TheCrew07

I'm more curious about Lasker.

Why should any system, elementary, high school, or college, have to focus on educating the parents as well as the children? My parents were involved as were all of my friend's parents, not because the school wanted them to be, simply because that's the way it was. Education was and still is a privilege, not a right, and was to be taken seriously, as were any extracurricular activities, being committed was just a given. I'm only 33, it's not like I'm 4 generations removed from the children I work with and come from a small town in north eastern Wisconsin, things aren't any different in small or large towns, this is just the way we've become. In school, the administration, parents, and teachers all used to be on the same side... It's now everyone for themselves. If a kid gets disciplined in class more often than not the parents want to know why their child was singled out and unfairly punished instead eradicating the behavioral issues. It's no different for us coaches in the field or on the court, the majority of parents do not hold their children accountable in any way. When I was going through school in the late 80s and early 90s it was unheard of to schedule shopping trips, dentist appts, senior pictures, and family vacations during practice time, however this has become the norm. The same parents then think we as coaches play favorites and that's why their children don't play, when in reality all they do is continually put their child behind the curve. If an athlete continually causes trouble in school, misses practice, or fakes injury so they don't have to practice, there is a going to be a consequence for those actions. If the child doesn't get that from school or at a home, then when are they going to learn that success just isn't handed to them? The expectation seems to have become that because their child is part of the team, they should get to play... to some extent I agree and we do go lengths to make sure that everyone plays at the elementary and middle school level. At the high school level sports are not an activity, that means they aren't something you can show up once in a while and participate in. Sports are a program that requires commitment and while everyone who attends practice EVERY DAY will get to play as a freshman and a JV, varsity games are results orientated, winning and losing matters. A player has to be able to carry out his/her assignment to get playing time, and our athletes just don't have the same basic fundamental knowledge of the games as my generation did. Some of that is video games, kids just don't go out and play the games for real. Instead of getting 6 guys together to get a game going, 3 or 4 get together at someone's house and play a console game of sort. There is a huge difference between grabbing a ball and playing for real vs console gaming, you don't pickup any of the nuances of the game unless you're actually playing it for real. Also, instead of watching sports on TV during their free time, there's 200 different alternatives in TV programming alone. Most parents just don't understand how they and their children themselves continually undermine their own goals. The part of this that I have the biggest problem with is how many times I've heard something along of the lines of, "My child says event X happened which caused result Y". Really? Since when do children tell the truth? Did any of us lay out the exact truth to our parents? Do adults in today's world tell the truth? I have a very hard time understanding how so many parents get duped by their kids, believing what their child says word for word. I'm thankful my parents were not that gullible even though I would have had a much easier time of it, I'm much better off now. For all of the problems we have with the he said/she said stuff at least in coaching it's an easy solution, come watch practice, come watch the games. For a teacher, I'm not sure what they do, and at least in the 3 school districts around here that my family members teach in, the administration is more concerned with keeping their jobs than doing what's right by children, which essentially puts the teachers out on an island. I'm not claiming that all teachers are perfect, far from it, but as adults we have the responsibility of building up our children, preparing them for the "real world". Instead we get caught up in doing what's easy instead of doing what's right, and for the most part it's everyone involved because even the good teachers seem to get beaten down by the fight over time. Raw talent or intelligence isn't the issue, in most cases it's simply the effort. A less intelligent person can succeed through hard work in the same way that a less talented athlete will succeed in the field or on the court. I've always been in the top 1 or 2 percentile depending on the testing measure and I didn't finish at the top of my class because I got by purely on my natural smarts, while the students that weren't as smart worked harder and got better grades than me. I was right there with them in classes that were math/science orientated, but when there was material that had to be learned in most cases (except history) they knew the material better than me because they worked harder than me. How is that any idifferent than how things go in life? We get what we put in. I understood that and didn't really care, I wasn't concerned with academic success until I got to college. I've often thought that it would have been better for me to have had to work a little bit harder in school, I would have been much better prepared for college, I learned some hard lessons about life in college. The problem has become that we're more concerned about what we get out than what we put in, and in many cases we expect to get more out than we put in. In life the reality is that everyone doesn't win, and I'm not talking about becoming a millionaire, I'm talking about being successful, getting the most out of what we each have. I'm not sure as a society we're even concerned with maximizing our talents at all, we're into "what about me?". It's unfortunate and people keeping telling me the pendulum is going to start swinging back the other way but I honestly just don't see it. The generations before us overcame great struggles which gave them perspective, how have we been challegened? The war on terror? Most people don't even think about it unless something significant happens. My grandparents lived through the Great Depression, fought 2 wars, lost children in Vietnam... what have we done? I'm not trying to romanticize war, but the reality is that going through life and death situations, having absolutely nothing, then dealing with the hardships of rationing, losing loved ones, and so on tends to give a person a different perspective on life. We've been spared those events thus far, but at the same time I feel we've lost some perspective into our own lives. I'm big into history, and every empire that has risen, has also fallen... maybe we've gotten so full of ourselves that we're starting our fall.

It's not just college kids, this sense entitlement is evident everywhere, even on this forum. It was a good read though.

It's one of the least best possible outcomes of an AB, but the whole SOs don't matter argument is based around comparing the different types of outs. For example, they aren't comparing the SO to a Hit, what's the value of a SO compared to an IF pop up? That sort of thing... so a SO is preferable to a Double Play, not as good as a Sac Fly and so on. It is an outs vs outs thing, not based on the final outcome of the plate appearance, just all of the other negative outcomes of a plate appearance..

The minor league splits links didn't work for me, FYI. I compared a bunch of different sites and the only one that doesn't match the others is minor league splits, I never noticed the difference because I've never looked at any full season lines before. Isn't that one of Jeff Sackmann's sites? He's a regular contributor at BCB, I believe if you sign up you can contact him directly over there.

I was going to call you out on that, as I remember running the numbers around june 1 and he was on exactly the same error pace as the year before. I bounced around the usual sites and too my surprise he did clean up his defense game. His fielding percentage got better at each stop. As I previously mentioned I actually forced myself to quit looking at his lines in the boxscore so I didn't follow him anywhere near as closely as I did in 2007. That being said there is no way he has more range than Escobar, and while his offensive potential is greater, his OPS by season is trending negatively while Escobar's is trending positively. Brewer has exciting potential, there's no doubt in his raw ability, his results just need to catch up so we really have something to talk about. I would love to have a similar debate with Escobar and Brewer as has raged with Hardy and Escobar, there's nothing wrong with depth and having multiple options to choose from.

The early reports from Spring Training have him playing 2nd base.

For years when people post certain types of pictures it screws up the formatting of my browsers and I'm too lazy to do anything about it even though I'm a computer guy. I have no motivation to google it and fix the problem, even though I must have thought to myself 100s of times that I should address the problem. I say lazy because I've just gotten home from working out at the Y, I get up at 4:30 and I'm home by 6:00, not because I start work so early, but because I hate the afternoon rush and it's better to go in the morning and get it over with. I'm left wondering if my forced motivation to get out of bed and be productive (I'm actually the world's worst morning person) actually causes me to be more lazy during the day as I've let little things like this browser issue go all over the place because I'm annoyed but don't really care enough to do anything about them.

Nobody unless he would get called up if he's an NRI

I was thinking maybe I over reacted initially then I received a text from my 1 friend who's a Cubs fan... the only part I'll quote because it really drew my ire was "Miller Park really is Wrigley North, maybe we can broadcast the games for you as well?" It didn't initially occur to me that this was more ammunition for the fire.

I kept my mouth shut because I really disliked the idea of hiring anyone tied in anyway to the Cubs to come and work for the Brewers. I know I shouldn't care, hire the best broadcaster available and all that... but the dude is a life long Cubs fan and I'm unable to put my hatred of all things Cubs aside. There had to be a better option than this guy... I'm unclear if the Brewers hired this guy or if WTMJ did, either way, come on guys... He could be the best broadcaster in the business and it won't matter to me, I'll always be wondering if he's being genuine or not.

Cain has developing power, he's a true 5 tool prospect.

Jack Z. you're ticking me off.

I'm finally doing the highlight film for the football season and at the end I normally do a tribute to the seniors, I put a picture up of them with their parents from Parent's Night and then play a highlight(more than 1 if you're a captain) for each senior. We had a large senior class and for the first time I have some players who didn't have a single highlight in their entire career. I've been through 2 years of varsity games and there are 2 kids that have absolutely nothing. I'm not going back to JV... I don't even capture those games to the computer, I'm entirely unsure what to do other than put a clip in that highlights them at the start and watch them run around? If I do that then it's trying to find the least sucky play, as in "Hey he didn't get knocked down on this kick off!". Truly depressing, probably why I put it off this long.

If he's not traded he would be a minor league free agent and could sign with any interested team, Brewers included.

I thought I made it pretty clear that if Gamel is the best option, his defense had improved to the point of being MLB ready, because his bat is already superior to what we have. The kids are going to have to play at some point, so if they are the best option coming out of spring training I see no reason to hold them back. In truth Salome will not be ready defensively, Escobar is blocked by Hardy, and Gamel likely would spend 2 months in AAA even if he was ready so I wouldn't say the odds aren't good, I'd peg it today as a remote possibility at best. I don't get the comment about losing a year in their prime either as it's essentially the same argument as starting their service clocks this year... As of today the earliest Gamel could be a free agent is his age 30 season, Escobar age 29, and Salome age 30. If the team buys out a year or 2 of FA with each player they'd be the wrong side of 30 by the time they were FAs, what exactly would the team lose? Salome is vastly superior offensively to what we already have as is Gamel, if those guys were better defensively they'd both be up for good right now. Escobar is the only player who's realistically blocked by the player(s) in front of him and a very good case can be made that he should stay where he is as long as Hardy is around.

If he is, why would they hold him back? They'd probably do what they did with Braun to avoid super 2 and then he'd be up for good. If he's ready this year when is the right to bring him up? Next year? What would be the difference next year other than Hall being more expensive? Escobar, Salome, and Gamel have not been rushed, they've gone 1 step at a time, so there should be no concern that they were pushed too fast. Salome and Escobar are currently blocked by Kendell and Hardy, but who's blocking Gamel? If there's a significant injury at C or SS we'll see Salome/Escobar anyway. I get what you're trying to say, but I'm having trouble understanding your logic. If he's better than Hall/Lamb, Hall, or whomever then why shouldn't he play? If he's the best option and the team thinks he's ready, how is it fair to the player to hold him back? I understand the team might just be around 500 this season, but if he gets comfortable this season chances are he'd be even better in 2010. What if he signs a Braunesque deal down the road? There are so many other variables to consider other than a year of service time in this case. If he's up then his defense has come around... this isn't a case like Hardy where the team essentially wasted a year of his service time while he got his feet back under him post shoulder surgery. I don't think any of us thought Hardy would come in and set the world on fire that first year, I didn't think Weeks was ready either but he was absolutely crushing the ball at the time, I don't see how Gamel's situation is similar to either player. The team didn't have a SS and Spivey wasn't exactly setting the world on fire and was easy to move. The team has alternatives at 3B if Gamel's D isn't ready, they don't have to do anything unless Gamel proves he belongs. Looking at it from the player's perspective, I'd be awfully ticked if I was the best option and got stashed in the minors for another year, the team would be intentionally shortening the window on my career. I would want as many years before the age of 30 as possible and would take it very personally.

TGJ is one dimensional, and if he sees time in a corner OF spot ever again I may very well break my TV. He's replaceable off the scrap heap at this point, he's a good defender that doesn't hit, there's tons of those guys floating around. As far as alternatives, the team doesn't have a ton at the moment but I'd feel better about them calling up Gillespie to fill an injury hole than I would be having them waste ABs with Gwynn. Other possible OF solutions are already invited to camp, you know the names... Nelson, Iribarren, Nixon, Duffy, etc... Gwynn's defense isn't remarkable in nature, he's not in Escobar's class defensively, he might be a marginal improvement over Nix's and isn't any better than Krynzel's was, what's so special about him that he's worth keeping around? Look at the FAs and CFs floating around AAA, Gwynn's skill set can be found pretty much anywhere. If it came down to longer term CF solution I was serious when I said above that I'd rather see Cain get his feet wet than give Gwynn any meaningful playing time, he simply doesn't have a future in Milwaukee. .

BCB did an interesting analysis of the defensive Break Even Point for Gamel vs the other alternatives at 3B earlier this year. It's interesting reading if you're into that sort of thing.

Pena isn't just a hard thrower, he has very good movement as well. Sometimes a simple mechanical adjustment can allow a pitcher like him to locate his pitches better so he doesn't have to groove fastballs down in the count. The only free video I remember of him pitching was the AAA All-Star game last season, and that inning kind of sums up Pena in a nutshell. No one is debating Pena's results, they've been less than stellar. The point is that when we're down to the last couple of spots on the 40 man, why not keep a player who has rare talents over someone that's replaceable off of the scrap heap?

Mass... a fountain of wisdom as always, it's actually a little disturbing that he could have been a MiLB free agent. Here's the original statement I remember from earlier this offseason. The quote pertaining to Scarpetta below. While Cody was an 11th round selection I believe he was considered 2nd round talent before injuring his finger prior to the draft. edit. Link to the thread in the MiLB Forum discussing the 40 man additions.

I know why the Tigers did what they did. The point is that I would hope the Brewers wouldn't assume that kind of risk given the health concerns with young pitchers in general. Scarpetta on the 40 man is no more limiting than Rogers on the 40 man and while I agree his status limits the organization in a minor way, it is what it is at this point. I wonder if they knew about this rule 5 draft exception when they voided his original contract or if they stumbled across it later. At any rate, it's certainly not the end of the world.

1. Scarpetta is an excellent prospect at this time 2. The Tigers added those players because they signed MLB contracts right away, much like the Brewers did with Weeks as 1992casey previously noted. Any player who signs a MLB deal immediately after being drafted has to be on the 40 man, and I believe that's part of the reason Weeks was rushed. I still have a hard time believing they signed Porcello, a HS pitcher, to a MLB deal, but to each their own. He's studly, there's no doubt, but if he gets injured they are just flushing money down the toilet. edit. RyDogg, surgery had nothing to do with the 40 man thing, the Brewers voided his original deal when it was discovered he needed surgery and then resigned him, thus forcing them to add him to the 40 man after his first full season. I'll try to find the exact verbiage as to why and edit again. edit2. It's because they resigned him for less money than the original deal, making him eligible for the rule 5 draft.

Because his original contract was voided immediately after he signed it when it was discovered he needed more surgery. It's a rule technicality, he'll be on the 40 man his whole way up the ladder.

It may be a numbers thing, but for many of us it's an upside thing. TGJ doesn't have any upside and Pena does. On the minor league side it's about development, not who's going to make the MLB roster. If Pena would break out it's certainly possible that he'd find himself in a MLB bullpen this year, maybe not the Brewer's pen, but someone's. TGJ is out of options as well, it's not like he has a future in Milwaukee either. I'd rather see Nelson, Gillespie, or Cain before TGJ, especially if he's playing in a corner spot. If he's playing CF that's one thing but that's a pretty narrow window of opportunity, I'd rather not have 1 dimensional bench players, it's a waste of a roster spot.