06/09/2006 Cardinals (Mulder) @ Brewers (de la Rosa) 7:05 PM

[brewmann04]

sometimes Ned decision making can make you go HUH

[treego]

Quote:

---

I forgot how much I hate hearing a loud cheer (from the scads of visiting fans) when the Brewers lose in Miller Park.

---

 

Milwaukee is a home away from home for the Chicagos and St. Louis' and even Minnesota's because the Brewers have done nothing in terms of paying enough for a decent team around here for quite a long time. Milwaukeeans/Wisconsinites are not stupid enough to come out to a game in full force to watch us flail against a more handsomely paid team because their owners care about winning more than our owners do.

 

We are a minor league team (at the owner's discretion) catering to the big boys in the MLB because we pay peanuts compared to what the other teams pay, generally. .500 or bust is our motto ... by contrast, other teams want the playoffs/pennant (they aren't shy about shelling out the dough to do just that)! Lots of seats for winning organizations' fans in Milwaukee. We have better things to do than watch our overmatched guys help your team win another game at our (fans) expense.

[endaround]

Yeah, unlike the big spending Twins organization!

[Invader3K]

So, can we officially say the pitching is the problem with this team right now? I can't believe they blew a 6-0 lead so thoroughly last night.

[Team Canada]

...their owners care about winning more than our owners do. We are a minor league team (at the owner's discretion) catering to the big boys in the MLB because we pay peanuts compared to what the other teams pay, generally. .500 or bust is our motto

 

Stop living in the past.

[treego]

Quote:

---

Stop living in the past.

---

 

Our payroll is nowhere close to the perennial winners' payrolls. Check it out for yourself. Mark A. is doing little different than did the Seligs. He is a little more clever in marketing ... that's about it.

 

http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/salaries

[PeaveyFury]

You do realize that the payroll went up about 30 million after Mark A. took over, right?

[treego]

Quote:

---

Yeah, unlike the big spending Twins organization!

---

 

They spend more than we do ... and they don't have the fancy ballpark to bring in fans and all that jazz, either, that fans have foot the bill for through taxes, etc.

 

See here.

[treego]

Quote:

---

You do realize that the payroll went up about 30 million after Mark A. took over, right?

---

 

So, what? That's a drop in the bucket compared to teams that seriously desire to win. Did you look at the 2006 salaries by teams here, yet?

[PeaveyFury]

Did you look at the 2006 salaries by teams here, yet?

 

Yes I did, you've only referenced it three times in the last five minutes, so it's kind of hard to miss.

 

So, what? That's a drop in the bucket compared to teams that seriously desire to win.

 

Your claim was that Mark A. was doing things the same as the Seligs. Like I said, the payroll has gone up by about 30 million since he took over. That pretty much makes that point wrong.

 

Also, I'd rather spend 56 million and build a team the right way while being ranked low on the total payroll scale than spend a bunch of money on overpaid crap players and be ranked in the top 15.

[treego]

Anybody else completely nauseated by St. Louis fans being noisier than Milwaukee fans tonight? St. Louis is not exactly next door, either. If Mark A. cares, he needs to step up and get our payroll in the Cardinals range. He needs to initiate this whole thing. Milwaukee is fed up with having to initiate things around here. Put a winner on the field for a change. Pay up! Or get out of the MLB, period. Or change the MLB system so that cheap owners/smaller markets have a fair chance --- cheap owners will always hurt the team, that said, though.

[treego]

Quote:

---

Your claim was that Mark A. was doing things the same as the Seligs.

---

 

Actually, the Seligs had a payroll more in line with other teams' payrolls some years ago. Going from 28th to 25th spot in the MLB in terms of spending is not significant at all!

[JoeH33]

The Marlins won the World Series in 2003 with a $63M payroll, which is in the range we are now. If you'd like us to trade Rickie/Prince/Hardy/Hall for some Craig Counsell like vets to raise our payroll, fine we could try that, but we wouldn't win any games.

Quote:

---

If Mark A. cares, he needs to step up and get our payroll in the Cardinals range. He needs to initiate this whole thing. Milwaukee is fed up with having to initiate things around here. Put a winner on the field for a change. Pay up! Or get out of the MLB, period.

---

That Jose Hernandez sure worked out for us. Thats what happens when you spend money for the sake of spending money.

[treego]

Quote:

---

The Marlins won the World Series in 2003 with a $63M payroll, which is in the range we are now. If you'd like us to trade Rickie/Prince/Hardy/Hall for some Craig Counsell like vets to raise our payroll, fine we could try that, but we wouldn't win any games.

---

 

Come on .... get real ... the Marlins are not perennial winners. They have to have a fire sale once they taste success. Is that what you want? I want a perennial winner .... not a team that has to get lucky once in a while, then have a fire sale to reduce payroll to a meager sum.

 

I'll not dignify your Craig Counsell for Weeks/etc. reference ... that is not what I said at all. Bait and switch game.

[PeaveyFury]

Actually, the Seligs had a payroll more in line with other teams' payrolls some years ago. Going from 28th to 25th spot in the MLB in terms of spending is not significant at all!

 

So based on your argument, the only mark of a franchises' hope for success and the only way to rate an owner is based on where their payroll ranks amongst the others in the league.

 

Gotcha.

[PeaveyFury]

I'll not dignify your Craig Counsell for Weeks/etc. reference ... that is not what I said at all.

 

Why not? It'd raise the payroll, so it'd HAVE to make the team more successful according to your rationale, right?

[JoeH33]

Quote:

---

I'll not dignify your Craig Counsell for Weeks/etc. reference ... that is not what I said at all. Bait and switch game.

---

You have no idea what you're talking about. You want us to raise payroll and that's about the only way we could do it right now. Spare me that bull crap about not responding. Its a pathetic cop out.

[treego]

Quote:

---

That Jose Hernandez sure worked out for us. Thats what happens when you spend money for the sake of spending money.

---

 

Jose Hernandez is not a star ... spending money for the sake of spending money is not what I'm talking about ... you are mischaracterizing things, again. I'm talking about retaining guys who are achieving star status (i.e., Carlos Lee) AND then pursuing more stars in the off-season free agent market ... not looking to sell/trade guys like Carlos Lee because he's gonna' be pricey. Carlos Lee is a proven star hitter in the league. Jose Hernandez .... please ... don't accuse me of going along with stupid past moves.

[JoeH33]

Carlos Lee is not a star. Period.

[treego]

Raising the payroll is necessary to win in the MLB ... if you guys cannot see that, your heads are in the sand. The 2006 payroll by team listing is most telling!

 

Cards fans are having fun at our minor league team's expense again tonight .... Scott Rolen just clouts one out .... Cards fans having a great time .... Rolen is pretty cheap, I bet. Maybe, he would like to come to Milwaukee.

[PeaveyFury]

Jose Hernandez is not a star ... spending money for the sake of spending money is not what I'm talking about ... you are mischaracterizing things, again.

 

Ok, who exactly should the Brewers have spent money on last year that they could have signed?

 

I'm talking about retaining guys who are achieving star status (i.e., Carlos Lee)

 

Signing Carlos Lee would be spending money just to spend money, as Carlos is a pretty mediocre corner OF.

 

Carlos Lee is a proven star hitter in the league.

 

Sub 'proven star hitter' for 'proven .830 OPS corner OF' and you've got it.

 

then pursuing more stars in the off-season free agent market

 

Ok, then what 'stars' do you want us to pursue in this coming off-season market?

[treego]

Quote:

---

You have no idea what you're talking about. You want us to raise payroll and that's about the only way we could do it right now.

---

 

You raise payroll by signing stars on the free agent market ... just like the perennial winners do.

[PeaveyFury]

Raising the payroll is necessary to win in the MLB....The 2006 payroll by team listing is most telling!

 

But teams like the A's and Twins are/were able to win with payrolls that were in our range. Care to explain how the Reds with a payroll that is a whopping 3 million more than ours and ranked 22nd in MLB are winning the toughest division in baseball, and why the Cubs who are ranked 7th are sucking? And with the Angels spending all that money, surely they couldn't possibly finish last in their division like they currently are, right? Afterall, they've got the 3rd highest payroll.

[treego]

Quote:

---

But teams like the A's and Twins are/were able to win with payrolls that were in our range. Care to explain how the Reds with a payroll that is a whopping 3 million more than ours and ranked 22nd in MLB are winning the toughest division in baseball, and why the Cubs who are ranked 7th are sucking? And with the Angels spending all that money, surely they couldn't possibly finish last in their division like they currently are, right? Afterall, they've got the 3rd highest payroll.

---

 

Because temporary blips do occur. I can roll two dice and total 12 occasionally. It's not typical, though. Same way with low payroll teams. Surely, the team payroll listing displays that the better teams/perennial winners by and large have a more pricey payroll. This cannot be denied. The season is far from over (it's not even the halfway point). The Reds will cool off. The Angels will rise --- injuries have plagued the Cubs so that point is pretty moot .... throwing money around doesn't guarantee success, certainly ... it only enhances the likelihood of success. Not spending the necessary cash guarantees failure more often than not, also.

 

Would you rather Attanasio spend more or less on the Brewers team? Simple question ... we all know the answer. Spend more ... give us a better chance of being a winner ... duhhh .... http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[treego]

Quote:

---

Ok, then what 'stars' do you want us to pursue in this coming off-season market?

---

 

Who's available at the end of the season? I don't have a handy list of that right now. Surely, there will be guys on that list who could supplant some of our current roster and make the team better. If we have the will to get better, let's do it!

 

I can spend far less eating at McDonald's when eating out ... the quality just ain't that good, though.