Thurston Fluff

Of the four teams left only one ranks higher than 22nd in home runs. Two rank 27th or worse. I guess somebody forgot to tell 3/4's of the teams who made it this far you can't make it this far without being able to hit home runs.

If you are then so am I. I like the short three game series because it makes teams fight for the bye. Sometimes a team can wrap up it's division early and coast the rest of the way. Having a bye to fight for makes more teams play for real longer. I'm not against the lowest seed facing the highest seed in the second round but picking the opponent seems like a gimmick. I guess it could let the top seed pick a team that had to go through their pitching staff more to get to that round but that's about it. As far as 154 games goes. Hell no. Listening to games is part of my daily life from April through September. I go through withdrawal symptoms on off days. I don't even want to talk about the horror of the All-Star break.

The Brewers just beat the proverbial team that got hot at the right time. Our bullpen also out dueled the supposedly best bullpen in baseball to do it.

For all the guff Ned Yost got here, he managed a small market team to two World Series and won one of them.

That was my point. Pushing all your chips in when doing so isn't going to have enough of an effect to matter is not doing a good job of pushing all your chips in. If there was ever a clear cut example of why that way of operating is not as good as the way the Brewers go about business it's the Cubs.

I'd argue it was a terrible job of doing it. If they had the prospect capital to get Skubal and maybe another above average pitcher I could see the logic of getting starters. If not then maybe get some relievers who can shorten games. What they did was get average at best starters who'd need quality relievers to back them up then failed to provide said relief. They'd have been just as well off getting a few scrap heap pitchers and hope their offense could pull them through. To go all in should be to get over the top not get back to what they were a year prior and could be next year. Deciding when to go all in is part of doing a good job of going all in.

Their run was built on homegrown offense and supplemented with veteran pitching. The reason they couldn't continued doing that was their superstars on offense didn't superstar very long. I thought they would have been more like Houston than what they turned into.

Well said. I'd add he signed a team friendly contract while paying at an MVP level to be a Brewer for the rest of his career. That alone is not usual but he did so while playing on a team friendly contract to begin with. He didn't bother testing the market in his prime choosing instead to stay here. He could have Paul Molitored it but he didn't.

I look at Yelich like the Brewers version of Yadier Molina (I threw up a little saying it but bear with me) He set the tone for the team for a generation. The team responded to his leadership even when he wasn't the best player on the field. The team took on the identity of the player. The only major difference is Yelich isn't a total buthead. Which means the team isn't full of them like the Cardinals were.

Life is good when you reach a point in the season when it would be mildly disappointing to only get 100 wins.

I think the relief of finally winning a series lead to a letdown they just didn't recover from well enough. Given the goal is set higher this time around plus the experience of what happens when you have an emotional let down makes me believe it's not likely to repeat.

Back in the 90's the two most prolific teams were Cleveland and Atlanta. One was built on power and a great overall offense and average pitching while the other on great pitching and an average offense. They won one World Series between the two of them. That one win was when they played against each other. The age old adage that good pitching bets a good offense has been proven both right and wrong depending on the year. There is no single best way. There is no built for the regular season but not the post season team. There is no good pitching beats good hitting. Homeruns are not necessary nor is an ace pitcher. There is just one good team managing to win all the series in a stretch when all the teams face a good opponent every series.

This is a bit out of left field but it's something that's always bothered me. All-Stars shouldn't be selected solely by the season they've had that year. While it's not a career accomplishment award it's also not a best first half of a season award. I bring this up now because I just read this blurb in the USA Today.

Voters dig the long ball.

I'd be nice to see defense get the credit it's due but do you really think that's going to surpass close to double the homerun difference between the two in voter's eyes?