Giants (McDonald) vs Brewers (Harrison): 6/2/26, 6:40pm

[Brock Beauchamp]

Kyle Harrison is on the bump again, let's notch another easy win!

	THU	FRI	SAT	SUN	MON	TOT
Trevor Megill	0	11	0	13	0	24
Shane Drohan	0	0	0	0	0	0
Jake Woodford	0	0	9	0	12	21
Grant Anderson	0	13	0	0	8	21
DL Hall	0	36	0	0	40	76
Chad Patrick	0	0	0	0	15	15
Abner Uribe	0	19	0	12	0	31
Aaron Ashby	0	15	0	0	0	15

[MilwaukeeBeers]

Kyle Harrison revenge game 

[formerlybis]

28 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Kyle Harrison is on the bump again, let's notch another easy win!

	THU	FRI	SAT	SUN	MON	TOT
Trevor Megill	0	11	0	13	0	24
Shane Drohan	0	0	0	0	0	0
Jake Woodford	0	0	9	0	12	21
Grant Anderson	0	13	0	0	8	21
DL Hall	0	36	0	0	40	76
Chad Patrick	0	0	0	0	15	15
Abner Uribe	0	19	0	12	0	31
Aaron Ashby	0	15	0	0	0	15

Whatever source you're pulling this from doesn't seem to count the pitches from when one of these guys opens/starts a piggyback game (noticed this with Patrick, too, when he did this last week) - Drohan threw 68 pitches yesterday. And, is Rob Z not on the roster? I thought they called him up, but I may have misunderstood.

In this stretch of no off-days, getting 6 IP from the "real" starters when it's their turn would help out a great deal. Ashby should be ready for action to bridge to the back end (if needed) tonight.

[Brock Beauchamp]

7 minutes ago, formerlybis said:

Whatever source you're pulling this from doesn't seem to count the pitches from when one of these guys opens/starts a piggyback game (noticed this with Patrick, too, when he did this last week) - Drohan threw 68 pitches yesterday. And, is Rob Z not on the roster? I thought they called him up, but I may have misunderstood.

In this stretch of no off-days, getting 6 IP from the "real" starters when it's their turn would help out a great deal. Ashby should be ready for action to bridge to the back end (if needed) tonight.

I'm still working on automating how to deal with openers. I wrote a custom call to the MLB API to generate these bullpen charts.

[Jim French Stepstool]

Let's hope last night was the start of good things for Sal Frelick. Seven hits from the trio of Frelick, Rengifo & Hamilton. The bottom 3rd turning the order over like that consistently would be huge.

I also loved not chasing & drawing the boatload of walks. Bauers is going to be pitched carefully if he continues to produce. I thought his taking four walks last night was beautiful.

[formerlybis]

I was looking at SF's lineup and they've got healthy batting averages and a similar (slightly higher) team OPS to the Brewers, but score about a whole run fewer runs per game. I'm no @sveumrulesbut I assume that has something to do with baserunning and productive outs - SF is dead last in SBs - only attempted 21 (15 successful), whereas the Brewers are 60 for 80. 

[willie key]

30 minutes ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

Let's hope last night was the start of good things for Sal Frelick. Seven hits from the trio of Frelick, Rengifo & Hamilton. The bottom 3rd turning the order over like that consistently would be huge.

I also loved not chasing & drawing the boatload of walks. Bauers is going to be pitched carefully if he continues to produce. I thought his taking four walks last night was beautiful.

If I was the brewer GM and I saw that when the bottom of the order actually did anything productive and all of a sudden they scored 16 runs.  That might tell me to actually do something about the bottom of the order going forward 

[wiguy94]

9 minutes ago, formerlybis said:

I was looking at SF's lineup and they've got healthy batting averages and a similar (slightly higher) team OPS to the Brewers, but score about a whole run fewer runs per game. I'm no @sveumrulesbut I assume that has something to do with baserunning and productive outs - SF is dead last in SBs - only attempted 21 (15 successful), whereas the Brewers are 60 for 80. 

100 fewer PA with RISP than the Brewers and a 91 wRC+ with RISP compared to 135 for the Brewers.

[sveumrules]

Just now, formerlybis said:

I was looking at SF's lineup and they've got healthy batting averages and a similar (slightly higher) team OPS to the Brewers, but score about a whole run fewer runs per game. I'm no @sveumrulesbut I assume that has something to do with baserunning and productive outs - SF is dead last in SBs - only attempted 21 (15 successful), whereas the Brewers are 60 for 80. 

Overall production is pretty similar with the Brewers at an even 100 wRC+ for the season while the Giants are a couple points back at a 98 wRC+.

I'd say the Giants lower run scoring is probably a convergence of a few different factors working in conjunction...

Shape of Production: while their wRC+ marks are pretty close, how the two teams have gotten there is quite different. The Brewers have an OBP heavy 334/366 line, while the Giants are SLG heavy at 300/403 with a 5.9 BB% that is historically bad.

Runners in Scoring Position: with their high OBP / low SLG approach the Brewers have gotten 100 more PA with RISP (652 to 552), and have hit much better in those opportunities (135 to 91 wRC+), resulting in an extra 62 RBI (228 to 166).

The base running you noted plays into it as well. FanGraphs has the Giants at -4.8 BsR (worst in MLB) and while the Brewers haven't been running quite as hair on fire as recent years they are still on the right side of the ledger at +1.1 BsR (12th).

Base Runs is a tool that estimates how many runs team would score with neutral sequencing. Based on the sum total of their offensive outcomes Base Runs thinks the Giants should have scored 4.27 R/G and the Brewers should have scored 4.51 R/G so far. Not too far off.

But the Brewers have been so good (& the Giants so bad) with RISP that their actual runs per game end up at 4.98 (+0.47 R/G) for the Brewers and 3.90 (-0.37 R/G) for the Giants.

[sveumrules]

There had been some talk in yesterday's IGT about who the most consistently good Brewers hitter is so I thought I'd pull some splits going back to July of last year when Vaughn joined the team and see what they have to say about things...

Contreras (559 PA | 120 wRC+)
vsRHP: 406 PA of 122 wRC+
vsLHP: 153 PA of 115 wRC+
Home: 280 PA of 158 wRC+
Away: 279 PA of 82 wRC+
Empty: 297 PA of 108 wRC+
Runners: 262 PA of 135 wRC+ 

Turang (556 PA | 140 wRC+)
vsRHP: 395 PA of 157 wRC+
vsLHP: 161 PA of 99 wRC+
Home: 281 PA of 158 wRC+
Away: 275 PA of 123 wRC+
Empty: 306 PA of 110 wRC+ 
Runners: 250 PA of 179 wRC+

Yelich (426 PA | 122 wRC+)
vsRHP: 289 PA of 122 wRC+
vsLHP: 137 PA of 122 wRC+
Home: 205 PA of 135 wRC+
Away: 221 PA of 110 wRC+
Empty: 222 PA of 108 wRC+
Runners: 204 PA of 137 wRC+

Vaughn (327 PA | 147 wRC+)
vsRHP: 213 PA of 109 wRC+
vsLHP: 114 PA of 220 wRC+
Home: 160 PA of 163 wRC+
Away: 167 PA of 133 wRC+
Empty: 156 PA of 172 wRC+
Runners: 171 PA of 125 wRC+

Chourio (322 PA | 126 wRC+)
vsRHP: 244 PA of 125 wRC+
vsLHP: 78 PA of 131 wRC+
Home: 160 PA of 104 wRC+
Away: 162 PA of 148 wRC+
Empty: 189 PA of 143 wRC+
Runners: 133 PA of 102 wRC+

Bauers (295 PA | 132 wRC+)
vsRHP: 239 PA of 141 wRC+
vsLHP: 56 PA of 94 wRC+
Home: 148 PA of 128 wRC+
Away: 147 PA of 135 wRC+
Empty: 154 PA of 134 wRC+
Runners: 141 PA of 129 wRC+

Adding up the total deviance for each of those six splits from their overall wRC+ mark in bold italics gives us a most to least consistent order of Yelich (54), Bauers (59), Chourio (91), Contreras (110), Turang (162), and Vaughn (188).

[Brewcrew82]

Notwithstanding the caveat that batting order has a limited impact, I'd like to know the reasoning behind why Pat Murphy doesn't bat Brice Turang leadoff....

Other than Shohei Ohtani, I have a hard time thinking of a more ideal leadoff candidate in the modern game than Brice...

2B Turang

RF Chourio

DH Yelich

C Contreras

LF Bauers

1B Vaughn

CF Mitchell.....

Looks like something that would end up producing a lot of runs by the end of the season provided at least basic production from the 8 and 9 spots. Best OBP hitter leading off. Maximize the PAs for your very best hitters. Power scattered effectively throughout the lineup. L-R alternates so opposing manager can't attack weakside. 

 

[Cool Hand Lucroy]

1 hour ago, sveumrules said:

Overall production is pretty similar with the Brewers at an even 100 wRC+ for the season while the Giants are a couple points back at a 98 wRC+.

I'd say the Giants lower run scoring is probably a convergence of a few different factors working in conjunction...

Shape of Production: while their wRC+ marks are pretty close, how the two teams have gotten there is quite different. The Brewers have an OBP heavy 334/366 line, while the Giants are SLG heavy at 300/403 with a 5.9 BB% that is historically bad.

Runners in Scoring Position: with their high OBP / low SLG approach the Brewers have gotten 100 more PA with RISP (652 to 552), and have hit much better in those opportunities (135 to 91 wRC+), resulting in an extra 62 RBI (228 to 166).

The base running you noted plays into it as well. FanGraphs has the Giants at -4.8 BsR (worst in MLB) and while the Brewers haven't been running quite as hair on fire as recent years they are still on the right side of the ledger at +1.1 BsR (12th).

Base Runs is a tool that estimates how many runs team would score with neutral sequencing. Based on the sum total of their offensive outcomes Base Runs thinks the Giants should have scored 4.27 R/G and the Brewers should have scored 4.51 R/G so far. Not too far off.

But the Brewers have been so good (& the Giants so bad) with RISP that their actual runs per game end up at 4.98 (+0.47 R/G) for the Brewers and 3.90 (-0.37 R/G) for the Giants.

I know wRC+ is park-adjusted, but does the overall similarity in that measure despite lower totals run production have anything to do with that stadium? Just something I'm curious about.

I know I was shocked to see the SF staff carrying such high ERAs, even though I know that park's big outfield somewhat makes up for the difficulty of hitting it out there.

[sveumrules]

Just now, Cool Hand Lucroy said:

I know wRC+ is park-adjusted, but does the overall similarity in that measure despite lower totals run production have anything to do with that stadium? Just something I'm curious about.

Home stadium was one of my first thoughts too, but StatCast actually has Oracle with slightly higher overall Park Factors (98 3yr | 97 for 2026) than AmFam (97 3yr | 96 for 2026).

Looks like the elevated HR factor that primarily propped up scoring at Miller Park has dwindled over the years...

2011 3yr HR Factor: 121
2014 3yr HR Factor: 132
2017 3yr HR Factor: 112
2020 3yr HR Factor: 110
2023 3yr HR Factor: 109
2026 3yr HR Factor: 103  

[Cool Hand Lucroy]

7 minutes ago, sveumrules said:

Home stadium was one of my first thoughts too, but StatCast actually has Oracle with slightly higher overall Park Factors (98 3yr | 97 for 2026) than AmFam (97 3yr | 96 for 2026).

Looks like the elevated HR factor that primarily propped up scoring at Miller Park has dwindled over the years...

2011 3yr HR Factor: 121
2014 3yr HR Factor: 132
2017 3yr HR Factor: 112
2020 3yr HR Factor: 110
2023 3yr HR Factor: 109
2026 3yr HR Factor: 103  

Fascinating stuff. Park factors must be so difficult to figure. Must be hard to isolate how much AmFam's declining HR factor is higher-velocity pitching versus Brewers' roster construction versus something to do with the park itself or the ratio of day games to night games to open roof, open panels, all buttoned-up, etc.

I feel like most MLB hitters would rather hit at AmFam than Oracle, but maybe the numbers know something they don't. And I do recall gripes about lighting from opposing players, so...maybe I shouldn't eye roll too hard about that.

Thanks for this analysis. Fun way to spend the pregame hours!