owbc

It's probably good that nobody is watching right now.

They have to win another game eventually... Brewers RF Norichika Aoki SS Jean Segura LF Ryan Braun 3B Aramis Ramirez C Jonathan Lucroy CF Carlos Gomez 1B Yuniesky Betancourt 2B Jeff Bianchi P Marco Estrada Cardinals 2B Matt Carpenter CF Jon Jay LF Matt Holliday RF Allen Craig C Yadier Molina 1B Matt Adams 3B David Freese SS Pete Kozma P Lance Lynn

This season is turning into a nightmare.

Nice video, the rain bursts look really cool. I miss that view.

Would be nice for Braun to shut them up with a HR, but I don't think he'll get anything to hit.

The deck is stacked against them. No small market team can win consistently. Even Tampa is treading water now.

Yes, NFL replay is horrible, but NHL replay is really good. Same with tennis and in the (few) international cricket games that I have watched. NHL replay successfully implements the "command center" and tennis successfully uses a challenge system with computerized replay. The cricket system is similar to what baseball could implement. They have an extra TV umpire and a limited number of challenges per inning. Players can challenge catches/traps as well as out/not out. It is a little easier though because they do not have base placement to worry about. Judging by the recent terrible umpiring in MLB, I am definitely opposed to anything that involves letting the current set of umpires look at video replay. Also, to topper09er: are you in favor of extra replay in the postseason?

[sarcasm]Sounds like replays should be done by the fans via Twitter poll.[/sarcasm]

Gomez now hitting .386

Both teams shooting themselves in the foot, trying to see who can give away the most runs.

That's why they need the central command center. That was an obvious HR and it took them 5 minutes to blow the call and another minute or two of Melvin arguing after they screwed it up.

He's probably going to get a triple out of that.

Stupid stupid stupid

I think you leave Gomez where he is, but it sure is tempting to move him up. You just don't want to jinx what he has going.

Lohse is due to get a win tonight. Go Brewers!

Lots of interesting ones have been posted around the interwebs, here are a few from Disciples of Uecker: Paul Molitor: “This kid is a winner. He can run, field, and throw. I feel he will hit with power in time and will be a high average hitter. This kid stood out above everybody else in the Midwest League.” Jim Gantner: “He’s a better fielder than Sal or Don but he doesn’t measure up with the bat. He has done better hitting as far as making contact, but he doesn’t have the power you would like to see. Has a good arm, runs alright for a 3rd baseman, and his attitude is good. I like him and think he can play in the big leagues defensively. But, of course, the question would be his bat.” Greg Vaughn: “Drafted several times, said he will sign for reasonable offer or will go back to schl. Could have wt problem in future.” Jeromy Burnitz: “Fourth or fifth type OF, who has power, on a first Division team. Starter on a Second Division team.”

The fangraphs article confirms what we are seeing visually. His pitch selection hasn't changed, but he's been very effective (lucky) at hitting for power when he does make contact. We all know he isn't going to sustain his current pace. The article also fails to mention that he has less negative defensive value in 2013 because of the position change. He wasn't even that bad at the plate in 2011 (for a SS), but we often failed to notice because of his terrible defense.

Great anecdote, azcheesehead. It sounds like MLB could improve things by changing the umpire traveling schedule or giving them more off days. They are on the field for longer than anyone else. I'm somewhat surprised at the number of reviewable calls, but if it includes check swings, foul tips, etc. then it is definitely possible. The issue with a finite number of challenges is definitely there, but I think that it can be mitigated if the correct goal is in mind. For instance, the NFL's goal on reviewable plays is to get every single call correct. However, the NFL does not have any review for penalties and is still subject to games being decided by questionable pass interference calls or missed holding penalties. Scoring plays and turnovers are the most important to 1) the outcome of the game; and 2) the easiest to review, so they receive the most reviews. In MLB, the easiest play to review is balls and strikes because the computer already does it. However, balls and strike have a very low importance on the outcome of the game, except in certain high leverage situations. That's why I advocate for a fixed number of challenges for balls and strikes. If the manager uses them up on low leverage situations, that's his loss. The plays that are most important to the outcome of the game are home runs, fair/foul balls, and safe/out calls. However, we have seen that these calls have some potentially tricky situations such as where to place runners and how many challenges to allow. The umpires have a right to be concerned. But the most question is--are the potential issues/problems solvable? I think the answer is yes. I also strongly agree that a central review room is best.

The biggest danger is too many reviews of calls that are really close. The extremely close plays are almost never controversial. So they shouldn't be reviewed. If the 5th umpire has the power to review anything, it is inevitable that there will be a delay after every close play to "make sure they got it right". Nobody wants that. I think what we want is to remove the really bad errors. So it makes most sense to give each manager a maximum of two challenges per game. There needs to be an incentive to prevent pointless replays like we often see in the NFL. Fair/foul, catch/trap, and safe/out are the three main categories. If a foul/out is overturned, the batters should just be returned to the nearest base. I would not include checked swings or foul tips. I've advocated in other threads for an additional six balls/strikes challenges per game. Three for batters and three for pitchers. This system would be extremely easy to implement and would not even require a 5th umpire. All MLB has to do is copy the technology that is used in tennis and cricket. After a call is made, the syntax is like this: 1) Batter or pitcher asks umpire for challenge 2) Umpire signals to booth 3) Scoreboard operator presses a button and the pitch is replayed as a "gameday" style animation on the scoreboard. It would be completely automated, no umpires necessary The entire process would take less than 30 seconds. I am tempted to suggest a full automated ball/strike system because it would be really cool to have the "gameday" interface on the big scoreboard. However, baseball has always required hitters and pitchers to adapt to the umpire's strike zone. If we only allow a few challenges per game, it means that borderline pitchers will generally not be challenged and this part of the game would remain in tact. However, it is worth noting that a fully automated ball/strike system would favor the batter, so if offense continues to decline at the current pace, this system could be a way to generate more scoring.

Can Cruz pitch? Otherwise the Brewers were still going to lose to the Cards in 6 games.

Nice to see the Brewers taking their walks tonight.

Hadn't checked the schedule, figured the Brewers were off on a road trip to Cincinnati or Pittsburgh or something (I guess that is next week). Should be a fun little 2-game series.

Moving thread to Issues/Events

Congrats!!! What do you have planned next? Six years isn't that unusual. I've seen a number of transcripts lately of students who started college in the 2005-2007 range and are still working on their bachelor's degree. Usually it's because they go to school part time, otherwise it's of a combination of changing majors and dropping/failing required classes. For reference, I started college in fall 2005 and I won't be done until 2017 (two graduate degrees will do that to you...).

Who's our Daddy?