Friday's Frosty Mug
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 8:48 AM CDT
in Milwaukee Brewers News
Email
PrintSome things to read while avoiding debris.
Before this week, the Cubs hadn't suffered a walk-off loss all season. This week, the Brewers beat them twice in three days in their final AB, with yesterday's win coming on a walk-off sac bunt (video). Disciples of Uecker has analysis of the play.
If Gomez hadn't scored the run, he would have been on third base with Jim Edmonds due up. Edmonds batted leadoff yesterday for the first time since September of 1999, when he was still an Angel. He went 1-for-5 on the day, legging out an infield single for his only hit.
Meanwhile, Rickie Weeks batted in the #2 spot for the second day in a row and reached base in each of his first four plate appearances. He finished the day 1-for-2 with a double and three walks. Anthony Witrado wrote a story about Weeks being removed from the leadoff spot, but apparently didn't ask Ken Macha if the move is permanent.
Corey Hart also had a pretty good day, going 2-for-3 with a walk, an HBP and his NL-leading sixteenth home run (video). Hart is on pace to hit 43 home runs this season, which would shatter his career high of 24 (set in 2007). Plunk Everyone also reports that his HBP made him just the 18th Brewer to be hit 25 times.
Other notes from the field:
- Carrie Muskat notes that the Brewers scored a run without a hit in three innings yesterday.
- Here are yesterday's MLB.com highlights.
- Carlos Gomez, Corey Hart and Rickie Weeks are leading FanGraphs Star of the Game voting.
- CoolStandings has the Brewer playoff chances at 0.9%.
- 36,363 fans paid to see yesterday's game, the highest attendance in the series.
I think a large portion of the Brewers' recent struggles have been blamed on poor pitching, and perhaps rightfully so. In-Between Hops reminds us that they're not the only ones to blame, though: The offense has averaged just 3.90 runs per game over their last 30 contests, down from 5.78 in their first 30.
Of course, the volume of bad contracts isn't helping either. Beyond the Box Score says the Brewers are second in all of baseball with $20+ million being paid to players on other teams, and lead all of baseball in percentage of payroll spent on players not on the roster.
Doug Davis' first major step towards returning to the team is still over a week away: He's scheduled to make rehab appearances for Nashville on June 19 and 24. If all goes well, he could rejoin the team around the end of the month.
The Brewers open a three game series with Texas today, the Rangers' first visit to Milwaukee since 1997. Doug Melvin downplayed the significance of the matchup with his former employer. Baseball Brew has the list of former Brewers working for the Rangers, including Mike Maddux and Jim Colborn.
In the minors:
- Now that Angel Salome has moved to the outfield, it's time to consider the potential impact on his prospect status. Jack Moore says it's "hard to get excited about Salome as a major leaguer." At The Hardball Times, Jeff Sackmann says the top of Salome's upside is now Matt Stairs. Ben Badler of Baseball America says Salome has 20 speed, which is the bottom of the 20-80 scouting scale.
- Jim Henry of MLB FanHouse has a profile of Lorenzo Cain, who's having a great bounce back season. He's hitting .337/.426/.473 for Huntsville, and why he's still there is anyone's guess.
- The affiliates went 3-1 on the field last night. Sean Halton went 2-for-5 for Brevard County with a home run, three runs scored and five RBI. He's hitting .295/.382/.448 since his promotion from Wisconsin, and is tied for the team lead with four home runs. You can read about his performance and more in today's Minor League Notes.
- Brewerfan.net reports that the Brewers have signed eight draft picks: 14th round 3B Mike Walker, 20th round SS Shea Vucinich, 22nd round C Kevin Berard, 23rd round RHP Ryan Bernal, 25th round SS Nick Shaw, 30th round RHP Eric Marzec, 31st round C Mike Melillo and 37th round RHP Seth Harvey.
- Battlekow has an interview with Berard, who certainly isn't lacking in confidence.
- Meanwhile, Baseball America reports the Brewers have released first baseman Chris Errecart. A 2006 fifth round pick, he was hitting .226/.261/.413 for Huntsville.
- I haven't heard any contract updates on Dylan Covey, but he did make Aaron Gleeman's list of great draft names. Also, kirbir will be interviewing him this week and would like your help with questions.
- Battlekow found this Youtube video of Covey's draft day party.
- Gophersports.com has a profile of Brewers 40th round pick Scott Matyas.
Beyond the Box Score wrapped up their "50 Best of the Next 5 Years" project yesterday with an overview. The Brewers are one of just seven teams with at least five players in the top 100.
Around baseball:
Angels: Signed pitcher Daniel Cabrera to a minor league deal.
Cardinals: Signed Jeff Suppan (FanShot)
Orioles: Designated reliever Alberto Castillo for assignment.
Twins: Placed J.J. Hardy on the DL with a sore wrist.
Having Jeff Suppan leave the Brewers and join the Cardinals is a little bit like getting Christmas and your birthday in the same week. Here's some reaction to the signing:
- Viva El Birdos is not excited.
- R.J. Anderson of FanGraphs says it "looks like a lateral move that’s only being made because Suppan has a history with (Cardinals pitching coach Dave) Duncan and (Tony) La Russa."
- Howie Magner of Milwaukee Magazine says Dave Duncan deserves his own wing in Cooperstown if he can find a way to make Suppan effective.
I don't know what's better: The fact that Wezen-ball created a Baseball Greats Chess Set, or the fact that it includes a former Brewer.
I'm not sure if this is a great or terrible idea, but the Marlins' new ballpark will include aquariums as part of the backstop. It'll be a cool, creative idea until or unless someone finds a way to break one.
On this day in 1999 the Brewers retired Paul Molitor's number 4. Molitor spent the first 15 seasons of his major league career as a Brewer, hitting .303/.367/.444 in 1856 games. (Thanks, TheJay)
Happy birthday today to:
- 1961 and 65 Milwaukee Brave Frank Thomas, who turns 81.
- 2007 Nashville Sound Adam Pettyjohn, who turns 33.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going back to Craig Counsell's video game.
Drink up.
377 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
interesting they also didn't think hank aaron was worthy
by Capt Science on Jun 11, 2010 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions
Well...
He did include the current HR King.
Actually, with the criteria he used to pick which players were going to be black and white pieces, I’m not sure where he would’ve put Aaron, since he straddles the time periods.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
Aaron could have gone in either time period. Mays is on white, for example, while Clemente is on black. One of the other criteria I used was to include all 9 positions among the 8 main pieces and the king’s pawn. Aaron couldn’t go on the old team, then, because of Ruth, and I really wanted to make Clemente the bishop on the other team, so he just couldn’t fit (there’s no way Hank Aaron is a pawn). Aaron would work as a bishop too, but I think Clemente’s life story makes him the perfect bishop…
Molitor is the choice over Yount because of this, too. I needed a 3B to fill out the squad.
==
Check out Wezen-Ball.com
Thanks for the clarification
I would’ve had a tough time deciding between Ruth and Aaron, but like you said in your article… way too many players to choose from.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
I'm questioning the title of "baseball greats"
Jeter over Yount?
No Hank Aaron?
Pujols?!?!
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jun 11, 2010 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think it’s a good descriptor.
I purposely went a different way when creating the roster since I didn’t want to create just another list of the 30 best player of all time. Those are way too common. I think everyone fits well.
The only person I would’ve chosen over Jeter for a SS/bishop is Cal Ripken (still my all-time favorite player), but I think Jeter’s surpassed him in the eyes of most as the “revered/respected” figure of recent history. And, as much as I love Yount, if I’m not putting Cal ahead of Jeter, Yount isn’t going there either.
Hank I explained above. If Pujols were to retire today, he’d still be one of the 10 greatest first-basemen in history. There’s no doubt he belongs on a list like this.
==
Check out Wezen-Ball.com
Nevermind
He’s there… just not as the piece I thought he’d be.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
by sjlee on Jun 11, 2010 9:26 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
see sjlee's sig
It was a quote from a Cards troll
by BrewCrewBrian on Jun 11, 2010 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions
Game ending sac bunt
First time since 7/26/2007 that the only runner on base scored all the way from first to win a game on a sacrifice bunt.
Failure is just success rounded down.
Didnt he score on the error?
Dont understand why its being referred to a “walk off sac bunt” when the bunt only moved Gomez over to third. The throwing error was the thing that scored the run.
Well, yeah
But that’s splitting hairs. The error came as a result of the play on the sac bunt.
Failure is just success rounded down.
that was a godly-placed sac bunt
absolutely perfect execution.
by PagsBrewCrew on Jun 11, 2010 9:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Errecart
Second week in a row an affilliates top HR hitter has been released (Heather last week, Errecart this week).
by Infield Fly Rule on Jun 11, 2010 9:04 AM CDT reply actions
Gomez
I wasn’t watching the game yesterday afternoon, so I didn’t get to see the game winning play live. Here a link to the game recap for anyone who hasn’t seen it.. link.
MLB Network interviewed Gomez after the game. If you didn’t catch it, here’s a link to it.
Besides Gomez’s voice, the other interesting thing I found in the interview was that he never once looked at the third base coach… he was concentrating on home plate the entire time.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
That first set of highlights you linked to is also linked in the Mug.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions
spelling Nazi ;P
How do you know was not using the texting version of debris lol
"It's a joke. It's all a joke.
Fixed
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions
So what are people's feelings on Hart being traded by the deadline?
Their recent roster transactions seem to indicate they intend to stay with the outfielders they have for the rest of the season unless they can get an outfielder in return for Hart which would dilute any minor league talent they could get in a package deal. I suppose they could move Stern back on the 40-man to take a backup outfielder position.
It seems like the valuation for each team for Hart would be quite varied from those that believe Hart’s resurgence is legit and shows promise for next year to those that see it as a fluke streak and value him about the same as last season. I don’t have a clue as to whether he’s got any serious trade value right now. If he’s still crushing the ball by the trade deadline, I would think he has to have some trade value and DM would have practically no choice in moving him.
His injury is persisting, though
which was my main concern with the outfield options. If Gerut is back to full health then I don’t see current outfield depth as an issue.
If they think they can contend in 2011, they'll keep Hart & Fielder
if they don’t, they won’t.
Shruggity.
Lincecum
He had a couple iffy starts, we could probably swing Hart for Lincecum now, right?
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
How long is Ubaldo under team control?
And would the Rockies really do that?
by BrewCrewBrian on Jun 11, 2010 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions
Team Freindly deal
I think Jimenez just signed a team friendly deal this or last year. If Im not mistaken, Btb called it one of the best contracts in baseball recently.
Funny thing is
That Hart’s HR binge hasnt really increased his value at all. Compared to the start of the season it has, but he’s currently on pace for a 3.2 WAR season, and his pre season expectation was for a 3.3 WAR from Pecota, and not too far behind/ahead from Chone.
Its quite the enigmatic season for him so far…with that many HR and that low of a WAR number, he profiles as a player with big power, big K numbers, but hes not really strking out that much. He’s still not walking horribly much either, but its just bizarre.
If the right deal comes along I dont think they can turn down trading Hart at the deadline. Problem is that Melvin is the one that makes that decision. Hes on pace for about an $8 million contract or so next year, and I dont think with or without him they contend. They could proably get a decent prospect for him in the right deal. Someone in the bottom portion of the BA top 100.
Well, right
but they’re never going to contend unless they blow the team up, in your opinion.
Shruggity.
by Mykenk on Jun 11, 2010 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
WAR is almost worthless right now because it is largley based on 2 months of UZR data, but you knew that.
Get a ife broseph
by Supertramp on Jun 11, 2010 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I disagree
There is ample amount of chances/innings to make an accurate value on a players fielding acumen at this point in the season. The season is 37% finished right now,a nd in Hart’s case, if he were to progress defensively the way he has, his value would actually decrease instead of increase. At the very worst, it holds steady and the number increases a bit.
I guess
The guys who created UZR caution that 3 years of data is needed, but if 2 months is good enough for you I guess that works too.
Pretty nice for the Cubs that Alfonso Soriano is now an above average OF.
Get a ife broseph
by Supertramp on Jun 11, 2010 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
That may be true
But Soriano always has been an above average defender in LF. Since moving there, he’s only had one negative UZR number out there. Heres a good question for you: Is Soriano as good of a LF as Hardy was at SS?
My only problem with this 3 year data thing is that if thats the case, it shouldnt be used as part of the WAR equation. If you have a bad or good year defensively it should be reflected in that players value for that year. If a pattern emerges over a 3 year span then that will be reflected too. Its just like hitting.
Which is why WAR is flawed if you only look at a one year sample
There aren’t enough data points in one year of UZR. A player can have a great year defensively and have that not reflected in UZR or vice versa.
You constantly argue that Hardy isn’t as good as his UZR rating is, so it seems like you are manipulating the stat to fit your agenda.
Get a ife broseph
by Supertramp on Jun 11, 2010 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hardy
Not stating that here about Hardy (although I do not believe he was an above average defender), but if you bring up Soriano, you have to bring up Hardy too.
I do not know all of the specifics of UZR, but do believe in it and believe in the validity of WAR as a viable one time for all stat.
From looking at numbers over the years, it doesnt really seem like the stat misses much.
From looking at numbers over the years, it doesnt really seem like the stat misses much.
Exactly, long term view its pretty good — looking at it after 2 months, it does miss quite a bit.
I don’t care about bringing up Hardy. I think its weird that you clearly think the stat is flawed in regards to judging Hardy’s defense, but have no problems using 2 months of it’s data to make a judgment on other players.
Get a ife broseph
As I understand it
2 months of UZR data isn’t necessarily flawed for evaluating how well a player has been defensively, just as WAR and a full year of UZR is supposed to be a pretty good representation of how good the player was that year.
The issue is when people use less than, say, three years of UZR data to try and describe a player’s defensive talent.
I’m not sure what the original debate was, just throwing that out there though.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
Ugh
Thats not what Im saying, or doing.
I readily accept that Hardy had solid defensive numbers, and that his value was accurately reflected in WAR, whether its from 2 months or two years of data.
With Hardy, I never felt he had the skills to be a consistent hitter the way he did those few years here, nor that his defense was all that great. Now a player can outperform his abilities and increase their value, many players do.
The bottom line is that even if Hart’s defense has been unfairly judged by 2 months of data, if it evens out over the course of the season, with the offensive numbers he has put up, he’s still only about a 3.5 WAR player.
A 3.5 WAR player is pretty damn good
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jun 11, 2010 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed
But wouldnt you prefer your 43 HR guy to have an all star level type WAR? Up in the 4’s or above?
I'd rather have him beat Yount's 11.5 WAR mark
But I’ll take a 3.5 WAR player any day
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
I think UZR over small samples
does reflect productivity over that time, as it is just a measure of how many balls a player got to in different zones relative to the rest of the league. But 2 months is a tiny sample that allows for a lot of noise. We can see this in BABIP for different players – in any given SEASON it can be 40 points off their career marks due mostly to dumb luck. 2 months of UZR data has a similar problem, there is no way to know if the number is representative of the players defensive talent or just a sequence of fluky balls hit his way. It takes about 3 years for that noise to even out, and I think that means there is little to no predictive value going forward from a 2 month sample.
UZR, position by position.
There might be enough chances for a relatively high-traffic position like shortstop, but in right field even a year’s worth of chances isn’t really enough.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well
They have 3 legit stars on the team, 2 really young guys with big upside potential and 2 guys doing very well offensively, and theyre still 10 games under .500.
I would think that blowing this team up (not completely) is something people in the know would agree on. Guys like Fielder/Hart and even Weeks are prime candidates for trades for prospects to improve the team with their increasing salaries forthcoming and nice value.
Glaring
Well, whats not to know?
With the team they have in place right now, they are on pace for 67 wins. That isnt very good. What is it that you feel is “working” for this team, that would merit keeping increasingly expensive players in lieu of dealing them for free ones (in relative terms) with big upside in 2 to 3 years?
There's not going to be an upside.
Ever. Remember, as soon as someone gets good, they get expensive, and MUST be traded for iffy prospects
Must. Constantly. Rebuild. Must. Never. Go. For. Anything.
Shruggity.
by Mykenk on Jun 11, 2010 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
I know you're laying on the sarcasm thick here, but it's a fact of life to some extent
The Brewers have a good enough payroll to compete every few years and that’s the reality of the situation. A $90 million payroll is enough to consistently get a team 82-85 wins, which is almost never going to be enough to make the post season. They might spike up a little or down a little, but $90 million will never consistently make the playoffs. Not for the Brewers, anyway.
If your goal is to truly go for a world championship, then they only way to do that with a league-average payroll is to play the prospect game. It’s just a fact of life in professional baseball.
by ecocd on Jun 11, 2010 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I know it's a fact
Trade for prospects. Prospects get good. Trade for other prospects. Hope that once every 50 years, the prospects get good faster than average, and make it to the playoffs, then trade them.
I need a new team to follow. Destined for 500 years of ~3rd place.
Shruggity.
by Mykenk on Jun 11, 2010 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Projected big upside
I’m pretty sure we’ve got some players right now who were supposed to be great for us, and haven’t turned out as projected. I’m just a little unsure at picking up minor leaguers who can’t handle the pressure/perform like we need them to while getting rid of anyone who is actually decent.
"Also, guys." - Mykenk
You're smart.
and by smart, I mean you share my opinion.
Shruggity.
by Mykenk on Jun 11, 2010 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe that just means
That the Yankees and Cardinals will suddenly disappear, giving baseball fans a whole new world to explore
"Also, guys." - Mykenk
Maybe it's the date that Lord Pujols ascends to Heaven
so that He may take his rightful place at God’s side. Or vice versa.
SRS BSNS
Pujols = Quetzalcoatl
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Jun 11, 2010 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I hear Caldwell and Vuk are looking for work...
by BrewCrewBrian on Jun 11, 2010 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions
Well, we're going to trade Prince eventually and he's not hitting anyway
And then you’ve got Corey Hart hitting the cover off the ball, a leadoff hitter that strikes out more than Adam Dunn and doesn’t steal bases… we should be able to get two solid pitchers for those guys.
I'm with BtC on this one.
Trade Fielder, Hart, and possibly Weeks. Gallardo and Braun will be around, and guys like Lawrie, Gamel, and whoever we get in return for the above players, will make for a nice looking club in 2012.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
McGehee's around a while, too
Gomez will be around for some time for better or for worse. I’m glad someone else says they agree with BtC, because I’m kind of with him on this, too. We don’t have a first baseman, though, and that’s an issue.
I’m still baffled as to why the Brewers are so hesitant to try Gamel at first unless they have designs on trading him or McGehee this season. Any thoughts on Gamel still being at 3rd?
I think they will trade him
I think they are out of patience with him and don’t want to bother with teaching him a new position.
Failure is just success rounded down.
I'm sure there are teams willing to buy low on him
Probably wouldn’t get much from them, though.
Failure is just success rounded down.
I said it elsewhere, but...
I see Gamel traded, playing well there, and Melvin hemming and hawing about how with a guy like McGehee everything evens out.
Failure is just success rounded down.
Right.
I think his value is best used by keeping him around and seeing if he can pan out somewhere in the system. What’s the point in trading him for somebody well below his potential.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
I don't think it would be a good trade
Just a hunch I have that the front office doesn’t view him favorably anymore now that McGehee has taken 3B and Gamel got hurt again in spring.
Failure is just success rounded down.
Do you think other FO's view him favorably.
If he gets traded, I feel like it will be a Hardy/Gomez esque trade, where it’s two buy low guys switching teams.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
Nah, there's still a few teams behind us
if we don’t hit on these trades though, we’ll get 3 #1 draft picks in a row, which would be okay, if we didn’t screw up the draft constantly too.
Shruggity.
You just
Pushed back the rebuild payoff year from 2012 to 2015 or beyond if you take the draft picks over established prospects.
I don't see
why people think rebuilding will be paying off in 2012. That seems awfully optimistic.
Shruggity.
And i'm saying that
if all these prospects we get turn out to be average, we’ll be getting the top pick in the draft for three years.
Shruggity.
What is an "established" prospect?
Either he’s in the big leagues and no longer a prospect or he’s in the minors and may or may not pan out after all.
Failure is just success rounded down.
by TheJay on Jun 11, 2010 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Showing the ability to continue to play well at a level higher then A ball. Not just “have the tools”, they show the ability to be able to use them against other professionals in the minors. I’d say Lawrie is an established prospect. He’s showing that he’s making the adjustment to AA ball.
There no such thing as a guaranteed thing prospect. Just as there is not really a guaranteed thing veteran. Regression happens to both, we just call it flame out in the minors. In the pros we call it Suppan.
And previously in this thread it was implied that we just become the pirates by trading for prospects. That’s not true. We sell the big cost, high ability guy now, with a team that projects to not do anything in the next two to load up the minors. Then we select our franchise players to build around (Braun, Gallardo) and go for it then. If we are 5 wins better with Fielder, and still only win 72 games. I’d much rather sell him now, and try to reload the system.. the same system that brought us Fielder,.Braun, Weeks, Hardy, Escobar, Gallardo, Hart… the real reason our team has gotten better… and make a run for it by picking up KEY free agents in 2012 when waive number 2 projects to break into the pros.
Then when that group gets to expensive. We select our new franchise players (Lawrie, Escobar and Heckathorn) and build around them. Two year rebuild we make a run. I’d much rather go for it all 2 – 3 times a decade, then sit around and watch .500 at best baseball year in and year out. Like the Marlins, but only better as we draw more.
Good luck with that.
They’re not going to replace the entire front office with people who share that mindset.
Shruggity.
The Marlins strategy hasn't really worked that well for the Marlins lately
And attendence doesn’t really matter when you’re trading just about everyone who becomes moderately expensive anyway.
Anyway, if everything breaks right, those rebuilding waves teams sneak into the playoffs once in a while.
Failure is just success rounded down.
The Marlins have control of their main young producing teams till 2012. Their front office is a little to shy on planting the flag and making a “go for it year”. They have a ton of room for salary growth, and that’s whats hindering them IMO. They don’t make the key FA pick ups to complete the team, they look to “sneak in” (To bad the Mets aren’t in first place, they could collapse and let the Marlins in).
I’d like a Marlin system with an owner willing to mark a year as a “go for it year” and spend like he has to. Then sell after. Rinse and repeat. 2 years of great baseball, followed by 2 – 3 years of bad. Ya know.. kind of like the 2009 and 2010 years. Except I don’t see much hope in our system.
So, do you bother following the team in the 2-3 years of last place?
Also, are they purposely bad to get a high draft pick to aid in the upcoming good period? Also, isn’t it more realistic to expect 1-2 years of good, followed by 3-4 of garbage?
Shruggity.
But what key free agents will sign for just one or two years?
It’s more likely the free agents that will make a difference want a longer deal or don’t want to be stuck on a team that’s immediately ripped down around them.
Failure is just success rounded down.
Simply over pay a bit
Like we are already doing.
I just don’t see how we can get better with out facing a rebuild. We aren’t 1 or 2 players away from being awesome. We are 4 / 5th of a rotation away. The bullpen seems to have gotten loads better now that we brought up some minor league guys.
I just look at our success due to our farm system success. We have pretty much emptied the farm system “going for it” since 08 and need to focus on development to do it again.
Wringing our hands and shouting about how unfair the FA market doesn’t help the team get better. Unless MLB changes, which it doesn’t seem like it will, we have to build a system that works in our market. The current system doesn’t seem to be working anymore. We emptied the resources we had to give the illusion of being better.
But going for it with the expectation of signing key free agents to push over the top
Results in the same situation as the current team. There will be overpaid veterans limiting the team, only they will be free agent veterans signed to expensive 3-4-5-year deals who can’t be traded (overpaid, declining) to help the new rebuild.
Failure is just success rounded down.
Well part of our problem
Was the way DM structured the Suppan deal. It really escalated a lot at the end. So that hand cuffed us a lot.
Wolf
Is a pretty good example of a more friendly contract. While I assume escalating contracts will still happen, I just hope they don’t escalate at the pace that Suppans did.
What I’m trying to say is that I think DM learned his lesson. Or at least I hope.
Yes and no
Wolf’s contract doesn’t escalate but does include deferred money. So even if he pitches all three seasons as a Brewer, the team will still owe him money after he’s gone.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
Deferring saves the team
Assuming he would have alternatively gotten the identical salary non-deferred.
Shruggity.
It's not different
although deferring any money in a contract of size X saves the team money versus paying out the contract of size X over the life of the contract
Shruggity.
So it's a little different,
in that it could save the team more money, but that’s assuming the contract would be the same nominal value whether it was backloaded, deferred, or paid “normally”
Shruggity.
I'd love to see a team try "frontloading" a contract.
Let’s say you’ve got Gallardo, getting ready to become arb-eligible. Instead of offering him a $0.5/3.25/5.5/7.75/11.25 five year deal, you offer him a five year deal worth $4.25 million annually. He takes home about 25% less money over the course of the deal, but gets a lot more up front.
In turn, the team pays a little more up front but has a smaller overall commitment and a lot more flexibility at the end of the deal.
Clearly, no GM thinks this far ahead (and can’t because they could be fired before seeing the benefits), but if they did they could effectively burn a little money now to create a lot more options later.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
It's different to me.
Backloaded = majority of money in final year(s) of contract.
Deferred=You still get checks after the contract is up.
IMHO, at least.
It's different, but it's splitting hairs.
Either way, you’re damaging future payroll flexibility to salvage present-day.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
depends on how the team manages its finances
in theory deferred benefits the club because the time value of money means that contact “costs” them less than stated. so if they set aside $8 today knowing it’ll get them the $9 they need tomorrow, then it shouldn’t handcuff anything in future years. but realistically, i expect they manage their current cash commitments more than worry about deferred payments.
by Capt Science on Jun 11, 2010 6:21 PM CDT up reply actions
How has this entire conversation
missed any mention of Tampa Bay and the way they do business? I suppose they differ from us in that they are excellent at talent evaluation and consistently hit with top draft picks, but as a model for running a baseball team, I don’t think it gets much better. Lock up elite prospects early for as long as possible (Longoria), keep the farm system stocked (Jennings, Hellickson), don’t keep players when they get expensive (Crawford), and admit mistakes and cut free agent misses (Burrell).
The 90's Brewers
Were mismanaged at a level that the ’stache could never dream of achieving.
Pujols…he’s actually underrated
Also, let's
deal Counsell, he’s a solid bench guy not in the long term plans… Coffey, same thing, has some value… Inglett… Bush, Parra… hell, might as well go for broke®
Shruggity.
I'm not saying trade anyone
but no one should be safe. If some team offers us a stupidly lopsided trade for Braun or Gallardo, they should go for it. It won’t happen, but there can’t be untradeable players, ever.
Shruggity.
Given the production and the contract
I can’t imagine any proposal being lopsided enough to part with Braun
On Coffey.
I totally agree. I think he’s got a lot of value at the deadline this year. Teams are always looking to add a solid reliever to the pen for the second half. Coffey and Villa are just that. They’re contracts are only going to go up next year, so it might be in our interest to trim the fat. No pun intended.
That being said, I love Coffey, and hope he sticks around.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
What's enigmatic about it?
He’s been good offensively and terrible defensively
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
E-nigma
I think the thing thats most curious about it is that the only thing he is really doing is hit HR’s. Hes not walking, not striking out, not really hitting either. Just hitting HR’s. Is he even a 3TO candidate at this point?
His BB% is at a career high
He’s hitting well all around. He only has a .261 average (though that isn’t bad for the power he’s flashing, obviously) but it’s being held down by a .248 BABIP
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
Maybe i'm just slow
but how can your average be higher than your BABIP? Can you get hits without putting the ball in play?
It's his potential going forward, though
He’s getting HRs, because of his newfound plate discipline. My theory is that pitchers are searching for a new hole in his swing which they’ll eventually find. Dempster was pounding him inside yesterday, but Hart wasn’t swinging at those, either. As SRB states, he’s even getting a little unlucky at this point. He’ll eventually start getting pitched around and start walking even more.
I know I’m being optimistic, but there are some peripherals and empirical evidence that Hart’s other numbers – not just power – will go up if he keeps his new eye at the plate.
I'm not sure that he has a newfound plate discipline.
His AVG and his OBP have both decreased since April.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
They're certainly up from last year, but Hart's value is coming from his power, which didn't show it's face til mid-May.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
I would be more interested in the quality of contact, though
I think someone stated his BABIP is really quite low. He’s making solid contact on fastballs and I would think that pitchers wouldn’t be throwing him fastballs he can drive if he were swinging at bad breaking pitches.
Which is why he's a great sell high candidate this year.
At the deadline, I’m sure there will be a team in contention looking to add a bat, specifically some power, specifically an outfielder.
We may be able to get a decent return for Hart, while avoiding having to pay him whatever insane amount of money he’ll get through arby. We can’t expect him to continue to hit homers at the current rate. 13 HR in his last 95 AB.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
"whatever insane amount of money he’ll get through arby."
This is an excellent point, when you combine it with BtC’s point above.
Hart is on pace for 43 home runs. Even if he cools off a bit and hits 30-35, that’s still a lot. But he’s not providing the type of value you’d expect from a guy who’s hitting that many – he’s not walking or getting on base.
When he gets to arbitration, though, his agent is going to pound the crap out of the fact that he’s a 40 HR hitter and deserves to be paid as one. If he can convince an arbitrator of that fact, his pay raise could be enormous.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions
How much value does he add getting on base?
If he’s consistently hitting in the bottom half of the order, isn’t slugging more important to run production than OBP? If he’s got Gomez, Escobar and a pitching trying to drive him in, getting onto 1st base isn’t going to produce many runs. Similarly, drawing a walk doesn’t get McGehee home from 2nd.
"isn’t slugging more important to run production than OBP?"
Yes. But if your average 40 HR hitter posts a .350 OBP, and Hart posts a .315 OBP, then there’s more value there, inherently.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions
My neighbor's platinum is more valuable but I'm happy with my gold
Failure is just success rounded down.
That's fine, as long as you're paying for gold.
But if you’re paying for platinum and getting gold, then there’s a value issue. That’s my point. By virtue of the fact that Hart could hit 40, he’s going to want 40 HR hitter value, and he’s not as valuable as your typical 40 HR hitter.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions
I know
It’s just an interesting discussion. I would be happy with a 40 HR hitter either way.
Failure is just success rounded down.
Agreed.
I just worry about the price tag an arbitrator will put on one.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions
It’d be awesome to be able trade him in a Casey Blake type deal but I think most teams value their prospects too much to give up a legit prospect for an inconsistent player like Hart.
Get a ife broseph
Just in time to blow everything up and trade for more prospects!
Failure is just success rounded down.
Exactly!
Trying to win games is vastly overrated. We just need to make sure we always have some iffy prospects in the system, and nothing but average players on the big league squad.
Huzzah for constant 3rd & 4th place finishes!
Shruggity.
I think Hart is an average player on the big league squad — didn’t mean to imply that I don’t want to win games.
Get a ife broseph
Constantly trading for iffy prospects
isn’t a good way to win games. I didn’t intend to direct that at you, I’m just not a huge fan of trading whoever is good for iffy prospects. And, 90%+ of all prospects are iffy, IMO.
Shruggity.
They dont have to be "iffy"
Part of the responsibility lies in the scouting department and player development staff to make sure that players they acquire for aging/expensiver vets, dont become busts.
My whole contention with this organization is that they need to make a wholesale change throughout, one that focuses on player development and scouting. If they do it the right way, they wont have to worry about trading away vets who are too expensive, because if they are doing thier jobs right, a replacement will pick up any slack that is lost by that trade.
It can be done. They just have to committ to it wholesale and get the right people in place to implement it.
by backtocali on Jun 11, 2010 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well the Brewers chances with the team we have are beyond iffy at this point.
Isn’t it time to try somethng else?
http://www.mlbsoup.com
I'm just saying, if you don't think rebuilding is the answer, what do you think a new FO is going to do?
That’s not going to change the players performance on the field.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
I feel like we're destined to be a team full of suck
But that doesn’t mean I’m not going to try and think of ways to change that.
We need a better farm system, with guys that can perform a little better if/when called up to the majors. Yeah, that will probably require spending less on major leaguers for a while and facing a rebuilding period. That also means we need someone who will actually rebuild too though.
"Also, guys." - Mykenk
I agree.
I know the teams likely gonna suck forever. However, I don’t think that anyone we’d bring in to run the front office would have the balls to totally change everything, fire everyone, cut everyone, rebuild from the ground up with a totally different emphasis on player development, etc. That’s a dramatic change, and would lead to a guaranteed 5+ year period of being terrible, followed by MAYBE success? It’s a huge, huge gamble.
Shruggity.
But we'd still have Braun through the whole time
Because he’s paid less than the beer vendors. It would be a 1-star team for a while but I’d get a bigger kick out of watching that than watching $90MM fight to stay out of the cellar.
We're talking about a fire sale and rebuilding with an emphasis on player development, right?
Since when has that strategy inflated payroll?
Well, it'll take a lot of years, and a lot of
firing people with contracts, and replacing them. And if you want good player development, you need to hire good player developers, which will demand money. We’d be paying 2 people to do the same job across the board for a few years.
Shruggity.
How much fan support can they lose though?
They’re already 25-35 and not looking good for the rest of the season. I think as long as fans can come to games and get drunk, there’s not much to be lost.
Yeah, maybe winning would be nice, but we haven’t been seriously contenders since 1982.
"Also, guys." - Mykenk
I'm available.
I’ll fire them all tomorrow and have them reapply for their jobs.
Don Money looks to be ok. Yost III.. he’s gone.
The historical cut off for playoff team payroll is $85-$90 million
The Brewers aren’t destined to always be a team full of suck, but they won’t consistently be a playoff team. I’d be confident that a good front office could put together a playoff contender on the fielder every 3 or 4 years with a payroll the size of the Brewers.
3-4 years? No way
8-9 years, is more realistic. Payroll’s gonna get back into the 50’s-60’s in the next 2 years, hopefully.
Shruggity.
Well
if we want to play this rebuild, run, and recycle game, there’s no reason payroll should be any higher than 60M. You’ll have your 2-3 core players making ~10M/y each, and the rest should be around the minimum.
Shruggity.
Tampa Bay gets it done for 70 million
9 of which they are paying Pat Burrell to play for Oakland
Either way it's going to suck
Either we take a path that has lead other similar sized market clubs to success.. or we hand wring and still suck.. just not as bad but ultimately never sniff the playoffs.
But we CAN'T take the Rays approach
unless we fire everyone in the organization. Which, maybe we can, but it’d be pricy. And even then, it might not work.
Shruggity.
I'm willing to gamble
But maybe it’s my love of watching players develop. I bought into the notion of “wait till our drafts come up” when we were terrible in the early 2000s.
They came up, we got better. Pretty much set my world view on how the team should be run.
Here’s a new idea. Lets convince Bud to close Tampa, merge with the Brewers. We assume the best players from both clubs. What does he care.. he’s leaving. And we’d be unstoppable.
Its so crazy it just might work! Quick someone figure out how to make mind control drugs and put it in his custard at Gillies.
I'm also willing to gamble
I’m just not as optimistic as others on the probability of success.
Shruggity.
okay, what about the red sox?
they’ve built a good player development system and haven’t had years of top draft picks. or what about the twins? really, that’s a near-ideal model. just doing it is the hard part.
by Capt Science on Jun 11, 2010 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions
I completely agree
Its time we face the fact that we aren’t a “large market team” and design a system, top to bottom, that fosters to our strength. That will have to be farm system with key free agent acquisitions when the time comes.
They should have done that 20 years ago.
Now it’s a little late to sell a “okay, we’re gonna suck for the next 5+ years while we rebuild the entire system from the ground up”
Shruggity.
I suppose.
Changing the brand of suck? But it better work. Don’t suck for 5+ years trying to rebuild, and then fail miserably at it. Then you deserve contraction.
Shruggity.
No
He was a poor decision by a GM who then taught a zealous owner to spend money.
Suppan was pretty average at the time of the signing. We just wanted to “make a splash” and should have really just taken the year off of FA pitching since the market was so inflated.
Well, true fans will say that
but 95% of the “fans” would have called for Melvin’s head for not doing anything.
Shruggity.
That was incredibly profound
If the key free agent market is always inflated, then it’s not inflated at all.
I’ve never thought of pricing players in terms or arbitration vs. free agent. If we were to take WAR, for instance, and get average figures of dollar per 1 WAR, it would actually make more sense to break those into arbitration WAR and free agent WAR.
I would be very, very interested to see an analysis on average arbitration WAR vs. average free agent WAR. I would be there is a gulf between the two figures. It would also give us a useful tool for accurately evaluating a GM’s decision-making skills on the free agent market.
In hindsight?
Or do you look a guys WAR to date and the contract signed? In other words, do you do the evaluation at contract signing, or after contract expiration?
Shruggity.
Both, probably
Projected WAR to evaluate just-signed contracts and retroactive WAR to determine a GM’s long-term evaluation of talent and pricing that talent appropriately.
Fangraph analyses
Say that the three years of arbitration tend to end up being 40%/60%/80% of a player’s free agent WAR value (40% the first year, 60% the second, etc.), and that super-2 players go 20%/40%/60%/80% (IIRC). I don’t know what data they have to back that up, but I’m sure Tango or MGL or someone looked into it.
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
WAR value wouldn't scale linearly, though
The value of five 1.0 WAR would surely be less than a single 5.0 WAR player.
Maybe I’ll have to go searching this weekend. I’ve begun to see Melvin as good at finding scrap heap guys that end up productive, but poor at big free agent signing. He could be very good at picking up 1 WAR guys, but poor at getting 5 WAR guys. It might also just be more difficult, in general, to project a 5 WAR performance than a 1 WAR performance.
Unless we get a really good trade offer, just keep him
The Brewer don’t have a clear RF replacement for 2011, and I think Hart is showing enough of a resurgence that he’ll be more than worth his new arbitration raise. Maybe ‘08 and ’09 were the flukes and he really is the player with 30/30 potential, it’s not like he wasn’t dealing with injuries and stuff intermittently.
It would be nice if he could start fielding decent again though.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
Craig Counsell's Good Fundamentals Baseball
is hysterical. Looks to be as riveting an experience as Lee Carvello’s Putting Challenge!
The kid on the cover of the game
Nathan Lewandowski, I went to high school with him. But he was a couple years behind me.
My goodness.
by BrewHaHeather on Jun 11, 2010 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Your ball is in the parking lot.
Would you like to play again?
Applying Simpsons and Star Wars quotes to Brewers discussions since 2009.
You Linked to Gophersports!!!!!
My life is complete!!!!
"If the world were perfect, it wouldn't be." - Yogi Berra
by mnbrewer on Jun 11, 2010 11:22 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Are you a WI transplant
I will never forget my first few years living in the Twin Cities and how everything was “Oh, youre from WI, you must be a Packer fan.” I never was until hearing that for 4 straight years.
I hear that a lot
Yeah I was born in Madison, but I live in Minneapolis. And I have to say I never really had to take anything from Viking fans until the Favre fiasco.
"If the world were perfect, it wouldn't be." - Yogi Berra
I'm getting a laugh out of the people who are acting shocked that the Brewers are a small market team and won't be good every year.
Sorry, but we’re not very good right now. It sucks, you hate it, I hate it, we all hate it. Keeping Prince Fielder around isn’t going to help anything. It’s time to trade him for some quality prospects. With those guys, we could be a damn good team again in a year or two. We still have a good foundation; Braun, Gallardo, Gomez, McGehee, Escobar,Lucroy/Kottaras, Braddock, Axeford, etc. should all be Brewers for a long time still.
With Gallardo
You only need 1.5 more starters. Fill the .5 with garbage, sign one starter when you’re ready for a run. Add water, and we win the world series. I like this plan, it sounds fun & easy!
2 years..
Maybe Rogers, Butler, Rivas. Heckathorn may be more advanced, as I assume he’ll be up in AA soon enough.
So why not try to maximize our return now, since 2011 seems to be more of the same.
And what's your solution?
You are basically trying discredit a solution of build from within (I’d like to adopt a hybrid Twins/Marlins system).
Who’s going to pitch for the Brewers in 2011, 2012?
More of the same, with no relief in sight.
I'll get your signed
As soon as Mark offers me the GM job. We can out right you, and the Cardinals will pick you up.
I don't have a solution
but counting on the system to develop pitching when that’s historically been a nightmare bothers me. Unless they replace everyone, but then these pitchers are gonna have to start over.
Shruggity.
Individually, yes.
But take this list, for example:
Marco Estrada
Chris Cody
Mark Rogers
Jeremy Jeffress
Josh Butler
Cody Scarpetta
Amaury Rivas
Kyle Heckathorn
Eric Arnett
Jake Odorizzi
(I’m sure I’m leaving guys out, because this is the top of my head.)
None of those guys have a 100% chance of being a major league starter by 2012. But all of them have a chance…somewhere between 10% and 50%.
So, while no single guy is the solution, the odds would suggest that at least one or two solutions will come from that pool.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Then take him off the list and add Wily Peralta.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions
"This guy here is dead ..."
SRS BSNS
by Rubie Q on Jun 11, 2010 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
Rec'd for Major League reference.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions
That's not fair
When he’s close to the majors, the Brewers just need to cal him up to the bigs every time he needs to take a drug test. No problems then.
For the rest of the season.
I don’t know that he’s a long term reliever any more than Angel Salome is a long term outfielder.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, I didn't really read the whole article.
Sounds like a pretty desperate attempt to keep the kid from ruining his life. Not sure I would bother at this point.
Shruggity.
I know.
But that statement isn’t a result of it. Do they really think they’re gonna keep the kid off of pot? He’s been dumb enough to get caught twice, there’s zero reason to suspect that he’s going to change. As soon as the 2nd suspension came down, I wanted him out of the system.
Shruggity.
Yes, we are.
Though, I’d prefer us to keep the pot-smokers that are smart enough to not get caught over the ones that are stupid enough to get caught.
Shruggity.
I would like to see them bump guys up faster than one level per year
Before including anyone not currently at AA.
Failure is just success rounded down.
I'm not sure if the "one level per year" maxim is in place because they're taking it slow,
Or if it’s in place because they don’t have anyone they feel is worth fast-tracking.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions
I would think that Heckathorn might start next year at AA
Given that he was a college guy. The year at each level guideline is more likely for Odorizzi and high schoolers.
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
I expect Heckathorn to be promoted mid-season.
Which would open the door for the AA 2011 you suggested.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
Heckathorn is at Wisconsin now
They seem content to bump guys up one level each year.
Failure is just success rounded down.
If he keeps pitching the way he is now,
and he isn’t bumped up to Brevard in a few weeks I’m going to be very upset.
My goodness.
by BrewHaHeather on Jun 11, 2010 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Colby Lewis pitches Sunday
I’m probably too excited about that.
Failure is just success rounded down.
I was excited about that too
Until I realized this morning that the tickets I thought I had for the game for the past 4 months, were actually for the Sunday Mariners game. Now I have to hope for a Felix Hernandez start.
Good Point
And although my wife was the one who bought the tickets, it would have been all my fault. Would never have heard the end of it.
Arent you a girl?
Cant tell if thats sarcasm or some sort of call on my husbandry skills.
I dont dispute it at all, she runs the show at our house.
I thought it was pretty obvious that it was sarcasm
You know, since I don’t know you.
If you read the rest of the thread, it’d probably make more sense though.
"Also, guys." - Mykenk
Eagle fight
Failure is just success rounded down.
by TheJay on Jun 11, 2010 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Now we know why they needed to be protected.
From themselves!
http://www.mlbsoup.com
by tcyoung on Jun 11, 2010 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
I never understood why the American eagle is red and the National one is blue
It goes against the colors on each league’s logo.
Failure is just success rounded down.
Obligatory DH is nonsensical post
Everyone playing everyone is silly. Everyone should play everyone that follows the same rules, otherwise there’s a decided imbalance
Shruggity.
by Mykenk on Jun 11, 2010 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Oh you
You know what I meant.
It wouldn’t end up being like A League of Their Own, I promise
"Also, guys." - Mykenk
Good
The last thing the big leagues need is more Tom Hanks.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Jun 11, 2010 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I hope that wasn't an anti-Tom Hanks remark
because if it is, you’ve just made yourself a new enemy.
My goodness.
by BrewHaHeather on Jun 11, 2010 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions
Here's the official scoring:
Good things about Tom Hanks: You could probably make a faintly amusing limerick using his name.
Bad things about Tom Hanks: Everything else.
"I hope your name is Rick"
by MrLeam on Jun 11, 2010 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
False
Forrest Gump. Enough said.
My goodness.
by BrewHaHeather on Jun 11, 2010 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions
with the exception of the running scenes
i think bill murray would’ve been awesome in forrest gump. bill murray is america’s greatest actor. just ignore his personal life (particularly the cubs part).
by Capt Science on Jun 11, 2010 6:31 PM CDT up reply actions
What about Bosom Buddies?
My goodness.
by BrewHaHeather on Jun 11, 2010 11:43 PM CDT up reply actions
you'd expect teams to pick up a few
in the sandwich round
by nullacct on Jun 11, 2010 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
2 sets of is rules is always nonsensical.
Who you play doesn’t matter, 1 game 1 set of rules. Pick a side and go with it.
I’d prefer the non-DH mlb but a total DH mlb is still way better then the current setup.
Meh.
I’d let that slide to get the game under 1 set of rules.
Though I’d vastly prefer they punt the DH & bump the active roster to 26/27 as a concession to get it passed.
And they shouldn't use metal bats in college ball.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
by tcyoung on Jun 11, 2010 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
baseball isn't about uniformity
if it was everyone would have the same outfield dimensions. i like the weird outfield walls and i like that one league has a dh and the other doesn’t. more choice, more nuance.
by Capt Science on Jun 11, 2010 6:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Interleague play building bridges.
Go White Soxs(I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit) I hate interleague play making me root for a Chicago team. damn where is my mouth wash?
"It's a joke. It's all a joke.
Here's a hint for the future
you don’t have to root FOR the White Sox, just root AGAINST the Cubs.
Do: “Hooray, Zambrano gave up 4 home runs”
Don’t: “Yes! The White Sox hit 4 home runs”
Difference is subtle, but it’s there.
Shruggity.
that just might work
It is sort of Star Wars esk you only accept the Good Side of the Force.
"It's a joke. It's all a joke.
Lets try to keep this family friendly
Please use C*bs
by BrewCrewBrian on Jun 11, 2010 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions
If any two teams could find a way to both lose while playing each other
It’d be the Cubs and the White Sox.
by brewbaybucks on Jun 11, 2010 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Isotpes eh?
@VictorRojas29 W/ Griffey retired, all ringers used by Mr. Burns on Springfield softball team in The Simpsons have now retired
Let's get a series win vs. the Rangers
With Narve-dog and Gallardo pitching we can do it. Give the Halos some help. They could use it.
Besides, I’m still ticked off from Cordero’s 3-run blown save in Arlington in 2007.
Can we set an over/under for first inning runs against Chris tonight?
Alternatively, can we have someone else pitch the first?
Split G IP ER ERA PA AB R H 2B 3B HR SB CS BB SO SO/BB BA OBP SLG OPS TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB ROE BAbip tOPS+ sOPS+ 1st inning 8 8.0 11 12.38 44 39 11 16 4 1 3 1 0 5 5 1.00 .410 .477 .795 1.272 31 0 0 0 0 1 0 .419 197 241 2nd inning 8 8.0 2 2.25 32 29 2 5 1 0 0 0 0 2 15 7.50 .172 .226 .207 .433 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 .357 5 23 3rd inning 8 8.0 2 2.25 30 28 2 5 2 0 0 0 0 2 10 5.00 .179 .233 .250 .483 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 .278 16 34 4th inning 8 8.0 1 1.12 29 26 1 4 1 0 0 1 2 2 5 2.50 .154 .214 .192 .407 5 0 0 1 0 0 1 .190 -1 6 5th inning 8 8.0 2 2.25 35 28 3 6 3 0 0 0 0 4 7 1.75 .214 .294 .321 .616 9 0 0 1 2 0 1 .261 48 65 6th inning 9 7.1 10 12.27 42 35 9 13 4 0 3 0 0 6 5 0.83 .371 .476 .743 1.219 26 0 1 0 0 0 0 .370 186 225
Shruggity.
I like that idea
Throw Riske or Smith out there for the first. Although the problem might be that it’s Narveson’s first inning, not the first inning of the game.
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
Yeah, that's ridiculous
Probably should have him throw like 25-30 real pitches in the pen before the game
Split G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR SB CS BB SO SO/BB BA OBP SLG OPS TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB ROE BAbip tOPS+ sOPS+ Pitch 1-25 17 87 73 12 27 8 0 4 0 0 11 12 1.09 .370 .447 .644 1.091 47 1 0 2 1 2 1 .397 157 195 Pitch 26-50 10 56 51 9 13 5 1 0 0 0 4 19 4.75 .255 .309 .392 .701 20 0 0 1 0 0 0 .406 67 95 Pitch 51-75 8 42 37 4 6 2 0 0 0 0 3 11 3.67 .162 .214 .216 .431 8 1 0 0 2 0 1 .214 4 16
Shruggity.
The analysis that isn't at all flawed by the fact that his first pitches go to the top of the lineup
It’s still eyepopping how hard he gets hit in the 1st inning compared to 2-5. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a velocity or movement graph that shows flat pitching to begin the game. They might want to send Axford out for the first.
O/U seems good at 1.5 runs
Well, right, the pitch number one is less biased though
because it includes his stats as a reliever
Shruggity.
I assume the IBB are from when he pitched in relief
Otherwise, yikes.
Failure is just success rounded down.
quick question about suppan
since he got picked up are we still on the hook for his option for next year?
"Cubs fans boo again – 99% of these people can’t see the plate." -Ueck
Wait, so
The Cards are basically spending $2.5 MM for 1 year of Suppan?
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
Yes, the Brewers
Sorry. Once they released, Suppan, they had to pay his 2011 buyout since obviously they were officially giving up any chance they would exercise the option.
Failure is just success rounded down.
Extra commas come free
Failure is just success rounded down.
by TheJay on Jun 11, 2010 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Er, wait
Who is “they” referring to?
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
I can see Soup chasing Dougie around on his bike “I want my two million dollars…”
by nullacct on Jun 11, 2010 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Continuing Contract talk
1 2 3 4 5 6 PV Nominal Benefit Straight 10 10 10 $27.23 $30.00 9.2% Backload 1 5 10 15 $26.79 $30.00 10.7% Backload 2 7 10 13 $26.97 $30.00 10.1% Deferral 7 7 7 3 3 3 $26.12 $30.00 12.9% Front Loaded 1 15 10 5 $27.68 $30.00 7.7% Front Loaded 2 13 10 7 $27.50 $30.00 8.3%
Shruggity.
I see your point from a financial perspective
But from a baseball economics perspective I see it a little differently. Assuming the payroll is going to hold steady (which is more or less a best case scenario), that $3 million in 2013 is the same percentage of payroll it would have been in 2010.
So, while financially it makes sense, based on team economics it becomes a “3% of 2013 for 3% of 2010” trade.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
And if payroll is cut
Then you’re trading a larger percentage of 2013’s payroll to gain a smaller percentage of 2010.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
Right this is purely financial, steady state economics
which isn’t really reality in MLB, I know. And I’m not sure how MLB teams fund their payroll. If it’s anything like other industries with known liabilities, they’ve got their assets matched to the liabilities, so that they’re earning a good return, while their investments come due when the salary is owed.
Shruggity.
Drunk Lou finally showed up
"I won over 1,800 games as a manager, and I’m not a damn dummy," Piniella said. "That, I can tell you. OK? There are only 13 others that have won more games than me, so I guess I think I know what the hell I’m doing."By the way Lou, there’s only 11 other managers who have lost more games than you.
by nullacct on Jun 11, 2010 3:27 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Also saw the snippet that Guillen and GM Kenny Williams
- almost got into a fist fight yesterday. Sounds like a lot of pent-up anger in Chicago, what do you think the odds are that there’s a brawl at some point in this series?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chicago
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Cincinnati
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Houston
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Milwaukee
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
St. Louis
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
(updated 2.16.2012 at 7:03 AM CST)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
