crossface21

Bosch states that he had no contact with Braun and was only contacted for consultation. Now he'll say that he was supplying PED's to Braun? If that's the case, I'm sure the PA's lawyers are salivating at having a go at Bosch. He's already turning into a witness that can't get his stories straight. They'll light him up. How would MLB be able to justify that he's a reliable witness??? MLB is looking to make a point. They may not get the suspensions, but just by muttering the names of these players and PED's in the same sentence, they're going to win the public opinion.

If they bring Scooter up to just ride the pine and get a spot start every couple of weeks, I'll have lost all confidence in this Brewer regime. But, they wouldn't do that, would they????

If you watch behind home plate in a lot of the games, they have a guy with a radar gun. Miller Park has the radar guy in the same place, so do the Dodgers. Those are just the places I can think of off the top of my head. He's there for the network or the stadium.

This is purely hypothetical, just tossing ideas out because we can't talk about winning baseball. If the consensus is that the whole thing needs to be blown up and the organization needs to start from scratch, where do they begin and how blowed up do they need to do it? You have all the guys that are front and center that would be gone to get prospects-Hart, Ramirez, etc. But what kind of players do they really get you in return? If they really want to blow this up, and start from scratch for the long term health of the organization to where they can be realistically competitive 3-5 years down the line and replenish the farm system, do they trade Braun??? How big of a haul would that bring back? Obviously, you'd get some stud minor leaguers, but do you risk having guys like Segura, Gomez, Morris, Gennett, Schafer be the future offense of the franchise?? They would risk a mutiny by the fan base(me included)but should this be something that DM at least puts on the table for discussion(no matter how remote the possibility is of it happening?) As has been happening for the last 10 years, the price of pitching is only going up every year and teams like Milwaukee need to grow from within their own system. Braun would catch some pretty nice arms.

It only takes one team that thinks they are *just* that far away to making the playoffs to drive the price up on a player like Gallardo. During the season is when you trade pitching, the off-season is when you trade hitting. I'd say the Brewers could come away with a pretty nice package if they include Gallardo with Aoki/Hart/Ramirez because of the nature of the beast when teams get desperate for a veteran or decent starting pitcher at the trade deadline.

Having great averages is awesome because it means guys are getting on base, but the poor baserunning on this team and lack of timely hitting is wiping out a lot of chances.

He's improved very, very little. Still very boring, monotone, unintersting. It's to the point that when he's announcing, I tend to let my mind wander and do other things until Uecker is back on. We were lucky with Powell, he was awesom. I even liked Provus. I was pretty young when Hughes was around, but I always remember him getting excited for the other team at times, but still a good announcer and a good partner with Uecker. I shutter at the thought of Block being Uecker's successor.

Not sure why you feel the need to taunt me. Whatever floats your boat I guess... the truth is that rickie sucks. there are no more excuses for him. he's an awful baseball player plain and simple. a drunk baboon could do a better job. Comparing baboons ability to Weeks ability is offensive to baboons.

Rickie Weeks is starting today vs Arroyo. He is a career .170 hitter against Arroyo, and that's not just a small sample. He's 8-47. Gennett will never be called up.

Facing a guy just up from the minors. I fully expect 3-4 hits and a shutout. 2-3 of those hits will be meaningless hits from Rickie Weeks.

I do think he's right. The DH is coming, it's just a matter of when. If I had to lean one way I guess I like having no DH, but there's no way they are gonna get rid of the DH so lets get everyone playing by the same rules. In football, they don't make the NFC teams go 12 yards for a first down and in the AFC 10 yards. Why baseball has stayed with this format this long is stupid. At the very least, a couple years after they started playing Interleague, this should have been dealt with.

Not so fast... http://i47.tinypic.com/24xiaur.jpg I said YET.........

Nobody has literally caught on fire yet. So we got that going for us.

On the telecast today they said that if Hart was put on the 60-day DL it would be late May before he can return because there are different rules from the 15-ay and 60-day DL of when the time can be retroactive from.

I'd like to see your math on that. Because, it makes absolutely no sense to put a roof on stadiums that don't have rain problems to begin with. Let me turn it around, why are you playing favorites and punishing teams economically by forcing them to build roofs on stadiums that don't require them? Roofs cost hundreds of millions of dollars and should only be built where they're a benefit. And it's not a benefit to build a roof in California. And there's a cost to a roof. Let's say the A's, which is the only team in the next 30 years likely to be affected by this "rule", find a great spot in San Jose with a great view. A view that makes the stadium as aesthetically pleasing as the Giants stadium. San Jose averages less than 3 inches of rain a year during the baseball season.Why should they be forced to obstruct that view and damage the experience of fans for 80 games a year as opposed to perhaps one game a year where a roof would benefit? It doesn't take much of a cost benefit analysis to think that's a drain on revenue which impacts the profit of the team and the salary of the players. You make a rule, you make a rule that holds up to common sense and is an economic benefit. There's no economic benefit to put a roof on a stadium to keep out rain when you're in a climate that averages less than, say, six inches of rain during the baseball season. Otherwise, you're throwing away money for no gain. And, honestly, it's much too late to enact such a rule. The A's are the only team likely to build a new stadium in the next 20 years where a roof probably won't be built. The time to institute a rule to have any effect, would have been before the stadium building boom of the 90s and 00s, not now when it won't make a difference. What's more, since stadiums are almost always a private / public partnership, it's probably an unenforceable rule. I'd love to see MLB's reasoning for telling California what they can or can't build. Robert I don't need to do any math. If you can't see what a huge plus the roof at Miller Park has been and continues to be, and extrapolate from there the advantages of adding a roof to other stadiums, there's nothing I can do to change that. And MLB has been telling California what they can and cannot build for many, many years now. They're called Universal Ground Rules and they apply to baseball clubs in California as well as they apply to baseball clubs in every other state. Hence, the "Universal" designation. California just isn't that special, no matter how much you seem to want it to be. If you get to be commissioner, fine, no roofs in California. If I get to be commissioner, they'll have roofs in California or they'll have no MLB. Period. That's why the thread is entitled "What if they made you Commissioner?" as opposed to "What if they made you Commissioner, but gave RobertR final approval over all of your decisions?" Comparing Milwaukee weather to California weather? Really? There's a reason Milwaukee NEEDS to have a roof. There's NO reason the parks in California need roofs. Wasn't there a span of about 5 years that the Dodgers had ONE rainout? The cost doesn't make sense. So then you won't have MLB in California if they don't have a roof on their stadium? You'd be commissioner for about an hour. I understand the thread is "What would YOU do if you were commissioner?" But come on, really?

Braun statement: http://brewersbeat.mlblogs.com/2013/02/05/braun-statement-2/

Rumor has it that Hamilton's asking price is 7 years for $175 million. Good luck with that, Josh. http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/eye-on-baseball/20795761/report-josh-hamilton-wants-7-years-175-million

I wonder if back on August 17th, RR got all the players together in the clubhouse and gave him the Lou Brown speech that he figures it's gonna 32 more wins to win this thing. Who would they be undressing with each victory????? I kept thinking Wendy Selig as a joke, but I don't think they would have wanted to win anymore games. And then I started thinking about it myself and I gave myself nightmares.

They just said that if projections are correct, they are going to try and start the game around 9:30.

I don't know what they will spend but I think they will try to get Marcum on a one year deal. One year at $10m wouldn't bother me much. A multi-year deal at $10m+/year would. Totally agree on both.

Funny, I was under the impression Fiers and Estrada of that group would be shut down before the end of the season as will Rogers and a few other young guys. Yeah, ya got me on that one with Fiers. Thought about that this morning. However, I haven't heard anything about Estrada being shut down.

I think at this point winning isn't going to impact attendance much this year. The damage is already done on this year's attendance. If they are good next year, what happens between now and the end of the season will not have a huge impact on attendance. If they win next year, the attendance will pick up. The payroll was going to drop next year regardless. Because of the market size our team relies on the draft and will continue to rely on the draft. Wanting a better draft pick is wanting our team to be better in the future. Again, who would be pitching for us even if we did make the playoffs? I don't see how making the game with a 50% chance of making the real playoffs would be good for us at all. I don't think the small boost in attendance this year and next would offset the better draft pick. Even with an apparently poor draft. Who would be pitching for us? If they make it, the same guys that made the run the get us to the playoffs. Gallardo-Fiers-Estrada-Marcum in this case. I understand the market Milwaukee is in and needing to have good drafts, but constantly drafting early in the round for the the future gets old. The Brewers were drafting for the future for 25-30 years before anything happened. If you have a chance to make the playoffs or make a run at it, why wouldn't you want to cheer for that?

The Brewers had NO choice but to trade Grienke. I'll take the playoffs over a draft position anytime. Unless you're absolutely terrible, wanting a better draft pick, to me that's the same mentality that it's good to just keep treading water every year and be happy to have a winning record with 85 or 86 wins.

I had never believed in Estrada as a starter, always waiting for the wheels to fall off. However, he's making a believer out of me with how he's held up over pretty much the entire course of the season. I think he would definitely be good in the rotation next year as the 4 or 5.

I think the way it works is that the O's will pay him the pro-rated minimum salary. The Brewers are on the hook for the rest of it.