lcbj68c
-
Posts
3,529 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
News
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospects Ranking
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
Milwaukee Brewers Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by lcbj68c
-
If it was in the strike zone and the batter does the same thing, the ump calls him out on strikes. Self defense was the issue, in my mind, and the ump gave him the benefit of the doubt. My opinion on this continues to evolve. I don't understand why self defense is an issue. If that ball lands fair, do the umpires consider self-defense and intent?
-
It doesn't matter if it is a strike or a ball, relative to the strike zone. Have you never seen a batter offer at a pitch outside of the strike zone? Lorenzen put his bat into the bunting position and did nothing to remove himself or that bat from that position and caused the bat to make contact with the ball. Again, if the batted ball is a fair ball, do the umpires get together and analyze his intent? Of course not. There should be zero reason to analyze his intent because it's a foul ball instead. Lorenzen intentionally put himself in a bunting position and while in that position, caused the bat to make contact with the ball. The fact that if he missed, it would have been a called ball, is irrelevant.
-
While the word "intent" is in the bunt definition, I guess, why does the outcome matter? This is really easy for me, as somebody else put it. If the same exact circumstance had been a fair ball off Lorenzen's bat...what would have been the outcome? A putout somewhere, I imagine. There's no way the umpire crew would gather around and say, "well, did he intend to bunt it?" It's only after the foul determination, does somehow, "intent" come into play? That's a bunch of baloney. If the intent is to no longer bunt, then get the bat out of the area of which it will make contact with the ball. Lorenzen didn't. He made that bat make contact with that ball from a bunted position, that he intentionally placed himself into and did not get out of. The fact that the same situation with a ball that lands fair and ends fair would be a different outcome, without intent mattering, tells me that intent doesn't matter simply because it landed foul.
-
Cubs sweep these fools in a 4 game set. We cant get out of the 2nd inning before enduring a seeming loss. Difference in contender vs pretender status -
2018 Standings and Playoff Race Discussion
lcbj68c replied to Eye Black's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
I believe we'll know the fate of the NL Central by the night of Sept 12. I feel as if the Brewers MUST go 4-2 vs Chicago to have any shot. 3-3, means making up 6 losses over 30 games or so, just seems highly unlikely. Go 2-4 vs Chicago and put a nail in it. In my opinion, STL is the team I want to see start losing. They are way overachieving in the 2nd half and it's miserable. -
I don't find it prudent to judge potential player acquisition on one poor inning. Archer is a guy that has, what, 4 years of control remaining? The move for Archer could have given the Brewers a guy with TOR potential for 120 starts. Suddenly that's a terrible idea because of a 6-run inning in 1 start against us? The debate remains valid on the potential cost to acquire Archer, but yesterday's start did nothing to change my opinion one way or another. #ForestThroughTheTrees
-
A bloop single?? No, that was a solid single. Good hitting. Good approach, but that was it. Exit velocity was garbage, location on the barrel was mediocre. Nothing like Aguilar's hit from the previous inning.
-
No, Chacin loading the bases blew it. Coming in with the bases loaded is pretty much a recipe for disaster. If he gets three outs with only that single are you really blaming Jennings? This. Can't expect a guy to have 0% of inherited runners score. He gave up largely a bloop single the other way. I was angry last night for the 4 pitch walk, but tonight's outing was a B+ in my book.
-
We played them 5 games last time we met.
-
Cubs acquire Daniel Murphy from the Nationals
lcbj68c replied to JDBrewCrew's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
Seems like something somebody says when they get dumped while dating, to make themselves feel better. Chicago North has enough money to do whatever they want, so if their A and AA teams suck, it doesn't mean the Brewers will be winning anything at the MLB level. -
If? Haven't we seen this film before?
-
Same ol Same ol series finale. Same ol Same ol Knebel Same ol Same ol Brewers
-
Finally got to see Thames home run...sounds like the pyro guy ran out ammo to reload quickly enough.
-
Poor Yelich. Two outs in the same inning. LMAO
-
Ring the bell, he's done.
-
Pete and RePete went down to the lake...
-
This is great news. Assuming few means 3...that 4 for 9 means, 12 plate appearances between Cain and Yelich. If Cain and Yelich get 12 plate appearances between them, we win.
-
I'll never understand how you lose a game you lead 4-0 in the first inning.
-
Why does the national media always overlook us?
lcbj68c replied to TexasCheesehead's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
Money. The National Media has no obligation except to make money for it's employees and businesses. Larger media markets are dominated by the population they serve. Millions tuning in to SportsCenter, for example, living in Chicago, New York, Houston, Los Angeles, Boston want to see coverage on the AL East and NL West. The hundreds or maybe thousands watching in Milwaukee aren't going to dictate coverage for millions of others. I don't know why this bothers people to be honest. Much like political coverage, media corporations don't have an obligation (nor should they, in my opinion) to report or have commentary in a balanced manner. They have a responsibility to garner revenue through the most eyes and sell those most advertisements possible. -
Michael Trout - What would you give up?
lcbj68c replied to lcbj68c's topic in Transaction Rumors & Proposals
Again, the conversation I was looking for is not whether trading for Trout would be a good or bad idea, etc. I simply want to know what prospect(s) or current MLB assets it would likely take to complete a fair deal. -
Gotta have somebody play 2b...
-
Just curious what some folks value in prospects. What would you give up to acquire Michael Trout? Never mind his salary or the fact that he's not available. Just in pure talent, if the Angels were to have been selling in July of 2018? (they are not).
-
game time: 2:18 nice!
-
7 and 8 in the lineup is still below average. Wouldn't mind just throwing Schoop out there full time at SS. Arcia for defense only in late innings.
