Cool Hand Lucroy

This is great. I'd love a link to your Badger hoops analytics recap. Always fascinated by that stuff, and by the "luck" category on KenPom/Torvik.

KenPom did this relatively recently with the Badgers. They put up a couple of middling years in that Ryan/Gard transition (the Davison years), and yet the algo had them rated very highly. I think he tweaked things to bump them down a bit because he thought something about Wisconsin's per possession strategy was gaming the system. Might not be a bad idea to adjust MLB projection in the same way, although I think you might start to run into funkier and less quantifiable variables given the nature of the sport. Good thought.

Thank you for this. I used to think we were the Rays of the NL. It's getting to the point where you have to say: we're just the Brewers. This is not to rag on Fangraphs. Projections are hard, there's going to be mean reversion, etc. But, man, it's a huge credit to this org to have systematically outperformed to this degree. In a weird way, I'm almost as impressed by the Dodgers, who have put together very projectable rosters and still managed to outperform systematically. Great job. with this, @sveumrules

Gone back and forth on this for awhile, but here goes: OF: Yelich, Chourio, Perkins, Frelick, Collins, Lockridge IF: Vaughn, Turang, Ortiz, Durbin, Mona, Bauers C: Contreras, Jansen SP: Peralta, Priester, Quintana RP: Koenig, Uribe, Mears, Ashby, Hall, Megill, Patrick, Gasser, Miz Notes: 1) There is a very loose divide between SP and RP. Swap out Q for Woodruff if Woodruff is healthy. I think Peralta and Priester are going to go five, but Q is probably only getting three, and you're counting on Patrick and Hall and Gasser for multiple innings. 2) Ultimately, I think Miz's upside is worth giving him a spot. Plus, he can be a righty long man. End of the day, Miz is the most uncomfortable AB we can give the opponents, and I think it's a mistake to leave that off the playoff roster. Even the threat of it is valuable, even though we know having him in the game is a risky proposition. In short, I think teams want us to leave Miz off the roster, and I don't think we should give them what they want. Tough call, but that's where I've landed. 3) Final position player spot is tricky. I think Hoskins is getting dropped. Would I have him on? I don't know. I like the veteran presence, but looking at who we have, he's redundant right now. Unfortunate, but I'm not sure he adds too much. The question then becomes who do you roster in his place? I think there are two candidates: Quero and Lockridge. Quero wouldn't play. He just allows you to pinch-hit Jansen with less downside risk. There's something to that, especially the way Jansen has been hitting. But I'd go with Lockridge because he will play. He'll run. He can play defense late. And he can give you an early PH AB and see a lot of pitches too, though that won't be something that happens much. Like I said, good arguments for adding Quero, but I just think Lockridge is more likely to give you value for the spot, in areas the Brewers like. Overall, I think this roster looks pretty good. If Henderson is healthy, maybe that changes the calculus on Miz, Gasser, or Patrick. Maybe they go with Grant Anderson, but I think the length the other guys can give matters. Success or failure is probably going to come down to: Do Yelich, Contreras, Turang, Chuorio (and Vaughn, to a lesser extent) slug? If you get two or three of those guys hot, you like our chances at a deep run. If not, going to be tough.

It won't be long before the playoffs begin, and they'll dominate the season narrative. Without wading too far into the debate about how much the playoffs SHOULD dominate that narrative, maybe this is a place where we can acknowledge and celebrate the season on its own merits. Longest win streak in club history. Most wins in club history. 3rd straight division title. Bye into the NLDS. My personal favorite game was the win over the Mets to get to 9 in a row. Fell behind early, came back and got a Collins walk-off. Pretty rare I've been so giddy watching a regular season game. Whatever happens, this team owns the Central division. I'll be hoping we get the Padres in round two, but let's just play our best baseball and remember who we have been, which is the best team in Major League Baseball.

Mets announcers talking about 2008 on the air.

There's a Joey Weimer sighting in Miami.

People in Milwaukee waiting on the result of a Mets-Marlins game to end the regular season brings back some very good memories. 97 wins!!!!!

Fedde is a fine depth option for next year. Can anyone imagine him pitching in a playoff game where we aren't down by 4+ runs? He screams semi-useful regular season arm to me.

Kind of puts into perspective just how crazy good those middle 76 games were. I'm not really sure who the real Brewers are, but one good sign is they've played their best baseball against the year's best teams. The bad news is the exception to that might be the Cubs/Padres, who they're now assured of playing in round two. Still. I suppose there are things to recommend that, as opposed to the (found themselves again) Dodgers or the scorching Reds (who will be even more scorching if they beat LA in the WC round)/Mets (though I'd take the Mets if I got to pick my playoff opponent). Let's rest up and play these 11 to 19 games just like the middle 76.

I guess I don't really see how that connects to the fan perspective. I agree with you. Which is why we shouldn't worry too much about these games.

I mean, I'm not holding my breath. Other people are different, that's fine, but the playoffs are random, so this has already been a successful year for me. But my post mostly meant the regular season, and the important thing is that none of these ABs will correlate to whether or not we win the WS.

Because we're going to get one seed anyway at this point, and the wins record is a pretty arbitrary emotional target. More importantly, with a week between now and the NLDS, what possible correlation could there be between these ABs and those? It's fine to care about those things, but we've already accomplished everything we could've hoped for this year.

These are basically preseason games, folks. Take the information you get from individual performances, make it one factor in your roster choices, and don't worry about the result. Plus, I'd kind of like to see the Reds in the playoffs. And we're going to hit a little bit today or tomorrow, I just know it.

That was obviously bad luck, but I have no idea why you're messing with breaking stuff on 0-2. If you can throw 103, you should do that in big spots.

Saw One Battle After Another today. I'm not a huge Paul Thomas Anderson fan (I like him fine), but Boogie Nights and There Will Be Blood are both brilliant films. OBAA might be better than both. I think it tops Boogie Nights for sure. Not only is it an excellent adaptation of the spirit of Pynchon (my favorite writer), but it's a great film on its own.

With nearly a full week from the end of the regular season until the start of the playoffs, I don't think how we're playing right now matters at all. That said, it's a fact that we're not playing well.

Re: Murph the in-game manager: The guy makes some calls that look super-duper weird (even indefensible) to anyone used to thinking about platoon advantages and reliever rest. Like, I genuinely believe the guy manages with his gut. That's going to take a lot of flak in the stats era, and, full disclosure, it's not my preferred style. Sometimes, I am just confused as heck by what Pat is aiming for. But, like, maybe the guy's a psychological genius who understands the humans who play for him. I can't rule that out. And his success genuinely has me rethinking certain criticisms I have had for the last couple years. I mean, I don't know why Ashby pitches so much, but maybe the simple answer is that Murph just knows he can handle it.

I don't think any of this is unreasonable. There are good arguments for the consistency of the all-time ABS system. And, in tennis, it has certainly allowed for a very consistent flow in matches. Though I admit to being one of the tennis fans who longs for the "good old, challenge system days." Our basic philosophical disagreement, probably unresolvable, is just that I prefer to preserve a collaborative, agreed upon, limited uncertainty (which the challenge system represents, at least in terms of letting some close calls be decided by humans, on the assumption that it's not worth arguing over everything) to the false certainty of completely automated systems. I especially wince (maybe unfairly) at the argument that "let's just get calls right" because I think the kinds of calls that most need to be made by a non-human arbitrator are often not binary. For example, I worry about ABS having its own version of the "guy came off the bag by a mm, maybe forced by the tag, and is therefore out based on the letter of the law." For my money, that's the worst thing about baseball, and it exists because we made a fetish out of replay being certain and correct. I guess, in the end, I'd rather the tech be the universally acknowledged authority in limited circumstances than all the time. Though I agree with the idea that we've already privileged its perspective. It's a good point. It's good to disagree about this, and I appreciate the substantive conversation. I suspect you're right that we'll be fully ABS in the near future. At that point, I'll have lost the argument, and I'm genuinely okay with being in the minority. As long as the decision-making process properly grapples with these broader philosophical issues, it's part of the deal if my preferred outcome isn't the one that gets settled on.

I can see that. Before my time. I can see an argument for 2018 too, based on the final couple weeks and the 96-win total. I probably overstated things. It's certainly an all-time regular season.

Understood. From where I sit, we have had an incredible regular season. It's arguably the best in club history (and inarguably if we win twice more). Having to listen to all the media and fan narratives about Counsell making the right call by leaving, on top of all the usual "it doesn't work in October" takes, would really be unfair to this team. It always is. But especially so if it's an L to the Cubs, and I'm not sure the joy of winning would match that. Everyone's going to perform their own calculus differently. But the media narratives especially would be such a bummer when they should be about how much this team has done with this roster and these resources.

Yeah, yeah for sure. And it's why I'm not that worked about it. This feels mostly right to me. I'm 95 to 97 percent on board with this call. Having SLIGHTLY more challenges would be my perfectly imperfect solution.

I think "correct" is a hard word here. Correct according to the cameras? That's still a simulation of objective reality. Is it a closer approximation? Yeah. But I would worry about giving it ultimate authority and saying everything it does is perfectly right. No system does that. Which is why I am in favor of the move today.

Fair enough. It certainly sounds reasonable to me. I'm not going to get too worked up about it either way. I think I'd still prefer slightly more (I like the idea of having a limited set of lower-stakes challenges early in the game both to gain information about the zone and the setup of the cameras that particular day and to allow teams to have some leeway in challenging important calls early without risking what might be VERY precious challenges late), but this feels like a place where good arguments exist all around.

Yeah, playoff seeding is so difficult for this reason. I really don't want the Cubs just because of the emotional stakes involved, even though the players probably care zero about that. If I could choose TODAY, I'd make us the two seed because a) the Padres might catch the Dodgers and end up playing the Reds/Mets, in which case I'd FAR prefer the 2 than being the 1 and having to play Cubs/Dodgers and b) I find the chance of the Reds/Mets/DBacks beating the Dodgers to be more beneficial than having a guaranteed series against the Cubs/Padres. On the other hand, I'd sentimentally love to be able to wrack up wins and set a franchise record. I don't know. I guess it comes down there's no point in caring about the matchups. Or getting too worked up if we close 0-6. The results matter less than being full-strength however it shakes out.