Big Picture...

[Marc Newfield of Dreams]

34 minutes ago, Playing Catch said:

Many of us felt the same way last offseason. "We relied on pitching! But it's gone!" "We HAVE to sign Hoskins!" "We can't rely on rookies!" "Hitting HRs is all that matters in the playoffs, and this team can't do that!" (The Brewers out-homered the Mets 5-1 in this recent series).

The difference being is the organization is elite at developing pitchers, The track record speaks for itself.

Hitting, well, that hasn't been so great with the exception of Chourio. Turang and Frelick can be serviceable contact hitters who are great defenders. Mitchell showed flashes, we'll see what happens with Black.

[Jim French Stepstool]

9 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

1 game, 3 games, 5 or 7, each team we've lost to has won a the NLCS. It's just getting hot at the right time...

And that guy that hit 3 HRs, 2 in one game, the other guy who was 5 of his first 8 while playing elite defense, guys like that make me think they handle the pressure and they'll find a way. 

I'm confident they can, too. Conceptually I just don't like 40% of all teams being in the post season when you have 162 games to sort things out. The marathon of a season should carry more weight than someone who won 86 games or whatever getting hot late. JMO.

[adambr2]

40 minutes ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

I'm confident they can, too. Conceptually I just don't like 40% of all teams being in the post season when you have 162 games to sort things out. The marathon of a season should carry more weight than someone who won 86 games or whatever getting hot late. JMO.

Unfortunately MLB couldn't care less how we feel about it, at least not relative to their primary question: "how can we make the most possible dollars off this?"

Wait til this isn't enough and they expand to 32 teams and finish out the season with a March Madness style tournament with every team making the playoffs, seeded from 1 to 32 in order of regular season finish. 

[Soupy]

With the tv contract in limbo I think Black gets a long look at 3B. Rookie salary for him will help the team payroll immensely 

[wiguy94]

1 minute ago, Soupy said:

With the tv contract in limbo I think Black gets a long look at 3B. Rookie salary for him will help the team payroll immensely 

Just seems unlikely that Black is in the plans at 3B anymore considering he only played 9 games at 3B this season.

[Jim French Stepstool]

1 hour ago, adambr2 said:

Unfortunately MLB couldn't care less how we feel about it, at least not relative to their primary question: "how can we make the most possible dollars off this?"

Wait til this isn't enough and they expand to 32 teams and finish out the season with a March Madness style tournament with every team making the playoffs, seeded from 1 to 32 in order of regular season finish. 

They could do away with divisions, and just play a totally balanced schedule. MLB would justify it by claiming that everything else is secondary to making sure all fans get an equal chance to see Shohei.

[BrewerFan]

3 hours ago, Soupy said:

With the tv contract in limbo I think Black gets a long look at 3B. Rookie salary for him will help the team payroll immensely 

The is literally the ONLY hole on the team. Even if they trade Williams(and I'm not suggesting they trade him as a result of this blown save, rather due to the value he'll carry as a dominant sub 2.00 career ERA pitcher).

 

So....I don't think Black is an everyday 3B. I think maybe he's an everyday 2B if...you absolutely have to play him at one of the two, but most likely it's a Bauer-type role. 

 

Also, as far as I've heard, the TV contract isn't going to hurt the Brewers. If ANYTHING, it should help the Brewers. This paltry TV money they get now would go up if MLB took it over(is my understanding anyway). 

[BruisedCrew]

My "big picture" view of the Brewers' current situation comes from following baseball for almost 70 years, following the Brewers from their first game in 1970, and a conclusion that I reached about 30 years ago.

That conclusion was that, given the economic structure of MLB, the probability that the Brewers would win a World Series in my lifetime is less than 50%. I don't think there was just one thing that drove me to that conclusion, but the Brewers' inability to sign Paul Molitor after the 1992 season was a significant factor.

Because I don't expect the Brewers to win the World Series, I don't have the attitude that any season that falls short of a Series title is a failure. The expansion of the playoffs over the years to include 2, then 4, then 8, then 10, and now 12 teams has made winning the Series even more difficult for a team that has an outstanding regular season. 

I hold out the hope that some year the Brewers might catch lightning in a bottle like the Royals in 2015.. But, I realize I'm in a small minority on this, but I wouldn't trade the Brewers performance since 2007 for what the Royals have done. Winning a World Series wouldn't be exciting enough for me to make up for the number of absolutely abysmal seasons they had before and after.

I have had my favorite professional teams win titles in the NFL and NBA, and my alma maters and favorite teams win NCAA basketball and college football titles. While those championships create great moments and memories, the glow from them does wear off and the lust for "just one" is soon replaced by "one more". Packers fans should understand that feeling. 

Last week's loss was exceptionally heartbreaking, not because I had any real hope that this team would be the one to catch fire and win four series, including against teams that are pretty clearly superior on paper. But, after getting paired against the team that I thought they had the best chance to beat of the playoff contenders, and overcoming some serious misplays to get tantalizingly close to advancing, watching Williams surrender the lead was like a swift blow to the heart. It was also a reminder that a 95% probability of something happening in baseball is not a guarantee of a positive result.

Let's see what next year brings.

 

[StearnsFTW]

On 10/7/2024 at 4:17 PM, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I hope everyone retains this energy in 10 years if the Brewers have made the playoffs 8 more times and not escaped the first round.

I'm certain you will. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

2 hours ago, StearnsFTW said:

I'm certain you will. 

What a weird dig. 

I would expect that most would be disappointed if something like that happened. Then again maybe not considering how happy this place seems to be about  getting knocked out of the wild card repeatedly.

Everyone keeps talking about the World Series, too. There exists a middle ground between winning the World Series and what the Brewers are doing, which to be perhaps overly harsh, could be labeled as faux competing. Sure they are making it, but no one really considers them a contender. 

[Brewcrew82]

2 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

What a weird dig. 

I would expect that most would be disappointed if something like that happened. Then again maybe not considering how happy this place seems to be about  getting knocked out of the wild card repeatedly.

Everyone keeps talking about the World Series, too. There exists a middle ground between winning the World Series and what the Brewers are doing, which to be perhaps overly harsh, could be labeled as faux competing. Sure they are making it, but no one really considers them a contender. 

At zero point in the history of the game has winning division titles and winning 90 games been considered "faux competing"...

[OldSchoolSnapper]

9 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

At zero point in the history of the game has winning division titles and winning 90 games been considered "faux competing"...

Probably because prior to a few years ago you usually had to win that many games to have a chance. It's a moot point when you can have the 6th best record in your league and still make the "postseason." 

Winning a division title? You better be 1st or 2nd because that 3rd one isn't worth a whole lot. 

 

 

 

[Recovering Chicagoan]

2 hours ago, BruisedCrew said:

I have had my favorite professional teams win titles in the NFL and NBA, and my alma maters and favorite teams win NCAA basketball and college football titles. While those championships create great moments and memories, the glow from them does wear off and the lust for "just one" is soon replaced by "one more". Packers fans should understand that feeling. 

Last week's loss was exceptionally heartbreaking, not because I had any real hope that this team would be the one to catch fire and win four series, including against teams that are pretty clearly superior on paper. But, after getting paired against the team that I thought they had the best chance to beat of the playoff contenders, and overcoming some serious misplays to get tantalizingly close to advancing, watching Williams surrender the lead was like a swift blow to the heart. It was also a reminder that a 95% probability of something happening in baseball is not a guarantee of a positive result.

Let's see what next year brings.

 

Excellent points. Winning a World Series would be great, of course. But if that meant having to watch the Brewers play non-competitive baseball for the next decade, I don't think many Brewers fans would like that. Still, we need to get over the playoff hump one of these years and savor that World Series victory for as long as we can - if and when that happens.

[BruisedCrew]

3 hours ago, Brewcrew82 said:

At zero point in the history of the game has winning division titles and winning 90 games been considered "faux competing"...

You have a very narrow view of the “history of the game“

[Brewcrew82]

10 minutes ago, BruisedCrew said:

You have a very narrow view of the “history of the game“

Yes, we're not all old and the divisions haven't existed forever, but the point still stands that at no point has winning 90+ games and division titles been considered "faux competing". 

[BruisedCrew]

7 hours ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Yes, we're not all old and the divisions haven't existed forever, but the point still stands that at no point has winning 90+ games and division titles been considered "faux competing". 

“Faux competing” is not a description I would use, but before divisions and wild card teams winning 90 plus games would often mean that a team was not even all that close to competing in the World Series or LCS.

There were no champagne celebrations for being the third best team in the league. Instead of talking about bites at the apple fans of those teams would be talking about how their teams need to win more games.

Just getting in and hoping to get hot at the right time was not a strategy for winning a championship. 

[StearnsFTW]

2 hours ago, BruisedCrew said:

“Faux competing” is not a description I would use, but before divisions and wild card teams winning 90 plus games would often mean that a team was not even all that close to competing in the World Series or LCS.

There were no champagne celebrations for being the third best team in the league. Instead of talking about bites at the apple fans of those teams would be talking about how their teams need to win more games.

Just getting in and hoping to get hot at the right time was not a strategy for winning a championship. 

There also wasn't a wildly-unbalanced financial system in place, which is kind of a big difference.

[Playing Catch]

22 hours ago, Marc Newfield of Dreams said:

The difference being is the organization is elite at developing pitchers, The track record speaks for itself.

Hitting, well, that hasn't been so great with the exception of Chourio. Turang and Frelick can be serviceable contact hitters who are great defenders. Mitchell showed flashes, we'll see what happens with Black.

I'm not necessarily putting you in this category, but I think many fans believe that free agents and spending significant money will inherently improve the product on the field, when that strategy has been demonstrably flawed. There's no doubt that signing the tippy-top players, like Ohtani, or for this upcoming season, Burnes, will, aside from long-term injury, improve the team. But the 2nd and 3rd tier free agents OFTEN become guys that are "too expensive," to just DFA when their performance is left wanting. In fact, I think most of those types of players are signed because teams have ZERO in-house options. But the Brewers have shown that they are often able to replicate or improve on that production with rookies, or 28-year-old castoffs, with something to prove.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, I think the big money teams are beginning to wise-up to this reality, squeezing out many established veterans in their 30's from getting their 2nd or 3rd big-league contracts.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

3 hours ago, BruisedCrew said:

“Faux competing” is not a description I would use, but before divisions and wild card teams winning 90 plus games would often mean that a team was not even all that close to competing in the World Series or LCS.

There were no champagne celebrations for being the third best team in the league. Instead of talking about bites at the apple fans of those teams would be talking about how their teams need to win more games.

Just getting in and hoping to get hot at the right time was not a strategy for winning a championship. 

Bingo. Exactly the point I was making. Doesn't really make sense to draw parallels to the last 100 years when they have drastically altered it in the last 10.

If sabremetricking your way to 2 or even 4 playoff spots worked, that would be very different than what we have right now, which is inching closer and closer to the NBA. "Just let them rest, we can get the 5 seed and then overpower the Brewers."

[BruisedCrew]

1 hour ago, StearnsFTW said:

There also wasn't a wildly-unbalanced financial system in place, which is kind of a big difference.

I noted that in the second sentence of my original post in this thread as one of the reasons why I don't expect the Brewers to win a World Series in my lifetime.

[homer]

18 minutes ago, BruisedCrew said:

I noted that in the second sentence of my original post in this thread as one of the reasons why I don't expect the Brewers to win a World Series in my lifetime.

If the Royals can do it, the Brewers can do it.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

5 minutes ago, homer said:

If the Royals can do it, the Brewers can do it.

I mean, yes, anyone can do it, and it's not outside the realm of possibility, but I would say it is substantially harder now than it was for KC when they did it. the Rangers would have a 3 gamer with the Angels, the Yankees couldn't get knocked out in 1 game like they were. 

The Royals were a great team, but the AL was also quite bad that year, now that I look at it.

[homer]

Just now, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I mean, yes, anyone can do it, and it's not outside the realm of possibility, but I would say it is substantially harder now than it was for KC when they did it. the Rangers would have a 3 gamer with the Angels, the Yankees couldn't get knocked out in 1 game like they were. 

The Royals were a great team, but the AL was also quite bad that year, now that I look at it.

They made it two years in a row. 

 

I mean sure it's harder for a team like Milwaukee but if people think they will never win a WS then why are you here? 

[Brewcrew82]

21 minutes ago, homer said:

They made it two years in a row. 

 

I mean sure it's harder for a team like Milwaukee but if people think they will never win a WS then why are you here? 

The Rays, the moneyballest of moneyball teams, have also made two WS in the last 15 years. Cleveland has made one. The Dbacks last year opened with a virtually identical payroll to us and went through the grinder of the current postseason format to make the WS. 

I'm not going to pretend it's going to be easy or that a lot things won't have to break our way, but there's absolutely reason to hold out hope. And in no way, shape or form, is winning 90 games and your division year in and year out "faux competing". Because then you'd have to consider the Dodgers to be "faux competing"....

[OldSchoolSnapper]

17 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

The Rays, the moneyballest of moneyball teams, have also made two WS in the last 15 years. Cleveland has made one. The Dbacks last year opened with a virtually identical payroll to us and went through the grinder of the current postseason format to make the WS. 

I'm not going to pretend it's going to be easy or that a lot things won't have to break our way, but there's absolutely reason to hold out hope. And in no way, shape or form, is winning 90 games and your division year in and year out "faux competing". Because then you'd have to consider the Dodgers to be "faux competing"....

You are really taking that way too literally. 

Of course every team that wins 90+ games isn't faux competing. The larger point was that stacking regular season wins isn't what it used to be. The Brewers had a good season by most measures, but even the more optimistic posters here noted pretty much all year that they appeared to be a clear No. 3. Most people readily accepted that they were not really on the same echelon as Philly or LA. That doesn't mean you can't beat them, because baseball, but I think most would agree it was true.

You've seen this for years in the NBA where there are numerous teams every year winning between 47 and 55 games, but nobody really takes them seriously for one reason or another, and they basically always fall well short of a championship because of some very obvious thing; in the past it was the lack of a big man, now it's generally lack of star power. Because their playoffs are drastically different from their regular season. MLB is trending that way with these expanded fields.