MJLiverock

I'm with TLB on his thoughts about a potential next manager whenever that may be. I don't want another retread who sticks to the same old formulas of veteran gritty guys and only using your best reliever in save situations in the 9th even if the it is the bottom of the order instead of heaven forbid in the 8th against the meat of the order with guys on base. No guys worrying about clogging up the basepaths so he has to put fast crappy hitters at the top of the lineup. Of all the baseball players and coaches and scouts who spend time studying the game, playing the game, etc. there has to be more than the 40 or 50 names that always seem to be mentioned. There has to be someone willing to try a new approach, football has innovations all the time in team approach, constructions, offense/defense philosophy, yet baseball managers seem to come from the same factory chugging out similar models year after year with little tweaks here and there regarding basepath philosophy.

If the player's union complained about the Brewer's delaying Hardy's service time couldn't the Brewers counter that they are starting Escobar's early? And doesn't it really then just come back to the argument of performance? It wasn't like Hardy was going great and they sent him down despite his prowess at the plate and brought up some scrub at another position just to screw Hardy over. He wasn't playing well, his replacement was playing well. They very well may have lost a year of Escobar's time and gained a year of Hardy's time but that should be a wash to the union who should be looking out for all players, in this case one guy's payday may be delayed, another guy's accelerated. Hardy's going to Arby eligible so it isn't like he is going to get stuck with a $400,000 salary instead of multi millions.

Just wondering on the creation of the linear weight values and how they are determined. Looking at the example above a stolen base is valued at .22 while a caught stealing is essentially a negative .38, that seems to either undervalue the successful stolen base, i.e. putting a guy on 2nd or 3rd or overvaluing the negative impact of a caught stealing. It just seems odd when looking at 42 steals and 10 caught is only 5.44 runs over just leaving a guy on 1st 52 times and having one less out 10 times. I'm not saying its wrong, it just looks odd in a quick thought of logical outcomes that come through my mind. Sort of like the defensive impact on WAR, I always seem to think it over values defense whenever someone devalues a great hitter's production to barely better than a horrible hitter who is a good outfielder. A la Manny Ramirez comparison's to players whose offense is vastly inferior. It seems to imply the guy is making run costing errors every other game and it never appears that bad. Or guys like Kendall offsetting horrific offense, it's not like they are saving runs every other or every third game by great plays.

I can't discount the Brewers record or predictions of a .500 or sub .500 record because of injuries or underpeformance. Many of those predictions were based on assuming the performance we got from guys like Parra, Hart, Kendall, Suppan, Looper, and even Gallardo and the bullpen. I am not trying to toot my own horn but I wasn't the only one skeptical of Parra suddenly becoming a #2 or even a solid #3 type pitcher for 175+ innings. Gallardo wearing down and/or not matching Sheets/CC type numbers was very realistic, moresoe in my eyes than him stepping in and being a young Dwight Gooden, dominating guys in in first full year as a starter and coming off an injury. For many eyes there just isn't an underperformance, it is right where expected. For the predictors of 90+ wins, yeah there probably was some underperformance from the expectations needed to get to that win total but I say those predictions were too optimistic. Even without Bush's injury the team would likely only be a couple games better off right now, its not like Bush is Roy Halladay. Injuries have hit all teams and do almost every year. The Brewer roster as constructed couldn't handle any injuries which is poor roster management mainly due to the dearth of pitching depth. Losing Weeks after he seemed to really be putting it together hurt but the play of McGehee, Lopez, and Counsell has been pretty good in replacement. Catching is a black hole and was expected to be by many, the pen wearing out was expected by many, third base being a problem, also no big surprise and Hart's poor start really not surprising either. Hardy's bad season is a surprise to most, but as I look back on his career I can't say I'm shocked, he is prone to long slumps.

He walks the first guy then easily gets out of it? Apparently the major league hitters didn't get that memo from him and his liking a whole inning may be his preference and the hitter's preference too. He gave up runs in every single game he pitched an inning in, it wasn't an isolated bad inning, or bad game, or bad week, or bad luck on a single call up. It was every time he came in a game. I've got nothing against the guy, I just don't see any reason to be surprised he was DFA'd or any reason to be upset about it, he was a fringe major leaguer who was given multiple opporutunities to show he could get major league hitters out and each and every time he failed. The comparison's to Gallardo rough spot were ridiculous at best and more of a straw man than anything. Gallardo has a record of success vs. major league hitters, Swindle has none. It further illustrates the willingness to cling to straightlining minor league numbers without consideration of the jump in talent represented by the major league over minor league, even AAA players. You may not like scouting because it is hard to quanitfy but it has value and the eyes that were skeptical of Swindle's ability to get major leaguers out have been proven correct by his actual results. How long do you distrust scouts and results before letting a guy go? Do you really need or can you afford to give a guy 100 innings of getting shelled before moving on to the next reclamation project?

Too bad they didn't miss very often.http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

So it was all just bad luck for Swindle? He had bad luck in the majors with the Phillies, he had bad luck in two stints in the majors with the Brewers. I could buy it if it was once, maybe twice, but all three times he has been called up? Not only just during call ups, but every single game he has appeared in? When do you stop blaming it on luck and start believing in results and talent levels. His BABIP may well have been high because he was grooving meatballs to ML hitters. The guy has gotten 34 outs in the Majors, and given up 21 hits +6 walks to get those 34 outs. I don't see how walking guys is bad luck either. He has yieled 27 baserunner to get 34 guys out. He has given up 5 HR's in that span. That's not luck that's just getting rocked, lefty righty, both have shelled him. This is why linear projections based on minor league numbers don't work that well for everyone. The talent level shifts up in majors to a new plane and Swindle's BP type pitches didn't cut it. His only hope was to catch on as LOOGY and even then I have doubts since he isn't going to sneak that "fastball" past many major league hitters. Now he has been DFA'd for the third time. When does the unquestioning worship of projecting minor league stats fall to actual results and observation of a player's ability? Not every guy picked off the scrap heap is going to go on and become a good or even servicable ML'er, in fact, that is rare and heading back to the scrap heap is the most likely destination for these guys because they were put there for a reason.

Struggled in pro ball so he has big upside? Swindle got rocked everytime he pitched and I just don't see any upside at all. It isn't like he was some power arm with control issues, he is/was a soft tossing lefty whose best pitch really wasn't good enough to get major league hitters out and they knocked him around the ballpark. This was a guy whom some had high hopes on based on stats generated in semi pro Northwoods leagues and a very tiny sample of anything above A ball levels. I was pretty skeptical but willing to give him a shot but based on his performance I have no problem letting him go, LOOGY's aren't that hard to find, especially bad ones.

I think if you go back and watch the Parra/Fielder dustup you will see Parra whip his towel, which was reported to have snapped across Fielder's head/ears/neck area causing him to turn around and go balistic. Does he have a temper? Sure, he does and I think I would have been p od if I had just told Parra to quit being a baby and sit with the team to finish the game and then got whipped in the head as I turned around. It was most likely and accident on Parra's part as he threw the towel down in frustration but my initial reaction probably wouldn't have been good if I was Prince either. They quickly made up aftewards, probably because each explained their point of view of what happened, but it seems the only people who hold the grudge or are still worrying about it are on message boards.

I always remember liking two Roger Kahn baseball books. The Boys of Summer is about the old Brooklyn Dodgers and would satisfy your old time baseball itch, kinda of a nostalgic look at a season. Another of his book, Good Enough to Dream, chronicles his year spent as a part owner of a Class A minor league team in upstate NY. Gives sort of a behind the scenes of the difficulties of the the low minors. IIRC, it takes places in the early 80's and is a true story of his time as owner. For a funny collection of stories check out Jay Johnstone's Temporary Insanity. I think he has since put out a few other books but I haven't read them. Temporary Insanity is a memoir of his career but the stories are hilarious. I doubt players would ever do things like that again from dressing as grounds crew during a game, locking Lasorda in a hotel room and piping in the smell of fresh lasagna, trying to get Steve Garvey to swear, etc.

But he was terrible in CF. He had to play with his heels on the warning track because he couldn't go back on ball over his head, had limited range and a below average arm. I will admit I hated watching him play CF.

OK so I was bored and thought to run a little run distribution analysis for the Brewers this year and their opponents. ( not league average, just how opponents have scored vs. Brewers) Brewers scored 2 runs or less 27x or 25%; opponents 26x or 24% Brewers scored 3 runs or less 38x or 36%; opponents 41x or 38% Brewers scored 4 runs or less 59x or 55%; opponents 50x or 47% Brewers scored 6 runs or more 36x or 34%; opponents 43x or 40% Brewers scored 7 runs or more 26x or 24%; opponents 30x or 28% Brewers scored 8 runs or more 17x or 16%; opponents 23x or 21% Distribution of runs scored in a game looks pretty normal for the Brewers ---Opponents 0 - - 5 ----- 7 1 - -10----- 8 2 - -12 --- 11 3 - - 11 --- 15 4 - - 21 --- 9 5 - - 12 - - 14 6 - - 10 --- 13 7 - - 9 --- 7 8 - - 5 ------ 9 9 - - 6 - - - 3 10+ - - 6 ----11 The interesting thing from looking at the oppoents runs scored is how do teams fare against an awful pitching staff like the Brewers. Teams look like they get 5 or more runs a lot against the Brewers, or in other words if the starter is struggling most likely 5 or more are going to score, veruse being on and keeping the opponent at 3 or less. The Brewers offense likes to get 4 runs. 24 of the 41 times the staff gave up 3 runs or less for the Brewers came in April and May. The staff gave up 6 or more runs just 8 times in April & May, but 22 times in June July and 4 days of August. One final piece In Wins the Brewers score an average of 6.2 runs, in losses they score 3.2 runs per game. Average overall is 4.67 runs per game Opponents score an average of 3.1 runs in Brewer wins, and 6.8 runs in Brewer losses. The standard deviation for Brewers runs scored is 3.0 and for opponents it is 3.3.

I think they mean consistently able to score a few runs rather than 1 or 10. A team that scores 1 or 10 every game may average 5.5 runs a game but will most likely lose more games than a team that scores 5 or 6 every game even though they have the same average runs per game. The Brewers are dependent on the HR which lends itself to scoring in bunches and they have a poor batting average which would result in a higher strand rate. OBP is important but walks don't drive in runners from second so the team would be better off with a .280/.350 AVG/OBP vs. .250/.350 I know it drives some crazy but at some point you have to be able to hit the ball rather than hope for the walk. Having 3 near automatic outs in Hardy, Kendall, Pitcher reminds me of the Brewers of 5 or 6 years ago with two or three innings a game with automatic 1-2-3 outs with Cousell, Moeller and Sheets at the bottom.

This latest outing should bring an end to the quoting Swindle's indepedent league stats as "proof" he is a good pitcher. Has he ever appeared in a ML game and not given up runs?

Oh I'm not saying a package of just 2nd and 3rd tier guys gets a difference maker. But those deals often include 2nd or 3rd tier guys in them and I'd rather he use them in those packages rather than dancing around the fringes and acquiring piles of scrap heap guys and 4th/5th starter types who if all goes welll turn out to be 4th/5th starter types. That seems to be his plan for a pitching staff, grab a bunch of guys cheap and hope a couple turn out to be servicable but the end result seems to be an army of low ceiling guys and a below average staff.

Or how will the those clinging to the beleif that this team is in the playoff mix after they lose 2 out of three to each of the Padres and Dodgers feel? The pitching staff wasnt' good to begin with and I firmly believe the only people who thought it was good were looking through Brewer goggles. They had a good stretch in the beginning but it was just a minor stretch much like any team has, theirs just came in the beginning rather than buried in the middle. The staff is only going to look worse as the season drags on and the 5 inning starts continue to tire the pen and Gallardo hits the wall around 170 or so innings. Bush getting hurt didn't help but no team can expect to go with the same 5 guys in the rotation for a full year and count on a young pitcher like Gallardo to be a 200 inning ace. It wasn't believable in March and it still isn't believable to some in August. I have no problem with Rottino for Vargas, they need Vargas just to play out the string and Rottino wasn't much to give up. I just don't want to see deals for more pitching of the Vargas/Looper/Soup/ mold. I would rather package up all the minor prospects Melvin likes to deal in small acquisitions for someone who can make a difference. It appears that will be in the offseason or else the team will be in the same boat next year, ok Offense, terrible pitching, and a .500 record or worse. I don't believe they can start next year with a rotation of Gallardo/Bush/Parra/Suppan/Burns?Villy?McClung? and hope to be a contender at the end of the season. Too many questions on everyone after Gallardo, not much upside on anyone after Parra, and still no depth for inevitable injuries. I hope that September at least lets someone from AAA get a shot at starting to see if they can fill a 5th rotation spot cheaply so Melvin doesn't have to spend $4 to$5 Million on a Looper type guy and can use that money toward affording a guy who is closer to a #2 type starter that can pitch 7+ innings once in a while.

A friend of mine speculated on this trade yesterday saying Jockety covets Rolen and Rolen wanted to get back to the Midwest. I know Encarnacion always seemed to have a negative vibe given to him by the Reds media and fans. I guess they wanted the sunny disposition of Rolen.

July 22: Red Sox trade Julio Lugo to the Cardinals for Chris Duncan. July 22: Pirates trade Adam Laroche to the Red Sox for Argenis Diaz & Hunter Strickland. July 31 (reported): Red Sox trade Adam LaRoche to the Braves for Casey Kotchman. July 31: Indians trade Victor Martinez to the Red Sox for Justin Masterson, Nick Hagadone, & Bryan Price. The LaRoche experience doesn't appear to have lasted long although I don't see the advantage of going for Kotchman off the top of my head, he's a few years younger so I suppose under their control longer.

Like I say RayKingFG, I really do hope she had nothing to do with it (aside from the creepiness factor of it for her if she wasn't involved). I just find it odd that the site that originally posted it hasn't heard a peep from her or her lawyers. Wouldnt' that be the first place you would call or subpeona records from if you were really interested in finding out who took the video? Why hasn't a police report been filed anywhere? They have to have a pretty good idea which hotel it was shot in and again that would be a first step in finding out who was behind the video. She was quick to acknowledge it was her, initially to get the ball rolling on the investigation I assume, but now nothing? Even Paris Hilton tried to deny it was her on the video at first. She is a popular person in the sports world but now she is getting to be more well knows outside of just sports fans. She has supposedly turned down offers from Playboy and such but this video now in its half baked, poor quality, grainy atmosphere gives her celebrity status that added sexualism like a Playboy shoot without actually doing it, the quick video in poor quality also is a little more modest than a full blown shoot, and she has a sympathy factor as well. It doesn't jeopardize her Disney employment, provides exposure, doesn't eliminate future jobs, nor preclude her from doing a Playboy type deal later in life either. I am not trying to be mysoginist here but just pointing out the devil's advocate details to the arguments of what possible reason would there be for her to be involved. How many of celebrity videos and pictures have we been exposed to that were supposedly inadverdently leaked and yet celebs keep making these private videos or forgetting their clothes or whatever when they go out for coffee and act surprised they end up on the internet and their on the cover of half a dozen tabloids.

The whole thing has gotten weird. Apparently the video was up on the net since February and Andrews has been aware of it but the video wasn't really known until ESPN's lawyers started sending out letters. She confirmed it was her pretty quickly once a buzz started about it. The site where it was originally hosted claims to have, as of yesterday, still not been contacted by law enforcement investigators or Andrew's attorneys. No one seems to be investigating the case at all and no police report has been filed. Yet Andrews or ESPN claim they won't rest till the perpetrator is caught, but their search is starting to look like OJ's search for the real killers. If she really had no part of it I feel sorry for her, but in this day of self promotion I have to keep a little cynicism about any celebrity who's name recognigition and popularity jump as a result of unintended videos or photos. I like Andrews and beyond her looks, I think she does a good job, even great job, as a sideline reporter. She doesn't ask stupid questions, she seems to know enough about the game, and seems like she is having fun doing the interviews and joking around with the player, coaches, and even other announcers. I hope she had no part of it, it would lower my opinion of her. She has enough talent and looks to make a bigger splash than just being a sideline reporter but sometimes people just don't have the patience. There is always the fear of someone younger, prettier, and newer coming along, unfortunately the women reporters face this fear more than they should have to if they are talented at actual reporting.

I heard a caller on the radio mention last night that the Phillies didn't even give up any of the 4 guys mentioned in the Halladay rumors and could conceivably still add him to the rotation. That would make the Phillies pretty much the easy favorites for this year and next out of the National League with that offense and a rotation of Halladay, Lee, and Hamels for any series.

I don't think it looks like a dump at all. I viewed more like TheCrew stated and the team could easily have said it that way. Hall wasn't viewed as part of the core of IFers of Braun, Hardy, Weeks, and Fielder, he was the extra piece that had value and was most likely selling high. He had a good 05 when protected against RHers and had a great 06 that exceeded everything he had ever shown before. Why not take advantage of that and fill a hole where there wasn't a surplus like C, CF, or pitching? Instead of trying to find a position for Hall like moving him to CF why not trade him to a team that needed a SS or 2B who had an extra CF? I don't think anyone is say the team should have dumped Hall, it is more about dealing from your strenghts to improve your weaknesses and at the time the Brewers had an abundnce of young talent infielders with very little on the horizon for catching, CF, or pitching, you can basically never have too much pitching because it is so easy to trade it for hitting. A team can't constantly be afraid of trading away a good player- it is the only way to get a good player in return. Melvin did a good job of that with LaPorta, a guy who didn't really have a postition in Milwaukee in the near term so he spun him out to improve a glaring weakness.

I think the expectations for the pitchers should have dropped for 2009 relative to the expectations for the beginning of the 2008 season. I know some people were overly optimistic about Bush getting better and Parra stepping in and being a good pitcher while Suppan didn't regress but I just found those expectations too lofty for myself. The other problem with 09 vs. 08 is the lack of ability to get more than 6 innings out the starters which really wears out a pen. Sheets and Sabathia had that ability and could save the pen, now the pen is routinely asked to throw 3+ innings a night and over the course of 162 games this just grinds the pen down. I would expect the pen numbers to get worse as the year goes on, not rebound to early season success rates. Bush getting hurt definately made things worse since he is at least servicable, average even but short starts and bad talent with no depth is the biggest problem. Even a healthy staff would be wearing the pen out and would be below average in my opinion. Gallardo is likely to wear out further as the season drags on as well. It is tough to expect an essentially first year starter to be the anchor of your staff for approx. 200 innings. I saw a post that mentioned since Suppan has been below replacement level lately replacing him should be a blessing but the Brewers depth is so bad I dont' know if the replacements can be at this so called "replacement" level.

I don't see this team in contention anymore for 2009. Their trend is down while the competiton is heading up. While the Brewers were playing well early in the year and the Cubs/Cards struggled the team wasn't able to build a cushion and as the Cubs start getting players back from injury, Cardinals trade for players and get Lohse back they have improved. Milwaukee has seen some of their pitchers fall back to earth and others have gotten hurt. I would not be surprised to see the Brewers buried by year end and end up 10+ games out of the division lead. The problem is with no changes they will be in the exact same boat next year, not contending this year and not contending next year. The previous posts about the Beane comparisons with the pitching and "luck" of having them pan out made me think about what creeps into my mind about Melvin. Beane wasn't afraid to deal Mulder for Haren+. As someone said, Hardy won't net Bucholz now but maybe he would have earlier, not saying that Hardy should have been traded last year but more that Melvin seems very very risk averse and only wants to make deals that are fairly sure things or so cheap/ low level that they don't matter. Getting CC was a pretty obvious move, signing a bunch of scrap heap guys like Kendall, Julio, McGehee, Cat, Kapler, Mota, don't carry a lot of risk. He did step out and grab Gagne for a year as a big risk given the money for that year and Cameron has been an OK move. Cameron is worth his pay, the question is was there a cheaper option for CF where the drop off there would be offset by using the money on better pitching but that is just a hindsight question not necessarily a bad move but not necessarily the right one either. I think my main criticism of Melvin is he likes to make little moves that sort of shuffle the deck chairs around but doesn't address the glaring problems of pitching. Almost as if the focus is now so short term that the next couple years are too far out. I think the team should be sellers at this point and look to make a bigger deal rather than make a bunch of little deals for guys with low ceilings. The team doesn't need a bunch of future 4th or 5th starters because they are cheap to trade for but more of a package for future 1 or 2 starters. At this point I would rather watch Escobar and Gamel play and see whomever roam CF or close than watch them hang on for 80 wins and be no better off for next year.

Crew, I don't think your opinion and mine are that far apart. I fully concede there is a point where you can burn a guy up I just don't buy into the very strict 100 limit as it seems this thread focuses on. If you occasionally throws 110 or 115 it isn't necessarily causing him damage or abusing him. The visits to the mound or in the dugout are usually for gauging how a pitcher feels, as well as observation on his mechanics, velocity, and control to help guide a pitching coach or manager on when the player is fatiguing vs. saying nope a 100 is all anyone can expect out of a pitcher below X age. A guy may have felt like a million bucks on a day and is pitching with ease or hasn't felt the need to go max effort often and his arm feels strong pumping fastballs at 90% effort vs. a day when every pitch seems to take full effort or the breaking stuff is requiring more twist making a 90 pitch effort more damaging than 115. I just don't think we should jump to the conclusion that he is abused everytime he throws over 100. As backup catchers said there is a risk reward profile to look at and the risk may not be all that great from 100 to 112 for a guy, and may make the difference in winning or losing a game. The extreme position is being totally risk averse which has drawbacks as well. At some point the team has to trust the pitchinig coach and player to know the limits of a guy vs. relying on a generic formula that is full of holes.