SoCalBrewfan

Makes me think of when I came back from Vegas after Super Bowl weekend and I experienced several symptoms for 3-4 days that now check boxes but weren’t known then.... slightly elevated temperature (99°), mild throat irritation, muscle/joint weakness and fatigue, chills at night, etc. once the US has an anti-bodies test, I’d like to check it out as I’m curious. I think there's a decent chance I got it, had symptoms exactly like these, was in Boston end of February and have mingled with tons of people since then including students at a large public university where I teach and spectators at a big multi-school HS track meet. These symptoms incidentally perfectly track the doc in Madrid who was tracking his infection, has been mild in the scheme of things but it def sapped my energy for several days. (Also feel like I sweated out quite a few pounds with the chill/sweats at night.) I was told there are very limited tests available so they wouldn't check me unless I checked three boxes, and that even if they tested me nothing much would change, so I should stay home and self-isolate and self-medicate. If what I have is the coronavirus, and again, who really knows, but if it is, there are probably dozens / hundreds / thousands of people just like me spreading it without knowing. Graduation at my university (mid May) is already 'postponed' and I'm starting to think my son's HS graduation (mid June) will be as well. If I had travel planned before June I would get a refund while I could.

For a sobering statistic, given the overwhelming of the healthcare system in Italy...this is obviously not the only number that matters, but it shows why flattening the curve to make sure the system is not overwhelmed is so important: Hospital beds per 1000 people, 2017 (except US, which is a 2016 number): Japan 13.05 South Korea 12.27 Germany 8 France 5.98 China 4.34 Italy 3.18 US 2.77 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_hospital_beds

Yep. My son runs cross country and track in highly competitive Southern California, and had goals for his senior year. He had a good chance to advance to CIF and/or break 2 minutes in the 800 m this year, but might well have run his last competitive race. It's one of many heartbreaking things for high school seniors, along with potentially no prom, no senior night and graduation ceremony, no admitted students events at colleges...he said some people were cheering when they announced school closing but others were in tears. I told him though that many years from now he'll be able to tell people that he was high school class of '20, and people will say, whoa, that's crazy, what was that like.

If you make a top 30 list for a weak system like the Brewers, you're going to get to names that are marginal. How many guys are rated as 40 overall on the Brewers' top 30 at MLB? Those are guys who are not expected to make an impact at the major league level on their current trajectory, or guys whose error bars are so huge that nobody is really sure what to expect. Sure, some of them will rise above that expectation and have a bit of a career. A very small number of 40s across the league will prove the scouts wrong and make an All Star team or something. I'll root for all of these guys, of course, and have my favorites, but who is 24 vs 30 vs unranked is really not a big deal in the scheme of things.

This is like the irresistible force and the immovable object. I'll root for Jeffress, but maybe secretly I wish for JJ to do poorly, get dumped by the Cubs, come back to the Brewers midseason, and then dominate?

The kool-aid is flowing... I get it, we have people who hate the thought of talking bad about the team, so much so, that anyone suggesting this team has not taken a step ahead, in fact has moved in reverse, is scolded, scorned, and made to feel like their opinions aren't valid. Is it not possible that posters have made a rational analysis of the changes and decided that they are on balance still have a good chance to be a contending team? (I have.) And if you feel bad about being scolded, scorned, or made to feel like your opinion isn't valid (which I agree should not happen), then why turn around and accuse people of drinking Kool aid? It's as yet unproven; we know what we've lost and what acquisitions have been made, but how the team will perform on the field is in the future and there's big error bars on anyone's projections, whether they admit to it or not. People can and should have a range of opinions, some backed by stats, some by hunches, some just by a desire to be optimistic or pessimistic or contrarian or whatever. People disagree, and that's ok.

Every year I feel like the press and fans get dazzled by the biggest signings and the flashiest trades. Check if you like, the 'winners' of last offseason: https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-offseason-grades-phillies-dominate-the-winter-white-sox-giants-pirates-have-lousy-report-cards/ Phillies A+, 81 wins. Atlanta C+, 97 wins. Angels B, 72 wins. Oakland C, 97 wins. Padres B+, 70 wins. Dodgers C, 106 wins. In fairness, the Twins and Cardinals were graded A and both did improve to win divisions, though you might argue how much their high profile offseason moves played a role in that. The Rays got a C and made the wild card. The ten playoff teams had 2 As, 4 Bs, 4 Cs. In case you think it's a fluke, check out the Angels and their winning 2017-18 offseason...etc. Or this bleacher report listing Donaldson and Lynn among the 'worst moves' last offseason: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2819108-picking-mlbs-best-and-worst-2018-19-offseason-moves It's not the offseason I expected, but there's a lot of solid signings, depth and flexibility, and I'm cautiously optimistic. I love the Narvaez and Urias trades, Urias more than Narvaez. I'm happy that there should be payroll space for an addition if needed. I'd still like to see another pitcher or two for depth, though.

In addition to what sveumrules says (great response, btw), this discounts the addition of Garcia who is at least average defensively whereas Braun was not; our OF defense should be solid to very good. Arcia was not great last year so there's a decent chance of improving at short as well. In addition, 3B defense is likely to have a bigger impact than 1B, and I think a GM who completely discounts defense wouldn't have spent big bucks on Cain in the first place. The defense is not without holes, but it's not historically bad, either.

Yes Brewers bottomed out at 62 and 68 mil in 16 and 17. In 2018 they brought in Cain Yelich. 2019 Grandal and kept Moose. Yeas, but the 'bottomed out' Brewers were actually pretty strong despite that low payroll; they won 86 games in 2017 and missed the wild card by a sliver. The White Sox are on the upswing and have made a lot of noise this offseason, but they were 13th in the AL in runs scored last year and so they started with a lot of ground to make up...I'm glad to see them trying but I think it's premature to crown them.

Given the radio silence Stearns seems to prefer, that's probably the most we're likely to get. Reporter types hear whispers, but also I think you look at the payroll trimming, and try to guess what the plan is. Some said payroll cutting for the sake of payroll cutting, others looked at the extra budget and said, hm, that's a Donaldson sized gap in the budget. I'd like it to be true, but I think anyone who tells you definitively that they know what Stearns is up to before he does it is full of it.

Here's a link with another link with some speculation discussing Brewers on Rendon or Donaldson: https://www.mlb.com/news/contenders-biggest-needs-for-2020

I'd guess we see a 3b option, at least a platoon guy, with an still decent shot of a medium to big money guy, either in trade or FA. Could still see Todd Frazier at third in addition to the other names mentioned. Cabrera I guess is also an option?

I might be crazy wrong here, but I really like the way that Stearns has responded to the challenges of this offseason. The process is clearly not complete (3b in particular doesn't seem solved and I'd still love to see another pitcher or two), but it's been a major remaking of the roster and has a decent chance to be not only just as good in the near term, but also stronger in the medium term. In particular I think the Urias acquisition is sneaky amazing. We had the combination of luck and foresight to get Yelich before he became one of the best players in the game. It remains to be seen, of course, but Urias seems like the best chance to do the same this offseason...a guy who has the potential to breakout, has the pedigree both from a scouting and analytics point of view, but because he hasn't been amazing in the majors yet, he was available for a price we could meet.

I want to believe. There were reports that the Brewers were players on Rendon and are in on Donaldson. I don't know what to think of that, but all this would make tons of sense if they were clearing the decks for one medium to big contract. A Seattle deal for Seager seems so sensible at this point... I liked Thames the person, seemed like a truly great guy, but this seems like a really solid signing.

Nice call. Also, I now have the song from Moana in my head...thanks.

I think it's good that we're open to trades, not that I'd be happy to see Hader leave. The article mentions Edwin Diaz to the Mets as a comp; the Mariners got salary relief from getting out from under the Cano deal, but also two really good prospects in Dunn and Kelenic. The Ms did take on Bruce and Swarzak as well, for whatever that's worth. Diaz had four years' control remaining, just as Vader does. Given that we're not shedding a Cano contract, you'd think we'd want more than two top 100 prospects or MLB established young players. Not too many teams can pull that off, I'd guess...

So your team just achieved a key milestone on the way to the championship, beat the big bad Yankees, looks like maybe a team for the ages. It's a huge deal. So, how do you choose to celebrate? Says a lot about the guy that he made the choice he did, that his joy at the moment was not complete without taking time out for some toxic harassment of a woman. It does, however, seem like the rot runs much deeper, and the stories are starting to come out about the culture of the organization. I don't think this is over. See, for example: https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/27926780/the-houston-astros-front-office-missteps-began-long-brandon-taubman-comments How demoralizing it must be to be a player on that team right now...

Honestly, there are a large number of posts on this and many other message boards that are essentially overreactions to an event or small number of events. Many posters are guilty of them, and it kind of bugs me sometimes, but I figure a lot of it is just emotional reactions as opposed to thoughtful ones. So saying the Brewers are done, or are guaranteed to make the playoffs, or are doomed to lose a certain game...they're overreactions based on an emotional response to something bad. It's similar with prospect reactions...Rasmussen is an ace, Rasmussen is bad, Grisham is trash, Grisham is one of our best hitters. Even when they turn out right that doesn't make the logic behind them sound. You can have gut feelings about the next two weeks of games, but the smart money would predict something close to break even. Calling a projection system trash because it works from that baseline prediction is just silly. And yes, there are many things not reflected there...emotion, fatigue, lingering injuries, just having a hunch. But those are sometimes the ways people fool themselves into dumb bets... So sure, post your hunch, your dream, the triple bank shot that gets us the division and leaves the Cubs and Cards at home crying. (Definitely post that one, actually.) Just don't pretend it's anything more than it is.

Edit: double somehow. I might add, though, that I hope Stearns' valuations of players is less volatile than, say, a few recent posts.

For the OP, I say no, and I think the impact of coaches is dramatically overstated in most cases. You have to put pretty high importance on coaching, overlook some improvements from guys, and even then I think that's a lot less important than player personnel moves. Some regression should have been expected after a lot of key players had great seasons last year, so the question is whether we prepared appropriately and had backup plans in place. Problem is, guys didn't just regress toward the mean... For the position players, the extent of the drop-off from Shaw, Cain, and Aguilar last year to this year is really challenging for any team to overcome...those guys went from all stars to smoking craters (except for Cain, who is merely ordinary after being one of the best position players in the league last year). What team could lose that much value from all three of those guys and still be in the race? We were much better prepared to absorb those hits than we could have expected though, with Moose, Hiura, Thames, and a big bump in catcher offense. Those investments in Moose and Yaz came at a price though...see below. The criticism that I can support most is of the pitching moves. I liked the three young starters, but that's a plan with some obvious risk given the volatility of pitching. I think we had the depth so that we could handle one of three struggling, or even two, but we had two utter disasters, and then lost Chacin and the one success story among the young guys in Woodruff. Add to that that we lost two key bullpen pieces pre-season, and the spiral of more bad innings and more workload for the remaining good relievers just got out of hand. Given that we don't seem to trust most starters deep into games, it's hard to sustain a pitching staff under these conditions. We had starting depth with Davies and Anderson and went back to the well for Gio, but at some point it's a cascade failure where one part breaking puts more strain on those that remain and then the whole thing collapses in a heap. The ultimate lack of depth might in part reflect the money we spent on Moose and Yaz, of course. We took a risk, pushed a lot of chips in, and the risk didn't work. Given all that went wrong, I think it's frankly a miracle that we're still over .500. Kind of sucks that this great Yelich season was not backed up by more team success, but at least there was a plan that seemed plausible. If you look at Burnes, Peralta, Shaw, Aguilar, Chacin, Knebel, two of those guys regressing but still retaining some of their value from last year is probably enough to get us in the playoffs. That's a pretty good gamble, honestly. If Arcia is back next year I take it all back, though...

There's plenty of evidence that teams approach player valuation with something similar to a WAR and $/win calculation. (At least those with analytic frames, but that seems like almost all teams these days.) You might not buy it or understand it, but it really doesn't matter...it's how team management thinks.

Believe it or not, the Brewers have come out way way ahead on the first two years of the contract; for $29M we got 7.5 to 8.8 WAR, depending on whose numbers you believe. Cain could never play another game and we'd do ok on the deal. Of course a team trading for him doesn't care about that. From a pure value point of view going forward, and for a team that didn't get the benefit of the first two years, the 3/$51M remaining assumes he's five or six wins above average the next three years, and that's not a bad guess; 2.5, 2.0, 1.5 would be a plausible curve. Before this season, Fangraphs projected him at 3.2 next year and 2.6 the year after that, which would more than do it, but presumably his season this year puts his stock lower. Still, where there's a lot of risk, there's a pretty good chance that there's still some surplus value in that contract. It's likely that Cain is worth more to the Brewers than to a potential trade partner, though.

It's funny how much disagreement there is on Davies' value, but then historically there's been a tendency among fans to underestimate the value of a starting pitcher like him. All you have to do is look at some of the second-tier free agent pitchers from this past offseason and what they've produced (see below, left out Corbin, Eovaldi who were real multiyear guys...Eovaldi has been a huge disaster this year though). A starting pitcher who can take the ball and pitch 160 innings with average or better run prevention is worth serious coin, so much so that teams will gamble $10M on rehabbers or reclamation projects who often turn out worse than replacement level. Davies isn't flashy but he has delivered decent innings, and his arbitration years still carry surplus value as you can hope he'll deliver value well above what his salary would suggest. He's easily in the top 10 Brewers in terms of trade value, might well be top 5. (Sadly, that's not saying much, as we don't have much surplus value in contracts beyond Yelich, Hiura, Hader, and Woodruff right now.) Happ, 2yr/$34M: 125 IP, 83 ERA+, 0.2 bWAR, 0.8 fWAR Lynn, 3/$30M: 160 IP, 144 ERA+, 5.8 bWAR, 5.5 fWAR A Sanchez, 2yr/$19M: 117 IP, 124 ERA+, 2.4 bWAR, 1.8 fWAR (before tonight) Keuchel, .67yr/$13M: 65 IP, 105 ERA+, 0.7 bWAR, 0.3 fWAR Harvey, 1yr/$11M: 59 IP, 59 ERA+, -0.5 bWAR, -0.3 fWAR Cahill, 1yr/$9M: 87 IP, 70 ERA+, -0.6 bWAR, -0.8 fWAR G Richards, 2yr/$15M: rehabbing And Davies: Davies, $2.6M: 122 IP, 122 ERA+, 1.5 bWAR, 1.0 fWAR

For eye-popping stats, I'll take LaVel Freeman in AA El Paso, .395/.467/.627, though El Paso in those days was as extreme a hitter's environment as can be...

The lists have some inertia, as they should, particularly in season. So Grisham or Ray doesn't drop as far as you might expect in a mediocre season, and then Grisham doesn't gain as many positions as you might expect in a breakthrough. If you base your rankings on scouting as well as stats, that is as it should be. Really after the top 4 picks in the draft, it's a huge crapshoot. I think a study concluding a huge drop-off from 1-4 to 1-5 is flawed. Doing statistics on the MLB draft, for which there is a sample size of one each year, you can't possibly hope for that level of precision in your conclusions. It's also not clear that median is the right metric, or at least the only right metric. In the last 20 years, along with all the busts, there have been four guys taken 5th overall with 40+ bWAR, but nobody taken 4th overall has hit that level (Ryan Zimmerman is close at 37.8).