CheezWizHed
-
Posts
11,998 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
18
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
News
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospects Ranking
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
Milwaukee Brewers Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by CheezWizHed
-
Isn't it at least partially a mentality issue?
CheezWizHed replied to Turning2's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
Saying the Dodgers have more talent is fair. Saying 3-4x is way over the top. We just played a toe-to-toe series while throwing out our #4, #5, and #6 SPs at them. Yes, last year's sweep still stings, but they were also healthy and we were not. The reverse happened mid-season (maybe that was the Dodger's plan?) and we swept them. Is there a gap? Yes. But it isn't as big as people think. -
Nolan Ryan was just a special dude. He pitched 26 consecutive years (plus one brief cup of coffee when he was 19 years old) in an era where pitchers were out there for 200-300 innings. At 44 years old, he put up 5.2 WAR and was still exceeding 100MPH on the radar gun. In 1973, he had 383 Ks in 326 IP (a modern-day K/season record). He had one season at 89 IP; after that his lowest was 131 IP. In his 26 full seasons, he averaged 207 IP per season. Like you said, pitchers have a higher K/IP rate these days, but could you imagine someone putting in 300 IP in a season today? Or Ryan pitching "only" 6 innings/game? I was never a specific fan of the guy, but you have to marvel at what he was able to do over such a long period of time.
-
The thing to remember with the Ryan/Johnson era of radar guns is that they changed where they measure the pitch velocity in 2017. Ryan's FBs were measured near the plate while Miz's FBs are measured closer to the mound. That gives modern FBs a +2 or 3 MPH to the previous era. I would guess Ryan throwing today in his prime would be neck and neck with Miz.
-
Cardinals (May) vs Brewers (Patrick): 5/27/26, 12:40pm
CheezWizHed replied to Frisbee Slider's topic in Archived Game Threads
But how will Chris Carpenter explain this to his son??? -
I stopped watching ESPN years ago... but I can't believe they just showed 3 people who report on sports for a living Googling if Murphy won the NL Manager of the Year award the last 2 years on a row. Embarrassing.
-
Cardinals (May) vs Brewers (Patrick): 5/27/26, 12:40pm
CheezWizHed replied to Frisbee Slider's topic in Archived Game Threads
Matt Wise says, "Salad is dangerous!" -
I'm personally thankful for an end to the days where the Cardinals would go head-hunting because someone peeked at a homerun, showed emotion, or celebrated a win. If you hit a HR, you have a right to celebrate it. You win the game and have a team celebration (Untuckem')? Congrats, you earned it. I don't and never have liked taunting in any form. Uribe's celebrations are fun (six-shooters), but he resorted to taunting last night. Obviously, he has had issues in the past with fights and other incidents. That doesn't make me hate him, but he needs to learn from it. Murphy does a fine job managing the clubhouse. I can't imagine what CC's post-game mumblings would've been like, but this is how Murphy controls his clubhouse. There needs to be some measure of discipline and accountability or the whole team falls apart (see 2025-26 Bucks...)
-
If the story is true, he will be suspended, released, and jailed. As for his performance, he has been on an every-other-year roll for 6 years. I am hoping that this was going to be one last good year from him.
-
I did think about that the other day when Miz gave up a run. Harrison is up to 18 innings now?
-
Yeah, I knew where you were going with it. I almost put my comment in blue, but 1987 was the year I was locked in as a Brewer fan. And certainly the funnest non-playoff team in Brewer history. Plus my therapist says that I'm almost worked out my issues with the Twins winning the WS that year with a worse regular season record than the Brewers, while the Brewers finished third... Nope, not bitter at all!
-
It feels sacrilegious to compare the Cubs to Team Streak.
-
Yikes on the charges... At least with RBs, there are generally a few available at the end of TC for a trade. And it normally doesn't take too much to incorporate them into the team.
-
Little Mario can jump!
-
Well, Hall started that year as a starter, so we can remove his -0.2 WAR and I'd guess we'd see less of the Frankie Montas (-0.1) or Joe Ross (+0.5) rather than impacting Rea (+1.1) or Myers (2.6 WAR - who came up a month into the season as an SP replacement).
-
I know I was being more "black and white" in my determination of success on the trade, but the reality is that there is still plenty of gray possibilities... If Ortiz produced multiple 3.0 WAR seasons and Hall had multiple 2.0 WAR (as a reliever), you probably claim that a win. I was trying to make more of a point against the "sum total WAR = WIN" argument rather than being definitive on what I consider a "win". If I gave 5 "win" scenarios it would've muddled my original argument and put the focus on the wrong part. So I chose to be succinct over thorough. you’re assessing how much you’re able to improve each roster spot over what you would’ve had there otherwise But getting multiple players that are 2.0 WAR or less in a trade (especially when we are giving up a high-end player) really can't be the goal. You can get those types of players with lesser trades and/or waiver pickups. If we didn't make the Burnes trade, it isn't automatic that our 3B that year would've been a 0 WAR player.
-
I'd want to tackle the X WAR vs Y WAR evaluation of a trade. There are very limited numbers of 4+ WAR players where having a 2 WAR player is much easier to find (or even have a replacement level player have a career year at 2 WAR). So I'm not a fan of simply adding up the WAR gained vs the WAR lost to declare a victor in the trade. Let's use the numbers from the Burnes trade: Corbin had 3.9 bWAR the one year with Baltimore Joey had 2.8, 0.3, and 0.4 (so far this year) + future years control Hall had -0.2, 0.6 and 0.6 (so far this year) + future years control The fallacy of saying that we gave up 3.9 WAR, but gained 4.6 WAR is that that 4.6 WAR was acquired with 2 spots on the roster over 4.5 years of time; thus a very low WAR/year/roster spot. If your goal is to fill a roster with cheap players so that you are simply "competitive" and not contending (i.e. the Selig era), then this trade is a win. But if you really want to contend for a WS, we need each roster spot to be filled with the highest WAR players possible. As of now, I say this trade was a bust. Unless one of Ortiz or Hall exceeds the WAR we gave up with Corbin in a single season, I think it remains that way. It is hard to predict a butterfly effect of the changes, but I'd guess we would be better off if we stayed with Corbin for that one year and get the comp pick instead.
-
This is why I don't like using English because you can make it say anything you want it to say. 😂 Metrics certainly need to be handled correctly. And they tend to be tricker to understand because people don't like math. But for the people that do understand them, it is pretty easy to refute someone abusing it. When you have something that models actual results well (not all metrics do), they are useful for comparing apples-to-apples for a player's full performance and not just biased to the ones a scout sees/remembers. And I agree with others that it is more about predicting probable outcomes and not ensuring them. There are still small sample issues when looking at a 5 or 7 game series and intangibles that metrics can't measure (i.e. the whole is more than the sum of the parts).
-
I'd certainly take a WS victory instead, but continually frustrating the Cubs is a nice consolation prize.
-
Agreed. I think people are getting the FA extensions mixed with the pre-arby extensions. As long as you are comfortable that the player in question is a MLB talent (and not someone you won't go to arbitration for), the extensions are really pretty low risk: Peralta's extension was a surprise to everyone... but after that initial shock, I think it was obvious that it would be a huge benefit for the Brewers Chourios was again a shock... but looking like a steal. Ashby's might be closer to just "fair", but certainly not a bad deal. Pratt: I did an analysis that showed that the break even on that deal with producing like Ortiz (2 WAR). I've said it before and I'll keep preaching it... it isn't a "YES" or "NO" on extensions, but "How Much". If you sign a good player to a good deal, it is ALWAYS a benefit to the team. Good players on good deals are great trade bait (Thank you Freddie!).
-
Perkins is a well-known entity and I'm sure he will do better offensively than now (very consistent with a 650 OPS and low 80s OPS+ for 3 years), but why wouldn't Lara be his one-for-one replacement? Personally, I could seem them pair Lara and Mitchell pretty easily in CF.
-
True. I'm thinking: Williams in June - post Super 2 date Cooper around the ASB Lara between the ASB and Sept. I think CF has a longer leash, but Perkins really hasn't done much the last two years offensively.
-
I think Ortiz can still be optioned to the minors, so you could stash him there as an emergency backup if Cooper struggles too.
-
I agree that Williams is probably the first one up with Rengifo DFA being the easy option. But neither Ortiz or Mitchell/Perkins should be too comfortable in their positions. Perkins is in his last pre-arby year, so I doubt he has much of a future with the club. Lara (at worst) is a close match (switch hitter, good defense) although Perkins is better as a RHB and Lara as LHB, but both are pretty close. If Lara continues to tear the cover off the ball and Mitchell isn't, it wouldn't surprise me to see Lara replace Perkins and tag-team with Mitchell. I think Ortiz has until the ASB to turn it around. If Cooper continues the tear he is on at AAA, I'd expect Ortiz traded and Pratt come up. Having three rookies in the lineup isn't ideal, but neither is having three black holes at the plate. You still have Hamilton at SS/3B to make a three-way shuffle at the two positions to mitigate some of the growing pains. In the OF, you have Mitchell and Chourio at CF if Lara struggles to adjust. So it isn't like they don't have backup options and honestly... it doesn't feel like the rookies could be worse. Ortiz: 196/282/245 - 51 OPS+ Rengifo: 199/262/257 - 47 OPS+ Perkins: 105/203/158 - 4 OPS+
