Raw Biz

Like most others have said, this isn't a terrible move in baseball-terms. But since Loria has repeatedly done stuff like this before and has shown that all he really cares about is making money, it's all very very shady. I think most here know about the shady Expos deal. There was even a RICO case filed against Loria. And I think it was his plan all along to do this. Even if they won the World Series, it wouldn't have surprised me to see the whole thing blown up, which is basically what happens to the Marlins every 8 or 9 years. The difference between the Red Sox and Marlins deals is the the Red Sox got rid of some bad contracts to use those savings elsewhere. Loria basically got rid of the bad contracts to pocket for awhile. And yes we don't know what the ultimate opening day lineup will be but history shows us it will probably be bottom 5 in the league.

I don't think the fact that a player wins or doesn't win an award really affects trade value much, if at all. The player's stats, mechanics, make-up, age, contract, etc. are all unaffected by some arbitrary award voted on by writers.

I don't see it happening. I don't think they want a guy coming back after a big health scare to start getting booed right away. That just wouldn't seem right.

I got the book for Christmas last year not really knowing much about it, other than it was about zombies. I still haven't finished it, I'm about halfway or maybe a little more through. I just found it a hard style to read. There's no central story (other than a global war on zombies) or really central characters. Its kind of interesting, in that it's like fake interviews with people who survived a zombie apocalypse but I just don't find myself wanting to keep reading. I basically read like 10 pages at a time before losing interest.

I'm still of the mindset that it's a bad idea to extend guys into their 30s, unless of course they are a truly special player like Braun. Hart is basically an average to slightly above-average 1B (in terms of OPS). He might offer some benefits defensively (being tall really helps) but I don't think he would be worth market value. That being said, if he were willing to sign for below-market (i.e. $10 million/yr tops), I would consider it but only for 2 years (2013-2014). I really want to get away from blocking younger guys by signing/re-signing aging "proven" vets. Morris may not succeed but we won't know if he doesn't get the chance. I really don't want to see him become the next Gamel/Green. 1B is also usually one of the easiest positions to fill and we have a lot of all-bat/little defensive guys who could probably handle it should Morris not work out. Bottom line: Extend through 2014 (2/20) or let walk. Better yet, I honestly wouldn't mind just trading him for pitching this year and letting Gamel handle 1B again, with Green/cheap bench guy as backup plans. With Braun, ARam, Aoki, Lucroy, Weeks, and Segura, in addition to a healthy Gamel, I think we have enough offense to cover Hart's loss. It's all about pitching.

I think deep is a better description than strong for this year's FA pitchers. There's basically no studs besides Greinke and maybe Sanchez but there seem to be a lot of solid, veteran back-end guys.

None of those three are very appealing.

If I'm trading Hart, it's not going to be for a 1 yr contract like Hudson/Maholm. The Brewers need to start focusing on long-term, sustained success. They need to cycle talent in for the long-haul, not just thinking of stopgaps. I'd want at least 3 years of control, maybe settle for 2 depending on the pitcher.

Personally, because I think Hart could bring back a better pitcher in a trade than we could find as a FA. I'd rather have Hamilton and trade for a young SP than re-sign Hart long-term and sign Dempster/EJax/Lohse/etc. I also don't think Hart will be that much cheaper. He'd still probably cost in the 4/60 range. Again, this is all assuming Hamilton could be had for relatively cheap, which I doubt. But given a choice, I'd trade Hart and sign Hamilton rather than resign Hart and sign a FA pitcher.

I've said that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. Hart could bring back a solid young pitcher.

I haven't read through every post but would people be opposed to signing Hamilton to play 1B and trading Hart for pitching? If you could sign Hamilton for something like 4/80 and trade Hart for a young arm with multiple years of control, I'd be all over that.

I know you've mentioned multiple times how you think the Brewers payroll will exceed 100 million. I think you even basically guaranteed that it will be closer to 115 than 85 but I'm pretty sure Melvin has already stated the payroll will be less than it was this year. I'm guessing probably in 85-90 range.

Lucroy is an above-average catcher. He would be a below-average 1B/OF. I'm not sure why so many people want him moved off catcher.

I was really high on Guerrieri. They had two 1st rounders so I don't know why they couldn't have taken a "quick-to-the-majors" type college pitcher and a HS guy with great stuff, who might take a little longer. I didn't see any need to settle for 2 guys just because they might arrive a couple of years earlier. I also liked Barnes a lot (I think there might've been some signability concerns) and Sonny Gray as well.

I don't know how or why you think Punk isn't a great wrestler. I agree Bryan is great too but Punk is awesome. I just think he hasn't really gotten a chance to show what he's really capable of in WWE since Vince hates having guys actually wrestle. For him, it's too much about the entertainment. That being said, I do love what he's done with Ryback, even though it's basically a Goldberg rip-off. His intensity and in-ring persona are a lot of fun to watch, but I still don't know if he'd actually be able to wrestle a match (other than the squashes he's basically only done so far).

If you think Green deserves to be in AAA based on his major league production, then by that notion, so does Gamel. However, neither really have anywhere near enough of a sample size to be able to judge accurately. But based on minor league numbers, scouting reports, actually watching them, etc., I think both should be on the team next year. I'd actually start Gamel in either RF/1B but that's another discussion.

Already being discussed here.

I personally never had any doubts about this year. He's always been a slower starter and I figured he would come around. The question will be whether he keeps it up next year (I think he will) and the 3rd year (that's where it might get dicey).

Really? STFU. Where's a moderator when you need one. That kind of stuff isn't allowed here.

I have no problem trading Hart but they should be trading for cheap, multiple-years-of-control guys, not short-term expensive guys like Lester.

Don't know if it's a done deal yet but most likely is.

I wouldn't want to give Hart any more than $10 mil per year for 2 years. I think people are focusing too much on the production you might lose from him versus the value he could bring back in a trade. I think he could bring back a top 100 prospect. If you add a prospect like that and put Gamel back at 1B, I think that and the cost savings are worth more than just keeping Hart for another year (or 2-3 at 14/15 per).

It's August. About 20 of the 25 guys of the roster on every team get put on waivers. Yeah, I'm pretty sure Pujols was actually put on waivers at least once in his career. If not him, other big name MVP-types definitely have. And most teams really don't bother putting in a claim because they know the team will most likely just pull him back. I don't think it really take a whole lot of effort to put a guy through so teams do it just for the hell of it. Obviously you're not going to trade a Trout-type player but sometimes unforeseen positives can come out of it (like the Red Sox this year). Basically, there's no harm in putting a guy through.

You'll be awaiting such an apology for quite some time as I haven't got a clue what you're talking about. There was nothing confrontational for the point of being confrontational, and I fail to see how I'm using hindsight in anyway at all in this post. You might want to be cognizant of how you generalize someone's posting and consistently jump into conversations in which you're not really a part of. I would consider that confrontational for the sake of being confrontational. What's more, if you're truly trying to do "good," for the board rather than just trying once again to "put me in my place", there's a nice little private message icon up there. What's more, "civil," conversations, don't usually entail, "I've called you out several times," nor do they pretend they're speaking for the entire board. Those tend to be more hypocritical conversations. Nor do "civil," conversations usually entail someone consistently following me around the message board from link to link picking these petty, frankly pathetic little arguments. You want to talk about confrontational for the sake of being confrontational? I'm not following you around. I simply read every thread and your posts are noticeable because of how long they are and frankly, how they sound. I can usually tell a post of yours simply by the tone. Like I said, if someone doesn't agree with you, you question how they can possibly think the way they do (like you just did in the Dodgers Rumor thread). Also, another poster flat came out and said he's had you on ignore for months so I'm not the only one who feels this way. Here's one postwhere you attributed stuff to me that I never said and brought my name into a discussion that I wasn't even a part of. Here's another one where you asked to borrow my crystal ball. That goes to my confrontational point. Like I said, it's your tone and style of writing. You putting things in "quotes" and CAPS to stress something comes off as condescending. Since I'm not working much (and love the Brewers), I'm on this board multiple times throughout the day. That doesn't mean I'm stalking you, it just means I can tell who a poster is almost by their writing style/thoughts. Maybe you don't read every post on here so you've missed a few of mine where I've asked you about this. So I'm saying it again. Almost every one of your posts is extremely long and repetitive. And often confrontational/condescending. I don't think this is being petty, I think its more towards keeping this board one of the best message boards out there. We do that by self-policing. Again, not sure if you've read the etiquette thread but there is a lot of useful stuff on there that would probably apply to you. Namely, repetitiveness, responding to multiple messages in a row, and the condescending talk. Sure, I probably should've PMed you but at this point, its probably a little late for that.

It doesn't matter if he's claimed, they wouldn't have to give him up if the claiming team doesn't offer anything they deem of value.