Patrick425
-
Posts
5,413 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Patrick425
-
It's interesting that this is being brought up considering that Howard is asking $10mil in arbitration compared to the $7mil number the Phillies put on the table. Not sure where and how to look this up, but my guess is that it may be the largest figure ever asked for in arbitration (by a lot), and it makes me wonder what Prince will ask for when his time comes.
-
Who will be the biggest dissapointment in 2008?
Patrick425 replied to Patrick425's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
I didn't realize this. I'm assuming that Baseball America also ranked him as one of the top Brewer prospects at the time as well then. I guess I just don't remember a whole lot of fan fare when Hall came up. Also, has he put on weight since his first year? -
This is what kills me. I had no idea that these guys ever tested positive. If it was baseball, you can be sure that the whole world would know.
-
Who will be the biggest dissapointment in 2008?
Patrick425 replied to Patrick425's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
When Bill Hall first came up I thought of him of nothing more than a utility infielder. Was he ever considered a top prospect of the Brewers? I was pleasantly surprised with the success that he had in 2005 and 2006, but I don't ever see him putting up 2006 numbers again. -
agreed...not sure how they come up with them.
-
I'm normally not this optimistic, but I have this feeling that Melvin is going to look like a genius after the season is over in regards to his off-season bullpen moves. A lot of people are skeptical about Gagne. However, even if he does falter, I'm more comfortable with our possible backups than I was last year. Last year our only possible options for closer were Cordero or Turnbow. Towards the end of the year, I was not feeling comfortable with either of them. This year if Gagne fails, they have Turnbow. If Turnbow fails, Torres has experience closing games. Even Riske and Mota have closed a few games and could be possibilities. I realize this is not very meaningful, but if CBS Sportslines fantasy projections for these pitchers are any where near accurate, I'll be pretty happy (well maybe except for Gagne's saves): Gagne 60IP/23S/3.15ERA/1.2WHIP Mota 70/1/3.98/1.36 Riske 70/3/3.21/1.11 Turnbow 70/6/3.98/1.29 Torres 60/2/4.35/1.30 Shouse 53/1/3.40/1.34
-
Who will be the biggest dissapointment in 2008?
Patrick425 replied to Patrick425's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
I have always had a hard time trying to figure out Hardy and the "top prospect" label that was put on him before he came to the majors. I look at his Minor League numbers and I don't see anything that really jumps out at me. I always just pictured him as an average middle infielder who will put up very average MI type offensive numbers. -
We have a thread about who will have a break out year and a thread with actual projections. Thought it would be appropriate to have this thread as well. Of course I tend to be a pessimist, so this kind of thinking is right up my alley. I think Ben Sheets should be excluded from consideration, because it's too obvious of an answer. My pick is Billy Hall. Not that last year wasn't disappointing for him but I really think that at the end of this year (or earlier) we will be looking to unload his contract on another team and in the market for a new 3B. JJ Hardy is my runner up.
-
I was thinking the same thing when I was driving home yesterday. I think hawings point is very valid as well.
-
Caution - may not be appropriate for work: My guess is that you have never seen the movie "Being There" with Peter Sellers either. Great Movie.
-
I don't get the title to the movie "Bull Durham". I understand the name of the team is the Durham Bull's, but I don't get the play on words and what it has to do at all with anything in the movie.
-
I might be totally wrong about this, but I think the law is actually that you have to have your headlights on when you are using your windshield wipers. Obviously, if that's true, the intention of the law is to make people put on there windshield wipers when it's raining (why they wouldn't just state the law that way...I'm not sure). edit: http://www2.jsonline.com/news/state/mar00/lights02030100a.asp not sure if this ever went all the way through or not.
-
It's been ages since someone has done a "Google won't save you" Also, is it just me, or has this site been really slow lately?
-
Yeah, I like listening to The Show on my way home (although, I usually only get to hear the last 20 minutes or so of it). However, sometimes Dibble drives me nuts. He always will take the players side in every case..whether its about PEDs, money, whatever. One time he basically said that baseball needs a new commissioner because Selig is from Milwaukee and Milwaukee is really not that "hip", baseball needs someone who is in touch with today's generation, someone from NY or LA. I came very close to calling in and blasting him, but by the time I would have gotten through, the show would have been over. I understand that Selig may not have his finger on the pulse of the younger generation, but it has nothing to do about where he came from. I find that I agree with Buck Martinez and Mark Patrick in the morning much more. They are not afraid to be a little bit more critical and call the players out on their responsibilities when it comes to things like steroids or HGH.
-
I have XM and love it. I basically just listen to it in the car. I have a 30 - 40 minute ride to and from work each day. The baseball coverage is great. Plus I also like the alterantive and comedy channels. I have the XM to go radio. It allows you to record things with the press of a button. However, I think the recording industry started expressing concerns about this and they decided not to make it any more (but I'm sure you can buy it on Ebay).
-
Ask yourself this? Why are we moving Braun to OF? To improve the defense at 3B. Right? Is Blalock really that big of an improvement at 3B? I guess that's debatable. Why is everyone talking about C. Lee? If I recall correctly he was not the LF last year, Jenkins was (75% of the time). Everyone keeps talking about offense. Does anyone remember how putrid the defense was last year? Replacing Braun-Jenkins with Blaylock-Braun only slightly improves the overall defense imho.
-
Everyone acts like a trained monkey could play the OF. I have visions of misjudged fly balls and other awkward looking plays..not only by Braun, but by Hall, who, contrary to what others believe, I don't think made "great" progress in CF (he made some progress, but not great progress). I would like to see an outstanding defensive player take Braun's place at third if the plan is to move him to the OF.
-
I thought the idea of moving Braun to the OF was to improve the defense. If Blalock is not that much better of a fielder then Braun, then I don't know that this makes much sense. My guess is that the Brewers had 3 objectives when they sat down at the end of the year. 1) Shore up the bullpen. 2) Improve the defense 3) Replace Estrada Attanasio seems to be the type of guy that likes to meet all goals and objectives that he sets (whether it's business or baseball). He has been successful with 1 and 3. This move does not seem to take care of #2 imho.
-
Well, I know these stats are not put together by 7th graders, but by guys who are much smarter than me. So, there must be some validility to them. I just have a hard time wrapping my simple mind around the concept. However, I will always think that a statement like this is an overstatement. There might be some luck involved in ERAs, but I don't think it's extremely luck based. That's like saying it's not a valid stat at all, or that Jake Peavy consistantly posts lower ERAs every year than Bret Tomko because of extreme luck. My impression is that the difference between those two teams was not because of "routine" plays that were not made by the Marlins that were not recorded as errors. The arguement made before was that Braun does not make easy plays and they are not recorded as errors. I questioned the frequency of this occurance, and I still do. If there were really 100+ routine plays not made and not recorded as errors then the Marlins might want to look into getting a different official scorer.
-
Ok, I guess that makes a little more sense. As I said in an earlier post, I'm not sure that I understand fip completely. Every explanation of it that I heard of it up until now, pretty much stated that it takes out all fielding plays and only accounts for BBs, Ks, and HRs. Your post, if I'm understanding correctly, makes it sound like that's not the case.
-
I did read this in Moneyball. At the time I read it, I thought how is this done? Is there a computerized grid laid over the field, then synced with game video to record in what zone every ball was hit to. Or, is it just someone making judgements with their naked eye? And, even if it's being done with a computerized grid of some sort, how does it take into effect different camera angles. Again, seems subjective. Either way, if this data is being gathered, then why not use it to adjust pitchers ERA. It just seems like fip is a "lazy" method to account for the effect of defense on a pitchers ERA. Since there are some really good defensive plays and some bad defensive plays, then lets eliminate all defensive plays?? Why not just account for those "good" and "bad" defensive plays (since it appears that's all be charted out anyways) to adjust an ERA. That would make much more sense to me. Like I said before, any pitching stat that does not give credit to a pitcher for making a pitch that results in a weak ground out or easy pop-up and only gives credit when he Ks a batter seems somewhat faulty imho.
-
If you read the rest of my post, you saw that I acknowledged that pitchers with a better defensive behind them tend to have lower ERAs. However, I don't believe that discounting ALL defensive plays is the way to accurately measure this. It's like saying since some QB's have better receivers than others, we are going to completely discount all attempts and completions when assessing QBs and only count times that they score on there own, since that's all that they can truely control. Wow, that all seems very subjective. "Florida's defense let in 102 more runs than you would expect from an average defense"....How the heck is that measured?? "Some of those are from unearned runs" How many? How many are routine plays that weren't made that were not scored as errors? Probably not very many if any at all. Fielding is so subjective, I sometimes think that peoples attempt to get there hands around it through statistical measures is futile, including attempts to dismiss it completely. One play I'll see a guy like Weeks totally botch an easy grounder. The next play he makes an outstanding top web gem play. How do you account for that?
-
This is what I just don't get. This happens very very rarely. A routine play in my opinion is an easy ground ball hit directly at a fielder. If a fielder misplays it, it goes down as an error. Unless the official scorer is blind or something. People are acting like this happens all the time. It hardly ever happens. I understand that everything else being equal a pitcher that has an overall better defense behind him will more likely have a better ERA than a pitcher that doesn't because his players make more "outstanding" plays. However, I don't think the solution to understanding the effect that has on ERA is to eliminate ALL plays that involve a fielder, even though a majority are routine. I'm going to have a hard time ever understanding that logic.
-
I think this is way overused excuse for Fip. In reality, what percentage of misplayed balls are not classified as errors? People make it sound like fielders should make plays on any ball hit within 30 feet of them. 99.9% of the time the routine plays outnumber the bad and spectacular plays in a game and Fip ignores all of them. Pitcher A: 7 IP, 10K, 5 ER, 0 HR, 3 BB Pitcher B: 7 IP, 3K, 1 ER, 1 HR, 3 BB Maybe I'm understanding Fip wrong, but I get the impression that Fip would say pitcher A is better than pitcher B. I don't get that. Baseball is played with 9 players, not 1. I think it's reasonable that pitchers should be expected to be able to rely on his fielders and not be expected to K everyone. If a pitcher makes a good pitch on a hitter in a tough situation and gets him to ground into a DP, he should definitly get some credit for that. Sounds like Fip would just ignore that. Sounds like people are trying to reinvent the wheel with this stat.
-
Yeah, I don't really get Fip at all. Lets bacically just look at Walks, HRs, and K's...huh? Hate to sound like an old curmudgeon (by the way, I do understand and agree that OBP is a better measure than average, so I'm not completely stuck in the past.). However, whats wrong with ERA? If a pitcher gets a guy to hit an easy ground ball to the shortstop, isn't it expected that a major league SS is supposed to make the play? How does that have anything to do with luck? Gee, he was lucky that the professional ballplayer didn't botch the play that he is paid handsomely to make. Isn't that what the E in ERA is all about?
