BuckyBrewer61

A bit of an aside, and one that's been hashed out before, but how good of a lineup would this look like right now? Weeks McGehee Braun Fielder NELSON CRUZ Whoever My grandma Eddie Gaedel Pitcher I generally like Doug Melvin, but from the second the Carlos Lee trade was announced I did not understand why we were giving away very good minor league talent when WE were the one trading away the superstar rental player...much less for Kevin Mench and a relief pitcher (albeit a good one). Did we just think Laynce Nix was a better prospect than Cruz? Really? We debate about a lot with Melvin and I generally am on his side, but that's definitely one strike against him in my book. Rant over.

2B Rickie Weeks CF Jim Edmonds LF Ryan Braun 1B Prince Fielder 3B Casey McGehee RF Corey Hart C Gregg Zaun SS Alcides Escobar LHP Doug Davis

As someone who has agreed with some criticisms of Witrado in the past, I have to say that a couple of his last blog posts on jsonline were pretty nice pieces. His blogs on Gomez and Dillard/Peterson gave some nice insight into a couple key additions to the Brewers and gave a glimpse into some of the stories to watch (new CF, new pitching coach with last year's awful staff) over the spring. Let's face it, the people reading that blog are people like us who want to over-analyze everything when there's really not much to analyze this time of year, so if we are going to be critical, we might as well give credit where it's due as well. Hope to see more of this good work from Anthony.

We were Lucky's Lagers. We lost to you in the first half, had the lead until the 6th until you guys started hitting liners everywhere and beat us 12-9. We're a solid team, usually play at around league 10 and compete pretty well. Won the top Thursday MSCR fall league championship last year. I'll talk to my team and then get in touch with one of you guys soon to try and arrange something, possibly closer to registration time. Can't wait to hit the diamond again...

Hey guys, Last summer my team played the BF.net softball team in MSCR softball, and we were taken down with a 6th inning rally from the hot bats of Brewerfan in a good game. Our team is returning intact this summer, and would love to get together someday before the season kicks off for a rematch/preseason scrimmage for some practice, fun, and maybe a few drinks after. We have access to the fields/bases/lights of MSCR so we could play day or night. I know it's early, but the earlier we plan the more likely we can actually make this reality. Also, I am sick of winter and can't help but think about the glory of summer.

Is it weird that I kind of like Wyoming's football jerseys? http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image?provider_id=240&size=550x550_mb&ptp_photo_id=8480547

It's easy to find an instance here or there where one call seemed like a dramatic influence on the outcome of a game, but the point there is that one call did not make the Brewers lose or the Twins lose. If the Brewers didn't load the bases and DiFelice didn't get to ball 3...ball 4 doesn't matter. If the Twins don't blow a 10-run lead, that last call doesn't matter. Did their chance of losing jump suddenly from moderate/high up to 100%? Yes, and that's nothing to scoff at, but they were not sole determinants of either team winning or losing. I wish I were as stat-savvy as some around here to figure out how much a completely blown call influences a game. Seeing as we have win probability charts, how hard would it be to randomly reverse one call (from correct to incorrect) and see how it influences either team's chance of winning. Sampling from across the board, from a play at the plate in the ninth to the 1st ball/strike call of the game, how much does one blown call really change a game? Then try and factor in how often calls are actually blown, the fact that they are blown both ways, a 162-game season, and see how influential this terrible umping really is. I realize that's an ambitious venture and don't expect anyone would do it (though the baseball/stat nerd inside me would love it), but my thought is that the effect is probably small, particularly compared to the price we would pay for replay delays.

Fair enough, but my point is that I am not a fan of sitting there and watching a replay for 5 minutes at a time, whether it's once or four times per game. I don't want baseball to start having delays in games like the NFL does, and if we're going to challenge close plays at the plate, trapped balls, bang-bang plays at first etc I think we'd be kidding ourselves if we say baseball would somehow be any different. Whether or not a football player stepped out of bounds or not seems like an easy call on replay...but how often do we see sit and watch a replay from 7 different angles for 5 minutes? We probably have different ideas of what amount of delay is worth bringing in replay reviews. I, for one, don't think it's worth it.

Regarding the tennis analogy, tennis has a replay where an in/out call can be made in seconds with a computer. It is very quick and efficient and, since that is about the only call that ever needs to be made in a tennis match, it is very effective. It is the exception rather than the rule when it comes to instant replay. Reviewing plays on the bases/at the plate, trapped balls in the OF, home run calls etc. would take more time and does not eliminate the human element like tennis does. Would it be increase the number of correct calls? Probably. Significantly so? I'd argue not. Would it make every call correct? Doubtful. The strike zone could potentially be monitored similarly to tennis, and as long as the calls were made instantly, I would be fine with that. I personally would rather just have the umps do it, but I think that's just a matter of personal taste. I'm most concerned, as I've said before, that baseball is falling down a slippery slope like the NFL. Everyone freaked out over a handful of controversial homerun calls, so they put in instant replay. When people said they didn't like it, everyone argued that it was a simple call on replay for a small amount of plays, so no big deal. But now the precedent has been set, and after a Twin got called out at home and Derek Jeter got called out at 3rd (god forbid), everyone is going crazy again. I just don't believe that the benefit of wide-spread replay in baseball will outweight the detriment, and I don't want to see challenges every half-hour in a baseball game like we do in the NFL.

I'd be interested to hear other people's perspective on this, but I'm starting to get the feeling, at least within the city of Milwaukee itself, that the Brewers are just as if not more popular at this point than the Packers. I'm guessing that in reality the Packers are still, in fact, more popular, especially around the state, but these days I hear a lot more baseball talk and see a lot more Braun and Fielder jerseys than Rodgers and Hawk jerseys. I'm sure this has to do in part to the Brett Favre saga, but it just seems like there's more of a buzz these days surrounding the Brewers.

Your 2nd assumption is closer. The table is giving stats for exact situation and number of runs scored. So with exactly 1 out and a man on 3B only, exactly one run will score 47.8% of the time, while 1 or more runs will score 66.2% of the time. That said, the runs doesn't have to necessarily scored by the original runner on base. For instance, the man could be picked off 2nd, then the batter hit a home run before the end of the inning, thus scoring 1 run, but not scoring that particular baserunner. In the end, my assumption appears correct (thanks for the stats logan), that you are more likely to score more runs by not bunting/"giving away outs" (given our specific scenario of 2B/0 out vs. 3B/1 out), but you increase your probability of scoring at least one run by giving up an out to advance a runner. Of course, this doesn't factor in the success rate of bunting itself, but I stand by my opinion that giving up outs to advance baserunners, while usually not the best strategy, does have an appropriate time and place.

When I see stats like this I wonder if they might be misleading. I'm generally a fan of the notion that giving up outs is not a good idea, but in certain situations it can be called for. So when a stat like this is raised, you have to remember what it means. These are the averages for these given situations. It may well be the case (and I'd be interested for a stat guy to tell me what the case actually is, because I don't know), that with a runner on 2B and 0 outs that a team is more likely to score 2 or more runs, while with a man on 3B and 1 out, a team may be more likely to score at least one run though probably less likely to score more. In that case, I'd hate bunting in the first inning, but would be all for it in the bottom of the 9th in a tie game.

Anyone know where to find some cheap Noah's Ark tickets around Madison? It seems like there are always deals around local businesses (like the buttload of Summerfest deals you can find in Milwaukee in June), but I'm not sure where to look. Thanks for any help!

Lucky's Lagers, you guys beat us in the only game this year that I missed. Coincidence??? Eh...probably not, but maybe we'll run into you again in the championship (if you ever lose in league 8...)

A bit off-topic, but what is the name of the Madison BF.net softball team? I also play on Tuesdays and can't help but be curious if I'm playing against some of you folks.

I was excited to hear Macha talk about holding players accountable when he was hired. I'd be happier if he actually practiced this philosophy. Why are McGehee/Gamel not being given a chance to prove they can play everyday when Bill Hall has proven, over multiple seasons now, that he cannot? And when will Corey Hart be held accountable for his lack of production and continued lack of plate discipline?

Crazy how a season ebbs and flows. For the first two weeks I had no faith in the Brewers mounting any kind of comeback. For the next month a 2 or 3-run deficit felt like nothing. Now a 1-run deficit in the 6th feels absolutely insurmountable again.

4 @ FLA (3-1) 3 @ ATL (1-2) 3 vs COL (3-0) 3 vs CWS (2-1) 3 @ CLE (2-1) 3 @ DET (1-2) 3 vs MIN (1-2) 3 vs SF (2-1) 3 vs NYM (2-1) 17-11 Prince: 7 HR Braun: 8 HR Cameron: 4 HR Total: 19 HR

I can eliminate two of them: A's (1988-1990...maybe another time too as they've won 9 I think) and Cubs (1906-1908). That's all I've got.Orioles did from 69-71. I'll guess the Tigers.Well that leaves the Tigers, Reds, Giants, and Cardinals. I don't know about any of them, but here's my guess: I'll say the Giants went to 3 straight in the 50's, Tigers went to 3 straight in the 40's, leaving the Cardinals and the Reds. Since the Cardinals seem more logical to have appeared in 3 straight series since they've won 10 of them, they probably didn't and are actually the correct answer, so I'll go with the Cards. Again, all the above are guesses outside of the A's, Cubs, and now Orioles. If anyone actually knows more about this feel free to keep guessing.

Gwynn for Gerut is not an earth-shattering move, but I think it's a very good one. The bench has been a bit of a weakness this year outside of Counsel, and adding Gerut in exchange for someone I have a hard time seeing ever becoming a legitimate major-league hitter is a positive.

Ah, did not realize this was an offseason trade rather than a free agent signing. Sounds like a perfect solution, good fill-in at 2nd/anywhere, not too expensive, leaves at the end of the year for draft picks when we get Rickie back. Count me in the group that would love this, depending on the price, of course.

What kind of contract did he sign with Cleveland? Is it that likely that Cleveland would trade him 40 games into his contract?

I can eliminate two of them: A's (1988-1990...maybe another time too as they've won 9 I think) and Cubs (1906-1908). That's all I've got.

Agree!

This is my biggest sticking point. I don't want NFL-esque instant replay reviews taking 5-10 minutes each. I don't want umpires down in the replay booth looking at frame by frame pictures of a play at first and all arguing if someone was safe or out when really the best way to tell was watching the play live and listening for the slap of the ball in the glove and watching for the runner's foot on first.. There are limitations to instant replay. Even tennis, which has the best replay in sports, takes 5 seconds to review an in/out call, so it may not really be possible to instantaneously call balls/strikes, fair/foul, etc. There is really just a spectrum of how invasive instant replay will be in the flow of gameplay, and I think many of us have different opinions on where along that spectrum we would be happy. If they could immediately make every call with computer-like precision, would I be for that? Yeah, sure I would (though again, I do still enjoy players adjusting to an umpire's strike zone. That's just a difference in opinion though). I just worry that expanding instant replay from homeruns will soon lead, in time, to replaying everything including trapped balls, bang-bang plays at first, etc until it's like football where, really, instant replay just doesn't work a significant amount of the time (would replay have helped in the 2005 ALCS with AJ Pierzynski's dropped strike 3?). Also, just a thinking point, it's easy to see a blown call once, like the other night, and say replay is great. But since it was implemented, the 2 overturned homeruns the other night doubled the total of changed calls since replay started last August. 4 calls (vs. 10 reviewed and upheld) in how many games? I'm not saying the current system is bad (though I'm not a huge fan), I'm just saying I don't think you can point to one changed call (or 4 total calls in 3 months/~1300 games) and say it's very necessary in the grand scheme of things.