Brawndo the Thirst Mutilat

Hot streaks do exist. They're incredibly easy to recognize in hinsight. They're almost impossible to use in a predictive fashion. Kapler went 4 for 5 today. Before that he was 2 for 5 in June. Is this the beginning of a hot streak? I guess we won't know unless we play him more, but the problem is that it might also be the end of one. Those that have researched this question have found that once you remove 20 / 20 hindsight selection bias, recent hot streaks have zero predictive value. If Kapler starts tomorrow, the best guess for his performance will be the same as it always is -- your best estimation of his true-talent hitting ability. Maybe I deserved the mocking -- I could've found a nicer way to communicate my frustration with the omni-present immediate calls to start a clearly inferior backup over a struggling regular every time said backup has one good game. In the long run, you're probably right that it wouldn't make much of a difference whether Kapler or Cameron starts the next few games.

M Skjellyfetti said most of what I would have wanted to say. I'll add that Utley is an elite defender at that premium defensive position.

Kapler is not really close to Cameron as a hitter, either. A reasonable guess at Kapler's true-talent hitting ability is something like .260 / .320 / .370. Due to his success this year, I've bumped that up 10 points of AVG, 10 of OBP, and 20 of SLG from what I would've said before the season. I know it can be difficult to remember that there are baseball games played that do not involve the Milwaukee Brewers, and that there were lots and lots of baseball games played before this season started, but can we try? For my sake? Please? Russ has done a really good job in a bunch of threads lately explaining why "riding the hot hand" is a fool's errand, so I'll resist my urge to go into that as well.

Regressing to the mean doesn't mean that you'll run into an opposing string of flukey events that counteract the past flukey events. I'll illustrate the difference with a coin-flipping example. Say you've flipped a coin 100 times, and it has miraculously come up heads 100 straight times. This is a normal coin, not 2 headed or weighted or anything else, so we know that the coin's "true talent" heads / tails distribution is exactly 50 / 50. Three perspectives: Totally non-stat informed: "This coin is amazing. I'm going to make so much money betting people that this coin always comes up heads, because it totally does." Gambler's fallacy: "That was weird. There must be a flukey string of 100 straight tails flips coming in the near future to cancel out that weirdness." Regression to the mean: "That was incredibly weird. That'll only happen like 1 in a billion tries. Oh well, the next one's still 50/50. The next 100 will still be 50/50. The next 1000 will still be 50/50. Etc. etc."

Ah...El Malo...where have you gone?

I don't see how Escobar can be much worse than Hardy offennsivley. Spoken like a man unfamiliar with the work of this guy. Edit: I should say more than that. I think it is important to remember that when Hardy was a year younger than Escobar is now, he put up a full season of AA numbers that are roughly equivalent to those Escobar has put up thus far, after the most titanic hitting tear of his life. Even though there is a huge gap in AVG (least stable of the 3 big rate stats), the OBP and SLG are equivalent because Hardy has more power, and a bunch more patience. I want to see a full season worth of this kind of hitting from Escobar before I'll think about him as anything more than future good field, no hit utility middle infielder. Hardy's '03 line in Huntsville: .279 / .367 / .428 Escobar thus far: .331 / .371 / .456 It's only in the last week that Escobar has caught Hardy in OBP and SLG. With his walk rate as low as it is, I'd be shocked if he finishes the season with a better hitting line than Hardy had. If you're wondering how Escobar would be doing in the majors... Escobar '08 MLE: .282 / .317 / .378 Hardy '08 actual: .245 / .325 / .319 I'll give the Escobar supporters this - if the Brewers could somehow have foreseen both Hardy badly underperforming and Escobar exceeding anybody's wildest expectations and give Escobar the starting SS spot at the beginning of the season, and if you assume that Escobar would've hit exactly as well in the majors as he has in AA, he would've been a bit better hitter than Hardy so far this year. Unfortunately for Escobar, his entire case rests on 239 AB this year. Let's look at last year: Escobar '07 MLE (A+): .260 / .278 / .299 (268 AB) Escobar '07 MLE (AA): .243 / .269 / .299 (226 AB) Hardy '07 actual: .277 / .323 / .463 You can choose to view Hardy's early season tear last year as a fluke, but then you really need to view Escobar's early season tear this year as a fluke as well. I'm not saying Escobar should never get to take Hardy's place. I know that very few are actually suggesting calling up Escobar now. It may be that Escobar is coming into his own as a hitter and that sometime next year, he'll have demonstrated that he's ready to handle big league pitching over a long enough stretch of AA and AAA ABs, and it becomes reasonable to say that he can hit about as well as Hardy. But I'd bet dollars to donuts that over the next year, both Escobar and Hardy regress to their respective means a whole bunch, and it will be quite obvious to everybody but the most stubborn folks that Hardy is a MUCH better major league hitter right now than Escobar is. Hardy is an average major league starting SS defensively. I still think he's a solidly above average major league starting SS offensively (last year he had a 100 OPS+ - that makes him an exactly average hitter REGARDLESS OF POSITION. SS is still the second worst hitting position). I'm still skeptical about whether Escobar will ever hit like a major league positional regular, even if he does turn out to be one of the elite defensive shortstops in all of baseball. He just doesn't walk enough. Oh, and on the original topic, give me Hardy over Hall for all the reasons Russ noted early in the thread. And I think the gap between Hardy and Hall's hitting is smaller than it seems Russ does.

In case Hall gets his wish and is traded, and in an effort to help those skeptical of Joe Dillon's effectiveness taking Hall's spot as the RH half of a platoon with Branyan understand why many of us are more sanguine about his abilities than they are, I present the back of Joe Dillon's baseball card in the bizarro-world where some crystal ball-possessing team brought him straight out of retirement to the major league level. Thus, his 3 season AA and AAA rampage can be processed and understood by those who only believe in the existence of major league batting statistics. What I did is I went here: http://www.minorleaguesplits.com/mlecalc.html and fed Dillon's minor league stats from '04, '05, and '07 (he was in Japan in '06) into Jeff Sackmann's incredibly handy little gizmo. It wanted to know the league in which the stats were achieved as well as the team so it could consider park effects in addition to making league adjustments. I told it to translate those numbers to a neutral park major league context, and this is what it spit out: Year Team AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS AVG OBP SLG 04 CAR 121 19 34 10 0 7 23 10 31 2 2 0.285 0.345 0.535 04 ABQ 416 61 103 27 5 21 55 34 92 10 3 0.248 0.312 0.486 05 ABQ 367 51 99 17 0 16 46 43 64 9 1 0.270 0.360 0.455 07 NAS 332 54 90 23 1 16 58 37 37 5 1 0.272 0.348 0.489 I kept the team column from the "actual" universe, so you can easily see which numbers translated to what if you go to B-R or the baseball cube. Enjoy.

I guess the real question is, What odds are great enough as to make it worth actively rooting for and investing in emotionally? I agree in principle, but I think you are underestimating the potentional emotional payoff if the admittedly unlikely Cubs collapse occurs, and if it is the Brewers that make off with the division title. Basically, I think it's important not to lose track of the whole sick schadenfreude "Ha Ha (Nelson voice)" revenge-fueled "this is what last year felt like to us, suckers!" aspect. This might be a longshot call - we're probably drawing to an inside straight, so to speak, but the size of the pot justifies it in my opinion. P.S. Especially if the reason for said Cubs collapse is total idiot mismanagement - like signing Jim Edmonds because Felix Pie isn't setting the world on fire offensively, or riding Carlos Marmol hard and putting him away wet in May.

This is the type of thinking that I hope some day, this organization is intelligent enough to embrace. I've spent much of Doug Melvin's tenure wondering just how smart my GM was. It's a ride that's gotten worse and worse as time goes on. Overspending on veteran mediocrities to "round out the contender." Trying to salvage the major league careers of washed up former mediocrities like Gabe Kapler and Jeff Weaver. Giving a starting rotation slot to Seth McClung because he throws 94 mph, even though he's not stretched out and isn't likely to be able to pitch worth diddly spit after 60 pitches and even at his best, he's barely better than a turd. Could've just kept Villy in there...this bad patch was likely just variance...Could've given Mike DiFelice a shot - his peripherals in AAA suggest he'd be significantly better than replacement level. But whatever...it's impossible for anyone who has never succeeded at the major league level to do so now, unless they're a "stud prospect" 22 year old, in which case they're the saviors of the franchise, and we should immediately trade any underperforming price-controlled talent on the big league team for whatever dreck we can get to make way for their stupendous ascent to the majors. I apologize if this post seems dismissive or mean, but I think you were out of line with sbrylski. He's absolutely right about Dillon's minor league performance, and the Brewers are, quite frankly, silly if they don't pay attention to that. I often wonder if they really are that silly.

It's easy to understand Hall's frustration. This makes the 2nd year in a row he has changed positions to accomodate the team, struggled offensively - but not been the only player to struggle offensively, and then he's been the first player to lose playing time as a result. From where he sits, why did Geoff Jenkins have such a long leash last year? Why does J.J. Hardy get a pass this year? It's also easy to understand the team's position. Russell Branyan is having a career year in AAA, the offense as a whole is struggling, changes are needed, and Hall is the most obvious candidate to ride the pine. Can't really move him now, his value is about the lowest it could possibly be. I would never say that I could foresee this kind of outcome for Hall, but I have always suspected that 2006 would be a career year for him. He did nothing - nothing at all - in the minors. It is very rare for a player to emerge as a superstar with minor league numbers as terrible as Hall's were. This is the drum that Joe Sheehan was banging over at BP all year in 2006 when Hall was the best hitter on the team. The vindication of this perspective has been a long time in coming, but it seems like it's finally here.

I have a love affair with Dillon. Strictly platonic, obviously. I've got a soft spot for guys who make the league minimum after putting up 3 straight 1.000+ OPSes at AAA. Particularly when they can play a bunch of postitions without embarrassing themselves too badly. It's quite possible that Dillon is the 4th best hitter on the team. The only guys I think are better are Braun, Fielder, and (probably) Hart. Maybe Weeks. Dillon projected as a better hitter than Hall before this season even started. If you adjust your expectations at all based on Hall's disaster of a year so far, Dillon's obviously the better hitter. I don't have a way to look at splits from those AAA massacre seasons, so I can't definitively say that he's better than Hall as a platoon partner. But I'm fairly confident in calling him a better overall hitter. He'll never get the chance to show that, of course. There's quite the institutional bias against 31 year old rookies (or near rookies). So if you don't think minor league stats count for anything in projecting future major league performance, you will very likely never understand why those of us who do like minor league numbers like Joe Dillon.

Skipping the #5 starter sounds like a fine idea to me. When it can't be skipped, if Villy isn't the guy to take the starts (or if he's deemed too effective or important as a short reliever), here's my preference order: 1) Mark DiFelice 2) Any non-prospect "replacement player" minor league vet currently starting in AAA for another team who has posted decent K and BB ratios over the last few years. You know, the Adam Pettyjohns and R.A. Dickeys of the world. Might have to trade a PTBNL. 3) Seth McClung 4) Random hobo off the street holding "Will pitch for beer" sign 5) Jeff Weaver For those that would argue that Sheets's health is too important to skip starts, I haven't seen any research to show that the lack of the occasional extra day off between starts increases the likelihood of injury. And if the team were to offer this as a justification for not skipping the 5th starter, I'd really want to hear why it's okay for Ned to let him throw 120+ pitch CGs every time he's pitching well, no matter how far ahead we are.

Seconded. He needs to see a hypnotist, who can trick him into seeing runners leading off from every base during every PA. Then he'll suddenly morph into Wade Boggs, except he can play SS. Or we can just be sensible and conclude that random variance is the best way to explain this data.

The current generation of fielding metrics is far from perfect, but it's hard to argue that it tells us less than the traditional defensive stats. Just because Braun hasn't been charged with an error yet doesn't mean he's doing well out there. A quick look at the Hardball Times defensive numbers shows that Braun has been pretty bad: http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=fielding&linesToDisplay=50&orderBy=zone_rating&direction=DESC&qual_filter=1&season_filter%5B%5D=2008&league_filter%5B%5D=2&pos_filter%5B%5D=7&Submit=Submit I always look at OOZ plays in addition to RZR, because RZR does nothing to account for defensive shifts. Braun leads NL LFs in innings, so his 17 OOZ plays are actually a little less impressive than they initially appear. For balls in zone, his RZR places him right between Adam Dunn and Pat Burrell. All things considered, this isn't so bad - it's the first time he's ever played the position and he's holding his own with the veteran bat-only guys whose teams hide them in LF. But let's not pretend he's been a revelation out there just because he hasn't made a blunder of the peculiar, narrow sort that's required before modern official scorers will charge an error. I've watched something like 90% of the games, and my eyes agree with the fancy numbers - he takes very strange routes to balls and doesn't seem to get very good jumps. All of that should improve, and his speed and his arm are such that he I imagine he'll eventually be better than average in LF. After all, with players like Dunn, Burrell, and Carlos Lee as your peers, "better than average" doesn't take much. Hart's RF performance is pretty middle of the pack this year (below avg RZR, above avg OOZ), but small sample warnings are every bit as valid for defensive numbers as offensive numbers, and he was among the better RFs last year. He's a much better option to play CF than Braun next year, if LaPorta is your third OF. One other note - "no sale" on the argument that Hart's arm plays better in RF. John Walsh has done some excellent research in this area, and Hart had among the worst results for all RF in 2007. His arm is just ok; it'll play in CF, but doesn't stand up against the best OF arms in the game who share his current position: http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/best-outfield-arms-of-2007/ I don't know anything about LaPorta's arm. Braun's is pretty good though, so unless LaPorta has a cannon that no scouts have so far noticed and raved about, I think the best defensive configuration in the OF would be: LF: LaPorta CF: Hart RF: Braun Seems like the Brewers want LaPorta in RF, based on them playing him there in Huntsville. I suppose that's fine - it's hard for me to imagine having them backwards costing the team more than a 10 - 15 runs over a whole season, even if I'm right and Braun's arm would be better than LaPorta's in RF. You'd be looking at probably the very best offensive and very worst defensive OF in the majors, no matter how you arrange them. (Edited for grammatical reasons and to fix the links)

It doesn't matter what metric you use, good players will do well, bad players will do poorly (traditional stats such as BA, OBP, ERA all will tell you pretty much the same thing as OPS, OPS+, FIP. ERA+ for the playes on either extreme). The entire DIPS notion was developed because Voros McCracken noticed that BABIP does not follow the rule you describe. It isn't that there isn't any variation in single season BABIP results, it's that it has almost no stability for a particular pitcher from one year to the next. So one year, the best BABIP might be posted by Pedro Martinez, Randy Johnson, Jake Peavy, and Brandon Webb. Then, the following year, those guys are all at the bottom of the league and the very best BABIP come from Seth McClung, Glendon Rusch, Jeff Weaver, and Jaime Navarro. So for BABIP, rather than "good players do well, bad players do poorly", it looked like it was totally random who did well and who did poorly. What conclusion would you draw? Doesn't it look like BABIP has nothing whatsoever to do with pitcher skill and is entirely a function of luck? Homers were never counted because we knew from the beginning that allowing a lot of HR is not a function of luck. HR allowed is not quite as stable as K and BB rates for pitchers, but there is a real and obvious HR suppression skill that emerges if you track the data from year to year. BABIP was invented to answer a specific research question - When the batter makes contact with the ball and the fielders have a chance to turn it into an out, how much does the pitcher have to do with the outcome? Counting homers was never a possibility. After several years of arguing, the general consensus is now that there is some genuine BABIP-suppression skill that some pitchers have and some do not. But, unless you fall into one of a couple of pitcher types where everybody's BABIP tends to be lower (e.g. knuckleballers), the signal to noise ratio on this skill is so low (93% of year to year variation is luck vs. 7% skill according to BP's Nate Silver) that you'd be a fool to begin to presume to be able to separate skill from luck with a sample size of fewer than 1000 IP or so. Better to just forecast a BABIP allowed exactly at the league average, which is usually between .290 and .300. Jeff Sackmann posted a nice summary about how BABIP is useful and how it isn't, when it's luck and when it isn't, how batters are different from pitchers, etc. Those interested can find it here: http://www.brewcrewball.com/2008/4/22/447297/all-about-babip

I don't think Fuentes would garner as much in return as Linebrink did. I think just the opposite. Fuentes is having a better season this year than Linebrink was last year, and has the Proven Closer label attached to him. You'll pay through the nose for those saves, which is dumb because they indicate nothing about his talent level. Their actual quality is pretty similar, but all the stupid stuff MLB teams care about too much works to drive up Fuentes's value.

DiFelice reached 89 on the gun today in the 9th. Apparantly, he has a straight fastball in addition to the cutter, which is the 83 mph pitch. He either hadn't used it or I hadn't noticed it before today. That seals it for me. Only reason I was tempering my optimism upthread is because I couldn't think of a single useful RHP in (radar gun measured) major league history who worked entirely below 85 (only exceptions being knuckleballers, which DiFelice is not). Even with that problem, I still preferred him to McClung and Weaver. After today, I know that I'm not hoping for a singularity. This team is nuts if they don't give DiFelice a shot at starting. In fact, given that they must've known he can get his straight fastball into the high 80s all along, they're already nuts for trying McClung first. Believing that McClung will become a quality starter requires a total suspension of disbelief with respect to everything I know about projecting pitcher performance. Believing that DiFelice can succeed just requires admitting to oneself that lots and lots of pitchers are effective without 90 mph fastballs. More lefties than righties, but there are certainly a bunch of righties too.

Why do we think Mark DiFelice is subpar? That's my basic question. Is it because he's 31 and has never had major league success? That's the best reason I've heard so far (other threads), and it isn't a very good one. Is it because his fastball doesn't light up a radar gun? True, it's tough to name RHP with sub 85 mph fastball velocities who've had sustained success in the majors, but at least a part of the reason why that's true is a systematic belief that it's impossible for such pitchers to have major league success. Whether you feel that's a valid belief or not is (I think) a matter of opinion. His minor league dominance over the past 1 1/3 seasons is reason enough for me to want to see what he can do. I do agree with Rillo's fundamental point, however. It is pretty depressing that these are our choices, and that the best I can do is try to take a pie in the sky position on Mark DiFelice's major league prospects in order to sustain any hope about the bottom of the rotation. The best orthodox solution is still probably going back to Villaneuva, but I'm starting to think we maybe oughta treat him as a quality short reliever we've developed, rather than hoping that he turns out to be a decent starter. Edit: For the McClung supporters, I will say that my Mark DiFelice optimism probably isn't substantially less unreasonable than the pro-McClung "at least he throws 95 mph" line of thinking. That's largely a matter of taste. I like minor league peripherals more than radar gun readings, hence my preference for DiFelice.

One of us will betray him one day.

Again, isn't Mark DiFelice an option? If he's not, I'm still waiting to hear why not.

Seriously? McClung gives up a 3-run HR yesterday and now he's garbage and we should start a guy in AAA with an ERA of almost 7? If you look back at the original post, end seems every bit as put off by the idea of calling up Jeff Weaver as he is by the fact that they ever gave Seth McClung a start, if not more. Here's the thing with McClung: there might be some people basing their anti-McClung stance on one game, but you won't find any in this thread. Any reasonable sample you choose to assess (note: must look at more than just this season, must look at more than just his time with the Brewers), reveals a very simple, absolute, and totally immutable truth - Seth McClung is not a major league caliber pitcher.

at this point I'd just rather have Villy back in the rotation. Agree that Villy's probably the best option. However, it would be pretty tough to put him right back in a position where he had failed so much lately after he had, what, one successful relief outing (no matter how dominant that one was)? Besides, this team needs short relievers almost as much as another back of the rotation starter. Torres I think you can believe in, as he's only rebounding from one bad year. But Shouse really needs to be a LOOGY and as far as I'm concerned, that's all we've got for decent short relievers. Dillard doesn't K enough hitters to survive for long. If you're snowed by the Guillermo Mota Revival, you're an easier mark at the carnival than I am. The team is awfully mum about Riske and Gagne's eventual returns. Until you get at least one of those guys back, it really wouldn't seem like a bad idea to keep Villy in the pen, particularly if he keeps pitching well. What I'd like to know is this: am I really the only person on these boards that wants to see Mark DiFelice get a few starts? It's increasingly seeming that I am. Before they called him up, there were quite a few people excited about his minor league numbers. Did you all just see his radar gun readings and give up on him? Is it such a crime to get tagged by David Ortiz?

I don't know. Hopefully it won't matter because he'll continue to get destroyed every single start he makes at Nashville and we never see him called up. Melvin seems to have fallen into a very bad pattern where all his scrapheap acquisitions are now washed up major league vets (kapler, mota, weaver, taverez, etc. etc.) rather than "4A" types who are at the peak of their powers but have never gotten a chance (or only barely gotten a chance and failed in a tiny sample). This is probably at least party a function of increased media attention for a "contending" team. It's very unfortunate that guys like Haudricourt and nearly everyone for whom he writes would prefer the corpse of Jeff Weaver to a guy like Mark DiFelice.

No. I can't stand Yost at all. I've wanted him fired since late last year. But this is not a reason to fault him. Maybe I'm just too big a fan of Earl Weaver, but the "aggressive baserunning" stuff has led to way too many silly outs on the bases this season for my taste. When you've got the chance to hit a 3 run homer or a 2 run double, and any of your best power hitters is up (let alone the youngest ever player to hit 50 HR in a single season), it would be stupid to take any chances on the bases.

But I do love me some Gabe Kapler! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif Tragically, just about everybody that watches Brewers baseball probably does at this point. Both inside and outside the org. Before we know it, it's going to be August, and Nedly will have given the vast majority of the season's high leverage RH PH ABs and the vast majority of the corner OF spot starts to a guy with a .280 OBP and a SLG under .400. Oh well, he's already done more to help the team win a few games than I ever would have dared dream before the season started. Free Joe Dillon!