topper09er

I remember Randy Johnson doing that on a nasty slider...I want to say it was Joe McEwing

Year Age Tm Lg G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+ TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB Pos Awards 2007 23 MIL NL 113 492 451 91 146 26 6 34 97 15 5 29 112 .324 .370 .634 1.004 154 286 13 7 0 5 1 *5 2007 22 COL NL 155 682 609 104 177 33 5 24 99 7 6 57 130 .291 .359 .479 .838 109 292 14 9 5 2 3 *6Braun's bat was better not only on counting stats, he had 6 less TB in 190 less PA and led the league (the same league as Albert Pujols) in SLG even after 11 outs were added to his stats because he did not have the required PA to qualify.

1) Get well Uek 2) Davey, LIVE on the radio is giong to be the trainwreck of the century: O boy, partner, I tell you what, um, Prince, is just, well, when he gets a fastball that cuts the plate, o boy, hahaha thats going to be hit well, i mean prince can hit the ball well. When Gallardo can throw all of his pitches, for um, strikes in the strike zone, boy I tell you he is hard to hit. Brauny had a nice game at the plate tonight, but he went 4-4.

It looks like for DISH in Madison it will be on 448

What do you think Macha means by this, he does not seem like the type of manager to order a beaning but it kinda sounds like that with this quote. I wouldnt mind seeing that just maybe to light a fire under the players by having their manager stand up for them for once.

We went 0-2 in those games with Hawkins taking both collars, so if we would have been pulled him and the next pitcher retired the side our record would have changed to either 1-1 or 2-0 in those games, so clearly the decision of whether or not to leave Hawkins in affected the result of the game.

It sounds you are saying that if Hawking would have been pulled in both of those games it may impacted out W/L record...so whoever decides to make that move can impact the W/L record.

If 1 manager doesnt make a difference in W/L then why will the consensus of 1000 managers make a difference in W/L? Clearly, managers can make a large impact on the result of the game. Or else why dont we just randomize all the possible options and then roll a dice to make the decision. Baseball managers do not seem to have a large impact because there are many less times when an important choice is needed as compared to say football when every play must be called, although every pitch in baseball is like a play in football but that is usually left up to the catcher (something which I think will change in the future, maybe not for 20-30 years but eventually catchers will have a headset in the helmet like a modern quarterback and a coach will call every pitch, Bart Starr used to call offensive play in the game but that is over with). Most of the time in baseball the optimal strategy is obvious so a manager is not needed; ie try to get on base or get this hitter out. There may be only 1 or less time on offense and defense each game when a manager needs to make a key decision, like which pitch to steal on or when to bring in another reliever, but already this season these situations have come up and Macha has usually made the wrong decision. I personally hate Macha but he is clearly Melvin's guy, there is no chance he will be removed unless Mark A. comes in and says so.

RBraun 2008: 151 G in OF, 92 R, 174 H, 42 BB, 39 2B, 37 HR, 106 RBI, 14 SB, .285/.335/.553 = .888, 338 TB, 216 TOB, 111 RC, 25 WS, .377 wOBA Fielder 2008: 158 G at 1B, 86 R, 162 H, 84 BB, 30 2B, 34 HR, 102 RBI, 03 SB, .276/.372/.507 = .879, 298 TB, 246 TOB, 114 RC, 23 WS, .370 wOBA This is very close and I think no matter who choose with the better season you could argue just as easily for the other. Fielder was on base 30 more times with nearly 40 more on base points, yet Brauns nearly 50 more slugging points and 40 extra TB seam to make up for this with a higher wOBA. Braun played a more difficult position but not very well. The arguement for best season would be very interesting. As far as Braun's projected career I think with his slugging, dedication and low walk % (obviously VERY early) he is on track to join Aaron, Mays, Murray, Palmeiro (A-Rod and Pujols) as members of the 3000 H/500 HR club.

My main point was that if you ask some random AFC fan they would have no reason to dislike the packers considering they have the most NFL titles, but any baseball fan has a good reason to hate the Yankees because of their competitive advantage or the Cardinals because they think that they have the most educated fans and are the only humans capable of understanding why it is good to move a runner to 3rd with a groundout to 2nd and then know how to show everyone how smart they are by clapping when that happens. I think it is generally rare for Packer fans to brag about having the most storied franchise/most storied stadium/most die hard fans/greatest coach ever even though these are all pretty much the case. Getting back to the thread topic, although the Brewers untucked their jerseys for every win against every team only the cardinals decided that this was direspectful to their storied franchise with the most NL WS titles and the lowly brewers with only 1 pennant should not untuck their jerseys against the cardinals, but when they do it against other teams it is ok.

"If you're going to burn the flag, don't do it around me. I've been to too many veterans' hospitals and seen too many broken bodies of guys who tried to protect it." [/sup] -Rick Monday Obivously its not great because of the physical skills required to do it, but it is one of the most famous "plays" in MLB history.

I was thinking most succesful, not most popular/most overhyped by ESPN.

A little off topic but following that last comment I would just like to point out that the Packers are the Yankees of the NFL and I really dont think any fans in the country besides division rivals have any problems with us (not counting that whole Brett thing)

I agree but if Stetter was brought in to face Fukudome and Adam Kennedy (or Narveson since for no good reason at all Stetter is down) we would have 2 more wins this season.

also, was that stolen base contested or given to theriot?

Looked like a hanging slider on 0-2 to Theriot on gameday

Zaun = new Braun

Good to the last drop

How do you not bunt with Zaun, he is like what 0-19, let him feel like he contributed by bunting and doing something positive at the plate for the first time this year.

Kendall 4-5 today, he got 4 hits 0 times last season

Uecker?

I feel like Zaun would have to be this bad for like 2 months before anyone cared, considering who is replacing.

I have to vote for Ozzie. "A great catch is like watching girls go by, the last one you see is always the prettiest" - Bob Gibson. What is the easiest play of all for infielders, catching fly balls, what is the only thing outfielders do, catch fly balls. The difficulty of fielding a hard hit grounder, especailly with a bad hop involved, is so much more than running and catching the ball. Great catches usually save multiple runs/bases and are more valuable whereas a great infield play may only only save a single so maybe they underrated. Like the hardest play to make in the game yesterday was that screamer hit at McGehee where he basically just got in front of it and couldnt even get his glove on it, if he could have fielded that cleanly and started a doubleplay that to me has a much higher degree of difficulty than catching a ball which would have landed far away from where you were initially standing. I tend not to rank things that require a lot of speed to accomplish because being fast is not nearly as difficult as being athletic/having good hands.

I am not talking about a slow roller just routine plays. For Rickie that means playing at DP depth, 2 hopper to SS, Weeks is standing at 2B with his left foot on the bag waiting for the feed in a stationary position. Then, when he gets the ball he lollygags it to first and it causes runners to be safe at first. So are you saying you do not care at all that players are beating out DPs not because they are fast but because the 2B sucks at turning them? I dont think hes lazy as much as stubborn, I think he thinks he can get away with his cute little throw and thats why he does it, unfortunetly, he proves time and time again he cant.

It would be foolish to disregard a statistic because of a high standard deviation, as the mean itself still has value. This is very incorrect, as a mean with a high standard deviation is very useless, such as the values of 1,1,9,9. The mean is 5, which is a very poor prediction of the actual sample set and the standard deviation is high. The chances of scoring 1 run with a man on 2nd and none out is 34.8%, with a total run expectancy of 1.15. The chances of scoring 1 run with a man on 3rd and one out is 47.8%, with a total run expectancy of .967.....You have to take into account, most importantly, the score, the inning, the 3 batters due, and the pitcher, in that order (in my opinion). So are you saying the numbers you quoted are correct or not? I dont get it, first you list these numbers and use it justify something, then qualify it by saying you cant take the numbers at face value because they dont consider everything involved. And to say that you know one thing will happen with 34.8% chance and another with 47.8% chance is very rediculous in my opinion because there is no way to prove this and there are so many things that these numbers dont take into account they are very useless on their face value. Are you saying that they are so good that when you take everything into account they might swing to 38% and 52%....or 12% and 87% or....you have no idea really how much the current batter/pitcher matchup swings those numbers around and there is no way you could quantify the other things you need to take into account. If you're playing for one run, bunt him over. If you're playing for the big inning, swing away. It's that simple. Was this not obvious before? Did you need a computer to tell you this, was it really so ambiguous as to what to do if you want to play for 1 run vs a big inning? I already knew this based on reasoning through the situation and I dont see why the average results from games over a 3 year span in the height of the steroids and wait around for HRs era should be considered? Also the point of this is that it makes the decision of what to do for you, you should not decide whether or not to play for 1 or a big inning because this is telling you the right answer is big inning. My arguement all along has been that sure you have these numbers but you dont need them because you intuitively have a feeling for they are relative to each other and knowing that when I analyzed the current game situation I came to the conclusion that by bunting the added win % would be increased the most and I listed several reasons why. Everyone is saying you have to take other things into account besides just these numbers at face value, but I still have not heard any argument saying: The numbers say you should not bunt here by a little, and when I analyze the situation I think with all things considered (and listed several reasons) that these numbers are even more confirmed and the best decision is to not bunt. Instead, the only argument is: We have thousands of games of data that suggests it is generally a bad move to sacrifice bunt in that kind of situation.