brewerfan82

That is the rule: https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-rules-changes

An interesting side effect of this would be a hesitation to start an inning with a reliever you may not be confident in. I wonder if you'll see more "2nd-tier" relievers only being used after there's already 1 or 2 outs, and with the bases empty, to minimize the potential damage they could cause. Even if they come in, give up back-to-back singles and you have them intentionally walk the 3rd batter to get them out of the game, the next reliever could still get out of the jam with a double play. I think there's a lot of interesting scenarios and strategy the rule change creates. With an already increasing emphasis on having good relievers, this definitely increases their importance that much more. This could be a pretty big benefit to a team already deep in their relief corps like the Brewers. Now go get Kimbrel and take full advantage! Not to mention, it increases the importance of having starters that can go deep in the game to avoid using unnecessary relievers. So go get Keuchel too!

Well...if those intentional walks don't score, that is. This change does not sit well with me. A reliever comes in at the start of the game, walks the 1st batter on four pitches and clearly does not have it...now you are forced to leave him in there for 2 more batters?? That is too big of a change to the basic rules of the game in my opinion. If they allow for pitchers to be removed because of injury, I can see managers/trainers "pretending" they are seeing an injury related issue and removing wild pitchers for "precautionary" reasons. I see this argument a lot, however, how often do you see a manager pull a pitcher for ineffectiveness after a single batter? That is a super quick hook for a pitcher that you intended to pitch more than a batter or two.

I'm cool with all the changes. For a league that's so resistant to change, the three batter minimum is definitely a bit surprising, but I think it'll be interesting to see how it plays out. LOOGY's are definitely the big loser here, but otherwise, I don't see it taking away from strategy, just changing it. In addition to eliminating LaRussa-esque back-to-back-to-back pitching changes, I like that it eliminates the lefty/righty matchup dance that burns batters and pitchers without them actually playing in the game. I also think it's interesting they went with "three" as the limit so if you don't like a matchup, or within the first batter or two you know your pitcher doesn't have it, you can always issue intentional walks to fill out the remaining of the pitcher's quota without giving up additional runs. I haven't heard for sure if injuries actually do let you bypass the minimum or not, seems like everyone assumes they do, but with the new rule that you can issue free passes without throwing a pitch, they could still enforce the minimum without additional risk to the pitcher. That would be pretty harsh for actual injuries, but it would also eliminate the "fake" injuries everyone is assuming will happen with the new rule. All in all, I think the changes will be intriguing to watch, but as mentioned by others, the biggest winner is shorter commercial breaks. I'm surprised the owners approved that and will take that in exchange for anything that's lost by losing LOOGY's.

Sorry, looks like I did steer things off topic! There's already a topic about this in the Brewerfan.net Issues & Events section of the site where discussion can continue: viewtopic.php?f=73&t=33718&p=1199050#p1199050

Looks like there *might* be an extension for this: https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=456&t=2246576 Seems like some people have had issues with it recently though, but it might be something someone can troubleshoot through.

I don't want to steer this too far off topic, but I wonder if someone could add this extension (or one similar) to the board: https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=456&t=2246576 I think there is value to being able to demonstrate that you agree with or like someone's post even if you don't have anything to add to it.

Today's lineup: Things are getting close! Pumped!

True. But each of the last three years he's also had at least a .277 AVG, at least a .783 OPS, at least a .329 wOBA, and at least a 102 wRC+ against lefties. He's not a superstar, but I'm not sure he's a problem either when you're talking about the 7th guy in the lineup in 1/4 of your games.

Interestingly, using the 3-year wRC+ numbers SRB posted earlier, this team is looking pretty even against lefties and righties now: vs. RHP Lineup: 113.875 average wRC+ vs. LHP Lineup: 114.5 average wRC+

It sounds like people are actually frustrated that we have depth, lol. Maybe Thames is a total waste on the bench and ineffective as a pinch hitter. Or maybe Aguilar gets hurt, shows he needs to sit more often this year against righties, or is completely ineffective all around, in which case I'll be happy we didn't drop Thames for peanuts. Unless the return is actually useful, I'll hold onto Thames.

Also, not pictured: 2B Hiura 220 wRC+ vs. RHP, 220 wRC+ vs. LHP good point!

Not to mention: 1B Thames 128 wRC+ vs. RHP What an insane lineup. Now if they can just stretch that payroll a little further for Keuchel...

I'm not sure it's necessarily a one or the other situation, but here's a comparison of Lawrie's last three years in the bigs vs. Perez' last three years: [pre]vs. RHP PA HR AVG OBP SLG OPS wOBA wRC+ ------- --- -- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- Lawrie 962 29 .248 .300 .397 .697 .304 92 Perez 824 22 .249 .284 .382 .666 .287 73 vs. LHP PA HR AVG OBP SLG OPS wOBA wRC+ ------- --- -- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- Lawrie 306 11 .270 .311 .460 .771 .331 110 Perez 398 14 .289 .314 .472 .786 .331 103[/pre] Lawrie not being much better than Perez is fair against lefties, but Lawrie has shown a bit more competency against righties.

In that situation, would you be willing to trade Hiura (plus others) to get Kluber (in addition to signing Keuchel). And then with your excess pitching, turn around and trade one or both of Peralta/Woodruff (plus others) to get Whit Merrifield? That's some video game GM'ing, but you'd end up with a ridiculous rotation and lineup.

Keuchel's three year splits vs. Suppan's three year splits going into his first season with the Brewers: [pre]Pitcher (Hand, Age) K/9 BB/9 HR/9 AVG WHIP ERA- ERA xFIP fWAR ------------------- --- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Keuchel (LHP, 31) 7.3 2.66 0.92 .248 1.25 92 3.77 3.59 8.7 Suppan (RHP, 32) 5.2 3.10 1.10 .267 1.40 93 3.95 4.52 5.1[/pre] Not a very good comp.

Neil Walker deal is 1 year for $2M: [sarcasm]Bullet dodged[/sarcasm]

Small sample alert, but to backup some other posters' points, 3-year, 3rd time through the lineup stats do support that he's shown he'd provide a more effective option to go deeper into games than current rotation options: [pre]Pitcher (Hand, Age) IP wOBA OPS xFIP ------------------- ----- ---- ---- ---- Keuchel (LHP, 31) 143.1 .311 .718 3.43 Davies (RHP, 26) 103.1 .341 .802 4.56 Nelson (RHP, 30) 93.2 .353 .823 4.59 Guerra (RHP, 34) 74.2 .307 .714 4.63 Chacin (RHP, 31) 107.1 .328 .759 5.08 Anderson (RHP, 31) 84.2 .318 .732 5.47 Suter (LHP, 29) 28.2 .411 .982 5.87 (guys who haven't even pitched 12 IP section) Peralta (RHP, 24) 11.1 .254 .574 4.29 Woodruff (RHP, 27) 11.2 .257 .558 5.45[/pre] The most impressive stat may be just the sheer total number of innings he's pitched the 3rd time through the lineup. 143.1 IP is the 16th most in the MLB the past 3 years. While part of that may be because he's been allowed by his team to pitch that deep, it also indicates his stats aren't swayed better by *only* letting him pitch that deep in games that he's going good.

Theoretically, if you're planning on using your bullpen a lot with most of your rotation, a horse that can give the bullpen rest by getting deep into games the other days becomes very important. If a guy has proven he can successfully go through an order 3+ times, they might be able to actually leverage their rotation usage to 'guarantee' they plan on using him in a different role than their normal 'two times through and you're out' pitchers. Might be a stretch, but might make a lot of sense too.

Just for some reference, here are some quick 3-year stats considering Keuchel... MLB ranks amongst qualified starters: [pre]Stat Keuchel Best Brewer ---- ------- ----------- HR/9: 0.92 (19th in MLB) 0.90 (Jhoulys Chacin, 14th in MLB) fWAR: 8.7 (24th in MLB) 6.2 (Jhoulys Chacin, 53rd in MLB) xFIP: 3.59 (25th in MLB) 4.04 (Jimmy Nelson, 49th in MLB) ERA: 3.77 (37th in MLB) 3.69 (Chase Anderson, 31st in MLB) BB/9: 2.66 (40th in MLB) 2.44 (Zach Davies, 30th in MLB) WHIP: 1.25 (42nd in MLB) 1.22 (Chase Anderson, 34th in MLB) ERA-: 92 (51st in MLB) 88 (Chase Anderson, 37th in MLB) AVG: .248 (62nd in MLB) .235 (Chase Anderson, 24th in MLB) K/9: 7.33 (83rd in MLB) 8.60 (Jimmy Nelson, 42nd in MLB)[/pre] Comparison with current Brewer rotation options: [pre]Pitcher (Hand, Age) K/9 BB/9 HR/9 AVG WHIP ERA- ERA xFIP fWAR ------------------- --- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Keuchel (LHP, 31) 7.3 2.66 0.92 .248 1.25 92 3.77 3.59 8.7 Chacin (RHP, 31) 7.2 3.45 0.90 .236 1.28 97 4.02 4.50 6.2 Davies (RHP, 26) 6.6 2.44 1.03 .265 1.31 95 4.06 4.22 5.9 Nelson (RHP, 30) 8.6 3.40 1.04 .260 1.38 95 4.06 4.04 5.5 Anderson (RHP, 31) 7.6 3.01 1.42 .235 1.22 88 3.69 4.63 4.1 Guerra (RHP, 34) 7.9 3.90 1.26 .239 1.34 93 3.90 4.62 3.1 Suter (LHP, 29) 7.1 1.91 1.39 .264 1.26 102 4.28 4.10 2.3 Peralta (RHP, 24) 11.1 4.76 0.98 .177 1.15 108 4.40 4.35 1.1 Woodruff (RHP, 27) 6.9 3.53 1.07 .253 1.38 122 5.22 4.82 0.6[/pre] He'd be right at, or near the top, of the rotation for nearly every stat you can throw out there and he doesn't do anything poorly. Add the fact we have a complete void of left handed options in the rotation, and he'd be a great add, especially if we're talking about a contract under 4 years.

I think I'd get over it as soon as I thought of a lineup of: Cain, Yelich*, Machado, Shaw*, Braun, Grandal#, Aguilar, Hiura I've lived in Baltimore the past 9 years, and while I was pretty disgusted with his antics last year too, I think we may be overblowing a REALLY bad stretch that we happened to be privy to having front row seats to last season. There are definitely some red flags, but his talent is pretty undeniable as well.

Perfect.

I'm partial to WOAH SOLVDD FELD

Definitely a gamble, but I think it makes a lot of sense. Between a pretty bad lasting impression spotlighted in his playoffs performance this year, to the fact that any signing team had to give up a pick to sign him, he wasn't in an ideal situation to optimize his earnings this offseason. He did his homework and picked a team and ballpark that maximized his ability to regain and supersede his lost value: - He moves from a ballpark with a 5 year park factor of 96 to one of 101 - He moves from a ballpark with a HR park factor of 100 to one of 108 - Beyond the park factor stats, he moves to a ballpark that he said from personal experience he loves to hit in - He moves to a team where he will be well protected in the lineup by several talented players including this year's NL MVP - Speaking of which, he moves to a team where he just witnessed a very good player from a pitcher's park move to a friendlier hitting environment and become the league's MVP - He moves to a team whose catchers last year ranked 20th in WAR, ensuring 1.) he is highly likely to maintain a high percentage of the catcher starts this year, 2.) he can be viewed as a major reason the team maintains (or exceeds) their success this year - He moves to a team that came within a game of the World Series last year, and with his help, are in a position to make another deep postseason run this year, meaning he could have another chance to prove last season's playoff gaffes were a fluke And perhaps most of all, he moves to a team that he will likely earn $18.25M with this year. From the rumblings it sounded like *at best* he was being offered $15M/4 years. With a decent season and with no team needing to give up a pick to obtain him next year, he'll only need $14M/3 years to come out on top. With a good season, and only being 1 year older, there's a good chance he comes out way on top. Again, he's definitely betting on himself, but he's been consistently good the past four seasons and I think he put himself in a good position to succeed and I can definitely see why he did it.

Huh, I knew the Brewers were bad at challenges, but I didn’t realize their 20% success rate (7 of 34) was the worst across all of MLB by 15%. Over half of MLB teams were at or above a 50% success rate on challenges. The Royals (75%), Yankees (74%), and Giants (74%) were excellent at challenging calls apparently. That link is really interesting. While the Brewers had the lowest percentage of overturned calls they also were wayyy below league average in the total number of calls overturned as well. Half the league had *at least* three times as many calls overturned as the Brewers and all but one team had *at least* twice as many calls overturned as the Brewers. On the flip side, the Royals had the best percentage and also managed to overturn a whopping league best 31 total calls throughout the year. It'd be interesting know how many bad calls each team *should have* challenged. Did the Royals really have that much worse of a time getting umps to rule plays in their favor throughout the year? Was whoever was in charge of watching the replays for the Brewers asleep on the job whenever Counsell called on them? Or was CC and his staff just totally incompetent when it came to this aspect of the game? If you can assume all teams have roughly the same luck in getting close plays called their way over the course of a season (which I don't know is true), that's quite the disadvantage they're putting themselves in just by being awful at something that shouldn't be that difficult to correct. If they can just get 10-15 more calls turned their way this year, that could be an area that improves them by a couple games over the season.