Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

adambr2

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    39,258

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    106

 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 adambr2

  1. adambr2
    I don't think it's the equivalent worth of $100: Fair enough, maybe I just don't really get the process. I don't see how it could be anyone of value, because if it was I don't understand what would be stopping Dombrowski from just not agreeing to it and sending 100 bucks instead after nothing could be agreed upon.
  2. adambr2
    If it's the equivalent worth of $100 cash, I wouldn't get too excited.
  3. adambr2
    Well, the very nature of predictions is that they're based off the information you have at the time, not necessarily when you have all the information. It would probably be easier to pick a lot of the categories if you do it after spring training than right now. It's also probably easier to pick World Series favorites now than it was back in November, but that doesn't mean people weren't doing it in November.
  4. adambr2
    I generally find the Cubs to be more insufferable as a fan base, but the Cardinals' team and players themselves to be more insufferable as a team. Off the top of my head, I've found TLR, Matheny, Wainwright, Carpenter, Molina, and Pujols all to be completely insufferable. I'm probably missing others, but their 'holier than thou' attitude has long been one of the biggest jokes in baseball. I can't think of a single Cubs player over the last decade or so that I feel the same about.
  5. adambr2
    Brewers ROY: Orlando Arcia (Proves to be an Alcides Escobar clone) Hey, that's cheating!
  6. adambr2
    Brewers Record: 72-90 Playoffs: No Brewers MVP: Broxton Brewers CY Young: I'll have to go with Jimmy Nelson. I have to think Guerra and Davies may have letdowns, and Nelson was by far our best until June last year. Maybe this is the year he finally shows it. Brewers ROY: Forrest Snow First player traded: Some reliever. I'll guess Torres Surprise player: Thames Disappointing player: Arcia World Series: Red Sox over Cubs
  7. adambr2
    Can't do that. Gotta pick one or the other.
  8. adambr2
    I would rather it end that way than because one team ran out of players to use. The game is built for 9 innings, when you get to 14+ innings you aren't really playing the game the way it was meant to be played anyway. Playing an extra 1/3 of a game is enough, after that you are getting into unsafe/poor play. Well, in September this generally isn't a problem with expanded rosters. If you run out of players in September in extras I would say that's more on the team for not calling up enough reinforcements. I get your point, I just don't agree with it. I would rather enjoy this as one of the very rare occurrences in baseball and deal with the consequences of that rather than change extra inning rules. I enjoy that strategic part of the game on the very rare times it happens. Do you use a specialist for one AB in a key situation and burn through a pitcher that quickly, or try to eek a couple innings out of him? Do you use tomorrow's starter in the 17th, or see if a position player can pitch a clean inning? Every manager has contingencies for these situations. Heck, some will even stick a pitcher in the outfield for one AB so they can go back to him. And I do think the NL adopting the DH rule would help -- at least you don't have to decide in extras whether to let your relief pitcher bat in a key situation when you're running low on pitchers. Yeah, it's hard on the team when it happens, but it's so rare. Really no different than a 4 or 5 overtime game in basketball which is hard on them.
  9. adambr2
    Out of 162 games last yeae, the Brewers played 13 extra inning games. Of those 13, 2 of them went past the 12th. Not one went past the 13th. Is this really that urgent of a problem that requires dramatic changes? On the flip side is this such a drastic change that it really modifies the game if it only happens rarely? Really long extra inning games are a huge issue when they do happen, curtailing them and nothing else is not a problem here. If you have a solution that doesn't impact 98% of games but impacts 2% of games that are really large issues then yeah that is a good thing. I'm all about the modernization of the game, but for me this is so rare that it's not worth playing late innings differently than the rest of the game. I'd rather just go with the tie after 12 that you had suggested. Do you really want to see a pennant race decided on the last day of the season in the 13th inning on a groundout to 2nd followed by a routine fly to left? There are other ways to speed up the game. The IBB thing is fine, enforce the time limits between pitches, etc. Either way, IMO too much is made of the pace of play problem in basball. Baseball is a unique game and anyone who appreciates it appreciates it for what it is, anyone who doesn't isn't going to suddenly like it with a few minor tweaks. Baseball isn't going to gain or lose any fans by the games getting 3 minutes longer or shorter.
  10. adambr2
    Out of 162 games last yeae, the Brewers played 13 extra inning games. Of those 13, 2 of them went past the 12th. Not one went past the 13th. Is this really that urgent of a problem that requires dramatic changes?
  11. adambr2
    Good to see Woodruff getting some recognition. When is the last time the Brewers had 3 pitchers in the overall top 100? Would probably be 4 if Bickford didn't fail a drug test.
  12. adambr2
    And the very few that go that long, it's fun. It's fun seeing a game in the 18th wondering how long it will go, it's fun seeing managers try to manage these games and see if they can squeeze an inning or two out of a position player. I still remember being 9 years old and listening to Willie Randolph hit a walkoff single for the Brewers in the 19th to beat the White Sox. Yeah , it sucks for the team for a couple of days and some of the fans aren't going to be able to stick it out, but c'mon, it happens once in a blue moon and that's what makes it fun when it does.
  13. adambr2
    PECOTA doesn't project out every player in the league only to make arbitrary win/loss projections. They're based on player performance. True, the batting average projections aren't pretty, but in a a lot of cases the WARP is over what I would predict, probably in many cases based on defense. I draw encouragement from some of this actually to the thought of if these projections add up to 76 wins, I wonder how much better we'd be if some our pitchers actually do carry a sub 4.00 ERA and we get a breakout or two in the lineup.
  14. adambr2
    None of the projections I've seen seem very bullish on Villar, but these look better than the ones from Fangraphs mostly. They see us being a good defensive team which will be a nice change. Strange to me that Broxton is projected for a 1.7 WAR in only 352 PAs, barely half a season's worth. The extrapolation is nice but if he's healthy and productive I see no reason he won't get 600 PAs this year.
  15. adambr2
    The Rays turned down an offer from the Astros this offseason of the #20, #35, and #54 prospects in all of baseball plus two additional prospects for Archer. No way do they turn that down only to settle for a low ball deal from us next year.
  16. adambr2
    MLB isn't like the NFL. In that scenario it would do Villar absolutely no good to complain or demand a trade. How often do you hear about a player doing that in MLB or holding out of spring training? Never, because there is nothing they can do other than work hard and be a good teammate to try to get more money on their next deal. MLB contracts are binding for both sides and the player can't just get it torn up and reworked by the team or a new team if he outplays it. Take Lucroy for instance. It was very obvious by the end of 2013 that he was going to easily outplay his 5 year/$11M contract, but he didn't once become disgruntled about it nor did it affect his play. Both sides and agents understand the risks and rewards. Assuming he doesn't fall off a cliff in 2017 he'll be rewarded much more this time around. Villar isn't likely signing a 5/15 deal anyway but players becoming disgruntled or demanding trades over their contract isn't something that typically happens in MLB.
  17. adambr2
    The point is that an owner shouldn't go over a GM's head to sign a guy, regardless of the situation.
  18. adambr2
    Now baseball is going to run a test in the rookie leagues with a man starting every inning on 2nd starting in the 10th inning to try to expedite extra innings. I'm all for modernization in the game, but that one goes too far IMO. How often does a team have a 15 inning game, once a year? Just leave it be.
  19. adambr2
    I'm pretty sure that is punishable by life imprisonment.
  20. adambr2
    Bingo. A player with nearly 3 years of service time of mostly productive play who is on the verge of making $5M on their first arbitration go-around, probably isn't going to be interested in a discounted long-term deal. Guys like Broxton or even maybe Arcia, who are 2-3 years away from seeing millions, and knowing that they might never see it if they get hurt or turn out to be a flash in the pan, are the guys worth targeting.
  21. adambr2
    Excellent read up on PECOTA's player projections for 2017. Most of these are a little bit more optimistic than Fangraphs, and they have us at 76 wins which would be an improvement. http://www.brewcrewball.com/2017/2/8/14546000/pecota-projects-76-wins-for-the-milwaukee-brewers-in-2017
  22. adambr2
    That's assuming they play up to their potential. If they don't, they now have a guaranteed contract that's harder to send down, cut or trade. If the only benefit is a couple cheap years at the risk of having wasted money (and I'm not thinking the 5 year 15 million contract we would give someone like Susac but more the 5 year 40 million contract Segura was rumored to have been offered), that's a big risk at year 1. Using segura for example, if we gave him the 5 year 40 million contract, we wouldn't have been able to trade him the way we did. However if segura was awesome for two more years, we could have got him on something like 5 year 60 million buying out two years of FA. I'm much more open to doing extensions after two good years once the risk of "flash in the pan" has been lowered (unless you have Braun's minor league/1st year pedigree). Yeah, but a 6/15 'take a chance on you, set you up for life ' offer is way different than 5/40 later on. I don't see any 5/40 extension candidates on this roster.
  23. adambr2
    It's mind-boggling to me. It's 2017 and almost the entire baseball world has figured out better and more accurate ways to judge a player's performance and predict their future performance than just raw traditional statistics. Yet for whatever reason, MLB arbitration panels are still stuck in the 1980's, awarding salaries based on batting average, HRs, and RBIs. Until they fix this you'll rightfully see more guys non-tendered than there otherwise would be. Considering Carter's market value was $3M over one year, and we would have been forced to pay him 8 to 10 million, Stearns clearly made the right call even though it was questioned at the time.
  24. adambr2
    I don't see the issue. As you hinted at in your last sentence, young good players are only worth more when under cheap controllable contracts. If a guy performs greatly but isn't your first choice at a position, find a new position for him or trade him for a haul. Can't ever have too much of a good thing.
  25. adambr2
    But is it really a cautionary tale when your net loss is $10M? Over 5 years? You could lose $10M in one year on a reliever who happens to have a bad year. Yeah, it didn't work out with Singleton, but I get what Houston was doing. And at the end of the day, you never hear much about it, because it didn't even put a dent in their budget. If it had worked out and Singleton was even a solid everyday regular, with an extra 3/30 team option attached, all we'd be hearing is about how much of a genius move it is to get 8 cheap years of a stud. Yes, regarding a guy like Broxton, you couldn't be blamed for wanting to wait and not bite based on 3 months. Just know that if you do, and he puts up 4 WAR next year, you can forget about a cheap buyout of any arbitration or free agency years.
×
×
  • Create New...