, which ultimately means more $$ for the team.

Any update on Tyler? I couldn't find any stats for the 2015 season.

The only exception I can think of was when Melving vetoed Jack Z in the 2nd round of the draft when Yo Gallardo was available. Jack Z didn't like drafting HS arms, and was probably going to draft a HS bat (again), but Melvin stepped in and told him to select Gallardo. At least that's how the story went as I remember it.

There's just way too many variables to consider to quantify "game-calling" into a statistic. At least with pitch framing you can take a visual data set and determine how many extra strikes does a catcher earn where the pitch normally would be called a ball. But game-calling? As others have mentioned, what happens if the pitcher shakes off the catcher? What if (gasp) the pitcher doesn't locate the pitch where the catcher is set up? What if you're comparing two catchers and one is catching Kershaw/Greinke, and the other is catching a staff where they average a 4.50 ERA?

We took our 3 & 4 year old sons to this game, and was their first Brewers game. It was as successful as you'd imagine with kids that age. They lost interest about 15 minutes after the first pitch and we wound up in the kid's play area in the terrace area by the 3rd inning. The real bummer was my 3 year old lost his Brewers hat in that tube-thing while 40 other kids were climbing around. I asked him what happened (if he took it off, or did someone take it from him). So far the suspects are "Iron Man" and "The Troublemakers" from Team Umizoomi. I'm pretty sure he got hot and took it off somewhere inside - he's pretty big for a 3 year old (48 lbs) and has a bit of a temper problem so I don't think he'd let someone swipe his hat without a fight. We asked some of the older kids to look for it in the tubes (they couldn't find it) and I didn't notice anyone with the hat. It's a pretty unique hat (royal blue with ball & glove logo, except the logo is entirely white - haven't seen anyone else with a hat like that). We left our information with guest services, and we know it's a long shot but hopefully it turns up.

I think the Marcum trade and the Greinke trade are tied together and need to be looked at as one package. I'm fairly certain that it was reported that Greinke only agreed to the trade after he was assured that they weren't going to trade Prince, and was impressed by the move to get Marcum. It's likely that Greinke doesn't agree to the trade if Marcum (or another quality SP) wasn't added before his arrival. If we're playing the "what if" game, the one that eats at me is Jose Abreu. It was reported the Brewers were one of the top teams in terms of money offered. Had they offered a little bit more and didn't sign Matt Garza... would last season had turned out any better? You'd have had a stud at 1B instead of the revolving door they've had since trading Prince, and would have had to have found a cheap replacement for Garza.

Exactly. OPS of 1.045 with 28 HR's while still having the added stress of playing defense. You could make the argument that NL teams were afraid of the defensive liability in LF, but there was no on-field argument that he couldn't contribute to any one of the AL teams. Off-field concerns a plenty (unrepentent jerk, PR hit with the PED stigma, etc), but if he was willing to play for a reasonable salary and you could hanlde the PR hit he would have been an incredible addition to an AL team.

That's what I was just thinking. Usually a mod jumps in to re-direct these discussions over there.

IGT's theme nights were pretty cool as well. Talk like a pirate day, and of course the epic "Haiku" nights were a blast as well.

RALLY CAPS(LOCK)!

This. He posted frequently here, LambeauLeap.net as well as the political forum. He was a die-hard Steelers fan, and posted very frequently right up until the Packers beat the Steelers in Super Bowl XLV. I don't think I've seen a post from him since. He was a funny guy. His avatar was a picture of his son with those oversized "Hulk Hands" hulking out in front of Miller Park.

The NFL finally caved and announced they wouldn't have anymore blackout rules. It always bugged me that I couldn't get the MLB.tv subscription because I couldn't watch Brewers home games subject to the blackout rules. I understand that somewhat if you live a short distance from the stadium, but living in 2 hours away in Green Bay seemed like quite a stretch to be included in the blackout area.

Dude, Clash of Clans is so 2014. Marvel's Contest of Champions is were it's at these days.

My parents have been spending their Feb/Mar months in their RV in AZ the past few years, and are now looking to buy a house in Buckeye to stay in the entire winter. My boys are 3 & 4 years old, so I'm hoping AZ continues to be the Spring Training location since the plan is to go down there every year for ST in the near future as the kids get a bit older and will enjoy it (hopefully) as much as I do. A new ballpark in a safer area will be a definite bonus.