gregmag

You made a strong assertion with no support or explanation for anyone who might not already agree with you. Essentially, you acted like you think *you’re* infallible — like you’re above the need for persuasion that norms of intelligent conversation place on us mere mortals. BrewerFan came back with a thorough, substantive, fleshed-out reply. The best you could do in response was bluster and name-calling. As for me, I loved the Payne pick at the time, so I’d have a hard time buying that this Ebel pick is as clearly bad as you suppose if it comes in at slot (though of course I’ll be happier if it comes in lower). The Brewers aren’t infallible; they whiffed on Brown and Wilken. But they’ve earned the benefit of more than tossed-off hot takes and juvenile cheap shots.

This is a very interesting point given the number of guys we’ve recently moved up from A+ to AAA (Adamczewski, Fischer, Ragsdale) and also from the complex to A (Frias, Martinez). Obviously those guys all deserved the promotions, but the timing also makes them all more credible trade candidates if they perform decently — which the AA guys certainly are doing. This is always a tough exercise because selling low is a bad idea (Jett), but you want to keep your guys who look good now. So you’re looking to consider trading guys (a) who are putting up numbers, (b) at positions / player types of depth, (c) whom you like less than your other prospects of that type. I would add (d) players who are (relative to your other prospects) older for their levels. Based on those criteria, I’d be most comfortable parting with Dinges, Burke, and Ragsdale (though losing Josiah would hurt my prospect-hugging heart). (Edit: O’Rae too — some team is going to love his profile.) I’d part with Fischer for an overpay. I’m having a very tough time assessing the pitchers, but I assume some other team(s) will value some of our guys at the margin more than we do.

My understanding from people who know about such things is that a broken hamate bone can sap power for a while. It therefore seems short-sighted to assume that 2026 Vaughn — a high-average, low-power lefty killer — provides a good sense of what 2027 Vaughn will look like. “Last year is last year. Who cares?,” aside from its obnoxious, smug arrogance, may be exactly wrong on the substance. If the injury matters as much as I’m thinking it might, then 2025 Vaughn may be a lot more relevant than 2026 Vaughn for projecting 2027 Vaughn.

We had some epic debates around here back in the day, when Brantley started out as an on-base / speed guy, about whether he would ever hit with enough power to have a major league career.

I’ve never gotten this logic — I’m not singling you out; most people seem to have this view. Why is hitting a home run against a great pitcher so much likelier to happen than, say, getting two guys on and mixing in a stolen base, or hitting a double and a single? Great pitchers vary in their strengths, but generally they’re good at both limiting baserunners and suppressing power. Hitting a home run is harder than hitting a couple of singles. I would think the same thing would be true against great pitchers. I always hear stats about how postseason series winners usually outslug losers, but I would be surprised if the same thing wasn’t true for OBP. The slugging comparison in a vacuum answers nothing. Winning teams generally do things that win games better than losing teams do. This is an empirical question, really a cluster of related empirical questions, to which someone who knows how to crunch the numbers should be able to provide an informed answer. I’m not that guy, but I know enough to be fairly sure I haven’t seen an informed answer yet.

Me: I really need to watch the game tonight. Brandon Sproat is pitching. Spouse: Oh, is he their best pitcher? Me: No, no. He’s like their fifth-best pitcher. Spouse: Then why are you so eager to watch him? Me: There’s a real chance that he’s turning a corner to possibly becoming their fourth-best pitcher. Spouse: Get help.

This is fantastic information. Thank you. As everyone pretty much knows by now, but your post nicely documents, the depth of our system is ridiculous. I’ve been paying enough attention that most of these stats don’t surprise me, but there’s one big exception. Given Matt Wood’s low batting average, I just assumed he was running a high strikeout rate. The fact that it’s actually 11% is bonkers. He’s laboring under a .200 BABIP. One of the classic truisms of prospect watching is don’t worry about logjams; they work themselves out. I think the Brewers are pushing that envelope at catcher (and arguably some other positions). Wood and Miller are 25. They should really be in Nashville auditioning for backup catcher duties next year; but they can’t move up because Quero is there. He has performed more than well enough to be apprenticing in Milwaukee right now; but he can’t move up because Sanchez has filled his role well and Contreras wants to catch as much as possible. It’s a great problem to have, but it is a problem, in the sense of a puzzle that needs solving.

We’re losing all these close games, and maybe we’ll lose this one, but Miz-Harrison-Woody-Drohan-Gasser with Henderson in the wings looks pretty great.

Fair. But I wouldn’t trade Payne for anyone after the top two.

As of right now, the only NL team to have won or lost more than six of its last 10 games is Miami at 7-3. Just an odd little thing I noticed; no idea how common it is for nobody to be especially hot or cold.

Somebody needs to remind the Columbus pitchers how a shutdown inning after your team scores is supposed to work.

I can’t remember any other time when I could look at an ACL line score, see that the Brewers had scored anything at all, just confidently assume that one particular guy was in the middle of it, and always be right. Yes, he has a .517 BABIP and hits too many grounders. Yes, he has struck out a few more times than he’s walked, which for a Brewers prospect these days is actually notable. Yes, he has been a poor percentage base stealer. I have no idea how his defense is. But I would think he could work on those things perfectly well in a league where he can’t just carry all the opposing pitchers around in his gym bag and trade them for snacks.

Twelve runs on four hits beats eleven runs on eight hits. Never change, DSL!

Does anyone else think pitcher wins have become a terminally stupid stat? In the era when starters were supposed to go 7-9 innings and bullpens were afterthoughts, wins had the big problem of depending on run support. But for most pitchers, run support came out in the wash, so you could be pretty sure a 20-game winner was a very good to great pitcher. Bad things like Bob Welch's 1990 Cy Young happened, but the problem was limited. (As Bill James pointed out, wins as a *career* stat in that era actually had great value. If you wanted to rank the greatest pitchers of the 20th century, you could do a lot worse than taking all the 150-game winners and ranking them by wins per season and/or W/L percentage, adjusting for longevity if that's your jam.) The wins stat still has the run support problem, but in our era of heavy bullpen usage, much bigger problems have come up. The vulture scenario that happened with Ashby last night was one obvious example -- totally absurd. But what about the starter who pitches 4 2/3 shutout innings while his team stakes him to a 6-0 lead, then watches a reliever come in for four innings, give up four runs, and get the win? What are we even doing at that point? I see three possible fixes: (1) get rid of wins and losses as stats entirely; (2) change the rules for what constitutes a win or loss to account for present norms; (3) expand official scorer discretion to award wins and losses and relax the norms that guide scorers' judgment in those situations (including the five-inning starter requirement). Of course, none of this will happen. Still, what do you think?

Rengifo was rocking a .534 OPS. Jett's at .693 in Nashville. He hasn't been anywhere near great, and he isn't ready, but if you had to call him up tomorrow, he very likely would outhit and outfield (on the infield) Rengifo. Maybe the team wouldn't like having its hand forced to call Jett up before the optimal moment, but he'd get decent playing time replacing Hamilton or Ortiz, and he seems like a guy who could take initial struggles in stride. In the end, then, I don't think DFAing Rengifo rather than stashing him makes any difference.