LouisEly

Interesting article over on BCB about how Chase Anderson has stopped throwing his cutter, and in the 12 appearances/11 starts since has a 2.54 ERA: http://www.brewcrewball.com/2016/9/23/13028858/brewers-starter-chase-anderson-has-ditched-his-cutter The interesting stat is that when he threw the cutter this year "opponents hit an unfathomable .435 with a .565 slugging percentage against the pitch". Also mentioned that he didn't start throwing it until 2014 and threw it rarely in 2015, but threw it more this year to try to be more effective against RHH - Anderson has reverse splits with a career OPS-A vs. RHH of .835 but only .713.

Depends on how they do the calculations and whether they normalize the data. I ran both runs/game and runs/PA; while runs/game will be essentially the same as total runs (unless a team plays less than 162 games, which has happened), teams that win a lot of games will frequently not bat in the bottom of the 9th. They might score more runs had they batted a 9th time; then there is the issue of extra innings games. Thus runs/PA may be more appropriate. Also, OBP/SLG/OPS are technically a per-PA stat, so it might make more sense to look at runs/PA as opposed to runs. Were the calculations based on runs/PA or just runs? It also depends on the time series you are looking at. Maybe that was the case 10/20 years ago, but is that relevant today? Has PED testing changed the game such that different variables have different importance now? That's why I looked at only the last five years. They could also have looked at it from an individual player standpoint, but since it is a team game and it usually takes multiple players to generate runs (unless it is a HR - one guy must get on base and another guy drive him in) it may be more appropriate to look at it from a team stat standpoint.

No, OBP technically has the third lowest variance - slightly higher than BA and OPS, but essentially the same as those two (exactly the same as OXS). SLG has the highest variance.

Looking at team data over the last five years (n=150), I ran correlation coefficients between runs/PA and BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, and OXS. BA had the least correlation (.692), followed by OBP (.755), then SLG (.906), and OPS (.922) was essentially tied with OXS (.920). When looking at runs/game and BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, the results were similar - BA (.712), OBP (.806), SLG (.894), and OPS (.931) also essentially tied with OXS (.933). While correlation does not necessarily imply causation, it suggests that SLG and OPS may be more important to runs scored than OBP.

I appreciate the research MrAllen. In looking at some of the players that B-R comps for Braun through age 31, many of them, IMO, don't appear to be on the same level as a hitter or an athlete. Walker appears to be the best comparison in terms of production and athleticism - yes, there is no official stat for "athleticism" but SBs can be a good proxy - and thus why B-R has him #1. Berkman comps well offensively, but was never the athlete that Braun is. Carlos Lee only once in his career put up an OPS equal to Braun's career OPS, and once into his 30's was not the athlete that Braun is (Lee is listed in B-R as 6'2", 270). Mondesi never put up an OPS in a season equal to Braun's career OPS, and only twice put up an OPS > .850; he simply was never the pure hitter that Braun is. IMO, the list of players who have/had Braun's hit tool and athleticism is a short list, making comparisons difficult. I really do believe that athleticism - which is usually the result of better fitness training - will allow position players to be productive longer and overcome minor injuries better. I look at guys such as Braun and Joey Votto and think that they can hang around longer as position players and not have to DH because they keep themselves in better shape. Holliday is certainly declining and certainly has put a lot of effort into weight training, but there is a difference between weight training and athletic training. He seemed to have a "conspicuously good physique", and also had several years that were Coors-field inflated (home OPS 1.157, road OPS .860 in 2007).

Fixed to remove condescension. Let's all stop with calling people ridiculous, and post more polite rebuttals if you disagree.

You're right, it is a ridiculous comparison because Braun is a much better athlete and is in much better shape than Ortiz (Braun has almost as many SBs this year as Ortiz has in his entire career). Braun will age better than Ortiz, allowing him to be a position player much longer. Braun's top comparisons through age 31 are Larry Walker and Lance Berkman, both of whom played almost exclusively in the NL and were productive into their mid-late 30's. Injuries caught up to Walker at age 37, but he still posted a 154(!) OPS+ at age 37 and a 130 OPS+ at age 38. (Yes, he played in Denver, but he had a road OPS+ of 109 at age 36 and his age 38 season was in STL). Injuries caught up to Berkman at age 36, but still posted a 164 OPS+ at age 35 for STL, a fairly pitcher-friendly park. So how about we use Walker and Berkman as examples of why he may not regress?

I really wish that people would stop making definitive statements based off of past performance; it's a good indicator of future performance, but it does not reflect whether people are making adjustments and improving. And references to league averages are exactly that - averages; whenever you are dealing with averages there will always be players above and below the mean who don't regress to the mean. And FIP/xFIP isn't an exact science either. I also wish people would look at league performance. Even if Guerra is a true 3.70 ERA performer, this year among the 65 NL pitchers with at least 100 IP that would rank 25th, or a #2 starter. A #2 starter - you don't think that has a lot of value in the trade market? It would be better than Gerrit Cole, Jeff Samardzjia, Zach Grienke, Gio Gonzalez, Wainwright, Wacha, Nola, and Archie Bradley. Let's stop acting like a 3.70 ERA means you're mediocre, because that is far, far from the truth.

For those expecting Braun to significantly decline in the next 2-3 years, David Ortiz says hello. Despite the shifts employed on him, Ortiz still leads the league in doubles at age 40. David Ortiz has also played in over 146 games in a season only once since his age 30 season - he needs a few days off every year as well. I don't think Boston regrets his contract one iota. Obviously the advantage Ortiz has is being a DH. That's not an option unless the Angels magically come up with something resembling prospects. I've said before that I can easily see the Red Sox and Yankees putting on the dog-and-pony show for Braun trying to get him to remove them from his no-trade list. Braun's career road OPS is .899 and at home is .926 - he's not inflating his stats at home. Pure hitters - such as Ortiz and Braun - are pure hitters.

Oh yes. They are out there, but many of the owners don't think to advertise on Google Maps or on Yelp (you can't post reviews of your own business on Yelp, but you can list your business). It's a pain to find any car wash, even the self-service ones. You practically have to stumble upon them while driving around.

This is the positive post thread. People can say whatever they want - whether you agree with it or not, whether it is realistic or not - so deal with it. Put the criticism in another thread. I saw something that said the Brewers have one of the best team ERAs, if not the best team ERA, in the second half of the season. Considering how many games they have played recently against the Cubs, Cardinals, and Pirates, that's something to be very positive about. Remember, Cubs pitchers don't get to face Cubs hitters, Cardinals pitchers don't get to face Cardinals hitters, etc., so those pitchers have a slight advantage when it comes to comparable stats.

Because things simply change. Once the off season hits the Dodgers will likely have other options they will explore. I have no doubts the teams will revisit this trade in the off season, but there is a reason the trade didn't happen. The teams simply couldn't agree on the return going back to the Brewers. Now yes they did run out of time, but there is no guarantee that more time would have lead to a better outcome. Regardless who knows what will happen in the off season as they could easily go a different route. Things do change, and the biggest thing IMO is that the Dodgers have a ton of money coming off the books this year and next. The Dodgers have up to $90M coming off the books after the season, depending on what happens with Turner and Jansen. Right now they are committed to $179M next year ($189M is the luxury tax threshold), and if McCarthy and Puig get moved in the deal they are around $180M with the addition of Braun. I think the hangup was centered around one or both of these things: 1) The Brewers want a 3rd team in the deal to take McCarthy or Puig B) The Dodgers realized how close they can be to getting under the luxury tax for 2017 and want to figure out how to move Kendrick or Ethier, in this deal or another. Particularly with scenario B, that could allow for huge implications for the Dodgers which time can provide.

I think it's more of a case of so many other quality guys. Just thinking about some of the guys who weren't on my list - Perrin, Coulter, Ventura, Burnes, Supak, Yamamoto, Harber, Feliciano, Webb, Burkhalter... three or four years ago McDowell would have been on the list but the system is really, really deep right now. So Broxton and Arcia get photos when they graduate, but Marinez does not? Where's the love?

Two errors in an inning, forcing Garza to throw a lot more pitches than he needed to, and Votto up with the bases loaded. What else is new? I wonder what the real effect is of pitchers having to throw more pitches in an inning because of errors.

I seem to recall that Correa was generally considered one of the top 3-4 players in that draft, but signed for a low slot because he had no intentions of playing college ball. I recall quotes from him where he said he wanted to start playing (and collecting a paycheck) right away. Speaking of the Astros, the other side of the coin is 2014 where they lost two picks because it backfired on them. With the bonus pool instituted in 2012 it's going to be too early to draw any conclusions, certainly for 2016 and 2015 and probably for 2014, considering that almost all examples are HS players. But we can look and see trends. I can't find anything that lists slot and actual for 2012 so I'll have to guess who signed for well above slot (looking for at least $500K over in 1a and 2nd rounds, $400K over in 3rd or later, can't be team's first pick): 2012: Gallo - hit McCullers - hit Smoral - miss Weickel - miss DeCarlo - miss Underwood - neutral (positive 2014/2015, negative 2016, but looks like he was injured) White - miss Kelly - in the majors, but .672 career OPS in minors, neutral Aune - miss Pike - neutral/leaning miss Ruiz - neutral/trending up Buttrey - miss Kivel - miss 2013: Manaea - hit A. Wilson - miss Mercado - miss Hanneman - miss Ward - neutral/leaning miss Brady - neutral/leaning miss Nunez - neutral (looked good 2014/2015, not 2016) Bohn - miss Michalczewski - neutral/leaning miss Driver - miss Nicely - miss Wiper - neutral 2014: Gatewood - negative trend Harrison - negative trend Blewett - negative trend Morgan - negative trend DeCarr - negative trend Bradley - positive trend (technically not $400K over but close) Sands - negative trend Steele - neutral (positive first two years, negative 2016) L. Thomas - neutral/leaning negative Cease - positive (high BB rate though) T. Scott - negative trend Overall not looking good. I think the point here is that no matter how much pool money a team has, ultimately draft picks have risks and most don't pan out. I still believe you can get more (and a higher success rate) by trading veterans doing well. The players acquired in the Smith/Lucroy/Jeffress trades (Bickford, Susac, Brinson, Ortiz, Cordell) have as good of a trend or better than anyone on this list except McCullers. Freddie Peralta - one of three pieces acquired for Adam Lind - looks better than a majority of the pitchers on this list (Herrera's off to a good start too, 8.8 K/9 and 2.2 BB/9 in AZ). But McCullers appears to be the exception, not the rule; less than 1/3rd appear to be legitimate MLB prospects so far.

Bingo. In the last 15 seasons only two World Series winning teams have had pitching staffs with an average age under 28 - the 2003 Marlins (26.1) and the 2010 Giants (27.5). The median is closer to 30; the Cubs this year is 30.4, with only one starter is under the age of 30, so if it is weighted by innings the average age is higher. The Marlins are likely the outlier with 21-year-old Willis and 23-year-old Beckett, and the heavy amount of innings they pitched at such young ages may very well have contributed to the early ending of their careers (Beckett was saddled with injuries at 30, Willis was washed up by age 26/27). If you're on the way down I can see getting rid of pitchers when they are 27/28, and if Braun is moved then there certainly is justification to believe the Brewers won't compete for 3-4 years. But there is no rush to trade pitchers who are 27 unless you get an offer that is too good to pass up (or have absolute studs pushing them for roster spots).

This is the second time in a week that someone has been out at home by at least 4-5 steps with Braun up next. Whenever that happens that is on the 3rd base coach. You have to know where the ball is hit, how good of an arm the fielder has, how fast your player is, and where your player is in relation to the ball and defender. Doesn't matter how good of a jump your player got - it's on you to determine whether to send him, and if your best hitter is up next your guy better have a 95% chance of scoring. It's one thing if the pitcher is up next and it's early in the game and you don't want to burn a PH, but if your best hitter is up next this cannot happen. For those rooting for a higher draft pick, Sedar is your best friend. Peralta gave up a walk and one hard-hit ball in the first, got burned by the shift twice, and gave up a lucky blooper. Should have gotten out of it with one run given up. The second knockdown by Villar was a result of the shift, the way he went after it was the only way he could have recovered and had a chance at a runner.

It was his first vs St Louis since his suspension. Man, that just seems crazy to me. It also could be his last AB vs. STL as a Brewer. No more fitting way to go out.

That's my point. In order to do that you have to sacrifice the #3 overall player and settle for a #11-16 overall player. The Brewers had that option, and they tried it before - see 2014. Hasn't worked out well so far. If they would have went with players ranked at those slots (Turner/Beede/Newcomb at 12, A.J. Reed at 41) they would be a lot further ahead. The 2nd round overslot guys from that draft (Harrison, Blewett, Forbes, Morgan) aren't doing so well. And by having players do well, they were able to get one of the overslot guys (Supak) anyway.

I said it was $2.1M; $500k is how much more under slot the #3 pick was than the #5 pick was, factoring in that the #3 pick signed for $1.5M more than the #5 pick signed for. $6.2M slot - $5.5M (what Rodgers signed for) = $700K $4.2M slot - $4M (what Tucker signed for) = $200K $700K - $200K = $500K. That's what I am referring to. The third pick - after factoring in what the players signed for - was only worth $500K more than the #5 pick.

Dodgers released a couple of guys in the last month that I think are worth a look in 2017. Matt West was a 2nd round pick of TEX in 2007 as an infielder and converted to pitcher in 2011. Career 9.1 K/9 in the minors, his K's took a dip this year (7.4) but in 46 innings gave up 35 hits, 8 BB (0.928 WHIP), and only 1 HR with a 2.33 ERA, all pretty impressive for the PCL. 2015 was 9.3 K/9, 2.9 BB/9, 1.238 WHIP, 3 HR, 3.54 ERA in 54 innings. In his limited major league trials it looks like he threw his FB around 94, change around 85, and curve around 75. He's 27, will be 28 in 2017, but I think worth a flier on a minor league deal with NRI. I'd be inclined to release Boyer now and claim West, give him a 2.5 week trial, and try to convince him to come back next year. Zach Walters was released back in mid-August. Yes, that Zach Walters, who was traded for Asdrubal Cabrera in 2014 and posted a .980 OPS that year in AAA. His K/BB ratio has improved dramatically since 2013 (it needed to), but has had a couple of "meh" seasons in AAA the last two years. Maybe he wasn't that good, maybe he was demotivated after only getting 180 PAs in the majors in his career and needs a change of scenery. Zach is only 26, will be 27 next year, and is a switch hitter with some positional flexibility - he played every position except catcher for Oklahoma City this year. Maybe switch hitting isn't the right thing for him - he was much stronger from the left side, posting a .842 OPS as a LHB vs. RHP, and was stronger as a LHB vs RHP in 2015. Brewers could use another lefty bat in the lineup, especially with those numbers against RHP. Could be a good 25th man to have, and if the Brewers move Braun and lose Wren/Reed in the Rule 5 draft there will be spots open in the OF.

The best moves are the ones where you give up little and get value. If I were to rank them: 1) Claiming Guerra 2) Rogers for Broxton + Supak 3) Cash for Marinez 4) Signing Carter 5) Signing Torres For those six players the only things he gave up were Rogers and cash. Trading for Villar and Susac/Bickford would be next, followed by the Segura deal, but he had to give up value to get value in those cases. Edit: Agree with Brew4U, Melvin did a good job of putting Stearns in a position to have valuable chips to trade for prospects.

That's not what I was getting at. I don't recall anyone having Ian Anderson in their top 10 much less top 5; he was an obvious deliberate overdraft to generate additional bonus pool money for later picks. He was not considered to be the #3 overall pick, and is not a #3 overall talent. My assumption was built on taking the #3 overall player at #3; quality not quantity a la 2014, which is looking like a disaster so far. What I was getting at was how Riley Pint, the #4 pick, signed for ~$700K more than Ray at #5. Those were guys who were projected to go around those picks. Because Pint signed for more, the amount under slot was all of $150K more than what Ray was under slot. Higher picks should sign for more if they are really better players. Look at 2015 - the #3 pick signed for $1.5M more than the #5 pick. Generated ~$500K more in extra pool, even though the slot is $2.1M higher. Yes, that can buy you an additional signee or two, but what are the chances that those players make it? My point is that you can get higher quality prospects and more of a sure thing by trading veterans who are performing well than $500K in pool money will buy you.

Don't higher picks sign for more money? How does that leave you with more money unless you purposely draft a player who isn't the 3rd best player available to get an underslot signing?

Funny how Puig/McCarthy was postulated in the 9th post of this thread. With the luxury tax threshold being $189M and the Dodgers committed to $179M in 2017, Puig/McCarthy combine for $18.2M. Braun is owed $19M; the salaries in 2017 are basically a wash and the Dodgers are $9M under the limit pending other acquisitions. The Dodgers have a number of position players who will be major league minimum (Barnes, Segedin, Taylor, Thompson, Toles); they should be OK with internal replacements for Utley, Ruiz, Reddick and Turner. They will likely need to let Turner walk to stay under the luxury tax threshold. They will need cheap bullpen help though. In no way is Torres a replacement for Jansen, but the Dodgers might have to let Jansen walk in addition to losing Blanton, Howell, and Chavez (likely let Fien walk too) to stay under the threshold. If the Brewers are taking on McCarthy then they better be getting at least one of De Leon/Alvarez and one of Bellinger/Buehler/Sheffield. Keibert Ruiz would be a nice get for including Torres, maybe Abdullah or Sborz. Braun + Torres + another cheap bullpen arm (Rowen/Scahill/Marinez) to LA. Puig/McCarthy to MIL plus either De Leon/Buehler/Ruiz or Alvarez/Bellinger/Sborz plus another prospect to MIL. Then see what you can get for Puig. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets bigger. For the Dodgers to retain Jansen they will need to move another piece (Kendrick, Ethier). The Brewers could take on one of those guys, essentially buying their one-year contracts for additional Dodgers prospects.