coolhandluke121

They've done an absolutely fantastic job. The idea that they should be in a better position than they are just a few years after tearing it down and are still wisely making sure not to compromise their long-term, sustainable success is extremely unfair. Fans like that don't even deserve a good team. The alternatives people suggested to the moves they made were mostly terrible. The Brewers didn't want to make some short-sighted move like paying Cobb for 4 years or giving up a pick for Lynn or trading a bunch of top prospects for overpaid trash that will just be an albatross when the team should be peaking. If they had done the types of moves people were calling for, they'd be no better off now and would be worse off in the future. The real reason they're not better is because you can't expect them not to have any bad players at this stage of their development after all the damage that was done during the Melvin era. You don't think other teams are competing for the same guys who might be better than what the Brewers have? You don't think most teams don't have their fair share of issues, especially if they're in a small market and are still rebuilding? It's actually amazing how many good players they have considering how few future assets they've given up. They're nearly in first place in a good division with lots of injuries and people think they're entitled to second-guess, as if they had better ideas. Most people's ideas included acquiring pitchers or guys like Walker who have been much worse than nearly anyone on the team now, relying on Braun to continue to be a solid regular, not signing Cain because you already had so many "good" outfielders, or trading Santana for someone good when that pretty clearly wasn't an option. Blame guys like Santana and Braun and Villar, all of whom the Brewers seemed to know would have these issues but couldn't get rid of them or get meaningful upgrades because other teams know their short-comings too. They're the ones who are supposed to be doing better.

Villar is still better against LHP's for his career. I don't think anybody really wanted Franklin or Sogard or Blanco over Orf this week. It's the negativity about the front office's decision-making and the complaining that rubbed several of us the wrong way. The idea that Orf is likely to be a little better than any of those guys is just not really supported by any objective evidence. The evidence actually supports the other 3 as being slightly more talented players, although Sogard and Blanco might be too far past their primes. It's already kind of annoying when fans complain about moves the team made, but when the front office is actually doing a great job and making the rational choice and people complain so adamantly, it's 10x more annoying. People could be right or wrong about Orf, but on the whole the front office is so much better than any of us that's it not even funny. People should enjoy it while they can because that's not always the case. See the Bucks for the last 25 years, for example, if you want to understand how frustrating it can be to be a fan of a team where you would literally probably do a better job than the front office. I bet my salary that the Brewers' front office crushes every single one of us in decision-making over the last few years, even if a few of us have, by pure luck, occasionally out-guessed them on what they should have done in a situation.

Happy Birthday Salvador Perez! Turns 28 today and is owed $40m over the next 3 seasons after this one. To be honest I'd be a little worried about it working out about like the Lucroy trade for the Rangers. All depends on the price obviously, but like BHAS said they will not be doing it just to shed salary. Castro, eh. Never liked him at all but he's better than what we've got. I wouldn't give up much for him though. He's got some infuriating habits like Villar and isn't any more talented or anything.

That was exactly my extreme example I gave him, but it was written off. It sounds like a stupid example to give, but it's still relevant. The idea that "we don't know, these other guys stink so try something new" could be applied on everyone. And so clearly refuted already in another post. These guys are all about the same thing. You're not comparing or choosing them between me or you. But continue to be that obtuse on it to try and be funny. It contributes a lot. Thanks. What's obtuse is thinking that Orf is any more likely to perform above his talent level than Sogard or Franklin. He's probably less likely to. Saying you know Sogard and Franklin are going to be terrible next month but you don't know if Orf will be is not valid scouting. It's hot air.

They should give me a chance. I haven't played organized baseball since 5th grade, but I've never been given a chance to see if I can hit major league pitching. Technically you don't know that I'd suck, whereas you do know that Franklin and Sogard suck, so why not gamble on something that actually has a chance of working out?

He's basically been a middle infield bat most of the year anyway.

http://http://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/z7kusi/picture145078159/ALTERNATES/FREE_640/braun.JPG

That's not really true. He values it as a tie-breaker when there's no obvious option anyway. For every example of the favoritism you accuse him of, you can give a better explanation, such as needing to keep guys with options in the minors for depth, wanting to preserve options, having innings limits or service time considerations for young guys, or the inexperienced guy just not having the track record to suggest he might be an upgrade.

Call him up anyway he can't be worse than Sogard.

Many, and they're better than Milwaukee's because they're able to sustain those percentages on very high volume. Also, maybe if the Bucks had two of the best offensive pg's in NBA history, it wouldn't matter so much anyway. Furthermore, Houston is not built around a superstar who needs to be surrounded by really good shooters to be great. It's inexcusable how the Bucks have built the team around Giannis. I understand why fans might mistake percentages with no context for being a good 3-point shooter, but it bothers me that the front office does the same thing.

But it's much easier to have a high percentage if you don't shoot them often. That's one of the reasons the Bucks don't shoot them nearly as often as Houston. You can't just tell Snell and Dellavedova and Jabari to start letting if fly like the Rockets. Their percentages would fall into the low 30's. And most of them aren't fast enough to get open for that many 3's anyway.

Are you ready to believe in the "special sauce" yet? And I am not trying to rub it in your face right now because in a month, he could be a turd. But it sure seems like there is something "special" about JJ in a Brewers uniform. It's early. Let's hope he keeps it up. Still don't think his struggles last year can be dismissed as easily as saying "he likes Milwaukee so he'll be fine" but obviously I'm happy to be wrong so far. He has less than 18 innings. That's the equivalent of 3 good starts. Wily Peralta strung together 3 good starts of nearly the same caliber as this multiple times in Milwaukee. Heck, so did Jungmann on at least a couple occasions if I'm not mistaken.

Those guys aren't really good shooters. It's a dynamic concept that requires you to consider how much spacing they provide and how much defenses pay attention to them. Guys like Delly, Snell, Jabari, and Brown don't draw defenses away from Giannis. They shoot when they're wide open and they're wide open a lot because defenses prefer to sag on Giannis and live with them getting open 3's. Being able to hit in the high 30's doesn't always mean you're a valuable shooter. You have to get open fast and shoot with defenders close to you and still be able to hit in the high 30's to really provide spacing. Khris is the only guy on the team who fits that profile, even though he struggled from 3 this year. Terry did in his prime. Mirza was a guy who could hit in the high 30's on very high volume with defenses paying constant attention to him. Same with Delfino. Ersan had tremendous value because he was a PF able to hit over 40% on high volume. That's the type of shooter you need to provide spacing for Giannis. Those guys would have hit close to 50% of their 3's if they only took wide open ones like most of the so-called "shooters" on the Bucks. But then they would never be wide open, which is the point - to draw defenses away from Giannis (and Bledsoe, if they keep him).

Wait, that was Miley? I thought the Brewers had traded for Kershaw.

Don't jinx it! ESPN has him at 21st in pitching WAR in all of baseball. That includes starters. Of course they also have him above Hader, so take it with a grain of salt.

The Cubs are very lucky it's not Luke. If it was, they'd be losing 47-2 every day and all their wives would be pregnant with Luke's children. Probably all sons, too.

He's not that good, just better than Walker, who runs like an old man.

Can't play SS, big downgrade from Thames or even Choi at 1B, not an appropriate platoon partner for Shaw because he's not good as an RHB, OPS = .413, significantly worse defender at 2B than Sogard... what's not to love? Maybe the Brewers can trade for him again this year. The way I see it, the only "problem" with the middle infield is that the Brewers are just a few years into a tear-it-down rebuild and you can't expect them not to still have a few bad players at the bottom of the roster, like nearly every single other team in baseball - rebuilding or not, big market or not, contending or not. And Sogard's .167 BABIP will improve quite a bit.

It shouldn't be seen as that at all. As long as others have the poise and talent to close when called upon, whether it's because others need rest or because of match-ups or whatever else, Knebel would arguably be even more valuable if you used him more, for example, against dominant RHB's when you desperately need K's, both things that you don't necessarily come up in every save situation.

Aguilar putting me to shame and I love it. A .500 BABIP on worse hard contact rates than last year is sustainable, right?

What's wrong with that? If you have enough guys with options and you give them enough days off, there's no reason you shouldn't be able to pull it off. Pitchers in general can pitch more total innings if they have fewer outings. The reason relievers can't handle more innings is because they often appear in 60-70 games. You might only get 80 innings that way, but if you keep it at 45-50 games, I think you can get 100 or more.

Is anyone in the Dodgers front office a life-long Brewer fan? Because you kind of have to be to want Braun and his contract at this point.

Looking a bit like A-Rod towards the end. With less bat speed, you have to start your swing a split-second sooner. That leaves you looking pretty silly against bad pitches some times. Injuries too. If you can't consistently count on him to play 1B against LHP's or play LF when Yelich is hurt, it's not so easy to justify the roster spot. With all the guys they have with options, obviously it's not likely to be an issue this year, but it could be as soon as next year. And I'm by no means an Aguilar guy, but what if they eventually cut Aguilar to keep Braun, only to see Braun unavailable for several starts and PH appearances against LHP's? When guys run out of options, or when they're so much better than the alternative that you can't really justify shuttling them back and forth anymore, this thread is going to prove prophetic.

Wrong thread.

It's pretty cold for baseball here all of a sudden. Was 70's today and a front moved in and lots of people were caught off-guard, out in shorts and skirts and stuff.