Thurston Fluff

One has to wonder if this in one of those something in an over the counter suppliment type things. Not that it's an excuse or anything. At this point anyone whose putting more than vitamins in his body should be banned for sheer stupidity.

My goal is more modest - a simple cessation of posts about Gwynn's limitations. When your limitation is as large as having zero power is a fairly significant shortcoming. I don't see how any discussion of him can be done without pointing out the fairly obvious problems. For very time someone says he hits for average and gets on base it needs to be pointed out that he would have to be significantly better in those areas to compensate for the fairly large problem of not having so much as gap power. regardless of what Gwynn does, he's going to take heat on a daily basis on this board. No other player (not even Turnbow!) gets this treatment. This much negative energy directed towards any player in a Milwaukee Brewer uniform, on a Brewer "fan" website, is both sad and embarrassing. I guess you don't remember the Wes Helms, Obermueller, Mench, Hendrickson, Moeller days. Wes Helms did more in a Brewer uniform than Gwynn did. It's what fans do. They look at players numbers and decide if they like them or not. Based on the skill set Gwynn has I just don't think his positives outweigh his shortcomings. He may hit for average but not mid 300's level like his dad. He may get on base but not at a 380-400 clip like other slappys. He may steal bases but not at an exceptionally high rate. Those all should be eye popping if he can't hit the ball hard enough to get to the wall without four hops. I tend to be one that usually agrees with management moves. I think like you do. They know more than I do. This one I simply can't see the benefit of Gwynn over other options.

I saw an interview with Bob Costas once and he was asked who his favorite guy to interview was. He said it was funny since he and Jonny Carson were just talking about that. They both agreed it was Ueck because they didn't have to feed him particular lines like most comedians need. (Dennis Miller I'm looking at you) They could go in whatever direction they pleased and Bob could do something with it. His ability to pull humor out of anything fed him is something few can do.

Nix at AAA has a career 880 OPS vs Gwynn's 756. I wonder if they aren't inclined to give Gwynn some regular playing time in the 8 hole for a week or two and see if some other team is interested in him. Why would they bother with a slappy when they have someone who has some power and plays sound defense?

Suppan is here because he can eat up innings and the younger pitchers did not need to be rushed up from the minors. For the record I agreed with the signing. However Villenueva was ready and capable of starting at the beginning of the year so slotting him in the rotation wouldn't have hurt his development. My point was he was the only one that may not have been signed IMO.

Sad to see. I always liked him. If the Cards cut it's not a good sign at all. They are pretty much in the same boat as we were last year with their pitching.

I'm not so sure any of the deals wouldn't have been done. The Jeffery Hammonds signing shows they were willing to pay for players when the time was right. They just didn't get the right player or pick the right time. That was more on Dean Taylor than it was the Seligs. Maybe the Soup deal wouldn't have been done but with hindsight being 20/20 that may not have been so bad. Not that Soup is a bad deal by any means. It's just we have in house options that are far cheaper and probably as good. We shouldn't judge them by the payroll the final season since it was not related to the Seligs unwillingness to pay as much as it was to aid in the sale of the team. It gave the new owner flexibility and didn't lock him in to potentially bad contracts like the Cubs did. Overall I tend to believe circumstances dictated the payrolls more than merely being cheap. The time they had the revenue was the same time they needed to start all over. There was no way they were going to be able to buy their way to a good team after Sal got through with it. They semi attempted to and all that did was get us 100+ losses. If they couldn't buy a good team it didn't really make sense to spend a ton of money on a bad one. As it is they probably overpaid for the production of some of those late 90's early 00 teams. Even Mark A. didn't ramp up the payroll to it's current level his first year. There simply wasn't any benefit to it.

You seem to be suggesting that a significant variable might be being omitted, which may be causing a significant and systematic error in the projections? Not at all. I simply want to see if there is any minor adjustment that might make it more accurate. I tend to believe in stats and hard numbers but I also question them. Mostly becuase I believe asking questions about them and analyzing them to the nth degree keeps statistical analysis updated and as accurate as can be. Also, as I mentioned in the PM, there's a lot of statistical noise in a seasons worth of games for a team, so it's difficult to find systematic problems with a model without looking at many years worth of results I'm finding that out.http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif I'm working now on taking individual stats. Things like run differential and seeing what those anomolies look like. I most likely will find out the null hypothisis is right, there is nothing goig on. But why not look? The best stats are the ones that had the most questions asked about them and survived IMO. The one constant is that a very good team bats a lot less than others...if they win most home games, those missing innings add up. Because of that minor glitch, you'll see most of them outperform their "expected" win total. If this is right then it should follow losing records should be closer to the predicted number correct? Again thanks all. I'm not at all agianst stats and am not out to prove they are all full of it. I just believe all of them should be questioned. Just like any good skeptic.

Another feel-good "the times they are a-changin'" thread in my eyes. A few years ago, we'd have been questioning whether he should be our #1 setup option. My thoughts exactly. He would be in the mix for a late inning close game role on a lot of clubs. Including some winning ones. Detroit just traded for Capps2 and he is getting more important spots than Spurling. I think he fits into the category of first impressions last longer than actual performance dictates Russ was talking about in another thread. IIRC he didn't start out very well in his first couple outings with the Brewers. Since then he hasn't had many important moments success (or opportunities) to erase that initial bad taste.

Every win gets bigger as the season goes along. It means there is less time for the Cubs to close the gap. Every win of the Cubs that gets matched by the Brewers is one more week they will need of us playing poorly while they play well. If you compare the worst month played by the Brewers to the best month of the Cubs they gained 4 1/2 games. That means they would have to play as good as they managed all year for six more weeks while the Brewers would have to play at their worst level of the year so far for those six weeks just to get even. Within a few weeks if we keep matching wins they will be relegated to hopeing for a monumental collapse by the Brewers for any chance what so ever of winning the division. That is assuming they play the best they have so far all year . That in of itself is harder to imagine than the Brewers falling apart.

The site?s in-game threads may be its most interesting. Aside normal talk and some inside jokes, the members are notoriously superstitious. How true. I posted once in an in-game thread. The Brewers lost the lead late in the game just moments after the post so now all I do is lurk there. Great to see BF.net get the propes it deserves.

The NL central has an average record of 38-43.5. The AL East has an average of 39.4-41.4. So if I did my math right the NL central is leading the AL East in putridity by 1.75 games.http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif With A-Rod down for a while I'm sure the AL east can muster up enough suckyness to overtake the title form us.

Thanks Igor. This, along with stuff Russ gave me, is going to take some time to sort through. Most likely to find out nothing is going on and I wasted my time. Thank God my time isn't worth much.

Does anyone else think this is similar to the Shouse trade last year in reverse? Last year we were desperate for relief help and couldn't/wouldn't give up much to get it. Detroit this year is very weak in the pen so they gave up something that wouldn't hurt now, or perhaps ever, and got someone who will help some. I wouldn't be surprised if they did a few more trades like this to see what sticks. I was reading some comments from the Detoit Free Press today. They seem to think he's got mid 90's fastball with a good slider that he can't control all the time. Are the in for a surprise when he averages 91 on his fastball.

Starting off good leaves a much stronger impression on a fan than ending good. Cappy and Eveland are two examples of that. I think it's differant for teams in a pennant race though. If for example Sheets started out poorly but he came around in September and boosted the Brewers to the playoffs I think he would be viewed more positively than if he was doing the exact same thing with a non contender.

I've been interested in looking into anomolies in projecting win/losses to see if it is simply random chance or if there is some small variable that got overlooked. I'm basically following the idea that many times with scientific calculations anomolies that don't fit the paradigm (as outlined in Thomas Kuhn's Theory of Scientific Revolutions) get ignored as random when in fact there may be some sort of minor variable that could be used to further enhance the calculation. Unfortunately I can't find an easily accessable simple projection vs. actual standings. I'd like to get as many years as I can so I can study the teams that didn't fit the projections. If someone has a link or something I'd greatly appreciate it. I don't really need the math or proofs but I would appreciate opinions on which projections are most reliable. Thanks in advance for any help given.

I guess it really depends on how worst is defined. If considering top to bottom performance yes it is the worst. If judging by how many competetive teams are in the division then no the AL east is the worst. Some may still feel the Yankees are going to get hot and eventually be a contender but I think that has more to do with history than it does this year's version.

while doing some research for predicting wins I found this that seems to suggest there is some sort of clutch although very small. www.tangotiger.net/clutch.html I'm by no means good enough at this sort of thing to vet out the accuracy but it's worth looking at.

One thing to consider with his wrist is whether he needs to use it to get over the soreness. If he just sits will the problem just go away or does it need to be used to it's fullest extent tro get over it? I have no idea but it may play into why they feel he should be playing regularly.

It would be really really deep down --- way past my inner Zambrano, but you may be right... My inner Zambrano? Classic. You're right about Slade's popularity boost though. Run Runaway was probably the first time anyone ever heard of Slade.

Cmon feel the noise was Quiet Riot It was actually Slade. Quiet Riot is the one most people remember but SLade was the original. How about when the GM cuts you while on the mound?

This is probably the Rickie we get this season IMO. It's not uncommon for someone to struggle the year after surgery/injury. It's similar to Sheets last year. Just be glad Hardy isn't going through it as well. I've been one who has said Weeks production has been disappointing so far and I stick to that statement. I also believe he can live up to his potential. It's just probably not going to be this year. I wonder how much pain effects things like plate disipline, pitch selection, ect. I'd imagine it has to leek into other aspects of the hitting.

I think maybe folks are being a little harsh about Capellan's attitude problem. He was the team's best reliever last year, he didn't do anything wrong, and he got sent down. I agree people are a little harsh on him but it's a stretch to say he was the best reliever on this team. Wise, Turnbow, Coco and even Shouse all managed to pitch pretty well for equivelant stretches of time last year. He has moments were you could make that arguement but his overall body of work wasn't very impressive IMO. I think the fact that he melted down late in the year and came back to spring training out of shape indicated to the Brewers braintrust that he wasn't dedicated enough to improve on what he already is. That's why I'm happy we got something for him. If he's just happy to be here and didn't do everything he could to improve on his mediocre season last year I'm not sure he will ever be more than he is now. That's simply not good enough for this team. First, how do you know that he didn't apologize? Actually one of the Brewers AAA players mentioned that he didn't in an article. I don't remember which one but I do recall the players were not impressed with his act or lack of contrition.

I can see both sides of this as viable. If we keep him we have a known commodity which is nice. If we leave him go that money could be used to extend Sheets or help pay for Coco ect. Since every team seems to wnat pitching we have some very valuable trading chips this winter. Several of which could get us a left fielder at a reasonably salary. Even if the production isn't quite at the level of Jenkins the rest of the team is about to hit it's prime so a slight drop in production there could be offset somewhat. Either way I won't complain.

Found this Prince article today. Nothing to revealing but like anything Brewer related worth the read. sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news...&type=lgns