bjkrautk

http://www2.jsonline.com/sports/brew/image/2001/april/leskanic0415.jpg

Congratulations to Coop. Admittedly, though, I'd be much happier if he were managing in another division, so that he wouldn't have to face the Brewers so often.

Fans attending the Milwaukee Brewers' game Thursday night against the San Diego Padres got a little gift from owner Mark Attanasio: a voucher good for $10 worth of food and beverages at a 2008 regular-season game. The gesture marked the third season in a row that Attanasio has given something back to the fans. Last year, fans who attended the home-season finale were given a free game ticket to one of four April 2007 games. The season before, all fans were admitted free to the game on Sept. 29, 2005. Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel It's going to be a tough off-season for this team, with major decisions coming immediately (Cordero, Linebrink & the bullpen, Jenkins) and others on the horizon (Sheets' contract, Capuano, and the rest of the starting rotation). That being said, a little good PR never hurt anyone. (It is a bit ironic that these vouchers were given out two days in advance of 'Fan Appreciation Night,' though.)

In retrospect (and my willingness to defer research when I suspect someone else already knows), did any college closer from the 2007 draft pitch in the majors this year?

Hammer meets nail head dead center. ...only if you presume that Weeks would have scored from 1st on Braun's single (or that Ricky would have stolen 2b were it not for the Defensive Indifference). Why is the critique not based on results, as opposed to whether or not he's thinking? Because it's impossible to test how often the 'right' decision would have resulted in a more favorable outcome. The more I've talked about this whole thing, I think that's what it really boils down to, deciding to use Turnbow after the plunking. Which isn't to say we had another great option, but at the very least you should know you're putting Turnbow into a spot he normally melts down in. As I said to another post today, if Turnbow had been brought in to actually pitch to Pujols, and walked him, lately they pull him right there. This time, we brought him in instead. That was the mistake on Yost's part. I'd argue that the situations in which Turnbow struggles are the ones in which he puts the runner on 1b...and second...which is slightly different. (If you look at the game log, he's given up 2 BB in each of his partial-inning appearances this month, except for the 9/19 game against the Astros, when he came into the inning with 1 out.) That being said, I at least understand where you're coming from.

I'm not going to quote pretendastronaut (lest the quote get too obnoxious...and in hopes that people might miss my having forgotten about the Brewers scoring a 3rd run in the 9th), but this is a partial response to him. I'll spot you that there's a difference between ensuring Pujols reaches 1st, and at least giving himself a chance to get himself out on a bad pitch. That said, the difference between his Avg. and OBP are fairly consistent across his splits this season, be none on, or runners on. (He's actually a bit less prone to draw a free pass with none on and none out, but that wasn't the situation in the 8th inning.) Whether it's intentional or intentional* ("don't give him anything to hit"), the strategy of not letting the opposing team's best hitter beat you is fairly common. Last night marks the 3rd time this season that he's been HBP with none on and 1 or 2 outs. Likewise, this past month, Ned has been fairly consistent in pulling Turnbow when he starts to melt down; that he was allowed to walk in a run does more to back up the notion that Sveum was making the call, IMO, after the ejection. That's the decision which I think is most arguable....but I don't think Ned borrowed Bobby Valentine's disguise in order to make those decisions from the tunnel. ..... Since I don't think I've chimed up in the past 53 pages of this thread (don't quote me on that), I could actually take or leave Ned Yost. There are decisions of his that I would disagree with, including the bullpen. I'd like to think I would have swapped Linebrink and Turnbow, rather than kept D-bow on a short leash in the 8th. I didn't really like raising Sheets and Davis's pitch counts over ~110 a few seasons back. And, while I remember hearing Ned talk about the importance of moving runners (playing "A B C baseball" as Ted Simmons used to say) and producing runs....it's either not being emphasized anymore, or the players just can't seem to do it. That being said, I don't really expect the team's manager to be in lock-step with what I would have done. Heck, I only agree with my own decisions about 90% of the time. I don't think Ned is much better or worse than any other manager in MLB. If pressed on the issue, I'll say "better than most," because the team has been careful about not abusing Parra, Villanueva, and Gallardo despite being in contention. And, for the record, I think that 24-10 is a bit of a misnomer. Look back on who they played during that first 34 games: Dodgers - 3 games (2-1); .506 win rate (2007 season) Cubs - 6 games (3-3); .525 Marlins - 3 games (2-1); .430 Cardinals - 5 games (4-1); .468 Reds - 2 games (1-1); .449 Pirates - 6 games (5-1); .430 Astros - 6 games (4-2); .443 Nationals - 3 games (3-0); .453 Maybe if the Brewers could keep playing sub-500 teams all year....they could have kept up that pace. They were only 5-4 against winning teams. The first month isn't representative of the rest of the season, which is why I think it's unfair to have re-adjusted expectations based on that record. I look at where they are now, and it's not that far off from the overall performance that I expected back in March. I like playing devil's advocate to some extent. I am willing to accept that people don't share my thinking on an issue, but I want them to be able to back up their thinking with a rational explanation. I don't like seeing people describe things as "obvious" (or words to that extent) when there is a legitimate counter-argument for the contrary viewpoint. My evaluation of Ned is much the same; I don't always agree with his thinking about his decisions....but I do know that he is thinking about his decisions.

As someone who listens to his show on a daily basis (note: he's got a fill-in host today), can we not make this thread about Belling, but about Canning and the Cubs?

All I ask is that the Brewers' draft produce 3-4 major league regulars. If they're starting pitching, relievers, infielders, outfielders, etc. -- I'll take what I can get. That being said, I'd have no problem with the Brewers targeting one of the top catching prospects next year. It's the position with the most uncertainty going forward, and quite possibly the most difficult position to find a quality 2-way player. A CF in the pipeline for when Hall's contract expires would also be a wise decision, if a suitable option is available when the Brewers draft in the first round. I guess I'll just fall back on my old default, best college pitcher available, preferrably lefty, & one of the "closest to majors" projections (command on pitches).

Should Yovanni Gallardo, arguably the future of the franchise in the rotation, have been extended beyond his prescribed innings limit? No. If the organization had a plan that called for Gallardo and Parra to pitch a fixed number of innings this year, that plan should have already factored in the possibility that they would be needed in a potential playoff run. The reason that you make a plan is so that you can make these kinds of decisions with some separation from the "win now" mentality of a competitive September. If it becomes a question of winning now v. an injury risk in future years, most teams will be swept up in instant returns. (See., e.g., Kerry Wood and Mark Prior) Should we have given up Will Inman, Steve Garrison and Joe Thatcher for Scott Linebrink? Since the trade: 20.2 IP, 3.05 ERA, 7.4 K/9 IP, 1.45 WHIP. I'd like the WHIP to be lower (even though it is below the team's collective 1.51 WHIP after the A-S break), but in terms of ERA, he's been our third best reliever since the break. The price may or may not have been steep (impossible to know now), but there weren't a lot of quality RP moved at the trade deadline. Given Matt Wise's collapse, I don't think that the Brewers are within a game of the Cubs without Linebrink. Did not bringing up Ryan Braun at the start of the season have any impact on this team? We were 24-10 early in the year. Most of the teams' struggles actually came with Braun in the lineup (even if not caused by him). It's hard for me to imagine that having a full year of Braun would have had that much of an effect. Has Ned Yost cost this team a playoff spot with his moves? The easy answer will be to say 'yes.' Questions like this tend to draw the attention of those who were upset by some of Ned's decisions, and also tend to under-weigh the times where Ned made a decision that helped the team win a game (batting Dillon # 3 on Sunday, for instance). I think both sides will have more than their share of ammunition on this one. Were the Brewers smart to keep Ben Sheets despite his propensity to miss games, which well may have proven crucial in this race, or were the games he actually pitched in too valuable to give up? I don't think that a team can let a pitcher with Sheets' talent get away. Other than the arm injury, most of his missed games have been flukish in nature. It's not like #1 starters are falling all over themselves for an opportunity to pitch for the Brewers. If this team does reach the Playoffs (during this window of opportunity), is there anybody that you could really see starting game #1 other than Ben Sheets? I hope Gallardo can become that guy, but he's a few years behind, IMO. How many games has the bullpen cost this team? The Bullpen ERA (ESPN Split - 'As Reliever' ) is 4.17, with a 20-28 Win-loss record, and 48 saves (it doesn't show blown saves). The team's overall ERA is 4.50. It's hard for me to place a numerical value on losses caused by the bullpen. How many of those losses came in tie games (and did the Brewers' offense score any runs during regulation)? Every pitcher not named Francisco Cordero is going to give up runs from time to time; that should hold true for opposing relievers, too. All too often, the Brewers offense would get a 3-4 run lead, and then not score in the back half of the game (based on my recollection....actual research may vary). It's the pitcher that gets stigmatized with the loss, even if he has pitched reasonably well. At the same time, Cordero has saved 43 out of 49 opportunities; how many more games would they have lost with an average closer, that they won thanks to the bullpen?

I tend to agree with Al's comments on the ramblings blog. It's not that Britney is unattractive....it's just that she's no longer attractive enough to go on stage dressed like that. Making matters worse, she never grew (as an artist) enough to get away from the choreography. If it were about the music, rather than the performance / aesthetics, her abs wouldn't be the focus of discussion the day after. You can compound that with the army of sycophants she seems to have surrounded herself with, and you get a performance like the one at the VMA's. (Not that I saw it live...but I did watch most of the youtube version.) Up until the K-Fed-isaster, I always thought Britney would make the transition away from music and towards acting in romantic comedies. Now, it looks like Mandy Moore is getting those types of roles (which bothers me not at all). I just hope that - for her sake - one or more of her advisors protected some of the money she made over the past decade. If she's leveraged beyond her current assets, things will end badly. I just get the sense of 'contractual obligation' when I watched the video this evening. [Edit: Almost forgot to mention....apparently Justin Timberlake called out Mtv for showing reality TV instead of actually showing music videos. I never thought that I'd be so N'Sync with Timberlake....but between begging Mtv to show more videos, and his SNL Digital Short winning an Emmy, I'm finding it harder and harder to dislike the guy.]

Hadn't given it much thought, but probably watching the Packer game, with the Brewers on the radio (and my finger hovering over the 'last' button on the remote).

IMO, the biggest danger in plunking Zambrano is that he would use it as motivation to pitch better (as the sort of machismo thing that he seems to feed on). I'd rather plunk Ramirez, Soriano, or Lee as a proxy for Zambrano; at least that might lead to someone on his own team suggesting he tone down the antics.

I'm not a fan of Estrada, but I'm hesitant to criticize his productivity (offensive and defensive) without knowing just how hurt those legs are. Catching takes quite the toll on a player's legs....if his legs are hurting, that can carry over to making quick lateral movements to block balls, getting out of the stance quickly to make a throw to 2b, running the bases, etc. I don't think he's the long-term solution at the position, and he will never walk enough to be a stud offensive performer, but there are catchers far worse than JE pulling an MLB paycheck.

Stupid question (since I can't help you, but can at least get this out of the way for someone who can): Living in Wisconsin? Out-of-state, you'd be looking at the "Extra Innings" package.

Waiting to see if my order for 3 BOC will be filled....this could be my first Woot!

Good post all together but I can't let this go. Did you not see the Jeff Suppan, Gill Meche, Jason Marquis and Vicente Padilla signings of a year ago? Now Gill Meche and Jason Marquis have pitched well above historical patterns. However those 4 represent a total of 15 years and $151.75 million of salaries I did see the signings....but I also saw the 2004/05 signings of: Kris Benson, Carl Pavano, Matt Clement, Eric Milton, Jon Lieber, Jaret Wright, Odalis Perez, Russ Ortiz, etc., etc. The reason that I consider that FA class to be a high-water mark is because they all got deals at or above 3/$21 mil, despite most of them being mediocre. There may have been a few big signings in the 06 class, but not nearly as many as in 04 (I'd also argue that I would take nearly any of the pitchers you mentioned over the 04 class). Lower supply = higher market price. (I might be off on a player or two, or missed a few guys....I can't go in-depth on the research at work.)

Arguably, the market peaked around the time of the A-Rod and Manny Ramirez contracts (I think Giambi's signing marks the downturn....as well as the inherent risk), as there haven't been many other deals promising big money for more than 5-6 years. On the other hand, one could counter that there haven't been that quality of free agents since then. The Soriano numbers mentioned earlier are about as close as we've seen to those deals (although, admittedly, I can't remember how much the Mets paid for Beltran). While the market has come back toward the earlier deals on a $/year basis, the real value of the early deals gets a bit of a bump due to inflation. That the top contracts are coming back to that level, almost by implication, means that there was a dip in the market. I also tend to think that all the 3 yr /$27 million contracts for mediocre starting pitchers a few years ago (Jaret Wright is the only one that comes to mind) represented a bit of a high-water mark in that segment, but only time will tell.

I'll say Steve Woodard. Same general premise (electric start, gradual decline), but the lows were even lower than Eldred's....and without all the injuries. Here's to hoping that the season ends up Jeff Cirillo (awesome at first, then went away for a long time, only to come back and defy the odds by still being awesome).

You can't talk about "You Can't Do That on Television" in a TV trivia thread without at least mentioning that Alanis became a bit more famous in her second career as a musician. "You Can't" was classic TV satire. Blip's Arcade (I think there were two adult males, but I'm not about to check), the firing squad, Barth's, the locker jokes, and of course, the Green Slime that defined the network for about a decade. Is this show (or Turkey Television, to bring up another classic sketch show that helped define my already warped sense of humor) available on DVD?

Thank you. I'm not giving up on this team this year, and I still have hope for the next few years based on what we've seen in 2007. (I have a hard time imagining the pitching getting any worse, especially when / if Gallardo and Parra are part of the starting 5.) I'll even admit that I've taken to listening in to Brewers games on the radio (freeing up my TV to play video games) for the past few weeks. This team has been painful....but it's surviving the lows that make the high points all the more worthwhile. There's too much to look forward to for me to even consider switching loyalties now (or ever).

http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902.html TangoTiger says that, on average, a team will score 1.65 runs in that situation. That's not terribly far from 2 runs (probably within a standard deviation, were I to actually do the math). I'm guessing the team at the plate would win about 30% of the time.

What was different about it? I have the Bourne Supremacy too, but I don't think I would remember the exact dialogue from Ultimatum if I watched it right now. She told him his real name at the end of Supremacy, but not in Ultimatum, IIRC.

Completely agree.

Still not sure if I miss the playbook editor....or just haven't found it yet. That's one of the big reasons that I didn't buy Madden games for a number of years.

The biggest difference between the 360 and PS3 version of Madden is that the 360 version runs at 60 frames per second, whereas PS3 clocks in at 30 fps. (Every other version of Madden has been at 30 fps or less, FWIW.) None of the big 3 review sites (1UP, IGN, GameSpot) even have a review up for the PS2 Madden. Then again....I tend to be skeptical of anything I hear from an EB/GameStop employee.