topper09er

Yeah, maybe after just watching the dodgers you are mad that we arent that deep 1-8, but most teams rely on a few sluggers and take what they can get from the rest of the lineup.

Is there a list of the top 10 all-time 3TO players? I would like to see them, and Matt Stairs.

Maybe in the future the gold glove will actually be a meaninful award that is not based on how well you hit.

I guess against a teams best relief ace some of you think its more likely that at least 1 of 2 players will get a hit and I think its more likely (and easier) that one player can groundout to the 2nd baseman and the next player can flyout. Obviously they will both fail some of the time but I think in general if you need a run and can get it whithout requiring a hit, and usually when you need a run you are facing a good pitcher, it is the better option than relying on hit or walks. Also, topper, it seems to me you're overrating how easy it is to "hit a grounder to the right side" or "just hit a flyball". You're forgetting that the pitcher also knows when the hitter would like to hit the ball to the right side to move a runner up and can pound the inside corner to a righty. Or when a player can hit a sac fly to win the game, you know the pitcher is going to throw low in the zone with some sink. It seems to me you're overrating how easy it is to "get a hit". You're forgetting that the pitcher also knows when the hitter would like to get a hit and can throw his best pitches to get you out.

Youre right we can just disagree, but I think you are taking things a little to literally here, the words "moneyball" and "manufacture runs" have specific conotations with respect to modern baseball discussions. People generally associate moneyball with sabermetrics and things that go along with that even if the actaul book does not literally bring up these exact topics in these exact situations. Maybe it is a misnomer, but it is the way things are. When people hear manufacture runs they think of the strategy of bunting and moving runners and stealing bases or "small ball" as opposed to using every sinlge out you have to try to drive the ball in the gap and hit HRs. Yes, whenever you score a run you could literally apply the word "manufacture" in sense of before this inning you add X runs and now you have more. I just used these terms to summarize certain ideas rather than writing them out. If you want we could also call striking out with a runner on 2nd "failing to get a runner in a position where he could have scored without a hit" as opposed to whatever.

You probably need to read moneyball, this really has nothing to do with moneyball. Hardy bunting lowers our chances of scoring without a single doubt in my mind in this situation. He is a bad bunter, he is slow so will never leg one out for a hit and Braun strikes out a lot and is a good hitter so many times will drive in Counsell without giving up an out for free. This is the kind of move I would blast Macha for making. As a very generic rule of thumb if you have average or better hitters up to bat bunting is always the wrong move unless they excel at it to the point they can bunt for hits sometimes. The gray area comes with just how bad a hitter needs to be to make bunting worth it. First, I have read Moneyball and it actaully is totally about this subject. Billy Beane trys to build his franchise around good OBP guys because OBP correlates better with runs scored than batting average. He looks at run expectancy and sees it is higher for runner on 2nd 0 outs than runner on 3rd 1 out so he makes sure to hire managers who wouldnt bunt in that situation. He sees run expectancy is better when you dont steal because you are risking a solo HR compared to a 2 run HR so he hires a manager who doesnt steal. He looks at the number of wins you would have from the worst possible team and the best possible team and figures out how much above a certain payroll each extra win is worth and uses that to decide whether guys are worth paying or not. He has also never been to the world series. Second, Hardy does not necesarily need to bunt, he could just ground out to 2nd base. Also, there is no reason that he should not be able to bunt, he only cant bunt because no one treats it like something important that he should be able to do. Yes Braun strikes out a lot, which is fine overall because you will strikeout if you hit HRs, but in this situation he should not be trying to drive the ball, just hit a flyball. That should dramatically reduce his chances of a K.

July 3th, Brewers lose 2-1 in 10 innings to Cubs. Top of the 6th inning, game tied 1-1: Fielder walk, McGehee single. Now, if I was the manager this would be an automatic bunting situation. Instead: Cameron K, Hart K, Hardy weak groundout. Top of the 7th inning, tied 1-1: Suppan single, Kendall reach on error. Now they randomly decide to bunt even though Braun and Fielder are coming up. Basically saying you have less confidance Braun and Fielder could drive a run in with a hit than Hart and Hardy. Counsell fails at getting the bunt down and strikes out and Braun hits the ball deep enough for a SF next AB. Now I know you can say this is proof that bunting doesnt always work, but I think it is because Counsell probably bunts like 3 balls in batting practice everyday and never in any "game like" situation where he is not just thrown BP fastballs because no one takes bunting seriously except for pitchers. You can also say Braun would have been pitched differently but he still did hit the ball deep to the OF and he could have done it again. The brewers only run came in the 4th when they had the bases loaded with 0 outs, went infield fly, infield fly, walk, infield fly. IF Casey McGehee would have just tried to fly out instead of hitting a gapper or even just grounded into a DP they still would have scored 1 run. In this game they had runners on 2 or better with 0 outs 3 times and scored 1 run by just sitting back and trying to hit a double in every at bat. I think if they would have "manufacturer" runs by getting their bunting down and grounding out or hitting SF they could have easily scored 3 runs and won the game.

By moneyball I mean the whole mentality of using these stats as the end all be all of what to do all the time. I dont loathe these stats I just dont like the conclusion that based on these stats you should not bunt ever. To get a runner from 2nd to 3rd you dont need to bunt all the time. It would be pretty easy for any player in the major leagues to choke up and take a half swing and weakly ground out to the 2nd baseman. There is no reason a player should not be able to bunt a runner over to 3rd especially if there is not a force out at third. I think no one takes bunting seriously which is why so many major league hitters are terrible at it. I honestly think I can bunt better than Corey Hart. Half of the time I see guys up there bunting with their feet and hands in the wrong position and no knee bending at all. I just think if players did a better job of bunting and situation hitting teams would score more runs then if every player always tried to hit a double in the gap in every at bat. So if you were Ken Macha, bottom of 9th tie game, Counsell on 2nd, JJ Hardy up, Braun, Fielder on deck, you would let Hardy just swing away rather than telling him to either bunt or ground out to the 2nd baseman? Im not trying to be condecending Im just disagreeing with you.

OK, that is the average for the entire league for every situation. It cannot and should not be applied to every situation. Also, I think todays players and manager do overall horrible jobs of situational hitting. When there is a runner on 3rd 1out, the goal of your at bat is NOT to get a hit. It is to try to get the run in. Lower your hands (Like JJ Hardy does for every at bat) and hit a SF or if the SS is playing back just ground out to him... Which player on the Brewers current roster would you not bunt with with runner on 2nd 0 outs in a tied game in the bottom of the 9th? Would you let Hart, Hardy, Hall, Kendall just swing away and think that the result of their at bat would be at worst runner on 3rd base 1 out? There are situations where pitchers specifically try to avoid giving up HRs and times when they are just pitching. Usually they try to avoid HRs when a HR would give up the lead, and these are when all the moneyball fans just sit back and hope for HRs. I cant think of too many times this year when we were losing late and we actaully hit a HR to take the lead. Prince in Cleveland, Braun in May against the Cubs. I think more often than not when you lose a close game there are several situations you can look back on and say man we really should have manufacturered that run in the 2nd inning instead of trying to hit a dinger.Those numbers are not broken down based on who is hitting and who is on deck. I would like to see the numbers when your 6 hitter hits a leadoff double. Then I bet you'd score more by bunting then letting 7-8-9 hack away. This is why Joe Morgan hates moneyball, people qutoes these stats which are averages for the ENTIRE league and assume they apply to every situation...they dont.

Getting a hit with RISP always increases your run expectancy.

Not if Jason Kendall is on deck or you set up a double play.

Well a walk with RISP is useless and OBP says a walk to equal to a HR. Over the course of a season OPS correlates best with runs, but the goal of teams is to win games, not necesarily score the most runs. If you win a game by 8 runs you will have a great OPS probably, but if you lose a game 1-0 and had a chance to bunt a runner over in the first inning and get him in or your best hitter walks with a runner on 3rd and the next guy strikes out it is bad but doesnt look as bad in terms of OPS. Overall it is good to have high OPS players, but more games could be won if situational hitting was done better. In a tied game, with 0 outs and a man on second base, I think bunting him to third with 1 out is better than letting him swing away. If you let the player swing away you may have a better OPS on the season, but if you bunt the runner over you may win more games.

Yount actaully did not make the all-star team when he won the MVP in 1989! Wow this team was really hurt by having to select a player from every team, no Jimmie Foxx 1933 or 1938 or Hank Greenberg 1938 at first base. Al Rosen 1953 3B for Cleveland was pretty good too. Mauer this year should probably be on there over his 06 season. Albert Belle '95 or Manny '99 could replace a few of those in the OF. Also, no Denny McClain 1968: 41 GS, 28 CG, 6 SHO, 336 IP, 31-6, 1.96 ERA, 0.905 WHIP, 280 K, 63 BB

Well those seem like pretty adult thing to like, who cares what they are. No one is judging you. I dont think many children enjoy wine collecting and watches. Most kids today probably cant even tell time on non-digital clocks anyways...but getting emence joy from meaningless baseballs during batting practice seems pretty childish to me and something that mature people should eventaully outgrow, at least in their 30s.

How is Bob Gibson 1968 not included????? Possibly the greatest pitching season of all time? 34 GS, 28 CG, 13 SHO, 304.2 IP, 22-9, 1.12 ERA, 0.853 WHIP, 268 K, 62 BB ...the only question is how did he lose 9 games? If you are going to include Bonds then you have to include Mark McGwire in 1998 over any of the 3 choices. McGwire 1998: 155 G, 130 R, 152 H, 21 2B, 70 HR, 147 RBI, 133 BB, .299/.470/.752, 1.222 OPS He also could have picked one of Warren Spahns Boston seasons to get rid of Wally Berger who had a good season but not in the best 9 in NL history, especially over Sammy Sosa 2001.

wow, this is kind of thing that can cause a horrible stretch, at least we have the ASB because it looks like a dodger sweep

was that a playable ball? McGehee defense has been horrible at 3rd.

CV is not good enough to be a 8th inning setup guy who get used in close games. At least a few run margin for him from now on. Coffey, DiF and Stetter only in close games. Also, I love how everyone is so shocked that the backup catcher got used, as if you use your backup catcher like 80% of games so you better save him for extra innings.

If hes a competitor he should get mad to be taken out now when he is crusing, I think it would be bad for his confidance because Macha is basically saying" nice work getting this far now let me pull you before you blow it, instead of, youre shuting them down, keep it up go get em

Rivera's throw from his knees was better than Kendall average throw which tails towards right field because he cant get enough on the ball to kepp it straight.

BA just said the cards rookie HR records is Pujols with 21 when it is actaully 37. Come on.

well the no-no is over

I have always called it that too...but is there a sports writer for any paper in the country who isnt an idiot? Look at Gold glove awards and MVP voting or Cy Young voting where people reward pitchers for having lots of wins.

I totally agree, I am not saying this is the time, I think it may be, but whenever we decide it is the time we should take a shot like we did last year. I do think that it has to be now or next year because we will not be able to replace Prince's bat.

How is this year different from last year?? Gallardo is just as good as Sheets, Braun and Fielder are having better years, the rest of the team is pretty much the same and we now have playoff experience under our belts. Also, we are 1 game out of first and the Cubs arent running away with the division. If we contend for the NL central title there is still a chance we take 2nd but still make the playoffs, whereas last year we were basically competeing for the WC only. Also, Prince will be gone after next year (unless he has a near death experience and realizes there is more to life than making as much money as possible and after you having $50M you should probably worry about being happy rather than accumulating more money, fire Scott Boras and resign with the brewers for 15M/year instead of with the Mets for 20M/year) so trading Matt LaPorta was actaully an integral part of our team and he would have been the 1st baseman of the future. I also think that rarely a team is good enough to win the WS with the same team they broke camp with because other teams are adding talent to fill their gaps and you need to keep pace. That is why i think the teams that always draft well and build for the future by always accumulating prospects (A's, Twins) never actaully win the WS because you usually need that extra player to replace your biggest weakness to win it all. That is why I think your best chance at winning the WS involves drafting and getting prospects, but also, at some time deciding this is finally the team you have been building and you need to improve it by getting some veterans through trades. Maybe even Billy Beane has finally figured this out when he did that for Matt Holiday. I think if you always worry about 3 years from now you may stay competitive but rarely be good enough win it all.