Are we too worried about losing Willy's power?

[gregmag]

I am really glad someone brought this up. I think the calls to add power, even by some very informed commentators, have seemed pretty reflexive and not backed by data. I’m not saying those calls are wrong; I’m not informed enough to be able to say that one way or the other. I’m just saying that they aren’t obviously right, and the proponents keep presenting them as obviously right.

Bill James did a similar study years ago in one of his abstracts to some of the articles cited above. He used a relatively bad low power guy and a relatively bad low OBP guy — maybe Vince Coleman and Dave Kingman? The upshot was that a lineup full of decent OBP guys works much better than a lineup full of decent power guys. It makes intuitive sense; stringing together sequences of likelier small events is more reliable than stringing together sequences of less likely big events.

My other pet peeve that this topic brings up is the failure to recognize that young players, as a group, tend to add power as they age. Of course it’s not guaranteed, more than it’s guaranteed that Pete Alonzo won’t suck next year. But it would cut strongly against what we know from past experience if, as a group, Chourio, Mitchell, Ortiz, Frelick, and Turang didn’t meaningfully increase their power output in 2025. Steamer is right to make that bet.

To put the point in more concrete terms: the name that I have probably heard the most as a power bat that would make sense for the Brewers to add (based on position and likely budget) is Yoan Moncada. Over the past three seasons, Moncada has slashed .236/.291/.387. he has had two good seasons, when he was 24 and 26. Next year he will be 30. Are we really better off paying serious (in Brewers terms) money for that kind of power-heavy profile, rather than just rolling with the options we have at third base? I’m not saying those are the only two possible choices, but again, Moncada is a frequently discussed avatar of the “add power“ plan. I just don’t get it. We’ve been down a similar road with Hoskins, and it hasn’t worked out great so far.

[Underachiever]

I would suggest a team of Vince Colemans and a team of Dave Kingman's would both be uniformly awful. No one is suggesting such a binary here. I am asking that the Brewers use their remaining dollars and roster space to find a player or two that has some power. I believe that that will help with the playoffs. The Brewers have the regular season nailed. Let's look toward the playoffs.

Last year, among playoff teams, the Brewers were 2nd behind the Dodgers in OBP. They were last in Slugging. They were also last among playoff teams in slugging in 2023. That is where I would look to improve. 

And if you read page one of the thread, you had two posts by sveumrules and two by wiguy94 and you say that the calls for more power are "reflexive and not backed by data"? Those two guys eat and breathe data.

[liveforoctober]

2 hours ago, Underachiever said:

I would suggest a team of Vince Colemans and a team of Dave Kingman's would both be uniformly awful. No one is suggesting such a binary here. I am asking that the Brewers use their remaining dollars and roster space to find a player or two that has some power. I believe that that will help with the playoffs. The Brewers have the regular season nailed. Let's look toward the playoffs.

Last year, among playoff teams, the Brewers were 2nd behind the Dodgers in OBP. They were last in Slugging. They were also last among playoff teams in slugging in 2023. That is where I would look to improve. 

And if you read page one of the thread, you had two posts by sveumrules and two by wiguy94 and you say that the calls for more power are "reflexive and not backed by data"? Those two guys eat and breathe data.

The one caveat I would add, and I would consider myself neutral on the subject of currently NEEDING to add more power now, is that there are really two seasons to deal with. As you mentioned, the Brewers seem to have the regular seasons nailed. Right now I think the focus is on building the best 40 man roster that can survive 162 games and come out alive at the end. I think the 2nd roster that needs to be built is the playoff roster and that is where we maybe need to be more aggressive, maybe more so than we have in the past. Once we hit summer and are positioned nicely ... I think "Do we have enough power?" is a super appropriate question to ask and act on. Right now, I really want the best players we can get that can get us the 162.

Who could have known Tobias and Perkins were going to be season savers when it all started last year. Imagine if he had "dealt from depth" before the year and traded Perkins for someone with power? Who knows, in a weird twist of fate maybe Mike Boeve ends up hitting 12 home runs for us this year.

Again, I don't think anyone is wrong in this instance ... but personally I just want the best players on the 40 man that we can acquire to start the year, all else equal. Sorry I rambled, hope that makes sense.

[brewfanmn]

4 hours ago, Underachiever said:

I would suggest a team of Vince Colemans and a team of Dave Kingman's would both be uniformly awful. No one is suggesting such a binary here. I am asking that the Brewers use their remaining dollars and roster space to find a player or two that has some power. I believe that that will help with the playoffs. The Brewers have the regular season nailed. Let's look toward the playoffs.

Last year, among playoff teams, the Brewers were 2nd behind the Dodgers in OBP. They were last in Slugging. They were also last among playoff teams in slugging in 2023. That is where I would look to improve. 

And if you read page one of the thread, you had two posts by sveumrules and two by wiguy94 and you say that the calls for more power are "reflexive and not backed by data"? Those two guys eat and breathe data.

Would you rather the Brewers add:

A .280/.345/.390, 110 wRC+, 2.5 WAR player with 10 HR

or

A .245/.305/.440, 105 wRC+, 2.0 WAR player with 25 HR?

That’s where the disconnect is for me. I get the sense that the folks clamoring for power would actually rather pursue slightly worse players just to check the power box, when statistically that would be a flawed approach to team-building

I understand why someone would look at a leaderboard with a team ranking #2 in OBP and #15 in SLG and think that team needs to target power. But even that team would benefit just as much by increasing team OBP 10 points as it would increasing team SLG 10 points. The shape or balance of the production just doesn’t matter. The amount does. It’s not like there are diminishing returns to the value of getting on base.

Hell, even if you were #1 in OBP and #30 in SLG, the research shows that if anything, you’d actually be better off continuing to add OBP

[wiguy94]

4 hours ago, Underachiever said:

I would suggest a team of Vince Colemans and a team of Dave Kingman's would both be uniformly awful. No one is suggesting such a binary here. I am asking that the Brewers use their remaining dollars and roster space to find a player or two that has some power. I believe that that will help with the playoffs. The Brewers have the regular season nailed. Let's look toward the playoffs.

Last year, among playoff teams, the Brewers were 2nd behind the Dodgers in OBP. They were last in Slugging. They were also last among playoff teams in slugging in 2023. That is where I would look to improve. 

And if you read page one of the thread, you had two posts by sveumrules and two by wiguy94 and you say that the calls for more power are "reflexive and not backed by data"? Those two guys eat and breathe data.

You know what they say. Breakfast Data is the most important meal of the day!

[wiguy94]

9 minutes ago, brewfanmn said:

Would you rather the Brewers add:

A .280/.345/.390, 110 wRC+, 2.5 WAR player with 10 HR

or

A .245/.305/.440, 105 wRC+, 2.0 WAR player with 25 HR?

That’s where the disconnect is for me. I get the sense that the folks clamoring for power would actually rather pursue slightly worse players just to check the power box, when statistically that would be a flawed approach to team-building

I understand why someone would look at a leaderboard with a team ranking #2 in OBP and #15 in SLG and think that team needs to target power. But even that team would benefit just as much by increasing team OBP 10 points as it would increasing team SLG 10 points. The shape or balance of the production just doesn’t matter. The amount does. It’s not like there are diminishing returns to the value of getting on base.

Hell, even if you were #1 in OBP and #30 in SLG, the research shows that if anything, you’d actually be better off continuing to add OBP

I just want the Brewers to add one more good hitter. Right now I think we have 3 likely good hitters (talking 115+ wRC+) in Chourio, Contreras, and Yelich and Yelich has injury concerns. Adding another good LHH would be awesome for balancing the lineup.

1. Chourio

2. Yelich

3. Contreras

4. Mystery 115 wRC+ LHH

5. Hoskins

6. Mitchell

7. Ortiz

8. Frelick

9. Turang

I don't think it's a realistic option and I don't know how we would make it fit defensively, but like Brandon Lowe would be an ideal option to fill that mystery cleanup spot.

[sveumrules]

54 minutes ago, wiguy94 said:

I just want the Brewers to add one more good hitter. Right now I think we have 3 likely good hitters (talking 115+ wRC+) in Chourio, Contreras, and Yelich and Yelich has injury concerns. Adding another good LHH would be awesome for balancing the lineup.

1. Chourio

2. Yelich

3. Contreras

4. Mystery 115 wRC+ LHH

5. Hoskins

6. Mitchell

7. Ortiz

8. Frelick

9. Turang

I don't think it's a realistic option and I don't know how we would make it fit defensively, but like Brandon Lowe would be an ideal option to fill that mystery cleanup spot.

Lowe definitely falls flush in the Venn Diagram overlap of proven hitter, the Brewers can afford him, likely available, and on a team we have trade history with.

Think he would need to play like 40 games each at 2B / 1B / DH to make it work defensively.

[Underachiever]

1 hour ago, brewfanmn said:

Hell, even if you were #1 in OBP and #30 in SLG, the research shows that if anything, you’d actually be better off continuing to add OBP

I see the Padres in 2022 were 22nd in SLG, 8th in OBP. They are an outlier. In the last four years, 12 of the 16 final four teams were in the top seven for slugging. The other four were 10th, 16th and 17th (and none of them were dramatically better in their OBP rank).

it doesn’t seem that teams that are low SLG, high OBP, make it far in the playoffs very often. 

[sveumrules]

18 minutes ago, Underachiever said:

I see the Padres in 2022 were 22nd in SLG, 8th in OBP. They are an outlier. In the last four years, 12 of the 16 final four teams were in the top seven for slugging. The other four were 10th, 16th and 17th (and none of them were dramatically better in their OBP rank).

it doesn’t seem that teams that are low SLG, high OBP, make it far in the playoffs very often. 

Yeah, it seems like every postseason they flash up the onscreen graphic showing how the team that hits more HR in any given game has some obscene win percentage.

Couldn’t find anything more recent, but this deep dive into the topic by Mike Petriello from 2020 does a pretty thorough job looking into it.

[brewfanmn]

24 minutes ago, Underachiever said:

I see the Padres in 2022 were 22nd in SLG, 8th in OBP. They are an outlier. In the last four years, 12 of the 16 final four teams were in the top seven for slugging. The other four were 10th, 16th and 17th (and none of them were dramatically better in their OBP rank).

it doesn’t seem that teams that are low SLG, high OBP, make it far in the playoffs very often. 

Yeah, of course. SLG is really important. So is OBP. I’m not suggesting SLG is bad or something. My point is that the makeup of a team’s current lineup should have zero importance on the types of players they pursue to add to the roster moving forward. Whether you’re a high OBP/low SLG team, a low OBP/high SLG team, or anywhere in between, it makes no sense to restrict yourself to “targeting” specific types of players. You should just be targeting the players that most improve your win expectancy through the combination of creating runs offensively while saving runs defensively. 

[TURBO]

Even with Willy we were lacking power, now you take away our biggest power source, add a guy (Durbin) who doesn't hit for power, and it's pretty obvious we will be deficient in the power catagory.

[Playing Catch]

Are there any studies that show how simply outhitting your playoff opponent does to winning%, or most total bases?

[Fear The Chorizo]

7 minutes ago, Playing Catch said:

Are there any studies that show how simply outhitting your playoff opponent does to winning%, or most total bases?

This level of analysis isn't really worth much of a deep dive - simply because playoff baseball is different than weighing marginal increases in team stats that lead to an improved record over 162 regular season games.

Having a bunch of bats in the lineup capable of scoring a run with 1 swing of the bat in October is invaluable in playoff baseball - but I also think a high-OBP lineup with speed can create alot of chaos in pressure-packed situations, too.

If the Brewers are looking to trade Hoskins, I think they really need to add another bat with pop over at 1st...this might be where adding Goldschmidt makes sense.  I think a healthy Mitchell paired with Yelich and Chourio in the OF are capable of providing plenty of power across those 3 positions in the lineup, and Contreras is an elite catcher offensively.  Without a SS capable of hitting mid-20's HRs over a season's worth of at bats, the Brewers do need to put those type of bats at 1B and 3B...I'm hopeful Wilken takes a huge leap forward next season and we start looking at him at 3rd or 1st in the very near future - he's the type of hitter the Brewers need at those positions longterm.

[brewerfan82]

I don't buy that in an individual playoff game the physics of baseball changes to benefit teams with power more than they do in an individual regular season game.

The difference between a good regular season team and a good playoff team (other than dumb luck in small sample sizes) is being top heavy in good hitting and good pitching. A 162 game regular season benefits teams that are deep and not dependent on a handful of impact players. Once you get to the playoffs, the teams with the best starting 9 and top 2-3 starting pitchers have a major advantage. But I don't care if they're the best because they can hit a homerun once every 15 at bats or because they get on base at a .400 clip.

I think you could argue the Brewers' recent success comes from being a deep team without many holes, which has lead to a lot of regular season success. That's probably also a more effective way to stay successful without the ability to pay out 100's of millions of dollars for superstar players.

So while it'd be great to add power to the lineup, at our market level, that power is going to come with other caveats (low OBP, bad fielding, etc.), so I'm not sure we NEED to add power just to add power, we need to add the best all around players we can and hope that we get some small sample size magic in the playoffs one of these years.

[Playing Catch]

I guess the point of my question is that a good on-base percentage is often a reflection of hitters taking walks. Presumably, there are fewer walks in the playoffs due to higher quality pitching.

All of the "home-runs in the playoffs" articles only reference homers. I'm curious though, if the winning percentages are similar for a team that simply out-hits their opponent. Not necessarily out-homers.

But like you said, probably not worth very much.

[Underachiever]

8 minutes ago, Playing Catch said:

I guess the point of my question is that a good on-base percentage is often a reflection of hitters taking walks. Presumably, there are fewer walks in the playoffs due to higher quality pitching.

All of the "home-runs in the playoffs" articles only reference homers. I'm curious though, if the winning percentages are similar for a team that simply out-hits their opponent. Not necessarily out-homers.

But like you said, probably not worth very much.

I'd be willing to play with that a little bit if you define what "out-hits their opponent" means. Sheer number of hits? Total bases? Seems like a fun project.

[Doug B]

Garrett Mitchell can replace 25 HR and 170 K's. 

[Frisbee Slider]

Quickly put together, I think Milwaukee will have more HR in 2025:

Brewers had 177 HR in 2024. 

 

I don’t expect many HR from Frelick but some of our bench bats will be in double digit HR totals.

[Devinep]

3 hours ago, Doug B said:

Garrett Mitchell can replace 25 HR and 170 K's. 

He likely won’t stay healthy long enough to hit 25 hrs in a season. He also might get the Huira treatment when teams take advantage of his inability to hit up in the zone 

[titanrick]

Honestly, I'm much more worried about losing Willy's clubhouse presence than his power.  I'm guessing Yelich and Hoskins will rebound and Chourio will take the next step.

[brewers888]

An infield with Turang, Ortiz, and a Dunn/Durbin platoon is way short on power and I really hope we plan to upgrade on Dunn/Durban who should really only be competing with Monasterio for the last player on the bench position.

Rosenthal who isn't in the gossip business believes we are going to go with a Dunn/Durban platoon and will also look to dump Hoskins to save money. If this happens its a sign that we are not serious about winning and would be beynd disappointing. Its bad enough that the financial rules of the game are crippling the small market teams like the Brewers but I've got to hope that we are not serious about going with Dunn/Durban as anything other than backups. 

[brewerfan82]

Just to clarify... here's what Rosenthal said about Durbin/Dunn at third (https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5994597/2024/12/14/mariners-luis-castillo-trade-mlb-offseason-notes/):

Quote

If Turang stays at second, the Brewers can play Ortiz at short and potentially go with a combination of the newly acquired Caleb Durbin and Oliver Dunn at third. The 5-foot-6 Durbin might not have enough arm for third, but the Brewers believe his speed, scrappiness and contact skills will fit their style of play. He set a single-season Arizona Fall League record with 29 stolen bases his fall.

And what Rosenthal said about Hoskins:

Quote

*As one might suspect, the budget-conscious Brewers are open to moving first baseman Rhys Hoskins, who will earn $18 million next season and also is owed a $4 million buyout on a mutual option for 2026.

I wouldn't leap to the conclusion that the Brewers are planning on Durbin/Dunn at 3rd and actively pursuing to trade Hoskins with no plans to replace his production at first base from that.

[wiguy94]

On 12/17/2024 at 10:09 PM, brewerfan82 said:

Just to clarify... here's what Rosenthal said about Durbin/Dunn at third (https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5994597/2024/12/14/mariners-luis-castillo-trade-mlb-offseason-notes/):

And what Rosenthal said about Hoskins:

I wouldn't leap to the conclusion that the Brewers are planning on Durbin/Dunn at 3rd and actively pursuing to trade Hoskins with no plans to replace his production at first base from that.

I'm already dreading Caleb Durbin being used as a weak side platoon guy by the Brewers. In his minor league career his OPS against RHP is over .800 and his OPS against LHP is in the .600's.

[gregmag]

12 minutes ago, wiguy94 said:

I'm already dreading Caleb Durbin being used as a weak side platoon guy by the Brewers. In his minor league career his OPS against RHP is over .800 and his OPS against LHP is in the .600's.

I suspect the Brewers know all about his reverse splits and Rosenthal doesn’t.

[wiguy94]

24 minutes ago, gregmag said:

I suspect the Brewers know all about his reverse splits and Rosenthal doesn’t.

The Brewers have shown absolutely nothing that would lead one to indicate they believe reverse splits are real.