Playing Catch

4-0.

I think the percent chance of that happening is about 99.9%.

Badgers dominated a decent opponent on a (somewhat) neutral floor. I thought the decision-making offensively was extremely impressive and decisive. They moved the ball really, really well. This team is one of the most skilled Badger teams 1-7 that they've had in a long time, and might be the most entertaining watch since the F4 teams.

Because I think the Badgers will go into most games with an advantage at the guard spots, I think a lot of the games versus better-than-average teams this year will come down to if Crowl/Winter can matchup effectively enough on both ends. Versus UTRGV they were ineffective on BOTH ends. If one or both can do it at least on one end, that will give UW an advantage. Looks like UCF likes to shoot FTs and go get orbs. I'll say it will be a 78-75, Badgers win in a physical, choppy game with lower shooting percentages where one or both teams blame the environment.

I don't feel strongly about the who-plays-where debate, but one reason some would like Turang to stay put is the, "if it ain't broke," idea. I also wonder that having a superior defender at 2nd isn't more valuable than we realize. There are more hitter-platoon advantage ABs for lefty hitters, and often times, the 2nd baseman needs to cover a larger space than short because the first baseman is holding the runner.

The "arena," for the Greenbrier is a theater/ballroom space. I can't imagine they can fit more than 1200 seats in there.

Someone should have opened up an IGT for this news.

3 wings, or positions 2, 3, 4... either way, I agree that typical Badger teams on the last 20 years featured more defenders at the 2 and 3 spot, and that the offenses often hummed with 1, 4, and/or 5.

I realize it's still very early, but is it possible that this version of the Badgers is better than the hypothetical 2024-25 team that includes Hepburn, Storr, and Essegian?

I'm with everyone else. The Deivi Garcia signing is not your normal minor league free agent pickup. His minor league numbers are very intriguing, and it's easy to explain-away his difficulties the last couple of seasons -- becoming a swingman/reliever, being waived and not picked up, going to... the White Sox. I'm probably as excited as one can be about a minor league free agent. Also, this excitement has EVERYTHING to do with the Brewers recent success with pitching. If the 2001 Brewers pick this guy up, he probably gets worse.

One reason I like this forum is simply to keep a lot of dumb stuff (no judgement! I like dumb stuff sometimes) off of the main board. Also, THIS board has also been pretty light lately. But there really isn't much to talk about right now. I think everyone is just waiting for stuff to happen.

My random thoughts on last night... The Vaqueros shot great last night. The kind of performance that wipes out a 3-seed in the tournament. But the Badgers won. I'm not going to think too hard about it. Janicki took 2 steps forward last night. NOT a liability defensively, as I thought a couple of games ago. He also handles and passes so confidently, to go along with his shooting. He's gunna have a very nice four years. The other bench guys are also plus. McGee and Gilmore do what they do, of course. And while Amos still needs to work on defense and general positioning, his ball-handling and shooting are good for a guy his size. It seems like the last couple of seasons, we've thought they'd have "depth," simply due to numbers, but the quality of the depth was, IMHO, lacking. Not the case with this group! Blackwell. He very well could end up my all-time favorite Badger. That's a crazy thing for me to ponder. I just love his background as a recruit, his humility. He just seems like a really, really good kid. And then when you watch him, he simply rises to the moment, time and time again. It doesn't matter if it's one of his first college games in Arizona last season, or versus UTRGV last night. He senses the moment and responds in all facets to try and lead his team to victory. Someone on the other board made mention that Crowl and Winter are neither big enough, or quick enough to take advantage of a mismatch. I think that is spot on. They are fine versus players that are similar to themselves. I think the rebounding and rim-protection will continue to be THE achilles heel of what could end up being a pretty good team. Particularly if they aren't getting the calls. Speaking of calls, any time I see a group of officials that includes D.J. Carstenen, I know it will be a frustrating, unpredictable, inconsistent performance from the zebras. Last night was no exception. The Badgers probably benefitted last night, but you just never know.

Since no one else will whisper it... (Maybe they are cheating?)

It ensures the Yankees sell out at least one game featuring the Brewers.

Questions off the top of my head... 1 - (40-man related?) What will Ernesto Martinez Jr. need to do in Spring Training to make the MLB roster, and how great would it be to see him be/become at least a serviceable left-handed 1B/DH/pinch-hitter/runner? 2 - Is the MLB roster young enough and potent enough to allow the Brewers to be more patient with their prospects? Is there any organizational benefit to "fast-tracking," prospects? 3 - My perception is that the Brewers are breaking into the enviable category of elite draft/develop organizations. Is this perception (A) accurate? (B) shared among the scouting community? Does this give an artificial "bump," in the faith that scouts have that prospects will reach their potential? If they are "elite," how long before the league catches up? 4 - Do you expect statcast-like data to become available to AA-ball, A-ball, rookie-ball soon? 5 - What free (or inexpensive) advanced data websites do you follow? 6 - Are there personal eye-test or stat-related indicators that each of you have that make you fall in love with, or mitigate your enthusiasm for, a prospect? Not sure how related these are to your initial pod's outline, but I'll send more as I think of them. Looking forward to the series!

So there's at least a couple of examples out there. That's good. I don't know where to find some accessible advanced stats, but in looking at the tiny AAA sample from his 2024 season on Fangraphs, it looks like he has elite "plate discipline" numbers across the board except on Z-Swing%, where his 57.7% wouldn't even come close to cracking the top 126 top MLBers (against commensurate competition). He just doesn't get guys swinging often enough. They just sit up there looking for a walk. I wonder if the org has toyed with the idea of going the Burnes route, and having Misiorowski learn that primary-pitch, firm cutter, and use the 4-seamer as a swing-and-miss pitch. Just scrap the change altogether, and limit the breaking balls to 0-2, 1-2 counts.

I mentioned this in another thread, but I'm not 100% sure that is true (I'm more like 85%, LOL). Yelich and Hoskins played a lot, in spite of their defensive qualities. There is NO doubt that the Brewers value defense. I just don't see evidence where a clearly superior bat was eschewed for defensive reasons. Maybe. Or maybe he's so untalented in the dirt that the Brewers have no choice. IMO, Black's biggest issue IS the bat, as it's not good enough to play ahead of other 1B/DH options on the roster, or on the waiver-wire.

Can anyone think of another top prospect that was able to halve his BB% from age 22 to say, age 25? Because I think that is close to what he would need to do in order to be a good MLB starter, let alone reach his ceiling.

What's a best-case/worst-case season(s) for this guy? How good is he?

This has been an issue for awhile now. The developmental program stopped developing. My pet theory as to the loss of dominant OL play is recruiting. I think that in the last say, 6 seasons or so, the Badgers have pulled in better recruits. But my uneducated guess is that many of those recruits get more stars because they can project as athletic pass-blockers -- not a bad thing, but perhaps a different body-type/skillset. It is baffling to me that say, 6 years ago, or so, The Badgers OL could be counted on to convert a 4th and inches nearly every time. That dried up completely, so much so that in recent seasons, I find myself hoping for an end-around or pass in those situations.

There were 87 free throw attempts, which really affected the scoreline*. UW with 47 FTA. Only 22 turnovers total, UW with 9. This will probably be the winning recipe for this team. Shoot/score well enough to make up for the lack of interior defense and rebounding. People will remember Tonje's performance, which was great, but for me, the game was about bench scoring. McGee, Amos, and Janicki went a combined 6-10 from behind the arc. It is really important that Amos and Janicki keep scoring, because I fear they would be liabilities otherwise. I'm not sure what Winter has shown to earn more minutes. Although, Arizona's bigs are BIG. That's obviously a tough matchup for the Badger's frontcourt. As for the ongoing question of McGee's coming off the bench, I think the current rotation is correct. I think the starting backcourt will continue to smooth out the offensive flow as the season goes on, and I think the bench NEEDS McGee's quarterbacking to get good shots. *(One can quibble with the refs involvement in the game, but do we, as fans, really want to see two teams getting mauled on their way to the hoop every possession with no calls? That turns a fair, 103-88 game into a 53-51 slog with 40 turnovers. It's a tough game to officiate as both teams want to invite contact, and one team wants a volleyball match underneath the hoop. It's tough because Arizona is active and handsy, looking to create breaks, and UW holds and tugs through screens, and uses hips and knees to knock guys offline, looking for defensive rebounds. Two physical styles, two different styles. The game can either be physical and fair, or physical and dubious. Speaking for myself, I don't enjoy watching deep, athletic, undisciplined teams slap and slash the ball on an endless, mindless quest for the turnover, and then getting away with it because refs don't want to impact the game.)

What would Hoskins cost as a FA this season?

I'm not convinced he's gunna hit. His swing looks goofy to me, and most of his hitting value is derived from taking a bunch of walks. His power isn't such that pitchers are going to worry about it. Pair all of that with his defensive shortcomings, and you don't really have anything more than a lefty pinch-hitter/pinch-runner that you'd have to replace in the next half of the inning.

This is very true, and you are correct. My point was more about the possibility that it was about dedicating a roster spot to Rea at all, regardless of salary. In other words, if he was making the minimum, would they go with him? Even with all of his innings pitched, his total fWAR was 0.9, so he was barely above replacement level with any given start.

With those moves made, it's hard not to think of all those new 40-man spots.