coolhandluke121

Cain is an easy choice as MVP for me. It's like Molitor and Yount; the guy playing gold glove defense at a premium position is a cut above. Yelich would have to have much better offensive stats than Cain to be the MVP, but SLG is less important than OBP so it's actually fairly close. Yelich has the "hot at the right time" narrative argument, but Cain has been arguably the best position player in the NL all year along and he's also playing very well during the pennant chase himself. Aguilar is the most improved. His OPS and his splits last year were not impressive at all for a lumbering 1B. He got a lot of starts against LHP's and hit 3 of his HR's at Coors. This is a dramatic improvement. Jeffress isn't that much better than he was before the Brewers traded him to Texas. That's a Comeback POTY award, not an MIP. Hader is the Cy Young. It's kind of crazy but the way they've been able to use him and all but guarantee wins in close games is incredible. Some of the credit goes to how they've used him to maximize "Win Probability Added", but he's an incredible weapon. A reliever has to be ridiculously valuable for me to even consider him (I wouldn't have even had Knebel ahead of Nelson last year, for example) but Hader has been.

It's not just 15 AB's. Granderson's stats as a Blue Jay would translate to about an .825 OPS if Miller Park was his home field all year. Braun has looked okay lately but you can't go wrong either way. I'd probably err on the side of getting another LHB in there against Archer and keeping Braun well rested, but both of them have proven they can be very effective as pinch hitters.

I agree. They look very comfortable up there, knowing exactly what they are doing. Also, why wouldn't we roll with 11 pitchers in the Playoffs? There are so many off days I'd much rather have a ton of flexibility on the bench. Other than Cain and Yelich (and Aguilar if he heats up), the rest of the roster is very match-up dependent. You might easily want to use, on average, 5 pitchers per game in the playoffs. Sometimes even more, considering how pulling starters early has been such a big part of the team's success. I don't think 11 is enough for a series. It's not like they get every other day off.

Has there ever been an explanation for this? I feel like if this is really truly the case counsel should have to answer some questions about it. I suppose with all his mistakes, you could argue that you have to bench a player who won't listen or you risk losing your authority. Can't have guys doing whatever they want out there. My problem is that even with his mistakes, Villar is almost as valuable as Schoop for their respective careers. The Brewers had Shaw/Villar at 2b against RHP's and Villar/Perez against LHP's. They had Saladino for defense. Villar's defense was okay. Schoop will make much more than Villar next year, and Ortiz is not exactly a throw-in prospect. The argument about playing Schoop at SS doesn't hold water because Villar played a serviceable SS at the major league level for a full season, which is far more than Schoop has ever done. Schoop does have more upside. Villar's never going to have a year like Schoop did last year. But if Schoop continues to stay within 25% of his career production this year and next, this trade is looking like a clear loss for the Brewers.

Birch is the one that breaks like a wafer cookie. I like balsa wood. It's light so I can swing faster, which makes up for the force otherwise lost on impact.

What if you could just schedule ~155 games for each team and then schedule the last 7 games for everyone with this sort of thing in mind? Division leaders get easy games because they earned a "bye", but wild card contenders play each other and have one last chance to grab the last playoff spot. That gives baseball what they want (more revenue from more teams still being in the hunt) while ending that stupid wild card game and basing it on record.

Truth. I have no patience for that. The smaller your divisions, the more likely it is that you can have some kind of statistical fluke with an exceptionally hard or easy division. I hate seeing bad teams in the playoffs and good teams out. Any scenario where 2 of the 3 best teams in the league could miss out on the playoffs completely, despite having one of the toughest schedules, is really obnoxious. The current system can't leave any of the 3 best teams out, but even that's not fair because the 2nd-best team probably deserves a series. With 30 teams, it makes sense to have 6 divisions. The current divisions also line up really well by geography and travel, and they're not even that competitively imbalanced by market size. The AL East has been too tough many times, but it's not like you can separate NYY and Boston and it's not like Tampa, Baltimore, and Toronto will consistently be as good as they've been over the last 10-15 years. Market size advantage is a separate issue anyway, and it's gotten better. They've come a long way with revenue sharing, pool money, and compensatory picks. I think they had it right with 1 wild card. I would like to see slightly fewer division games to balance the schedule more. My outside-the-box idea is flexible scheduling in September. Convene an NCAA-style committee to decide match-ups, balancing out strength of schedule discrepancies and rewarding teams that have played the best while maximizing playoff chase suspense. It would be tough to not know who you're playing, but you could stick to your home/road schedule. It could be like the playoffs before the playoffs.

They should. Not only did they have a better record, but they also probably played a tougher schedule and had to win a wild card game where anything can happen. I don't really like the current system because a tough division is a double whammy. I think 4 teams was the right amount. I think baseball kind of sold out by adding the wild card game. It keeps a few teams interested later in the season and probably generates a little extra revenue, but I don't think it's worth compromising the integrity of their regular season. If anything, they should be making the regular season more fair by reducing dramatic strength of schedule discrepancies. Going back to 2 divisions might help. Division winners and the best runner-up automatically get a series. Next 2 teams play for the wild card. However, the current divisions make much more geographic sense.

Thank you.

I hated Villar's decision-making as much as anyone, but you have to try to be objective about the value he adds to a team. Right now he has 26 steals this year and has only been caught 4 times, and he's hitting better than Schoop. I desperately wanted to trade him after his career year, but the Brewers did the exact opposite and sold low. Consider his splits against LHP's this year, not to mention playing Shaw at 2B and Hernan at SS, it was one of the few moves they've made over the last 2 years that I really, really don't like. Even Villar's defense was on par with Schoop's. He has made small but important incremental improvements since falling apart last year. Errors and TOOTBLAN's are frustrating because Villar could be so much better without them, but in the end his net value is pretty close to Schoop's at a much cheaper price. You can't have biases against mistake-prone players if the end result is comparable in terms of value added. I could have lived with Villar and Carmona but even that would be kind of a pointless move, all things considered. Schoop's lucky he hit that grand slam against Bumgarner and he better have a good year next year.

Really pathetic Cubs article on ESPN today. Don't get me wrong; 30 straight games is a noteworthy story, but the way it's presented feeds into the ridiculous whining victim complex and the "I don't want to make excuses, but..." excuse-making. The only reason the Cubs are in first place at all is because the Brewers played 21 games in 20 days right before the break and lost 7 of the last 8; where was a similar article then or a mention of it in this article? All the news at the time was about how the Brewers were wannabes and would just collapse again like they did last year. Then they played 17 in a row right after the break, with no games against teams more than a game or two under .500. And all that was without the benefit of September call-ups, which the Cubs have now to mitigate the damage. I don't normally subscribe to the "I hate the Cubs and Cardinals no matter what" philosophy, but combine all the whining this year with the disgraceful cancelled game last year and they're really getting on my nerves. I haven't wanted to destroy a team this badly since Madison Bumgarner hit Ryan Braun on purpose and Jonathan Schoop stuffed a grand salami up his butt.

Can someone explain what we should take from the run differential? We have so so offense and very good pitching? We've won a lot of close games and thus have some luck factoring in? It's already been mentioned how many times the Brewers have pitched position players, which is a factor. I think a bigger factor is that the Brewers are built to win close games. There's no luck involved in the systematic way they've used their starters and bullpen; it was clearly intentional all along. A good bullpen, a versatile bench, and great defense is how you win more than your fair share of close games and beat your run differential. Run differential is usually a very good predictor of future success. So is OBP, but that doesn't mean you can't dig into other variables like BABIP and explain why OBP isn't the best indicator of future success in certain cases. Same goes for winning with a poor run differential. The Brewers are doing a great job playing the "Win Probability Added" game and consistently beating their run differential. That's no accident.

Definitely feels inevitable that the Dodgers make a run and catch the Rockies, just like it felt inevitable last year that the Cubs would catch the Brewers. I'm sort of hoping for that, because there's still a pretty good chance the Brewers could face Kershaw in a WC game and I don't want that. The Rockies are the preferred opponent, whether in the wild card game or even as the lowest seed in the division round should the Brewers win the Central and the Rockies steal a game against the Cardinals or Cubs. This is irrelevant to the Brewers' fortunes, but I'm kind of sick of the mediocre Rockies being in the division mix, too. I think they've been very lucky the last 2 years and I don't like seeing mediocre teams with bad management make the playoffs unless it gives the Brewers a favorable playoff match-up. I'm also fed up with so many players getting overrated and overpaid because of their inflated Coors Field stats.

Definitely go with Moose given his history against Quintana. Aguilar is like burned toast right now so Braun at 1B is intriguing, but I think I'd go with Perez in RF over Broxton.

I think I'd rather see the Cardinals get that wild card than the Dodgers. That said, securing at least a wild card earlier is a huge advantage because you can set up your playoff pitching better. If the Brewers don't collapse, I would love to see the Rockies get the other wild card. A lot would have to go right for that to happen, but they would obviously be the preferred opponent in an elimination game. Better yet, maybe the Brewers can win the division and Colorado can beat the Cardinals or Cubs in a wild card game. A home series against the Rockies would be a dream scenario.

Legendary outing.

I'm glad Hader is out there too but the Cubs would have been fools to walk Arcia on purpose. WAY too much chance of giving up multiple runs against Thames, Shaw, Pina, or Santana. What's the point of avoiding Hader if that happens? Hader is no Mariano Rivera yet; they have to hope he makes a mistake and Bryant/Rizzo/Baez make him pay. Not likely, but still a better bet than loading the bases for a pinch-hitter.

I hated that game too but to me, Prince was the biggest culprit in that game. Top of the 4th, Cards have runners on 2nd and 3rd with nobody out. Brewers lead 3-1. Prince gets a ground ball and foolishly tries to get the runner at home instead of taking the sure out. Turns into a 5-run inning. Brewers lose in extra innings. Prince was supposedly a leader but I thought he was extremely overrated. He would make plays like that, but he would complain about Macha trying to get guys to show a little more patience at the plate and play better fundamental baseball. He didn't want guys trying to steal when he was at the plate, even if they had a great chance of success, because apparently he thought he was going to drive them in all the time. His defense was much worse than the stats indicate because his lack of reach always went as an error on the throw even though Prince's lack of reach was the difference between a routine groundout and a baserunner. He did that vegetarian diet thing and lost most of his power one year. The Brewers should have traded him and moved Hart to first when they were both young. Braun was an impatient hitter, and when your best hitter swings at pitches outside the zone it's hard to get anyone else on the team to take a pitch. Guys like that should be setting an example instead of being the hero. Braun would also overthrow the cutoff man and throw to the wrong base a lot, trying to be the hero or something. And then Hart and Weeks had bad conditioning habits and lost almost all their athleticism when they should have still been in their prime. Hart waited until spring training to fix a knee problem that should have been taken care of in October. Guys like Yuni and McGehee were kind of a joke. I hated the stars and scrubs model. They lacked depth and they didn't use platoons wisely, resulting in them running about the score against LHP's which caused people to overrate their offense. They'd often lead the league in HR's but be about 5 spots lower in runs scored. Defense was generally awful. Yeah, I like this team 10x better. Braun/Fielder teams were winning in spite of themselves because of their god-given talent, but they were total underachievers most years. And anyone who complains about CC needs to take a long, hard look at Yost and Roenicke again. CC is pretty damn good compared to them and a lot of other managers. Most of his "mistakes" are just guessing wrong, but he plays the odds pretty well.

I think a 1B should put up gaudy numbers like Pujols or be Keith Hernandez with the glove if they expect to be in contention. 1B's are supposed to mash; it's the trade-off for playing the easiest position. If 1B's are so valuable, why not just play them at other positions and have more offense? We all know why; they'd give all the offense right back to the other team. When guys like Duda, Morrison, and Reynolds can barely find a job, you can't justify giving Goldschmidt or Carpenter the MVP award. I think it's sad that it's still often a slugging award. Goldschmidt and Carpenter barely have better hitting stats than Yelich or Baez in a vacuum, let alone when you consider other intangibles. I'll grant that Carpenter can play some third, but not very well... Slugging is more important than average but it's not more important than OBP. Cain's .400 is still terrific, and OPS undervalues that. And since slugging is just a measure of how many bases you gained on behalf of your team, Cain's and Yelich's and Baez's ability to steal or take an extra base has to be taken into account. My pick is Cain and it might not even be close. Cain is a gold glove CF, whereas Baez has mostly run up his dWAR playing 2B and is just average when playing a premium defensive position. Yelich is below average anywhere but LF, where I think he was overrated to begin with. Cain's OBP is better than Yelich's and puts Baez to shame. We've known how important OBP is for a long time, but I think we're starting to realize how important defense and speed are as well. Cain has been the NL WAR leader for position players most of the year, and even that doesn't capture his full value. The Brewers also had the best record in the NL longer than any other team this year if I'm not mistaken, and Cain has been their steadiest player.

Glad we got a separate thread for this. I mentioned Keuchel in a different thread. The Brewers clearly prefer to bargain shop unless they're getting a significant upgrade like Yelich and Cain. Keuchel would qualify as a big upgrade and he might get overlooked a little. That said, even if Corbin and Kershaw sign before him, he'll still get a big offer. I could see the Brewers offering a deal like Arrieta got, but ultimately I think Keuchel gets a little more than that and the Brewers end up keeping Gonzalez and/or Miley. I like the idea of keeping both of them for insurance. They need swing lefties with Suter out for the year.

That's valid. I didn't check their schedule. They're so much better than the Rockies though. I would still give them better than a 50% chance to win the division. Combined with their chances of catching the Cardinals, which would probably lead to a WC game against the Brewers, they are still a playoff favorite IMO. Pretty much all the projections agree on that. It reminds me of 2011 when we desperately wanted the Braves to hold onto the wild card because we knew how dangerous the Cardinals were if they sneaked in. We all know what happened there. I think I'd sleep better if the Dodgers just knocked the Rockies out as a WC threat and won the division, but if the Rockies sweep them then maybe we don't have to worry about it.

Perfect day yesterday. The Brewers got the result they wanted in literally every single game. Even the games with 2 playoff threats went in favor of the Brewers. Someone has to win the other 2 divisions anyway, so you may as well root for the division leaders against WC threats. I suppose you could argue the Dodgers will eventually catch the Rockies anyway, which means you'd rather they beat the Rockies now and knock them down in the WC race... but that's kind of splitting hairs.

Truth.

Not picking on you here but I've heard this kind of thing a lot lately. Not everything is just randomness. Okay, I'll take the bait... how long do you think the bullpen is going to keep giving up 2-3 runs per game? I would hate to go through life thinking every rough patch is going to last indefinitely. That would be a miserable existence.

Arguably squeezed on what should have been strike 2 and eventually walked Kepler in the 9th...