JJHardy7

whatever Arod....you would have never said anything about this if the story never came out. How sorry can you really be? As this list grows (the other 103 will come out IMO), you'll have 103 more players who never said anything and probably have lied about in some shape or form. Why would A-Rod tell the truth about in 2007? From a fan's view, this sucks and I guess I understand why some here feel the way they do. From a player's perspective, I really don't have a huge problem with what he did. He pretty much got screwed with his name being the only one that came out and the union will take a lot of heat about this before it's all said and done. As a player, you could do something to recover quicker and your opponents are doing it too. I don't think A-Rod 'didn't know' what he was taking. He knew what it was, but he knew his competition was doing it also. Based on the numbers, there were probably 3 Brewers on that list from 2003. Why didn't they come forward and tell the truth? Has any current baseball player came forward before it got to the press?

I know I'll be in the minority here, but oh well...here goes. I do not think what A-Rod did is right. I do think MLB needs to take some of the blame. Making money took over and IMO MLB turned away from it. Teams were making money, players were making money, and baseball was making money. Again, I'm not saying A-Rod did the right thing, but I have to imagine that if I was in that position I might try it. Knowing what we know from the outside, I wouldn't do it now, but at the time I might have been willing to try and match what everyone else was doing. I wish the steroid era never happened, but I would be very interested to see the impact of a player on steroids vs. off steroids. Steroids aren't going to make you an all-star, MVP, or even keep you in the league. It's sad that the top players (A-Rod, Bonds, Mac) used the juice. IMO A-Rod and Bonds had natural talent to begin with...it's not like they were scrubs (Brady Anderson).

I disagree Dmiles about the economy and its impact on contracts. I don't know for sure, but I have to imagine the NBA is feeling the impact due to their ticket prices and due to the fact that teams like say...Milwaukee are losing money and there isn't light at the end of the tunnel (ie the Brewers had Miller Park when they were bad). I don't think it will change the market completely, but money won't be tossed around like it has in the past. This doesn't meant the Bucks can't keep CV and Sessions, but it does mean they're not going to overpay for them, which in this economy may mean they keep them. IMO the NBA will suffer the most from the economy out of the three major sports (I don't know enough about the NHL to comment on that). I'd also like to know what is so terrible about the Charlie Bell deal. It's not crazy. He's been banged up a bit this year and i don't put a ton of weight in his numbers this year. His contract ($18.5 million over 5 years) is the least of the Bucks worries. If that's a terrible contract, then I don't know what you expect. I'm not saying it's the best deal in the NBA, but I have to imagine Bell's contract is probably a deal when he's healthy. I do agree with you on Gadz, but not on Redd. Should they have given him the max money? I don't know, but he was on the Olympic roster so it's not as if the Bucks are paying a guy a max contract who is terrrible. He's just very one dimensional. I also think it should be noted that Milwaukee is not a destination for NBA players. If they had the extra cash, they'd still have to overpay for players to come to Milwaukee. The best bet for the Bucks is to draft and develop guys like other posts have mentioned here.

He got sent down to AA during the 2008 season. He's on the Stars roster.

Honestly, I'm looking forward to hearing A-Rod get booed from now on. A pretty boy multi-multi-millionaire who used steroids, playing for the Evil Empire, whose agent used to be Scott Boras. What greater villain can you have in sports? To be honest, I don't understand this logic 100%. Pretty boy - Why? Who cares? This could be also said about some of the Brewers. Multi-multi-millionaire - This is one thing that drives me nuts. Is this A-Rod's fault? Should he play for less? The thing about professional sports is that your job is more or less the same whether to play in Milwaukee, Kansas City, LA, Chicago, or New York. It's not like 'normal' jobs where depending on where you work can change your real duties in a major way. I have no problem with a person doing the same job in professional sports or real life going to a place that pays the most. A baseball player has a job to do and doesn't have to make any type of stand against making money. If you could have the same job you have now with the same responsibilities, but get paid 10 - 30% more would you take it? Steroids - I'll give you this one. I do worry though that this list of steroids players will get longer and longer and we'll assume (or already do) that every player did it. Scott Boras - Similar to your millionaire comment. If I were an athlete, I'd want an agent that could get me the most money. That sounds selfish, but let's face it...athletes know where they want to or don't want to play. They don't have to be convinced. Boras gets his money for his clients. I hate Boras as a fan, but if I understand why he has a nice client base. Evil Empire - I'll give you this one also. The only thing that sucks is they aren't breaking rules. I hate them as a fan. Hopefully something will change in the future to prevent them being able to buy any player at any price. I'd have to imagine the Yankees are still making some good bank so it makes business sense. If the rules don't change, the Yankees sucking is the only way to stop the Evil Empire.

This sucks. I've always really liked A-Rod even though he was a Yankee. I'm sure many on this board got to see him play in Appleton -- he wasn't there all that long, but you could tell at that time he was something special. I don't buy the 'light-hitting' shortstop Bush. His slugging percentage was was .631 with 36 home runs in the bigs when he was 20 years old -- his first 'full' season in the bigs. I always had it in the back of my mind though that given his power surge during his career he might have been on the juice.

I have been pretty tough on Sheets for awhile also, but I always respected that he could at times be one of the handful best pitchers in the game. I'm not saying at times he sucked, but I always thought that since he did miss time it hurt his value among other elite pitchers. As I've posted before, through some minor league contacts Sheets hasn't had a reputation as a workout warrior or anything like that...it's much of the opposite. I know it's impossible to know if his injuries were conditioning related or what, but IMO there's reason to believe it's possible a lot of these 'fluke' injuries were due to conditioning. I know ender will post stats of innings pitched and such and how Sheets isn't injury prone, which I do appreciate. The thing is I never understood how Sheets got a 'pass' on these fluke injuries. I know there is evidence to suggest he may have been abused with pitch counts and such in Milwaukee and to me those injuries due get a 'pass'. I'm not going to post a source or anything of that nature so take this however you want, but I think part of Sheets conditioning habits are a good reason why there weren't more offers out there for him. This is not to say a team wouldn't have given him $8 million over 3 years, but Sheets and his agent wanted more than that. Sheets wanted to be paid like an ace and that's understandable. Without using a source I'll try to just paint a picture and again take it for what it's worth: - Sheets pitched like an ace last year...there's no debate about that. - Sheets missed the end of the season with an injury at the time that should heal with rest...in other words over time he'd be back to ace level. - Even in this 'bad' market most of the top players got signed to about market or below market value. Some took a hit, but still had nice contracts. - Sheets and any kind of real rumors really didn't exist. There wasn't interest in Sheets at the level he wanted to be paid (like an ace). - The Brewers and baseball did not know Sheets needed surgery...yet there were no offers for Sheets. I hope that paints the picture of what I'm trying to say. Sheets work ethic could be put into question. I don't know if this is fair or not because he puts up ace numbers, but apparently IMO it scared away teams from a long-term deal. I think the thing that is being missed here is that there's speculation he was already hurt and the Brewers knew that so there were no offers. I don't believe that to be 100% true in regards to his surgery. The Brewers offered arby to get the draft pick. If Sheets accepted it, great. If not, they'd get a first round pick. Sheets does have value, but I do believe his work ethic scared away teams from offering what Sheets wanted. I'm not saying no team wanted Sheets because of his work ethic, but they weren't going to offer him a deal they knew he'd laugh at.

I still wonder why Ben didn't get all that much attention before the Rangers deal. Maybe other deals have fallen through/failed other tests with other teams? Something still doesn't seem right about this situation. If he wasn't going to need surgery as originally thought, why was there still little interest?

To be fair, there is a pretty good team in Milwaukee for him to cover now. He's defended himself numerous times on the website about all the 'knowledge' he has about the prospects. If he's going to do that, he should do his homework. No he hasn't started posting in the comments section of his blog again. Yes he has. I haven't seen him attacking posters yet (I don't read the comments most of the time so I guess he could have), but he has started posting again in the comments section.

Look at it this way. Rickie is horrible in 07 and has his salary cut to $1.07M. Prince was drafted a year before him, hit 50 HRs and led the team offensively, and got a pay raise to $670k. You see why one might be a little upset about the salary structure. The difference is Weeks signed a better contract than Prince did after he was drafted. It's not the salary structure. The Brewers agreed to a better contract with Weeks than Fielder...and we all know Prince's issues with his dad and his bonus, etc. The biggest thing I have with TH is how he's the minor league 'expert' for a lot of publications. From what I know and have been told, he pretty much goes with some stats and what he 'hears' and then makes his prospect list. There are many here (especially in the minor league forum) that know this is far from how you judge minor league talent. I also blame some of the 'new prospect' lack of hype on TH. There are some pretty darn good players coming up pretty soon, but because of TH's terrible coverage you wouldn't know it, but he loves to point out he ranks prospects. While these prospects may not be Braun or Fielder (which an honest person would tell you is a lot more rare than the normal stud prospect), the next prospects lack of coverage blows my mind.

Very glad to hear that from Melvin... not that it wasn't already pretty obvious. 2009 will be a huge season for Rickie, and I will again set myself up for disappointment by hoping for that breakout year. I know you like Weeks and I've wanted him to pan out the past few years. I believe in other threads I've called him our 'off-season addition' in the past if he plays the way we think he can. I'm not one to say Weeks is terrible or anything like that. I just think his offense doesn't make up for his defense. I know Weeks is debated around here based on his draft pick and to me...that is fair. I know a lot of first round picks don't make it to the big leagues and I've seen that first hand. Rickie put up some darn good numbers and hasn't produced in the bigs. To me, it's not a level of talent. It's finding the right hitting coach that clicks with Weeks. If it's not that, Rickie isn't putting forth enough effort. I know that sounds harsh, but he does have the ability to not only be one of the best hitting 2B in the league, but to be one of the better players in the league...or at least he's shown that promise. I know Brian has said he's seen it first hand and I've debated that with him, but comparing what Weeks did to now he has shown the talent in the minors and Brian is right. I can no longer sit here and think 'thank goodness we still have Rickie so when he breaks out we were right'. I'm more in the boat of let's groom a replacement and if Rickie happens to find the potential most of us think he has that's a good problem to have. I guess for the stats and such it can be debated all day. I'm sure people will point out more lead off stats and OBPs, but Rickie wasn't drafted to be a league leader in OBP while displaying little home run power and striking out a lot. If that's what he is, he has a major league career...it just likely won't be as a starting caliber player for much longer. Rickie has the tools...he just has to find a way to make it click. I know I have given Sheets and Fielder hard times for what I consider poor conditioning habits (not saying I'm right on those), but I'm also wondering about Rickie and his work ethic. I don't think anyone in the minors would've said that Weeks would be behind Braun, Fielder, Hardy, Hart (hopefully it was a 'slump'), and potentially Gamel, Escobar, and Salome in terms of future MLB ceiling. I know not everyone of those players fits based on projections and the end of last year, but a few years ago it was 'clear' in the eyes of some that Weeks was going to be a better hitter than Prince...that has been far from the truth so far.

92

Gadzuric over Zaza. That's true. That was a bad move. I was talking about matching the heat offers for Williams and Bell. Also siging Gatzuric for the obnoxious contract when Harris did. The Gadz contract was bad. I don't think matching Williams and Bell were bad ideas. Bell's contract was somewhat small. The problem I have with Williams is the return they got back for him. I do like Ridnour, but it seems like we should've gotten more in that deal considering Williams might make the all-start team this year.

What decisions would those be?

If I think I might be able to get a little more back maybe I will have my accountant look at that as well. Did you deduct/credit your education? You may want to figure out some rough cost/benefit analysis before you amend. If you didn't deduct/credit your tuition (I'm assuming law school), you could have a nice refund available. PM me if you want some specific help/advice. You'll need to get your 2005 return amended sooner rather than later if you want to get a refund.

Redd is out for the year. Tore his MCL and ACL. There's a story on the JS about him possibly being out for the year, but rotoworld and Racine Times state he's out for the year. That screws up a lot of things...winning, trading him, etc.

24

Question 1) What I would have the accountant do is the taxes from my wife's job, my job prior to my business, and then my business. I have no investments or anything crazy like that, just income from 2008. How much should I expect to be charged by my accountant to prepare my tax returns? It all depends any other 'issues/situations' you had. Did you have your own business prior to October or is that just a W-2? Question 2) It occurs to me that from 2004-2006 that I might actually have been able to receive MORE than I paid in, as I was in school, making less than 30k a year and was supporting children. I believe it is the Earned Income Credit perhaps? I remember figuring my taxes and just stopping when I reached -0- paid in, even though it seemed I could have gotten back more than I paid in. It didnt seem like it was correct. Anyway, Question 2) Can I file Amended returns for those years and get back more? You may not be able to amend the 2004 return due to statute of limitations (3 years). Did you use any deductions or credits for your education?

I don't know if you want to do this, but a daily update post of all numbers received might be nice, especially if this thing reaches a few hundred posts. I disagree. Read the posts and pick a number after that. It's all about the chase... 278.

So it looks like the difference between an all lefty bench vs. one that has a righty in it, is likely to be 1-2 hits over the course of an entire season. Is it worth spending a million or two million for a bench player for one or two hits? I don't think it can be broken down quite that easily. You're assuming that every right handed hitter stays healthy for the season, but if that doesn't happen there will be a lot of bad matchups/opportunities where having another right handed hitter on the bench. On top of that, the question can be raised as to why are the Brewers were they are right now with their lefty dominated bench.

In a conversation I had recently with Boras, he said Fielder had lost weight since the end of the season and is committed to a conditioning program. It really wouldn't take much for him to lose weight...if he missed a few meals he could be down a few pounds. If he's been working his tail off and eating right (not saying he is or isn't or any of that debate...just saying that's how conditioning programs usually work), it good be a very good thing for the Brewers and Prince's long-term in the bigs. I still have my big time doubts about Fielder. My big worry is that he gains weight and his trade value goes down, but I don't know how much damage he could do in two years. I'm very interested to see more information about how much or how little weight he has lost.

Aslo, neither of us can stand Chloe and we were dissapointed when she popped up again. She may possibly be the worst actor I have ever seen. I think you may change your opinion if you watch previous seasons. Chloe's character is strange and I don't think it's bad acting. Chlose is just well...Chloe. I really like Chloe's character, but I'm sure that's because I've seen every season and grown to like her.

Ill tell you this, if McClung was a free agent I bet he couldnt get a 1 yr contract for 1.66 million. He'd have a shot to get more.

Yeah, I understand that they have top 10 picks, but they don't have a super star in the group. The best way, and probably the only way, the Bucks are going to get a super star is through the draft. And the more lottery picks they can acquire, the better chance they have on finding one. Most of the top teams have missed on lottery picks as well, but, in my opinion, eventually finding a superstar is worth all the misses. I agree with what you're saying. I'm still holding out hope that Bogut continues to develop into the star, but I don't think that will really happen. I also don't know if it's 'missing' or if it's more luck. Like you've mentioned they just haven't had the best years to have top picks. You can't really say that because you don't know what the eastern conference will look like in a couple years. After a couple years, Redd, Jefferson, Ridnour, Bell, and Villanueva will be gone or on their way out, so you have no idea for sure what the Bucks roster will look like. And you also say that the Cavs, Celts, Pistons won't be elite teams, but what's to say the Knicks, Bulls, Nets, etc... won't be an elite team by then? I'm assuming you mean the Cavs won't be an elite team if James leaves. Well, all the rumors say if he leaves he's going to the Knicks or Nets, so whichever team gets him has a good chance to turn into an elite team. That 2010 FA class is going to improve a lot of teams, and make others much worse. I agree with what you're saying here. I guess what I mean is that the Bucks will have a chance to be among one of the better teams given how the current top teams are. If the Bucks continue to bring in more youth and hopefully develop that youth and like you've mentioned find a star they could be in good shape for awhile. I still fear that if things don't change for the Bucks (i.e. not have a top team in the east for years and don't get a new building) they won't be in Milwaukee in five years or so.

They're waiting until the results of the dunk contest. Update from a Memphis paper last night is that the discussions are ongoing. To me, it doesn't make sense. Why are they waiting on the results? I thought I read Alexander will be in the dunk contest. What are they going to do either way? I looked around that blog and didn't see the dunk contest mentioned, but I'm probably missing something. If it is going to happen (which I don't think it is), it's nowhere near done like Gery claimed it was. If agents and everything were involved, players wouldn't be playing. I still doubt this trade had any truth based on what has been reported. Now if there's other parts to it maybe, but it just doesn't make any sense and now the delay I don't really think there's anything there. I don't want what I'm about to say come off poorly, but Memphis really could care less about their team and any 'reports' about the team can be wrong and no one really cares. I think rumors may have gone on through the team, but to actually get a 'scoop' on the team doesn't happen because nobody first of all cares and second of all the Memphis management team is pretty quiet about that stuff. Dmiles -- you bring up some good points. I just don't think it has to happen that way. If the Bucks continue to improve, it's not without top ten picks. There's Bogut, Villanueva, Alexander, and Jefferson were all drafted in the top ten or close to it. I'm not saying these guys are or will be superstars, but there's top ten talent/draft picks on the team. Obviously it's much easier to have a top team by drafting the talent and keeping it, but the Bucks don't have a real stud on the team. I think it's a little bit more fair to compare all-stars on teams and the more of those the more likely you'll win. The Bucks have Redd, but he has his limitations and really isn't the type of player that can carry a team by himself due to his game lacking other parts. Building through the draft is a real good way to go, but I think the Bucks can be a top 4 team in the east in a few years if they stick with a plan. I'm not saying they'll be a dominate team, but given how the east currently is it's quite possible the Cavs, Celtics, and Pistons aren't elite teams in a few years.