HarveysWBs

Very much so. It makes living in Illinois quite bearable, at least until round 2.

And in other news tonight, the Bears still suck. You Love to see it.

Frelick acquitted himself quite well in the leadoff spot. I could get used to seeing him there for a long time to come.

Let’s go!

No, I don't think you get what I'm saying at all, and I'll take responsibility for that. My reply to you was flippant, so I should expect a flippant and superficial response in turn, so allow me to elaborate. Nowhere in my reply did I defend Counsell, nor did I in any way state that he is infallible and above reproach--that would be a foolish position to take. It is quite obvious that his decision regarding relievers in yesterday's game did not work, and I think all of us as Brewers fans would at least agree on that. But here's the rub: we can all see when the results are good or bad, however, those results are only the public-facing tail end of a long chain of processes that are largely or entirely hidden from our view. So what we often do as fans (and I include myself in this category as much as you or anyone else) is extrapolate backwards from result to an evaluation of process. Leaving aside the issue of bad processes sometimes leading to good results and vice-versa, let's get into the real problem we face, which is that we as fans do not see the process. We watch the games, look at box scores and stats, and get on here and enjoy armchair managing, which is all good fun (at least, we all like to argue so much I assume it is fun for us, but maybe I shouldnt assume). However, you and I don't talk to the players every day and get a read on their mindset, energy, confidence, or body language. For instance, how does each player in the bullpen react to their usage: do they prefer defined roles, or a "fireman" approach? I have no idea, but I'm willing to bet Counsell does. We don't have an army of analysts and statisticians poring over datapoints that put each of our players and their opponsents under the rigorous microscope of cutting edge data analytics. How do Elvis Peguero's arm slot, arsenal, and spin rates play against the batted ball profiles and swing paths of Joe, Delay, Bae, Reynolds, and Hayes? I have no clue, but I bet someone in the organization does, and I can imagine that he or she is feeding Counsell actionable intelligence on bullpen decisions. The truth is, though, I have no idea what Counsell's or any other manager's decision-making process really looks like. The popular, but by no means universally accepted, benchmark is 10,000 hours of experience as championed by Malcolm Gladwell. Forgive me for another assumption, but I suspect neither you or anyone else on here has logged that kind of time, and I know I haven't logged even hour #1. This is why I took umbrage with your characterization of the situation as a "SIMPLE" decision for a manager to make, and cited the Dunning-Kruger effect in response. Dunning and Kruger's study suggests a common logical fallacy, which is that once we start to know something about a topic, we naturally tend to overestimate our overall understanding of that topic. In light of this, when someone is in a position that is elite and selective enough that only a few hundred people in the world are probably capable of filling that role at any given moment, and this person makes a choice that I don't understand or I would have done differently, I have two ways I can try to explain this. On the one hand, I could assume the expert blew it with a bad process and I would have a better decision-making process. This is theoretically possible, but highly unlikely, as suggested by the Dunning-Kruger effect. Alternatively, I could try to puzzle out the process that person actually used to make their choice, and all the information and variables that informed or affected that choice. This sounds like a far more interesting conversation to have, to me at least, though a two-day old IGT is almost certainly not the place to have it. So, here's where I'm at: I know that the bullpen call didn't work. I have no idea what the process was like that led to that choice or how it compares to other managers' processes. And, most apropos to your post, while Counsell's process may very well have been flawed, I'm reasonably certain that the decision was far more complicated than it looks on TV.

Google Dunning-Kruger effect. Then check the mirror. If you think this thing is simple, that should be a big red flag.

Yeah, Peralta just suddenly lost it in the 6th. His final line did not reflect the quality of his outing, to my eyes anyway.

It’s the Pirates…quit playing with your food! This is how you lose a division title.

After the Brewers loaded the bases with no outs and got only one run in, a Brewers fan went up to the sage and said to him, “this offense is doomed!” And the sage replied, “we’ll see.” A second man went up to the sage after they scored six more runs in the next inning and said to him, “this offense is saved!” And the sage replied, “we’ll see.”

Oh man…all month long with this stuff, I can already tell! Not a great time for the A-team in the pen to start getting the shakes. We’ll need to start winning games by 4+ or something.

If he doesn’t, well, there’s going to be some unhappy campers around here, to say the least.

I don’t curse a lot, but, I polluted the air on that one. May take the weekend off now.

I get that this stinks from a possible chemistry/personality perspective, but...the Brewers have had a couple really good clubs go down in the playoffs against a team employing either Yasiel Puig or Joc Pederson (or both, in the case of the Dodgers). Maybe the team could use a little pinch of Dennis Rodman for themselves? IDK, I kinda wanted to see Black, too, but I'm trying to make the best of it...

Two more wins to the season series clinch and the tiebreaker!

I want out of this inning before Bellinger comes up. Then we should be in decent shape.

My instincts may have been wrong…

Is it weird I almost don’t want any more runs? I like the idea of letting Payamps and Williams lock this down with a 3-run lead.

Yeah, I certainly wouldn’t call them a stupid franchise. They have several things going for them, and I will be the first to admit that I thought the CM3 trade was a horrific blunder, yet it seems to have turned their offense around last year and gave them a chance at a playoff run, so hats off to that decision… …but is CM3 really going to stay healthy again? To get one full season out of him was pretty lucky. He’s under contract for three more years with a ballooning cap hit after this year, so how much more value and health can they reasonably expect to squeeze out of him? It was a weird trade, and another example of how they make decisions like this that smack of arrogance—“everyone knows you have to have a QB and you don’t pay for RBs, but we’re the 49ers and we can do it differently” sort of vibe.

I wonder how Josh “It’s nice to be on a team that’s trying to win” Hader feels about this situation? Somebody should ask him while he’s in town.

Yeah, and no slouch with the stick. I was holding out (a fool’s) hope that we could find a way to pry him away from the Padres, but much like the Angels, they were too pot committed to sell. Shame—he’d be a great Brewer.

Good point

It is starting to look like the 49ers brain trust have been a bit overrated. For all the hosannas, they’ve made some really questionable decisions that don’t get nearly enough attention. It’s always “Kyle Shanahan is a visionary” and “John Lynch is a genius.” But the Packers are dummies for taking a quarterback when they weren’t in dire need of one. Ok, then. Good luck with Sam Darnold, compadres.

So, we can’t score runs for Burnes all year. But we give him 6 and he can’t keep the Twins to 5 or less at home. Figures…

Finally, put it in the books. Heck of a road trip (especially if you just left the TV off from Tuesday through Thursday like me…)

Gosh darn it, the run prevention unit is already on the plane, it seems.