PeaveyFury

I have to agree, especially if the Giants can hang on. Having the Dodgers in a one-gamer and another five gamer before we’d even play them is probably the best path for Milwaukee.

Hasn't Chryst also led the Badgers to 3 New Years Six bowl games, but actually won 2 of them?

There seems to be some continued confusion about how probabilities and projections actually work, so I thought some clarification might be helpful: A probability of something like 97% for the Yankees isn't designed to be static, it's going to fluctuate. If the Yankees had a 97% probability heading into the last month of the season to make the playoffs, that probability is only invalid should the Yankees actually miss the playoffs. If the probability declines to 40% and they still make the playoffs, that 97% prediction was correct. That 97% builds in scenarios where the Yankees' lead would shrink and such, as it has. So, as you'd expect, the odds have shifted because of the results. Until the results end up in the 3% where they don't make the playoffs, the initial projection is valid. I hope that helps in clarification of the statistical assumptions. Application of the Yankees' scenario while still in progress doesn't accurately capture the outcome of the probability. Until the season is over and the actual results are known, the statistical accuracy of the projections are also not known.

I’ve been catching a lot more games on the radio this year, and I have to say that the road team really is quite good. Not often you have three good broadcasters in one radio market, but the Brewers really do on the radio.

The Badgers were a quarter away from upsetting a really good OSU team an winning a Big Ten championship in the last non-COVID season. That's not ancient history. It's ok to be disappointed by a loss, but calling for 'changes' is too drastic and unreasonable at this point, IMO. Now, they crap the bed on the whole season, that's a topic that is probably more relevant. But one game in?

You've got that right. My usual takeaway is that opinions are opinions, not facts.

It's very similar to the Braves' model in the 90s. Passable offense coupled with rotations/staff that were absolutely devastatingly effective. Won them a WS and got them a bunch of additional swings at it....

Yeah, there's a whole lot of 'snatching victory from the jaws of defeat' going on with this team, when the opposite was true for so many years.

[sarcasm]Jose Capellan?[/sarcasm]

Didn't say that at all. I just think he's getting unfairly judged right now immediately after an injury. He's got more time left to get right again, and he will. But, more than fair to be concerned about how long that will take, if that's your point. I agree with that concern. I just don't think it's going to take into late September, let alone the playoffs for that to happen, IMO.

Peralta's a complete lock for the third pitcher in the playoffs. He's basically doing his rehab assignment in MLB. He'll be completely fine. You think that’s true if he goes four innings 4 earned runs every start the rest of the way. It's his first two starts back, and didn't rehab in the minors. He's still winding back up....

Peralta's a complete lock for the third pitcher in the playoffs. He's basically doing his rehab assignment in MLB. He'll be completely fine.

Yeah, off days weren't the only part of it. They had crazy travel to facilitate the make-ups that didn't help them at all.

I don't think I was being unfair. The reason it was dismal was because of the reasons you mentioned, not despite them. Having a field goal blocked and three turnovers in the red zone cannot be separated from the team's performance; it WAS the team's performance. That's very fair. Just worth noting that the offense ran a bunch of plays because they successfully moved the ball and set up multiple scores. They didn't convert those opportunities, which is on both the offense and ST. But, the opportunities to score WERE there.

To be fair, they scored 10 points because they had a FG blocked and turned the ball over 3 times in the redzone. If they convert the way they're simply supposed to, they score 20-27 points...

Didn't the Brewers have a bunch of off days in 2019, while the Cubs had to make up a bunch of rain days? If I remember correctly, that was a big contributor to the Cubs' fading down the stretch. Good to have a roof and rest in September....

Well, he did qualify it as "potentially top end starters", to be fair.

Really good in Boardwalk Empire as well.

Really do have to wonder what would have unfolded if Coan hadn't gotten hurt last year. I'm sure the staff was concerned that Mertz wouldn't wait for a starting job and likely would have transferred at some point, but yeah. Mertz looks like a guy that could have been an elite-ish 2-year starter that got thrown in too early and now looks like a deer in the headlights.

Honestly, because the scheme put them in a chance to win.... twice, as it has 70-80% of the time since Chryst took over. The game plan got them into a position where if any of Mertz' throws in to the endzone had connected, they had a chance to win with an XP. Instead, his throws that actually made it there were inaccurate, on one drive necessitated by a second fumbled handoff, and resulted in two redzone interceptions. The Badgers clearly have chosen to rely on winning time of possession, pounding an opponent into submission, and playing stifling defense. In the end, Mertz wasn't the only reason they lost today- the OTs played like garbage, they allowed a FG block that dramatically changed the course of the game at the end, and allowed three big pass plays in the 2nd half on blown coverages (not to mention that PSU had receivers open on other plays but the QB overshot them on deep balls). Plenty of stuff to clean up. But, winning the way Wisconsin is designed to win necessitates a smart QB that makes sound decisions and 'doesn't lose the game'. Hornibrook was the opposite of that guy, and Mertz looks a lot like that at this point. Coan didn't lose you games, even if he didn't make big plays to be the guy that won it. In the end, Mertz turned the ball over three times in the red zone, and that's on him. Maybe the QB can't make those throws, hence not calling them. He hasn't hit the mid-throws since Illinois- why would they trust him to make longer ones? They see him in practice each day, and have seen him in camp. If he's wildly inaccurate, as he has been in game play, they're not going to build a scheme around attempting passes that have a low probability of success. Nor should they. We as fans only remember the hype of the recruiting rankings and an absurd first game against a bad Illinois team. Since then, everything else suggests that they may be vanilla on offense because the QB's play necessitates it.

Again, based on what? One fantastic game against a dumpster fire Illinois program? Every other game he's literally looked like Alex Hornibrook. At some point, you can't blame the game plan for missing mid-level throws. If you can't hit the throws, arm strength doesn't matter. Hornibrook couldn't hit mid-level plus passes, and neither can Mertz. One may have been due to arm strength, the other is due to inaccuracy and decision making, which may actually be worse. In the end, they're both guys who can hit 5-yard passes and not be trusted on much else, and turn the ball over at an absurd rate. The reality is, Jack Coan should be the Badgers' QB this year, and they made the wrong choice. Mertz may be very good eventually, but he's just a guy now.

He is a far better player than he has shown. Based on what, exactly? Sorry, when you make bad decisions that lead to interceptions and miss wide open receivers, that's a QB issue, not a scheme issue. I know fans thought he was the second coming, but at some point we may simply need to acknowledge that we hitched our wagon to the wrong horse, and that horse looks an awful lot like Alex Hornibrook 2.0.

Mertz looks like every other crappy QB who doesn’t know how to protect the football. So disappointing.

Leo Chenal out today after a positive COVID test.

.....hence, not that great overall. 4/5 of their rotation are literally very old veterans who were great 7-10 years ago. That's not going to win you enough games. Plus, who knows how long Arenado is even on the team. I think the odds of him opting out are greater than many think. As I said, the Cardinals are good enough to make noise each year, but they aren't really good enough to be considered an absolute contender each year for the division for the next 3 years like the premise of the initial post was.