JJHardy7

Or there are a lot of owners/GMs that don't know what they're doing. Not to mention, having Barry Bonds and a healthy Kerry Wood and Mark Prior tend to make a manager look pretty bright. That could be, but I don't think it's really important to take every quote he says and try and make him look like an idiot. Of all the interviews and such that go on in spring training every manager can look foolish just looking at a quote on a piece of paper. I'm not going to judge him by some comment...I'll see what he can do with the Reds this year. I'm not a huge Dusty fan by any stretch, but talk is cheap...especially in February.

This is a whole new level of player we are looking at. If ownership is going to base their extensions off of the history of subpar players in relation to Fielder and Braun, then we don't have much to look forward to as fans in my opinion. Fielder and Braun aren't free agents though. Historic or not there isn't a rush right now to get anything done. From here on out, don't sign any one of the youngsters to a long term deal because nothing has worked out in the past. I don't think anyone is pointing this out. I'm just pointing out the contracts come with risk and I'm not sold on inking these guys long-term before we have to. In a year or two I may not have a problem with it, but I just don't see the urgency right now -- especially with Sheets' situation not resolved.

If he stays healthy and we make the playoffs I think he stays a Brewer. This is no longer a small market team and with a playoff appearance I'm not so sure it is just mid market for the short term at least. The money is there to sign him if the attendence goes up enough. How much more an the attendance go up though? I know it'll generate more revenue, but there comes a certain point and time that attendance isn't going to be enough. I really think it comes down to how many years Sheets will sign for. If it's possible we can get him for 2 or 3, I'd be more willing to go down that path. If it's a 5 or 6 year deal, I don't think the Brewers can consider that -- whether they're a small market or mid-sized market.

He seems like a good guy. Sure the Brewers are a business to him, but it's also his hobby. He knows that if you improve your product then you'll be able to sell more of it. He also knows that people like us will pay whatever he charges. I see what you're saying to a certain extent, but I think the fact that he stays out of DM's way (or so it appears) makes it more of a business. Does he like baseball? I'm sure he does, but I think part of his drive is turning around what has been a terrible franchise of late AND making money out of it. That's pretty impressive.

Is there exclusivity in being a fan of something and making money from it? I'm a fan of making money in whatever I choose. My point is that Mark A. isn't a great owner because he's a baseball fan.

You come to your conclusion based on one year of the Suppan and Hall deals? What else has the current administration done for long-term deals? I guess we can throw Counsell in there, but besides that I can't think of anything else.

All I know is that looking at ball four and swinging and missing at it have two very different outcomes. How do you get the best of both worlds? Could it possibly be that OBP isn't really a true indicator for every player? I think that is what Dusty is getting at. Not every player has a great idea of the strike zone, but OBP wants you to get on base. That's the entire point.

Those sentiments are somewhat contradictory. How? There are lots of rich people who are fans of lots of things -- does this mean they buy them? I like lots of things, but I'm not going to drop a ton of money on something if it doesn't make sense. The entire fan thing could be an entire show -- and to be honest I don't care if it is. Every one of us likes things, but are we going to put our money into something just because we are a fan? That's my entire point. If someone likes where they work, does that make them a fan of it? This is an investment/job/business for Mark A. and he likes doing business. I could care less about him being a "fan" first. It's easy to be a genuine fan of something when you're making money. I'd be a fan of anything like that -- and that's my entire point.

It's just looking too much into one quote. Dusty may have done some things that don't make a ton of sense to a baseball fan -- but he keeps getting hired for millions of dollars. I'll sign up for that gig -- he must be doing something right. I'm just not a fan of analyzing every quote -- the product on the field will tell the story. I guess I could say that some here that are all take pitch and OBP crazy -- Dusty is talking to you. I can see what he means in certain terms.

I don't really buy the whole Mark A is a fan first thing. A lot of us are fans, but how much money would we put in the team? I think Mark A is first of all a business guy. He didn't become rich by being an idiot when it comes to making money. He may like baseball, but lots of rich people like things and don't buy a team. I like Mark A because he knows what it takes to run a business -- every sport in every major league is a business -- not a sport. The Brewers made money last year by winning and I'm sure Mark A has his people and his own charts estimating winning vs. total revenue. He isn't in this to lose money. Milwaukee showed last year that if the team is winning they'll sell out games and Mark A knows that. He wants to get to the playoffs because that's more $$$ and there's nothing wrong with having that mind set. Mark A wants to make MORE money and not just cut payroll (i.e. Marlins) and take a small profit. Mark A. is a smart guy and I'm so happy he bought the Brewers. I hope that Brewers fans can show enough support to prove his investments were worth while. It took a lot of guts on his end to buy this team...does Mark A. know any rich friends who want to go into the basketball business?

And it'll play out the same way (except Sheets won't be a colossal bust after signing his deal). If Sheets isn't healthy, it won't be far off. It is a tough spot for the Brewers AND for Sheets. I don't have anything against the guy. He seems like a guy that likes Milwaukee and loves to pitch. This is why he's the golden boy with most Brewers fans. That is fine. The problem I have is that he just can't be counted on plain and simple. Even if he starts every game this year and has an ERA of 3.5 and great stats his history shows that it's not a given he can take the mound every 5th day. Would we want Fielder or Braun if they'd miss this amount of games (on a percentage) that Sheets has missed? Whether he's injury prone or bad luck doesn't matter -- we can't afford to pay him what the market rate is with his health concerns. I really hope Sheets has a great year, but I honestly don't think we are in a bad spot with him anymore. In the past Sheets would get hurt and we'd be in trouble. Now with Yo, CV, and Parra I have a really, really hard time believing Milwaukee will pay Sheets big money. I just hope he does well enough to earn a Type A free agent status and I will wish him the best of luck.

Are the naming rights even worth anything?

Being a one-time fluke all-star and leading the league in "Quality Starts" (a horrendous stat if there ever was one) are not good arguments for considering anyone an ace, or even a very good pitcher. I actually like this stat. There aren't too many stats that indicate exactly how good a player is (I'm not saying this is one either), but it means Cappy at least is getting deep into game a decent success rate. I'm kind of on the fence as to whether Cappy is the all-star Cappy or the bad Cappy. In my opinion he deserves another shot. I know it'd be very difficult to compare, but I wonder what Cappys W/L record would be with the run support Vargas got. I know a lot of people point to his loss streak, but it wasn't just Cappy in those games. I honestly don't even think this needs to be a Cappy vs. CV debate. We're early in spring training and it's a long year. I still think this has more to do with getting CV consistent pitching in than anything else -- if it's true. It's easier to have Vargas be the long guy and pitch him in the #5 starting role as needed in April.

Villanueva has done nothing but perform since he's been with us. I think its ridiculous to think he could start the year at AAA. He's easily one of our 5 best starters and definitely one of the better relievers if they choose to put him in that role. What a joke this is I just don't look at it this way. I think Villanueva showed in Nashville that if he's given the ball every 5 days he can stretch out quite easily from a bullpen role to a starting role. I think part of the logic might be that they can give CV regular work in AAA whereas in the majors the month of April really doesn't need a 5th starter and they'd rather use their #5 as a long guy/starter for the month. I think the whole point might be to keep CV in the same role the whole year and not mess with it. What's wrong with that? The month of April doesn't make the season and I think some might be getting a little too worked up over this. Now if CV is in the minors the entire year -- yea that's a problem, but there is no indication that is the plan.

So you basically spend your whole post whining like a four year old and then your last sentence says you'll be back when the adult conversations start back up? Not to be mean, but this is kind of not called for in my opinion. I think the general feeling is that The Muscle is loved or hated -- no in between. I think a possible good idea would be to just keep a thread for him all year and those that want to chime in can and those that don't want to can just avoid that thread. I think it's kind of like the Yost thing. I'm not real into bashing a guy time after time so I avoid the main Yost thread and all is well. This isn't a knock on those that do bash Yost it's just a way to avoid things I really don't have an interest in. Just a thought. I personally like the signing and I look forward to seeing him hit some bombs in Nashville -- and getting a done of RB autographs.

And no, I will not be getting a dog from the humane society. I've went that route twice before, with disastrous results both times. I don't know exactly what the rescues are like in Wisconsin, but in Tennessee the rescue programs for puppies/dogs is pretty impressive. They put a lot of time and money (donations) into taking care of the dogs. Both of our lab mixed puppies (we got them at 2 months and 3 months old) have worked out really, really well. I know from the programs we got them from they were in good homes and these rescue programs grabbed them out of the county pounds when they arrived in order to save them and all that stuff. I guess it really depends on what you're looking for. My wife and I wanted labs and we were able to get mixes which we were happy with.

I understand why the Bucks chose Bogut at the time. They had no center and had both TJ/Mo, but in retrospect i can't see how anyone would rather have Bogut than Paul. In the vast majority of cases, good NBA teams are driven by an elite player, Paul is in that level. Without an elite players, the deck is stacked strongly against any team. I agree with this. I think the one thing in the NBA is that teams don't always draft the best overall player since only 5 players can play at once. A rookie can make a big impact from day one in the NBA and with TJ & Mo they'd have 3 starter caliber PGs. Paul is a very good player and I have nothing against him. I just still wonder if Bogut is really being used the right way. I do think he can be a 20 point 10 board guy night in and night out, but it just seems he doesn't fit anything we have ran on the offensive end. I'm starting to think that Michael Redd (I think he's a great player and I've been a big fan) may need to leave Milwaukee for the Bucks to improve. I think getting pack some picks and a nice young talent for him, getting rid of Gadzuric's contract, rid of Simmons' contract, and get a new proven coach may get this team in the right direction. I think the next few years will be huge in terms of whether Milwaukee keeps its NBA team. The Celtics are very talented, but they have 3 players who aren't getting younger and are looking to make a run in the next few years, the Pistons are getting older, and besides that I really think the East is up for grabs. Orlando looks like a team that may have some staying power, but the Bucks are going to have the opportunity to make a run at one of the top 4 seeds in the next few years. They're young and talented now they just have to make some smart moves and get this thing figured out. I really miss the electricity around the team from the year they made the Eastern Conference Finals.

Page 2 is only good when there are actually jokes backing up the stuff. I know I might be in the minority in liking Bill Simmons, but at least that guy knows sports and makes crazy/funny remarks. This clearly made no sense and it's more ESPN trying to branch out as a pure media entertainment outlet than anything else. I personally like ESPN, but like everything else you have to look past the bad and corny stuff. The more sports coverage the better in my opinion -- I do wish though it was covered more so by sports people, but what can you do.

Yeah, that's a tad silly endaround. I liked the Bogut pick, but it was obviously the wrong pick as Chris Paul should have been the guy. I don't think based on the Bucks roster it was the wrong pick. I don't think Bogut is being used right and there are reports out that he's one of the most underrated players in the league. I wouldn't give up on Bogut just yet.

You can't assume Harris is bad though. That's the point I'm trying to make. Nobody knows how good or bad Harris is because he's not allowed to make deals he wants to make because of Kohl. I actually don't think Harris is that bad of a GM. I do believe the Bucks are still a pretty darn talented team, but they're too one dimensional. I think Bogut needs the ball every trip down the court and we need to run the offense through him. I think a lot of us (by us I mean Bucks fans) had some hope this year because Coach K did well in his small stint last year. It's looking more and more like that wasn't reality and the Bucks may have just played better because they just needed a change -- Coach K isn't the answer...he's part of the problem.

I vote for national tour.

I'm all for restoring credit, but I'd have a problem letting a dealer know what I'm willing to pay for a car or what I'm willing to pay per month on a loan. That's true, but you could just run some numbers online through some creditors so that you know your max or what you want.

Without knowing your entire situation I think it might be a good idea to look at your monthly budget and see how much you can reasonably afford for a car payment. I would use that number and then go to banks/dealerships and see what type of loan you can get based on your credit. This may help you get a car that has a little more value, but in the end it will help restore your credit rating which in the long run may help you out.

A lot of the players caught on right away too, it appeared, so I don't think the judges were oblivious to it. Barkley didn't believe he did it until he saw the replays. I do think the judges missed it. I think it did have a high degree of difficulty because it showed his tremendous hang time. Howard's "Superman" dunk was actually botched. There's videos on YouTube where he actually does dunk the ball. The pass/jump wasn't timed right so he just threw it in.

I still think Green's blowing the candle out before dunking was the best of the night. I agree. I don't think the judges actually saw what he did. My first reaction was the force of the ball blew the candle out, but replay clearly showed he actually blew it out. It's similar to what happened to Howard when he put the sticker up on the backboard last year -- I don't think the judges saw what really happened and didn't have the benefit of replay.