Mr. Hart

[markedman5]

You are really going to compare Hart to Prince and CC? Really?

 

 

Hart begged in the media for an extension offer right before the trade deadline 2 years ago. As soon as he got it he signed it.....it took all of a week or 2 IIRC.

 

Prince was offered a big contract and turned it down....said he liked playing here but never said he wouldn't take top dollar and would accept a 2 year extension. He also had Boros as his agent.

 

CC said he loved it here and would be "open to staying" but he never made staying here a priority and certainly never asked for an extension while he was still under contract. He sure didn't say "I don't need every last dollar" in the media no less like Corey just did.

 

If you can't see the difference you just don't want to see it. Now if the brewers low ball him he might not take it but his meaning is clear. Let's talk and see if we can find some common ground....I love Milwaukee and if you give me a reasonable offer I'll sign it.

[monty57]

You are really going to compare Hart to Prince and CC? Really?

 

 

Hart begged in the media for an extension offer right before the trade deadline 2 years ago. As soon as he got it he signed it.....it took all of a week or 2 IIRC.

 

Prince was offered a big contract and turned it down....said he liked playing here but never said he wouldn't take top dollar and would accept a 2 year extension. He also had Boros as his agent.

 

CC said he loved it here and would be "open to staying" but he never made staying here a priority and certainly never asked for an extension while he was still under contract. He sure didn't say "I don't need every last dollar" in the media no less like Corey just did.

 

If you can't see the difference you just don't want to see it. Now if the brewers low ball him he might not take it but his meaning is clear. Let's talk and see if we can find some common ground....I love Milwaukee and if you give me a reasonable offer I'll sign it.

 

Sure, but there are millions of people who have said they love their job/employer, but still lost their job for whatever reason.

 

It is highly doubtful that Hart would take a pay cut to stay, so he would be paid at least $10.333MM/year while he will be 32, 33 and maybe 34. It is likely that he would get a pay raise, so probably at least $11MM/year and more likely $12-15MM/year.

 

Meanwhile, we have Gamel who is in the majors now, and Morris who will be in the majors in a year or two. They're both due around $500k, so they would make somewhere around 3% what Hart would make without the risk of a guaranteed contract. We could also trade Hart for more guys who could be good players playing for around $500,000 a year and be under Brewers' team control for six seasons. The guys who look really good could be extended to "Lucroy-type" deals, giving us around eight seasons of team control.

 

I like Hart, and it is heartwarming to have someone who really likes to play for your team. However, this is a business, and Melvin needs to consider what is in the best interest of the franchise. If he doesn't think Gamel & Morris can cut it, then extending Hart may make sense. If he thinks they can, then he should trade Corey for young guys who will be Brewers for a long time.

 

I won't feel too bad for Hart. Regardless of who he plays for next season, unless he gets hurt he will get a monster deal from someone.

[slappzilla]

You are really going to compare Hart to Prince and CC? Really?

 

 

Hart begged in the media for an extension offer right before the trade deadline 2 years ago. As soon as he got it he signed it.....it took all of a week or 2 IIRC.

 

Prince was offered a big contract and turned it down....said he liked playing here but never said he wouldn't take top dollar and would accept a 2 year extension. He also had Boros as his agent.

 

CC said he loved it here and would be "open to staying" but he never made staying here a priority and certainly never asked for an extension while he was still under contract. He sure didn't say "I don't need every last dollar" in the media no less like Corey just did.

 

If you can't see the difference you just don't want to see it. Now if the brewers low ball him he might not take it but his meaning is clear. Let's talk and see if we can find some common ground....I love Milwaukee and if you give me a reasonable offer I'll sign it.

There's no difference, sorry.

 

I'm not going to be naive to the fact.

 

Again, if he signs on the cheap, awesome, I will love it, but to expect him to or to assume him to because of his PR rants seems more wishful thinking.

 

Braun did it, and it honestly shocked me, so it's not like it's never happened before, but I just don't see Hart turning down millions of dollars to stay in Milwaukee. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not going to think different because Hart is following the leads of other big name FA's that said they liked Milwaukee and would like to stay here.

[markedman5]

So there is no difference between a guy who says he would be open to signing a 2 year extension and somebody who turns down a bigger money 8 year deal?

 

"Braun did it, and it honestly shocked me, so it's not like it's never happened before, but I just don't see Hart turning down millions of dollars to stay in Milwaukee."

 

Hart already did it when he begged for his last extension. He was set to become a free agent in 3 months and asked the Brewers to make him an offer because he wanted to stay. Prince was "willing to stay" if we gave him the best offer(which he knew was impossible). Big difference there.

 

Corey goes out of his way to say he doesn't need every last dollar and although he would like to stay his whole career in Milwaukee 2 years would be ok too.

 

Did Prince ever say anything remotely similar to that? Prince only talked about his contract when asked. He was always diplomatic but never went out of his way to tell everyone who would listen how much he loved Milwaukee. His standard response was "yeah it's cool here.......Maybe we can work it out....we'll see".

 

 

ps. I'm not saying he won't or shouldn't be traded. MA and DM have to decide what's best for the Brewers. All I'm saying is it's refreshing to see a guy who does in fact show loyalty to an organization and a city.

[monty57]

I agree with you markedman5. I just hope the Brewers make their decision based solely on the business side of things, and not the emotional side. It sounds rough to say that, but I'll feel differently as soon as I start seeing players with guaranteed contracts saying "I'm not earning the contract, so you don't need to pay me." The rules are set (and I agree with guaranteed contracts), so the Brewers have to work within those rules to do what's best for the franchise, including trading expensive guys when you can pay someone $400-500k/year to do the same job.

 

Now, Melvin may decide that extending Hart makes the most business sense, but I don't see how unless he really thinks that neither Gamel nor Morris will cut it as a major league first baseman.

[markedman5]

"I'll feel differently as soon as I start seeing players with guaranteed contracts saying "I'm not earning the contract, so you don't need to pay me."

 

You know it's interesting that you should bring that up. IIRC the last guy to do that was Lyman Bostock I believe. He signed a huge contract at the time and had a bad year. Told the owner that he didn't earn it and they should cut his pay.

At least thats how I recall it......I think the owner was Gene Autry?

 

http://sabr.org/bioproj/person/9bb77e84

[HiAndTight]

I think both in reality are applicable. But if you traded Aram, Weeks, Hart, K-Rod,Marcum and Greinke, and "anyone else of value," that's a firesale, despite the fact it isn't due to financial reasons.

 

And these players where all players that TC07 was advocating trading if we could get players in return.

What does TC07 have to do with a post by monty?

 

 

I thought it was self explanatory. He was the one who initially argued that it wasn't a fire sale if we made the aforementioned moves, which moved me to argue that it would in fact be a fire sale.

 

So it was a discussion about what does and doesn't register as a fire sale, and since it was TC07 I was debating the definition of a firesale with, I don't see how you don't get how he'd play into it.

 

Go ahead though, throw out an opinion rather than nitpicking a pretty obvious post. Would that in your opinion, trading away virtually any viable trade options, motivated by money OR a rebuilding process constitute a fire sale? I think that's a lot more important and pertinent to the discussion than wondering why I'd mention the person I was initially discussing this with and who himself says that he's repeatedly said it WOULDN'T be a fire sale.

[Raw Biz]

HiAndTight, I think you are just confrontational for the point of being confrontational. You continue to call out people in posts that have virtually nothing to do with them. You respond to someone's post and then add in somebody else's name. Or you respond to posts that are weeks/months old, using hindsight to better your argument. I've seen this done by you in multiple threads but I don't know exactly what they are off-hand.

 

I'm also still waiting for your apology toward me. I've called you out numerous times about how you have attributed other peoples quotes to me and brought me into conversations that had nothing to do with me. Usually you will just disappear from posting for about a week and then continue to do the same thing to other posters. We like to have civil discussions here but it seems that if someone doesn't agree with you, they are automatically wrong and you attack them. I also know I'm not the only one who feels this way.

 

So if you could just try to be a little more cognizant of what you're writing and how it might be perceived, I think we all would appreciate it.

[HiAndTight]

Hey, if he signs on the cheap that's awesome.

 

Usually the $$$ wins though. I don't have to go through the lists of other guys who said they wanted to stay in Milwaukee.

 

No, but if you want to dismiss this, you DO need to go through a list of players who have gone so far out of their way to make it public that they'd take a under market contract for a shorter period of time(two years? If he has another good year next year, 30 HR's, .270/.340-ish, he'd get 4-5 years at 60 or so million) and THEN talks about how getting every last dollar isn't important.

 

 

You take one line about how he wants to stay in Milwaukee and then you say, "pftt, others have said the same as well," totally ignoring the rest of the...really over the top stuff he says about staying here. If anyone's EVERY sounded sincere about staying here, it's Hart. He's come out and said it only has to be two years and he's not looking for every last dollar, AND that he wants to be one of the rare guys to stay in Milwaukee.

 

It's almost like this incessant need to take everything and try and make it as negative as possible. You are still on record as saying we'll cut payroll nearly 30 million next year, right? Even with another 30 million coming into our revenue stream(at the very least)?

CC, Prince, and Greinke all said it, but they didn't sound as sincere as Hart (according to you) so they don't count. Ok.

 

You can buy into the "really over the top stuff he says about staying here" all you want. I'm just going to stick with the trend and base my opinion off that.

 

If Hart actually signs for a discount, then the sincerity is indeed legit, and it will be great for the Brewers. The track record of guys saying they want to stay put, and hinting at taking a home town discount in order to stay put - who actually do so, is few and far between. Tough to treat Hart any different.

If rewarding him is paying him more than he's worth or even market-value, I'd pass. However, if he would take a discount, I might consider it. I just don't think it's smart to spend a lot on players past 30, especially when they could be blocking younger, cheaper players.

I agree with this. If he actually does sign for a discount, I'm all about keeping Hart aboard, but even at market value (because of how jacked up the market is) I think the Brewers should pass on him (or more/less deal him) because of what they have in waiting.

 

 

 

ACTUALLY, not a single one of the players in the first bolded part EVER went to management and requested that they NOT be traded and then signed a below market contract. Remember, Hart signed his deal shortly before Werth, a similar player signed a contract for over 120 million dollars.

 

So that may be the worst comparision I've ever heard.

 

Greinke when trade talks where going down didn't go to management and say, "I don't want to be traded, I'll sign for below market."

 

I forget, but maybe Prince did that. We all know with his agent it's possible HE approached the Brewers about a two year extension months away from Free Agency and said it wasn't important to break the bank.

 

Sabathia also NEVER said anything remotely true.

 

All you're doing is taking players who said they liked playing here and where "open," to staying if they where paid top dollar when they hit free agency as opposed to coming to the team during trade rumors and not only asked NOT to be traded but asked for a two year extension AFTER doing the same thing a couple years ago when he signed for well below market value.

 

So again, you're just flat out making things up when you try and claim that Greinke, CC OR Prince said anything even remotely similar to what Corey Hart did.

 

 

Frankly, if you're talking about a two year extension and one in which Hart says he doesn't need every last dollar, I think it'd be hard to overpay him. And we can stop with the "this player would make 3 pct of this player," type of argument. Where does that leave us? Without any players making 10-20 million dollars?

 

There is a reason Hunter Morris isn't a top 100 prospect and Corey Hart is a multiple time all-star. So to just say, "meh, we can replace him for cheaper..." C'mon. I've never been a huge Hart fan, but a .270/.340 25-30 HR a year hitter who helps out your IF defense like Hart does and has(which has been just incredible this year) comes out and says what he has, and you just list other FA's who've left and make no logical attempt to distinguish between the vastly differences.

 

 

 

Edit-For the record, I wouldn't be on board with giving him 2 years at 15 million per, but 2 additional years for 11-12 would be fine by me. And please don't use Gamel as a reason not to after you've already declared him a bust. Be overtly negative if you must, but at least do so consistently.

[slappzilla]

That's nice how much you buy into what Hart said.

 

It will be cool if you're right and he signs on the cheap.

 

Won't be logical at all, and it won't follow any common pattern pertaining to the topic, but it be cool.

[monty57]

And we can stop with the "this player would make 3 pct of this player," type of argument.

 

No. I will never stop comparing relative value. Both production and finances have to be considered. When one player is making $12-15MM per year guaranteed for multiple years and his replacement will play for $400,000 with no guarantees, the prior player needs to be much, much better to justify his salary.

 

Whatever the business, whatever the conditions, money matters. Risking spending it has to be a justifiable risk. Maybe guaranteeing Hart eight figures for the next three years would be justifiable risk. If you took the time to read my post (the same one with the 3% quote you noted), you will note that I said:

 

Meanwhile, we have Gamel who is in the majors now, and Morris who will be in the majors in a year or two. They're both due around $500k, so they would make somewhere around 3% what Hart would make without the risk of a guaranteed contract. We could also trade Hart for more guys who could be good players playing for around $500,000 a year and be under Brewers' team control for six seasons. The guys who look really good could be extended to "Lucroy-type" deals, giving us around eight seasons of team control.

 

I like Hart, and it is heartwarming to have someone who really likes to play for your team. However, this is a business, and Melvin needs to consider what is in the best interest of the franchise. If he doesn't think Gamel & Morris can cut it, then extending Hart may make sense. If he thinks they can, then he should trade Corey for young guys who will be Brewers for a long time.

 

In a follow-up post, I said:

 

Melvin may decide that extending Hart makes the most business sense, but I don't see how unless he really thinks that neither Gamel nor Morris will cut it as a major league first baseman.

 

So, to your There is a reason Hunter Morris isn't a top 100 prospect and Corey Hart is a multiple time all-star. So to just say, "meh, we can replace him for cheaper..." C'mon. I've never been a huge Hart fan, but a .270/.340 25-30 HR a year hitter who helps out your IF defense like Hart does and has(which has been just incredible this year) comes out and says what he has, and you just list other FA's who've left and make no logical attempt to distinguish between the vastly differences.

 

I would reply that (A) I never listed other free agents, that was Slapzilla, proving Raw Biz's point that you attribute quotes to the wrong poster (B) I acknowledged that Melvin may not think Gamel and Morris are MLB-caliber players. If he does not think they are, he should extend Hart. If he thinks they are, they should trade Hart.

 

I don't think you're really arguing with me or Slapzilla or Raw Biz or anyone. I think you're combining multiple posters' thoughts into a strawman and arguing with that.

[jerichoholicninja]

"I'll feel differently as soon as I start seeing players with guaranteed contracts saying "I'm not earning the contract, so you don't need to pay me."

 

You know it's interesting that you should bring that up. IIRC the last guy to do that was Lyman Bostock I believe. He signed a huge contract at the time and had a bad year. Told the owner that he didn't earn it and they should cut his pay.

At least thats how I recall it......I think the owner was Gene Autry?

 

http://sabr.org/bioproj/person/9bb77e84

 

I believe Gil Meche retired because he didn't think he was earning his contract.

[endaround]

As a 1B Hart makes a really fine RFer. If Hart isn't being moved back to RF he should be traded.

[TheCrew07]

I'm not sure what's been said about me or what I think as I've had that poster on ignore for months.

 

However, just to be clear and in a succinct manner as possible:

 

I do not favor trading everyone, I've never been in favor of firesale, in fact I'm fiercely opposed to team management concepts that make a firesale necessary. This is why I think a continual youth movement is necessary and the best way to ensure the team remains competitive.

 

I am not in favor signing any player into their mid 30s. I can grudgingly get on board with exceptions for special talent like Braun, but for the most part I'm looking to control a player through his age 30-32 (depending on when he breaks in) season and move on. I want a player only through his peak performance years and then I'm willing to let someone else pay him to decline. Of course the risk of injury also goes up significantly and becomes exponential into the mid 30s, and I'm into minimizing the potential for dead money on the payroll. So the double whammy of declining performance and greater injury risk is enough for me to be willing to move on.

 

As far as trading Hart, if you aren't going to compete for anything with him and he's only signed for 1 more year, why not recycle fresh talent back into the system? I'm not saying the Brewers won't be able to compete in 2013 but the season will hinge largely on young pitching and young players are impossible to predict from a performance standpoint. If the Brewers aren't sure what kind of performance they are going to get out of the pitching, why not move him? For example what would it matter if we win 79 games instead of 76? If a good deal came along I'd personally part with Hart, but it has to be a the right kind of deal.

 

I have a list of untouchable players which is very short (Lucroy, Braun, and Gallardo) but I'll trade anyone else, especially an overvalued closer/relief pitcher if the price is right. If not I'm happy to retain the talent and move forward in a different manner.

 

A player's production does not equal his "value". A player's ultimate value is his production and service time vs his injury risk and cost. For example, a pre arby 4 WAR player is much more valuable than 32 year old 4 WAR player in the last year of his contract. Ultimately in baseball the most valuable commodities are pre arby players who are performing at an elite level.

 

As such I favor signing core players to early contracts which buy them out (with option years) through their age 30-32 seasons, then I'm happy recycling fresh talent back. I've loved James Shields' contract since 2008 (Gallardo's is similar), that's my benchmark for pitchers, and I liked Longoria's contract for position players (Braun's original contract was similar). Anyone who won't sign that kind of contract or who's just an average to above average player, ride out their 6-7 years and say goodbye. My attachment is to the franchise and not to any particular player.

 

I'm value orientated, I want to buy wins far below market rate and I want to build a deep and productive farm system which should enable the MLB team to remain competitive and relevant for a very long time.

[markedman5]

As a 1B Hart makes a really fine RFer. If Hart isn't being moved back to RF he should be traded.

 

Harts OPS numbers put him in the top 10 of all first basemen in 2012. Quite a few guys ahead of him(and some behind him) are making a lot more money.

 

Seems like he is fine there to me.

[danzig6767]

If i was Melvin, my stance on Hart would be that if he truly would be accepting of signing a 2-3 year extension, i'd negotiate numbers with him on that this offseason. Maybe i'd go a 4th year based on Corey meeting certain metrics which vested that 4th year.

 

If though he wanted 4 or 5 years fully guaranteed at around say 13-14 million per, i'd pass and then decide whether to trade him before the season based entirely on what the offers were. If the offers were only really mediocre, i'd just keep him and see how the season panned out prior to the trade deadline.

[HiAndTight]

HiAndTight, I think you are just confrontational for the point of being confrontational. You continue to call out people in posts that have virtually nothing to do with them. You respond to someone's post and then add in somebody else's name. Or you respond to posts that are weeks/months old, using hindsight to better your argument. I've seen this done by you in multiple threads but I don't know exactly what they are off-hand.

 

I'm also still waiting for your apology toward me. I've called you out numerous times about how you have attributed other peoples quotes to me and brought me into conversations that had nothing to do with me. Usually you will just disappear from posting for about a week and then continue to do the same thing to other posters. We like to have civil discussions here but it seems that if someone doesn't agree with you, they are automatically wrong and you attack them. I also know I'm not the only one who feels this way.

 

So if you could just try to be a little more cognizant of what you're writing and how it might be perceived, I think we all would appreciate it.

 

 

You'll be awaiting such an apology for quite some time as I haven't got a clue what you're talking about.

There was nothing confrontational for the point of being confrontational, and I fail to see how I'm using hindsight in anyway at all in this post.

 

 

You might want to be cognizant of how you generalize someone's posting and consistently jump into conversations in which you're not really a part of. I would consider that confrontational for the sake of being confrontational. What's more, if you're truly trying to do "good," for the board rather than just trying once again to "put me in my place", there's a nice little private message icon up there.

 

 

What's more, "civil," conversations, don't usually entail, "I've called you out several times," nor do they pretend they're speaking for the entire board. Those tend to be more hypocritical conversations.

 

Nor do "civil," conversations usually entail someone consistently following me around the message board from link to link picking these petty, frankly pathetic little arguments.

 

You want to talk about confrontational for the sake of being confrontational?

[HiAndTight]

If i was Melvin, my stance on Hart would be that if he truly would be accepting of signing a 2-3 year extension, i'd negotiate numbers with him on that this offseason. Maybe i'd go a 4th year based on Corey meeting certain metrics which vested that 4th year.

 

If though he wanted 4 or 5 years fully guaranteed at around say 13-14 million per, i'd pass and then decide whether to trade him before the season based entirely on what the offers were. If the offers were only really mediocre, i'd just keep him and see how the season panned out prior to the trade deadline.

 

 

I've never been a big Hart fan, and have expected him to fall off the last several years, but he continues to put up big numbers. But I wouldn't even begin to discuss 4-5 year deals at 13-14 million per year.

 

He put it out there that he'd be open to a 2 year deal, talking about how that'd be 10 years with the same organization. I'd look at a 2 year maybe 24 million dollar extension and a vesting option for a 3rd year. But I don't think 14 million or 5 years should even be discussed.

 

Though he has really looked incredibly comfortable at 1st base this year given the time he had to get re-acclimated to the position.

[HiAndTight]

I'm not sure what's been said about me or what I think as I've had that poster on ignore for months.

 

However, just to be clear and in a succinct manner as possible:

I do not favor trading everyone, I've never been in favor of firesale, in fact I'm fiercely opposed to team management concepts that make a firesale necessary. This is why I think a continual youth movement is necessary and the best way to ensure the team remains competitive.

 

I am not in favor signing any player into their mid 30s. I can grudgingly get on board with exceptions for special talent like Braun, but for the most part I'm looking to control a player through his age 30-32 (depending on when he breaks in) season and move on. I want a player only through his peak performance years and then I'm willing to let someone else pay him to decline. Of course the risk of injury also goes up significantly and becomes exponential into the mid 30s, and I'm into minimizing the potential for dead money on the payroll. So the double whammy of declining performance and greater injury risk is enough for me to be willing to move on.

As far as trading Hart, if you aren't going to compete for anything with him and he's only signed for 1 more year, why not recycle fresh talent back into the system? I'm not saying the Brewers won't be able to compete in 2013 but the season will hinge largely on young pitching and young players are impossible to predict from a performance standpoint. If the Brewers aren't sure what kind of performance they are going to get out of the pitching, why not move him? For example what would it matter if we win 79 games instead of 76? If a good deal came along I'd personally part with Hart, but it has to be a the right kind of deal.

I have a list of untouchable players which is very short (Lucroy, Braun, and Gallardo) but I'll trade anyone else, especially an overvalued closer/relief pitcher if the price is right. If not I'm happy to retain the talent and move forward in a different manner.

 

A player's production does not equal his "value". A player's ultimate value is his production and service time vs his injury risk and cost. For example, a pre arby 4 WAR player is much more valuable than 32 year old 4 WAR player in the last year of his contract. Ultimately in baseball the most valuable commodities are pre arby players who are performing at an elite level.

 

As such I favor signing core players to early contracts which buy them out (with option years) through their age 30-32 seasons, then I'm happy recycling fresh talent back. I've loved James Shields' contract since 2008 (Gallardo's is similar), that's my benchmark for pitchers, and I liked Longoria's contract for position players (Braun's original contract was similar). Anyone who won't sign that kind of contract or who's just an average to above average player, ride out their 6-7 years and say goodbye. My attachment is to the franchise and not to any particular player.

 

I'm value orientated, I want to buy wins far below market rate and I want to build a deep and productive farm system which should enable the MLB team to remain competitive and relevant for a very long time.

 

 

Ok, so to me that reads a firesale. It's really semantics. You don't agree with firesales, but more importantly you don't agree with teams putting themselves in position for firesales. But you'd trade Hart and everyone else except a handful of players who are in their mid 20's.

 

 

However your utopian way of building a team just isn't realistic. Obviously on a spreadsheet, or even if you're building a team over the long term a 4 WAR player at 32 doesn't have the same value as a 4 WAR player at 26. However your whole recycling in new talent only works if you have the talent to recycle in. And beyond that, I can't recall a WS team in my life that didn't have some players who where past the years you would keep a player(save for the rare situation) of 30-32.

 

Yes, it would be great if we could be the Rays and have a constant flow of young talent coming through our system, not ever have to pay guys like Corey Hart and trade them at this stage and then just seamlessly replace them players who are simply younger without a drop off in talent all while building an elite minor league system.

 

But your criticism of Melvin because he hasn't been able to meet your expectations by building an elite and deep farm system while continuing to replace talent and never signing(ideally not signing) players in their mid 30's to contracts except for the rare case means you're hitting on an exceptionally high number of draft picks and again, there are two teams in baseball that even come close to meeting what I think is an unfairly high bar, the Rangers(who most certainly sign players to large contracts after their pre arby and arbitration years are up) and the Rays who I'm almost certain WOULD if they have another 50 million in their payroll.

 

As for "that poster that you've had on ignore, yet responded to," I recall you getting upset because you bemoaned Melvin's terrible track record for in-season trades and we argued over what player, what move, what he had done that had come back and proven to be a bad move for us. You keep harping on what Melvin would do, and how he wouldn't sell and how bad his track record is and got upset with me for asking each time what trade did he make that was bad?

 

 

I think exceptions can get a little bit over the top. It's not realistic in my opinion to take a 100 loss team, build it into a team that eventually makes the playoffs twice in a 4 year span and all the while maintains one of the elite farm systems in the game all while letting players go ALMOST regardless(you did say except for the rare exception citing Braun) when they hit 30-32.

 

The problem with that is you're going to perpetually have a team that's inexperianced and if you're lucky enough to replace them somehow with equal players making 500K rather than ever paying for a good but not great player and you're going to have to deal with the issues that come along with that, ie, the 2008 season when it seemed the entire team tensed up during Sept and most our RH'ers where swinging at sliders 3 feet outside.

[Raw Biz]

HiAndTight, I think you are just confrontational for the point of being confrontational. You continue to call out people in posts that have virtually nothing to do with them. You respond to someone's post and then add in somebody else's name. Or you respond to posts that are weeks/months old, using hindsight to better your argument. I've seen this done by you in multiple threads but I don't know exactly what they are off-hand.

 

I'm also still waiting for your apology toward me. I've called you out numerous times about how you have attributed other peoples quotes to me and brought me into conversations that had nothing to do with me. Usually you will just disappear from posting for about a week and then continue to do the same thing to other posters. We like to have civil discussions here but it seems that if someone doesn't agree with you, they are automatically wrong and you attack them. I also know I'm not the only one who feels this way.

 

So if you could just try to be a little more cognizant of what you're writing and how it might be perceived, I think we all would appreciate it.

 

 

You'll be awaiting such an apology for quite some time as I haven't got a clue what you're talking about.

There was nothing confrontational for the point of being confrontational, and I fail to see how I'm using hindsight in anyway at all in this post.

 

 

You might want to be cognizant of how you generalize someone's posting and consistently jump into conversations in which you're not really a part of. I would consider that confrontational for the sake of being confrontational. What's more, if you're truly trying to do "good," for the board rather than just trying once again to "put me in my place", there's a nice little private message icon up there.

 

 

What's more, "civil," conversations, don't usually entail, "I've called you out several times," nor do they pretend they're speaking for the entire board. Those tend to be more hypocritical conversations.

 

Nor do "civil," conversations usually entail someone consistently following me around the message board from link to link picking these petty, frankly pathetic little arguments.

 

You want to talk about confrontational for the sake of being confrontational?

 

I'm not following you around. I simply read every thread and your posts are noticeable because of how long they are and frankly, how they sound. I can usually tell a post of yours simply by the tone. Like I said, if someone doesn't agree with you, you question how they can possibly think the way they do (like you just did in the Dodgers Rumor thread).

 

Also, another poster flat came out and said he's had you on ignore for months so I'm not the only one who feels this way. Here's one postwhere you attributed stuff to me that I never said and brought my name into a discussion that I wasn't even a part of. Here's another one where you asked to borrow my crystal ball. That goes to my confrontational point.

 

Like I said, it's your tone and style of writing. You putting things in "quotes" and CAPS to stress something comes off as condescending. Since I'm not working much (and love the Brewers), I'm on this board multiple times throughout the day. That doesn't mean I'm stalking you, it just means I can tell who a poster is almost by their writing style/thoughts.

 

Maybe you don't read every post on here so you've missed a few of mine where I've asked you about this. So I'm saying it again. Almost every one of your posts is extremely long and repetitive. And often confrontational/condescending.

 

I don't think this is being petty, I think its more towards keeping this board one of the best message boards out there. We do that by self-policing. Again, not sure if you've read the etiquette thread but there is a lot of useful stuff on there that would probably apply to you. Namely, repetitiveness, responding to multiple messages in a row, and the condescending talk. Sure, I probably should've PMed you but at this point, its probably a little late for that.

[ilikewisco]

Count me in on a 2-3 year extension around 12-13 million per. You could have Gamel at 1b and Aoki in CF for 3/5th of the time, and Gomez in center and Hart at 1b the other. If all three of Gamel, Aoki, and Gomez play their way into more pt, look to trade one. If one of the three can't hack it next year you are still looking fine. It seems pretty obvious Hart wants to stay, and if he takes a deal like above, I'm doing it if I'm Melvin. Morris is still a year away at least, so this gives you some time to see if he can keep it up. Though this would mean Davis, Gindl, and to a lesser extent Schafer will not have anywhere to play in Milwaukee.

[slappzilla]

With the news posted today (or last night?) about Greinke saying he misses Milwaukee and more news about Hart saying he wants to stay, I am actually coming around (just a bit, not alot, settle down) on the possibility that maybe one or both sign with the Brewers on the cheap.

 

I'm still sticking with my guns on the whole "everyone says they like it here and want to come back but go after the $$$ when it comes down to it" mindset, but as more comes out about these guys supposedly really wanting to stay in Milwaukee, it's tough not to buy into it just a little. I maybe breaking my own rule and being naive though. Probably am.

[Raw Biz]

I wouldn't want to give Hart any more than $10 mil per year for 2 years. I think people are focusing too much on the production you might lose from him versus the value he could bring back in a trade. I think he could bring back a top 100 prospect. If you add a prospect like that and put Gamel back at 1B, I think that and the cost savings are worth more than just keeping Hart for another year (or 2-3 at 14/15 per).

[danzig6767]

With the news posted today (or last night?) about Greinke saying he misses Milwaukee and more news about Hart saying he wants to stay, I am actually coming around (just a bit, not alot, settle down) on the possibility that maybe one or both sign with the Brewers on the cheap.

 

I'm still sticking with my guns on the whole "everyone says they like it here and want to come back but go after the $$$ when it comes down to it" mindset, but as more comes out about these guys supposedly really wanting to stay in Milwaukee, it's tough not to buy into it just a little. I maybe breaking my own rule and being naive though. Probably am.

 

Most athletes are lying when they say it's mainly not just about the money for them when it comes to a new contract. That said, most isn't all professional athletes.

 

For a certain number of athletes though, especially those one who are married with kids, staying in a place they are very comfortable with does trump money so long as the money would still leave them ridiculously wealthy.

 

I don't claim to know Corey Hart, but i do know that he has a wife and i believe three kids. Maybe as a family unit they'd really prefer to stay in Milwaukee so long as they feel the Brewers were to give Hart a reasonable extension. So while most athletes do end up just taking the most money out there, i do also think there is a certain number of athletes who will take less to simply stay in a place that they and their family feels very comfortable being.

 

TJ Lang of the Packers just signed an extension even though he was due to be a free agent after the season. When interviewed about the new contract, he stated clearly that staying in Green Bay was priority number one because he was so comfortable playing there and that even if he may have gotten more cash in free agency, it wasn't worth the unknown of potentially not being as happy in a location and on a team he wasn't familiar with.

[KCBrewerfan34]

Thank goodness your not our GM, Hart for a prospect. I don't think so. The Brewers should immediately offer him a contract similar to Ramirez. This team isn't far away from contending rebuild the bullpen and get a RF and we're right back in it next year.