BruisedCrew

Come on Levering, that was not a “seeing eye single”. The batter took an outside pitch and drilled it into the hole.

Not for long.

Rotino must have been looking at a different game than I was on Sunday when he says Peralta has pitched “beautifully” his last few times out. I give him credit for battling through 5 innings but against the worst hitting team in MLB 3 runs in 5 innings doesn’t qualify as “beautiful”. He’s heading for another short outing today with a ton of pitches in the first.

Now that they’ve broken that silly record I hope they can give Contreras a day off. He’s looked kind of lethargic the last couple of weeks.

Thanks. What I tried was a lot cruder than that. I used Baseball Reference and went to the team’s “Schedule and Results”. Then I could sort the column with runs scored but had to count each number or group of numbers. That would get even tougher as the season goes on. I miss the old BR scoring tables

I see that someone else asked this too, but I’m curious where you got this data. Baseball Reference used to have handy tables showing how many times each team, and the leagues as a whole, scored and allowed a specific number of runs. This made it very easy to look up a team’s run distribution. But, with the transition to Stathead last season, those tables disappeared and Stathead does not have them.

Reds beat Cubs for their 6th straight win. if the Cardinals hold on to their lead over the Rockies, the Cubs, Reds, and Cards will all be 6.5 back with the Pirates 7 out.

He wasn’t beaned there. It hit him in the arm.

Per Baseball Reference, there have been 10. Fried has 2.

Is that a spelling comment? When you dictate that’s how it comes out.

I remember Howser having one against the Cardinals a couple of years ago. Burnes could have had a complete game no hitter last year if the Brewers could have managed a run.

Speaking of the Tigers announcers, I feel bad for Jason Benetti moving from Steve Stone to Kirk Gibson as color man. Gibson’s illness really limits the banter that Benetti seems to enjoy.

A feast or famine offense can do that

What a stupid throw that was.

Good to see an opponent finally pay for a drawn in infield.

Good to see the top of the order bounce back from the Phillies series. 🙄

The Cubs are just 5.5 games behind the Brewers. That’s a deficit that can be made up in a week. They’re going to have to fall a lot further back to be sellers at the trade deadline. The Pirates are no pushovers with some of their young talent, especially the new pitchers.

It was the Reds that beat the Cubs. They have now won 8 of 11 and are tied with the Cardinals just a game behind the Cubs and a half game ahead of the Pirates.

I think putting all run totals for which the league winning percentage is under 50% in one bucket is very logical. When I chose these a month ago for the reasons I gave, the Brewers were very low in the middle bucket. That was in the thread about the Brewers offense. When I updated them now they brought the middle bucket up.

Why is that? Regardless of the curve aspect, the Brewers have more games scoring 3 runs or less than the other teams listed. And scoring 3 runs produces generally produces more losses than wins. This year the Brewers are 4-7 when scoring 3 runs.

I gave the reasons why I chose the buckets the way I did. IMHO it’s no more arbitrary, and actually more logical than the ones used by BR. I chose those buckets a month ago and before I knew how they would come out.

First, there's an obvious type here because the Brewers have 25 games of 6+ runs, not 35. The percentages are correct. You will recall that when we had an exchange about this on another thread a few weeks ago, I had independently defined the buckets differently. I used 0-3 runs as the low bucket, 4-6 as the middle, and 7+ as high. This might be arbitrary, but I thought it made sense because: !. In recent years it has usually taken 4 runs for a team's expected win % to approach 50%. So, I consider scoring 3 runs or less to be "low scoring" because to win the opponent has to be held to 2 runs or less. When the Brewers had strong pitching the announcers would often talk about how high the Brewers win percentage was when they scored at least 4 runs. 2. I used 7+ as high scoring because there had been graphics touting the Brewers as leading MLB in games with 7+ runs scored. When a team scores 7+ runs the win percentage is quite high. 3. That left 4-6 as the middle bucket, which seems appropriate since we are talking about teams averaging close to 5 runs a game. Scoring in the 4-6 range should produce a good winning percentage, and scoring within 1 run of a 5 run average on a regular basis would be a sign of a good and consistent offense. So, updating the numbers I posted a few weeks ago and applying them to the teams you listed produces this: (low/middle/high) Baltimore: 20/22/18 Cleveland 20/21/19 Philadelphia 17/29/17 NYY 21/23/19 Milwaukee 25/18/19 Kansas City 24/21/17 LAD 20/28/15 What stands out now is that, of the teams listed, the Brewers are tied for the most high scoring games, but have the most low scoring games by a significant margin (except for KC which has just one less) and the fewest games in that middle bucket (and quite a few less than most of the other teams). So, make of it what you want. But it is a fact that the Brewers have more low scoring and fewer medium scoring games than the other top scoring teams in MLB.

I don’t think “consistency” is really the goal. A perfectly consistent offense averaging 5 runs a game would score exactly 5 runs each and every game. Nobody is going to do that, and it isn’t necessarily what you want. What you want is to reduce the number of low scoring games that usually produce losses unless you get perfect or near perfect pitching. Since they won’t let you take excess runs from blowouts and apply them to other games that has to be done some other way. I guess what the Brewers need to reduce the low scoring games is have more high quality major league hitters who can find ways to get on base and produce runs even against elite pitchers. That’s a lot easier said than done.

I don't think the Phillies have to be alarmed about anything. Their offense produced the runs they needed to win. The Brewers don't necessarily have to be alarmed by scoring just 2 runs against the Phillies. But they might be concerned about having so many games in which they have scored 3 or fewer runs. That number is more like an average offense than one of the top offenses in the league.

Probably not considering that (1) they won all 3 games meaning that they scored what they needed to win those games, and (2) they have only been shut out twice and scored only 1 run twice this season. The Phillies provide a good contrast to the Brewers in terms of their run distribution. The Brewers have scored 7 or more runs 19 times compared to 17 for the Phillies. 7 runs should be enough to win most of the time. In fact, the Brewers are 18-1 and the Phillies are 17-0 when scoring 7 or more. Those games where a team piles on runs can be fun for the fans they do tend to pad the stats. Every team has some of those, but the Brewers have had more than all or most. They have scored 10 or more runs 8 times and the Phillies have had 5. What makes the Phillies offense more effective in winning games (and one might say more "consistent") is that they have significantly fewer games with 3 or fewer runs (which more often than not result in losses) and a lot more in the 4-6 range where the probability of winning flips above 50%. The Phillies have 29 games where they have scored 4-6 runs (22-7) while the Brewers have had only 18 (11-7). The reason I call the Brewers offense more "feast or famine" than normal is that their run distribution chart looks more like a dumbbell (heavily weighted on the ends) than a bell curve with the heavier weight in the middle like the Phillies and most other top offenses.