Cool Hand Lucroy

I will agree that 2 does seem too limited. I think I'd like to see 2 "use it or lose it" for the first five innings and then 2 or 3 more for the final four.

So, having watched tennis for years and years, I have to say the the challenge system feels far superior to me than the full-on automated line calls. There are a few reasons for this (no particular order): 1) The system sometimes can crash, meaning the game cannot continue, and there are occasionally lengthy delays. 2) The challenges provide an element of strategy. You've got to know when to use them, and I think this is broadly a good thing. Plus, the Brewers are good at stuff like that. If there's an element of public feedback for umpires who miss a lot of calls, there is also one for players/managers who complain about borderline pitches, or pitches that are clearly strikes/balls, depending. EDIT: Since only the batter, pitcher, or catcher can challenge, this adds an even further element of strategy--how aggressive will players be, how will management communicate the data?) 3) The fully automated zone is going to have weird blind spots. The low strike, for example, that will be called a strike, even when the catcher catches it at the shoe tops. There are pitches that are technically strikes that don't feel like actual strikes, and I'm not sure we want that to become the default call. In tennis, this manifests as balls whose elongated bounces just clip the baseline on Hawkeye (even though there's a margin of error and they might well be out). It's better when these can be challenged as opposed to when they are always in. 4) I know people gripe about "the human element," but the fact is the technology isn't always "right." It isn't always even perfectly consistent. We just defer to it because its fast and easy. That's not always a good thing, even in the context of sport. It's good for umpires to have jobs. It's good to have a person understanding the ball not as a dot on the screen thrown by a dot on the screen to another dot on the screen, but as a baseball thrown by a human to another human. There is something important lost when we cede all power to robots, on the false promise of perfect accuracy (which doesn't exist). "Subject to Review" is a great 30 for 30 short documentary about this process. 5) There will ALWAYS be borderline pitches that are both balls and strikes. That is, from a physics perspective, it's impossible to tell sometimes where one object (or subatomic particle) ends and another begins. See the famous cat in the box. We should embrace that uncertainty and correct the most egregious or game-impactful misses. A challenge system does that. Fully automated does not. And when the challenge system is very fast and efficient, the biggest injustices are corrected without wasting time on silly stuff or always-going-to-be-impossible-to-define stuff. Here, if you lose on a coin-flip call, you'll either have challenges remaining (in which case we let the machines flip the coin), or you won't (because you didn't use them wisely enough). That's better than the machine always flipping the coin. Of course, all of the above depends on teams not trying to game the system too hard (by seeking the best data and then challenging every single close pitch they have a 51% chance of winning), and recent baseball history suggests the system will be gamed. Maybe we'll end up with fully automated anyway. I just think it's completely worth trying a challenge system first. You don't really lose anything. And I think it will be very difficult for teams to get so good at challenging that we effectively have an all-automated system anyway (EDIT: especially when challenges have to come from batters/pitchers/catchers). If you'll let me get philosophical: the strike zone is about justice. I think the best version of justice occurs when technological input is used by thoughtful humans to aid the decision-making process. Making the technology the all-time, default arbitrator is, in its way, as incomplete as letting the umpire decide everything on gut. You want both, and that's what this system gives you.

Yeah, this is the "rebuild him in the aggregate" situation. Obviously will take up some roster spaces and involve extra fatigue in the bullpen (less an NLDS problem). Between Miz, Patrick, Ashby, and Gasser, that's a good start. Then there are Henderson, Hall, and Q if healthy. We'll need the "out-getters" approach, but our best 2018 starter was....? Woody? Freddy? Chacin? This rotation, even minus Woodruff seems about as good.

Yeah, it's kind of like that time I went to Spain and had the best meal of my life and then sat out and had some cava with Rafa Nadal and then it rained, and we got soaked. Could've been so much better.

That was incredible. Mostly, it was the spectacular catch. Ours was the better all-around one, but Robles came from nowhere. Great individual play.

Sophia tweeted William gave a thumbs up about his wrist at the end of the game. FWIW.

Thought I saw Contreras sitting on the dugout rail. Better than being in the locker room, I guess.

Is Haase on the 40-man? I am not sure if injuries are an exception to the "must be on the 40-man" rule. If not, it has to be Quero, right?

I think Hoskins should be on the playoff roster, but...Murphy hasn't even really let him pinch-hit in big spots over the last week or so. Honestly, I'm getting nervous they might actually leave the guy off. Maybe they know more than me. Maybe they'd rather have Lockridge or an extra pitcher. I have no idea, and I'm not going to worry too much about it yet. But if we don't see Rhys getting some ABs here, I might get a little more serious about wanting to know the plan for him.

Some poetic justice in watching Perk do that to him specifically.

This does show the impact of the tiebreaker. It really feels like the Phillies are nipping at our heels, but our standing against them vs. the Cubs is basically a wash.

Man, I'm surprised by just how far away I am from a lot of folks relative to the number one seed. Complete respect, not arguing, but I honestly feel more and more like I'd rather be the two, especially since the 4 and 5 seeds are going to be basically identical, one of them will be the Cubs (and the other might be the Dodgers), and I like the chance of playing the Mets/Reds/Giants/Dbacks more than I fear playing LAD (or SDP if they end up taking the West). Either way, we can all agree the division is the big target now. It comes with a guaranteed bye. Today is a relatively big swing day. Up 4 with 9 to go is safe but probably somewhere between 1 in 30 and 1 in 50. Up 5 with 9 to go is more like 1 in 100, maybe. Up 6 with 9 to go is probably more like 1 in 200. Really hoping we can knock 2 off the magic number, but 1 would be a perfectly acceptable result.

Our Civale.

Fedde is not a call I expected.

I think they feel like "might as well celebrate once." I imagine they are going to go all out against the Reds. If the magic number is down to one or two by end of day Sunday, they probably prioritize rest and youth ABs (which doesn't always mean a downgrade in performance). I mean, at 4-5 back, the Cubs are not going to press their pitchers too hard. At 3? Differetstory.

Taylor Ward hit ball far.

I kind of figured this race was going to come down to the last week. Still might not, but the Brewers and Cubs have been two of the three best teams in the NL all year. Coming in to these past two series, you were hoping for the Rays and Pirates to each get one. It's looking like the Cubs will go 5-1. Still probably not enough, even if we only manage to split these next two against the Angels. But you never know. I do think the Reds will manage a better showing. It's a big ask for the Cubs to get 3 of 4 in Cincy under these circumstances, facing the pitchers they'll face, and with their bullpen really having had to cover a lot of high-leverage innings (including today). Maybe they do it, in which case major hats off to them. You don't win divisions against very, very good competition by sleepwalking through the last two weeks. We've been a little spoiled in the regard recently. Two bits of good news from my perspective: 1) It's not the worst thing in the world to get pushed down the stretch. Keep focused. Keep winning. Playing meaningful games later in the season is good for everyone in most ways. Honestly, the ideal scenario is you clinch with 3-5 games to go. That way, you can steal a week's worth of extra rest for the guys who need it without too long a lay off. 2) We're real close to clinching over the Padres and Dodgers, meaning the division means the bye. That's new, if we can pull it off. It would be worth a real big celebration and be a fitting cap to what might be the best regular season this team has ever had.

I mean, Yelich, Frelick, Turang, and Collins are likely going to start games. So Bauers is your only lefty PH option.

I see you, Chad Patrick.

They've absolutely been nails. Credit to that staff for sure. The one thing that helps from a Brewers perspective is their bullpen has really been ridden hard over the last week. Keller even pitched in the game they lost to the Rays (got the BS, I believe). You'd have to think that'll catch up to them at some point. It's the soft part of their roster. We'll see over the next 5, I guess. We'll also see how hard the Cubs push for the division. They may well clinch tonight. They're certainly not going to give in, but they might rotate some guys in and out.

One of Freddy's very, very good outings. 6 strong, made one mistake. Nibbled a little, but put together some efficient innings in the middle portion. The Angels offense isn't great, but they look like world-beaters compared to what the Pirates are running out there right now.

I like Lockridge too. I think, though, Perkins needs to be here. Without him, we are EXTREMELY right-handed, especially off the bench. Plus, the defense. Just gotta keep hoping he figures it out.

I really don't think how a team is playing on September 14th has much to do with how they'll play in the playoffs. I don't think how a team plays in games 158-162 tells anyone very much either. We can play the vibes game (there's not much else to do other when you're up 5.5 with 12 to play), but that's mostly just to pass the time. We played a mediocre series and won 2 of 3, after playing a slightly better series and getting swept. That's the name of the sport. Some poor defense from Jackson really cost Q in the 2nd, and then there was the bad break of Frelick's throw hitting the runner. We didn't get the big hit, and there's your ballgame. On the bright side, this looks, on paper, like our week to make a move. Phillies are out west, including a series against the Dodgers. Dodgers have to play seven games, with their other series against the in-the-thick-of-it Giants. Cubs also play seven games (after having to lean on their bullpen quite a bit against Tampa), including four against the in-the-thick-of-it Reds and three tough pitching matchups in Pittsburgh. Meanwhile, we get some favorable pitching matchups against the Angels and then go to Saint Louis. If we gain 1.5 on the Cubs this week, we win the division. Even if we lose 2.5, the magic number would be 4 heading into the final six. Nobody wants any part of that latter scenario, but it does illustrate how much this next week crunches things. We play a good week, and this thing gets put to bed.

I am kind of in awe of how inexplicable was. Was Leahy even warming? I GUESS you could argue you wanted them to stick with a wild Romero? But what's the harm in making Leahy try for a 4 out save? Managers are so often making 50/50 choices. Tough job. All kinds of irrational critics. But that's the easiest call I've ever seen a manager refuse to make.

I mean, you have three 1B for exactly that reason. I'm not going to get worked up over much. But, like, explain that to me, please. Every manager in the league PHs Vaughn there.