brewfanmn

A simple Google would let you know this is not true

At what? Mitchell has been the better hitter, fielder, and runner in their MLB careers, and is younger

Wait so is Murphy a bad manager now because he taxes the bullpen too much, or because he leaves his best starter in too long? I'm having trouble keeping my narratives straight

He didn’t? The current starting 3B was acquired this offseason and is a 25 years old holding his own in his first taste of the big leagues with 6 more years of team control What move should have been made? Checking in so far on the most commonly desired names this offseason: -Alec Bohm has a 65 OPS+ and has graded among the worst defensive 3B in the league his whole career -Ryan McMahon has an 87 OPS+, has been a below average hitter every year of his career, is making $12 million and is owed another $32 million after this year -Brett Baty was sent to AAA before the end of April. His season line is OK (106 OPS+) after hitting 3 HRs the last few days, but he also has a 30% K to 4% BB ratio and has always been a liability defensively -Brandon Drury has not been able to make the White Sox roster and has a 67 OPS+ in AAA for them -Jose Iglesias has a 63 OPS+ -Luis Rengifo has a 47 OPS+ -Yoan Moncada has been good in his 47 plate appearances, but has already spent a month the IL which is the known risk with him. Durbin has played more than Moncada, so the Brewers would have had even more Dunn or Capra so far if they had gone after Moncada instead. He’s also making $5 million, so you probably don’t have Quintana on this team if you have Moncada Also, none of the trade candidates listed were actually traded by their teams. It takes two to tango So what exactly were the obvious 3B moves missed?

Nestor Cortes made 30 starts and threw 174 innings last year. The guy who was injured most of last season was the one they traded away.

That occasional short window sure has been lasting a while.

Probably Moncada if we have to pick one, but really I'm not sure any of these guys is even an upgrade over what the Brewers already have Steamer projections from Fangraphs Turang: 95 wRC+, 2.6 WAR* Ortiz: 104 wRC+, 2.4 WAR* Durbin: 96 wRC+, 2.2 WAR* Dunn: 85 wRC+, 1.5 WAR* Monasterio: 90 wRC+, 1.3 WAR* Moncada: 94 wRC+, 1.9 WAR* Polanco: 97 wRC+, 1.5 WAR* Drury: 91 wRC+, 0.8 WAR* Dejong: 79 wRC+, 0.9 WAR* (have seen this name mentioned a lot) *WAR scaled out to 650 plate appearances to put everyone on the same playing field

Yeah, of course. SLG is really important. So is OBP. I’m not suggesting SLG is bad or something. My point is that the makeup of a team’s current lineup should have zero importance on the types of players they pursue to add to the roster moving forward. Whether you’re a high OBP/low SLG team, a low OBP/high SLG team, or anywhere in between, it makes no sense to restrict yourself to “targeting” specific types of players. You should just be targeting the players that most improve your win expectancy through the combination of creating runs offensively while saving runs defensively.

Would you rather the Brewers add: A .280/.345/.390, 110 wRC+, 2.5 WAR player with 10 HR or A .245/.305/.440, 105 wRC+, 2.0 WAR player with 25 HR? That’s where the disconnect is for me. I get the sense that the folks clamoring for power would actually rather pursue slightly worse players just to check the power box, when statistically that would be a flawed approach to team-building I understand why someone would look at a leaderboard with a team ranking #2 in OBP and #15 in SLG and think that team needs to target power. But even that team would benefit just as much by increasing team OBP 10 points as it would increasing team SLG 10 points. The shape or balance of the production just doesn’t matter. The amount does. It’s not like there are diminishing returns to the value of getting on base. Hell, even if you were #1 in OBP and #30 in SLG, the research shows that if anything, you’d actually be better off continuing to add OBP

This article had a similar takeaway https://blogs.fangraphs.com/choose-your-own-lineup-adventure-on-base-vs-slugging/

Thank you for making this thread. This is becoming a pet peeve of mine. I really don't understand this narrative. It seems like people are caring more about what the production looks like over the amount of production itself. A lineup of nine Luis Arraez's (career 120 wRC+) would be the best lineup in baseball (#1 last year was LAD, with a 118 team wRC+). Besides, all the "you can't build a lineup out of Frelicks, Turangs, and Durbins" comments seem to be conveniently forgetting that those guys will likely bat at the bottom of a lineup with Chourios, Contreras', Yelichs, and Hoskins' at the top of it. I was curious to google if if there was any evidence to support the need to strike a balance between OBP and SLG, and found this interesting article which actually suggests the opposite: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/mark-trumbo-and-the-relative-value-of-obp-and-slg/ If anything, it seems like if you have a high-OBP, low-SLG lineup (which I'm not convinced even applies to the Brewers), you'd actually benefit from doubling down on more OBP. I have to say the conclusion makes sense logically:

I hope they just keep adding good baseball players.

Who said anything about being cheap?

From a style standpoint or a team-building standpoint? I don't think the team should care even one bit how they go about scoring and prevent runs. Trying to acquire specific types of players seems like a great way to force bad moves or miss out on opportunities elsewhere

Do they actually need "power and pop" or do they just need production? I never understand why people get so focused on *how* a team produces. The goal of the game isn't to hit homers, the goal of the game is to score more runs than the other team. It doesn't matter how that happens. Taking a walk, stealing second, scoring on a single, and saving a run with the glove the following inning is worth just as much as a 2-run homer.