danzig6767

Yes, this is the case here. There is no such thing as a 'take a 3-1 pitch sign'. Maybe in little league or when the worst guy on your softball team is up, but not for 3 hitters in the majors. That would be like deciding to go for 2 after Lucroy's HR; something that does not exist in baseball. No kidding You have to have near irrational level of hate for a manager to think he or to think any MLB manager would ever tell one of his best hitters, if not his best hitter to take on both 3-1 and then 3-2, much less in the 9th inning of a tie game.

I've seen replay blow calls before, but that was amazing to blow such an obvious call with multiple angles showing the ball hit the bat first.

The thing is though, he does pull the ball sometimes and hits it hard, so why can't he do it more often? It's not as if he only pulls pitches on the inside part of the plate. Sure it could simply be injuries for the home run decline, but i wouldn't just dismiss the idea of him using PED's in the past and now he's not doing so. I only ask because i'm far from really versed on hitting mechanics and how injuries would impact a swing.

What i don't get is why the injuries prevent Braun fom pulling the ball more?

Lee also makes 25 million dollars next year, with a 27.5 million dollar vesting option for 2016 or a 12.5 million buyout. That's a lot of cash and then you also have to factor in the prospects he'd cost. I'd pass on going after Lee. I'm reasonably fine with our rotation. It's the bullpen, firstbase, and Segura's pitiful hitting which concerns me most about the Brewers chances to make the playoffs. Even though Braun is hitting for average, it would also be nice to see him starting hitting home runs again. He only has one homer in his last 140 at bats.

True, but while Lester did have a great postseason, the only other reliable starter they had in that run was Lackey who was far from ace material. Hell, the year prior Lackey had an abysmal 6.41 ERA. You get in any playoff series, especially the short five game ones and things are often very unpredictable given the nature of baseball. That's why since that great multiple titles stretch by the Yankees many years ago, baseball playoffs for the most part have been quite unpredictable from year to year. For as important as elite starters are in the playoffs, i'd say bullpens have been shown to be nearly as important. The teams who have been able to avoid blowing any games late and/or survived mediocre starts with quality bullpen work tend to have advanced, while often teams who blew late leads suffered badly for it. Ortiz deserved the World Series MVP last year, but IMO Uehara was right up there in importance with Ortiz and Lester during the Red Sox playoff run. Tazawa was also great, along with the Boston pen as a whole. In 2011, Carpenter was the Cardinals only reliable starter in the playoffs, but their pen kept the team alive in many of their games leading to a title. Clearly their offense was also great though in that run. On the flip side, the Texas bullpen arguably lost that World Series vs St. Louis.

Did you watch the playoffs in 2011? The Cardinals won a title with a team which needed insane luck to just make the playoffs and then once the playoffs started, many of their starters struggled to pitch only five quality innings. Last year Boston won it all with a pitching staff which ranked 14th in ERA. Atlanta lead the league in ERA, yet won just a single playoff game. It's simply a myth that only teams with a great rotation and pitching staff make it to the World Series. Sure you'd rather have a Kershaw and Greinke leading your pitching staff in the playoffs, but that's far from a guarantee of a spot in the World Series. History has proven that. I won't go as far as some others who say the postseason in baseball is a complete crapshoot, but it's also not very predictable either. Nor does a great rotation almost always lead to postseason success or a non-elite rotation mean that team can't go far in the playoffs so long as their bullpen and offense is productive.

Thanks to anyone who took the time to respond. I played with the settings more and it's better, but i do notice that these monitors have strict viewing angles. If i don't look straight on, video gets really distorted.

For any interested Bucks fans, they play in Summer League tonight on NBA TV. First shot to watch Parker and Giannis together.

I'm not very versed with computers. I use mine to just go online, listen to music, and watch shows/movies sometimes. Well, for a number of years i had a 19' NEC 5:4 1280 x 1024 LCD monitor. It finally took a crap on me about a week ago and my sister had a fairly new 19' AOC 16:9 widescreen monitor which was just sitting in her closet since she doesn't use a desktop PC anymore. So she gave it to me and i hooked it up. First of all i didn't care for the size of it with the widescreen aspect and another annoying factor was i thought the video image was kinda faded compared to how crystal clear my old NEC 5:4 1280 x 1024 monitor was. Same with picture images, even after messing with the settings for awhile. I gave her back the AOC and went to the store and bought a 22' LG widescreen monitor since the 5:4 types are no longer manufactured. I like the size of this monitor, but as with the AOC widescreen, no matter how much i playing with the contrast/brightness/color settings, video and images aren't near as sharp as with my old NEC monitor. My kid really loves photography and she also thought her digital pictures weren't as sharp as on the old monitor. Is this just a common aspect with these 16:9 monitors or something on my part which is making the image/video quality inferior to my 7 year old 5:4 NEC monitor because i had assumed that these new monitors would be superior?

Yesterday was a prime example of that as he rolled over four straight weak grounders to the left side of the infield.

Obviously Coors is helping him, but he is hitting .284 with an .805 OPS on the road. Not out of this world road numbers, but it shows that he's not just killing it at Coors and being mediocre to bad on the road as a number of hitters have done playing in that ballpark. With the huge inflation of player salaries, his 5 million dollar salary this year and 6.75 next year would make him a major bargain if his production remains roughly the same.

I agree with you that all of the offers proposed in this thread would be to low to acquire Morneau for a variety of reasons. 1. He's playing well and wouldn't just be a half year rental. So whoever got him would also have Morneau at a bargain price next year of only 6.75 million. 2. Because of that very team friendly contract and Colorado not being some pinch every penny small market franchise, they could easily decide to just keep him for next season with a healthy roster if a really good offer isn't sent their way. 3. That team friend contract should make Morneau quite attractive to multiple teams at the trade deadline, so trying to get him for fringe prospects like Morris and Jungmann would have very slim odds of completing a trade.

I'm with you in general. Take managers mostly out of the process as is the case in college football. The one thing though which would need to be worked out is if say the team on defense is worried that a call could be overturned, the pitcher can't just get on the rubber and try to quick pitch before the replay guy has a chance to buzz down. I watch a ton of college football and the one big flaw in their system now is that with so many offenses running these very quick to the line and snap systems, often the replay official lacks the time to buzz down before an offense gets the next snap off, negating the chance for a replay when one was warranted. This is especially true if an offense fears a play by them might get reviewed. They'll quick snap the ball in a blink.

You also forgot how much time Henderson has missed and Kintzler hasn't been as effective as the team hoped for. It's mainly been the three additions of Smith, Duke, and K-Rod which has allowed the Brewers to hold on and win so many close games. All three have been fantastic and i'll admit that when the roster was initially picked, i wasn't a fan of keeping Duke. Glad i was so wrong.

No kidding A lot of major league pitchers are really effective that only throw around 90-91 as K-Rod does because they have quality command and good secondary pitchers. Hell, we just saw that tonight with Gio Gonzalez who won 21 games two years ago without a blazing fastball. Loshe is another great example. When he threw really hard in his younger days, he never had the kind of success as he does now, even though his fastball today tends to sit in that 88-90mh range. It's not like there isn't tons of film out there of K-Rod to watch, yet he's been getting good and mediocre hitters out for years even as his velocity has dropped because he can command all his pitches well more often than not, just like any other successful pitcher who doesn't throw really hard. Plus, he has an elite changeup which he can throw at any point in the count. Speaking of that changeup. The more i watch baseball closely, the more it seems like young pitchers should all be pushed hard to learn a changeup, whenever possible. It's such a devastating pitch for guys with good command of them and not taxing on the arm. I watch Peralta and think if he can ever get just solid command of his changeup, he could be dominant. He's already really good even though everything he throws is hard, but mix in a pitch that changes speeds for hitters to think about, he'd be brutal to bat against.

It wasn't about you singularly. I see it a lot from others when it comes to K-Rod and just don't understand it given how effective he's been, especially for a guy who wasn't expected to be as important to the success of the team as he's been. Given Henderson wasn't effective early, then has been out for a long time with his injury, and Kintzler hasn't been as good as the team hoped for, Smith and K-Rod have been so hugely important in holding on to a ton of small leads all year long. Without those two, no way are the Brewers 17 games over .500 and with the best record in the NL. Yet for whatever reason, a sizable number of fans act like K-Rod has been more of a ticking time bomb high wire act than the highly effective godsend pitcher he's really been. BTW, why would you hate watching him pitch? I give K-Rod a lot of credit. The guy was used a ton while young and in turn lost velocity. So he went about remaking himself as a pitcher from a power fastball/slider thrower to a savvy changeup/command pitcher. Not a lot of guys can pull that off and still be this effective.

I won't say i don't ever get worried either, but look at the stats among other save leaders right under him. Romo 4.83/9.95 ERA the last two months Rosenthal has been good in June, but struggled in April/May Jansen is a big strikeout guy, but had a 4.86/6.75 ERA the last two months FWIW, K-Rod not having a big fastball gets me nervous at times also that he'll leave one over the plate and get it crushed. My main point was that nearly anytime i read a game thread and the 9th inning of a close game is coming, there is a common theme of oh god here comes the K-Rod high wire act to suffer through as if he's constantly got multiple baserunners on or an abnormal mount compared to other closers, even though he has a great 0.91 WHIP. Or as soon as a guy gets a hit, often out comes the K-Rod is going to blow this posts. If god forbid he actually blows a save, the venom can get pretty harsh as if he's just been lucky so far this year and now comes his complete implosion. Prior to his game today, K-Rod had 1.74 ERA/0.87WHIP/.171BAA in 10 games this month, after struggling in May. He's never going to be Kimbrel or Chapman like who can simply dominate hitters with 98mph heat, but bottom line is he's been very productive, so i just wonder why some get on him so much whenever he has a bad game, which all closers do?

I posted something in the game thread to a post by turboricky going off on K-Rod, but he's by far not alone. Why do so many here get on K-Rod almost as if he's like Axford of the last few years? I just don't get it and defies the facts? Do people expect a closer to never blow saves, allow baserunners, and/or get in scary situations? He has a fabulous .091 WHIP. So many act like he's constantly got lots of runners on base and each save is a roller coaster, yet he's among the top 5 of closers at least number of baserunners allowed per inning. His 42/9 K/BB ratio is outstanding, again among the best of all closers. His .188 BAA is also top notch. He only has two blown saves even though he leads the league in saves. Sure, i'd rather have someone like say Chapman or Kimbrel who throw 98mph with command, but those guys are pretty rare. OveralL though, K-Rod has been outstanding and a big part of the Brewers success so far. Will Smith has pitched a little better, but if say he was made closer and K-Rod switched to the 8th inning guy, that accomplishes almost nothing given 3 outs in the 8th inning of a close game mean as much as 3 outs in the 9th. It also takes away the flexibility of using Smith in the 7th inning at times when teams have buserunners on in a close game. So what am i missing about why so many Brewers fans seem to believe his typical save outing is some really abnormal high wire act compared to other closers in baseball, even though nearly all of his stats say otherwise in comparison to closers throughout the league? Is it just because he doesn't throw 97-98mph?

Why do so many here get on K-Rod, i just don't get it and defies the facts? Do people expect a closer to never blow saves, allow baserunners, and/or get in scary situations? He has a fabulous .091 WHIP. So many act like he's constantly got lots of runners on base and each save is a roller coaster, yet he's among the top 5 of closers at least number of baserunners allowed per inning. His 42/9 K/BB ratio is outstanding, again among the best of all closers. His .188 BAA is also top notch. He only has two blown saves even though he leads the league in saves. Sure, i'd rather have someone like say Chapman or Kimbrel who throw 98mph with command, but those guys are rare. OveralL though, K-Rod has been outstanding and a big part of the Brewers success so far. Will Smith has pitched a little better, but if say he was made closer and K-Rod the 8th inning guy, that accomplishes almost nothing given 3 outs in the 8th inning of a close game mean as much as 3 outs in the 9th. It also takes away the flexibility of using Smith in the 7th inning at times when teams have buserunners on in a close game. .

I'm ok with how he's hit, especially given how bad Scooter is vs lefties, but Rickie is a train wreck defensively. That was never a strength of his, but now he's so bad in the field.

Agree with this 100%. Off the bat, I thought easy grounder. Then I realize that Weeks is absolutely nowhere near the ball and couldn't even touch it on a dive. A 2b with even average range is going to field that ball and likely get the out. Weeks really hurt us in this game in the field and at the plate. Weeks is brutal defensively, but there is zero chance that Scooter gets an out on that grounder. That ball would have forced Gennett's body away from first base and even if he fielded the ball, he wouldn't have been able to get a lot on the throw. With a slow baserunner, then maybe an out, but Campana can really fly. He'd beat out the hit easily, regardless if Scooter was able to field the ball. Campana has Gomez like speed and comes out of the box from the left side.

I was ok starting the inning with Kinztler, but once they got the double and two lefties in a row were due up next, why not use Duke? That is precisely why he's on the roster. We are carrying an extra guy in the bullpen and have three lefthanders out there. It's not like the pen was shorthanded if the game went to extras after using Duke.

Besides both being fabulous all around catches, another thing which adds to how good both are is the number of games they catch when healthy. Molina has averaged roughly 137 games over the last five years. Lucroy played in 147 games last year, with 12 being starts at 1st/DH. These guys are highly productive, even with the grind of starting so many games behind the plate.

I wish i ran baseball and had ultimate authority for situations like this because i'd be suspending pitchers and managers who throw at batters on purpose for large amount of games, not these tiny 2-5 game suspensions which scare nobody in baseball. Start at 10-20 game minimum suspensions. Anyone who has ever played hardball understands that a baseball is pretty much like a round shaped rock which could really hurt a person when being thrown hard, much less 85-95mph. A pitcher intentionally throwing at a batter may intend to hit the guy in a place to not cause injury, but it's not a given. At some point baseball needs to take this stuff more seriously and punish offenders harshly enough to make teams/managers/pitchers think much harder before intentionally throwing a baseball at a hitter. It's not just the potential for injuring a player, teams have a lot of money invested in many of those players. Just imagine if that pitch thrown at Braun had hit say his hand instead of his butt, and broke a finger. This simply shouldn't be tolerated in baseball anymore, just like football no longer tolerates say delivering a brutal late hit in retaliation for some silly perceived snub. Stuff like that can result in a 2-4 game suspension, which would be like a 20 or 40 game suspension in baseball. It's long past time for baseball managers and players to grow up and stop getting so bent out of shape over silly perceived slights or unintentional hit batters.