Fatter than Joey

And again, 30 appearances (every other game or so) of a Scott Linebrink, replacing on the roster an on-the-job trainee like a Balfour has GOT to influence our chances at a postseason berth... Well maybe. Theoretically a guy like Balfour (at this point) should be used in games where the outcome has been pretty much determined, i.e. bullpen Stooge. If you think Ned uses the tic-tac-toe playing chicken to make bullpen moves -- then this helps us. When Henny Penny randomly selects pitchers, then you can't have a mop-up pitcher at your disposal. If you think that Sheets could be out until mid-September, or Yo will be shut down then, -- this is going to be a good move. If Sheets comes back soon, why couldn't have we used Thatcher as a stop-gap, like the Padres (in a pennant race) are doing. Otherwise I think Wise/Tbow/Linebrink will be getting a lot more low-leverage innings. I don't see Linebrink as an upgrade over Tbow or Wise -- I see Linebrink getting Spurling's innings. I think this could be like hiring a decent center in the NBA to give Shaq a bunch of fouls -- when just about any knuckle dragging clown could do that.

Over all the Cubs may be better at the moment than the Brewers in some ways but they are not superior league wide in any category to say they have some type of special ability other teams don't. I think to suggest the Cubs have some sort of ability the usual stats missed there should be some sort of correlation to consistently higher rankings in most of the categories. I am at all not contending that the Cubs are superior -- only that if you compare 2 teams or players, using OPS alone -- that is not objective.

Lets look at Dave Bush. Please... This is exactly the same discussion we had earlier in the year about Bush who has pitched exactly like before other than his BABIP evening out and suddenly he's doing well. Are you talking about Dave or George? -- If you mean by "suddenly he's doing well" June, I would agree. His July looks a lot like his April and May. As I recall our Bush discussions, it was about him evening out his April ERA to what his career norms would be, something around 4.20. In fact I seem to recall you or Russ making the comment that if his ERA was 5.00 at the AS break he'd probably by demoted (bullpen or something). Well we are past the AS break and Bush has a 4.91 ERA -- which I grant you is better than his April ERA, but I dont think any of us thought his ERA would remain at 6+ for very long. Bush is a very frustrating pitcher for me to watch -- because he has flashes of being a very good pitcher, but man, he just gets way too much of the plate up in the zone, and then he gives up runs and the Brewers lose. I suspect that his 2007 ERA will end up being closer to 5 than to 4, and that would be worse than his career norms, which is what I thought may happen all along. I hope Bush proves me wrong, and strings together some 0ER or 1ER starts -- but I think its going to be a lot more 6IP 3ER and 5IP 4ER starts here on out. Ironically I thought his career norms were to small of a sample to project 2007 from. Especially when he pitched only 2 years, one in each league. I always got the impression that coming into 2007 he was lucky that his ERA was not higher.

Btw Theriot has a .696 OPS and that has actually gone down over the past 2 months, that is not emerging. My bad -- I meant Fontenot. He is having a pretty good month. At some point don't you think Theriot will have to deal with the same adjustments when pitchers find his weakness? It seems a little odd that Hardy forgot how to hit yet Theriot will emerge and never go trough what Hardy is going through now. If anything Hardy is ahead of Theriot in the sense that he has already went through part of his adjustment period. Sure (I meant Fontenot) -- but I use Hardy as an illustration of a player that can "forget" how to bat with RISP. Fontenot may do better or worse -- that is left to be seen. In the meantime Graffy relearned how to hit so nice bit of luck for us there. Amen. That is one area were I believe the Brewers are head and shoulder above the Cubs. We will see -- I am not sure I agree or disagree. OPS is the best "simple" stat we have that correlates to runs produced (and what can be expected to be produced). It may be the best -- but it still is incomplete and analysis using it exclusively is subjective. Over a full season, however, this evens out. No -- It's not that simple. If 2 teams are equal in talent and attributes -- then perhaps -- otherwise there is no reason to think things will even out. There is an element of talent and ability that gets glossed over here. Furthermore you are talk about 2 teams that have made roster changes. so you really can't expect things to even out when the dudes that created the April stats may not be there, or are hurt/healed. At the end of the day though Strawboss, your analysis may be right -- we will have to see what happens.

No, you pointed at runs scored meaning more than OPS No -- and perhaps I did a poor job illustrating my point. Strawboss had gone through both rosters and shown where the Brewers had advantages in most positions (offensively speaking using OPS) My point was: You cannot take 2 players/teams, and compare their OPS's and then objectively say one is better than the other. I illustrated that point by showing that the Cubs OPS was worse than the Brewers, but yet they scored more runs, which contributed to their wins. Am I saying runs scored means more than OPS? -- not at all. All I am trying to illustrate is that OPS is not as objective as many people may want to claim. There are aspects of a players offensive value that OPS does not measure. The Cubs have put up a .691 OPS this month and managed to score as many runs per game as they have the rest of the season, that is simply balls bouncing their way, there is no other plausible explanation for it. I don't agree that the only explanation is ball-bouncing. For example: There have been roster moves. Some teams/players are going to be better in moving runners while they make outs, OPS does not account for that. Some teams/players are going to be better/worse at getting runners from 1st to 3rd on a single The Brewers have a young team -- I think it is reasonable that some players will "learn" to hit with RISP better, and some players like Hardy will "forget" when pitchers change their approach to him. If you are in a statistically heavy field you should know that looking at a one month sample of data in baseball is almost completely useless for judging future success. Sure, but for the sake of argument, since we have only 2 months to go, people are going to use small samples to try and project other small samples -- it's just the nature of the beast. It probably is sloppy methodology, but people will try anyway. While I agree you can't just compare players OPS I also don't think looking at runs scored or wins over a month holds any more value than just looking at the OPS. This is where I failed -- I did not want to compare the 2 metrics. I wanted use runs/wins only to illustrate the short-comings of OPS. For example -- If you had a Prince Fielder that was a few pounds lighter, but hit the same, he probably would have more value to a team offensively, as he could score from 2nd easier, etc.. but that value would not show up in OPS. Another example could be if Johnny Estrada all of a sudden started hitting all of his crappy grounders behind the runners, his OPS would be the same, but his offensive contribution would increase.

I think the fact that every single study ever done on the subject suggests that if clutch exists its at an extremely small level backs up my opinion on that. Most of those "studies" are not worth the paper they are written on, you will have to forgive me if I am quite skeptical about a lot of sabre-studies. I have never mentioned "clutch" in any post I have ever made (I am pretty sure in any thread) -- the concept of clutch is your addition to this thread. Quite simply sometimes the balls do or don't drop your way, thats baseball. I really don't like it when you say "quite simply" -- I understand random variance. I also understand that there is a difference between the words "sometimes" and "in a large part". Furthermore I understand the idea that balls bounce in unpredictable manners -- Lastly I believe talent trumps that. Earlier in the year the Cubs couldn't buy a base hit with RISP, did they just suddenly learn how to be clutch this past month? Does that really sound more plausible to you? Honestly, it doesn't sound any less plausible than "due in a large part to random variance" Let's see... Izturis was effectively replaced by Fontenot. Theriot is an emerging player, who is coming on strong -- so I am sure in some sense he is learning how to hit with RISP better. Ramirez is not hurt Soriano got moved from CF to LF which seems to benefit him. Matt Murton is not starting. Earlier in the season the Brewers were hitting very well with RISP, did we forget how to be clutch? I think Hardy "doesn't know" how to be "clutch" since pitchers have quit serving him up fastballs. (for example). I think Weeks has flat out forgot to hit. I never brought up the concept of "clutch" or "random variance" -- the only point I was trying to make, is that you cannot claim by comparing 2 players OPS (in all cases) is an objective fact in their overall contribution to an offense and that offense's ability to score runs and win games. I really do not want to come of as being snarky, but I have a degree in EE with an emphasis in Materials -- which is probably one of the most statistical dependent fields in engineering that I am aware of. I say this because I truly want to have the stat guys backs on this site, but sometime you really make it hard when posters get Yosted in the backside with your small sample/randomness mantras every time anyone makes an observation. I made a comment about the objectivity of OPS and it turns into a another discussion about small sample randomness. I have a problem with applying principles that are used with silicon wafers on first baseman, and expecting that the analysis is as sound/acceptable.

Thats largely just random variance though Of course both you and I know that you cannot make this statement as if you know this to be true. teams go through streaks where they can do no wrong or no right all the time Maybe, this is mostly hand-waving though, and really irrelevant to my post. Teams are also going to be better or worse at scoring/manufacturing runs. It is not as if all teams have equal attributes, and they are waiting for the coins to flip in their favor. I think you're going to have to work pretty hard to prove which of those two guys is going to be more helpful over the next two-plus months. This is more on line with what I am trying to say. Strawboss took one approach -- segment by segment -- and broke down what he perceived to be favorable matchups for each roster -- he did a great job, and I have no issues with what he presented, other than I do not think it is as objective as he claimed. His analysis may end up be correct -- I just took issue with his claim of objectivity. I think we are in for a dogfight. I would expect that the division lead could change hands a few times in the next few weeks. Another interesting thought in this with regard to pitching -- I tend to agree that the Cubs BP is inferior to ours -- but they are getting more IP out of their starters, so perhaps it can be a bit worse. Our BP has pitched more innings so it better had be good.

Offensively, Prince has been better than Lee this season. That's objectivity. Trying to add defense in the mix would make the list very subjective, First -- I am not so sure that adding defense makes things subjective. I think by just about any metric/scouting -- Lee is a better defensive player than Fielder Second -- I am not so sure that you can say Prince has been better offensively than Lee this year in an objective fashion -- Check this out. Prince has a higher OPS than Lee, this is a fact. In the same fashion, in July.... Brewers -- Cubs OPS: .721 -- .691 HR: 29 -- 8 TB: 306 -- 261 So, using your methodology, the Brewers have had a better July than the Cubs? -- Not so fast.. Runs: 87 -- 100 wins: 9 -- 14 Please keep in mind that the Cubs have played in one less game, but have scored 13 more runs than the Brewers in July. In a vacuum I would agree that the Brewers have had better offensive numbers, but I wouldn't be so quick to claim a higher OPS as objective as you may think. Your method tends to look at the stats and the roster as individual parts-- My method tends to look at the roster as a sum, and is more focused on results. Is one better? Hard to say. I am just pointing out that your method is probably not as objective as you think. There are a lot of data that OPS doesn't measure, perhaps Lee is a smarter/faster baserunner than Prince -- maybe he goes from 1st to 3rd on a single a lot more, making his contribution to the offense much better. Maybe the Cubs make better outs than the Brewers, less DPs, hitting the ball behind the runners -- perhaps the Cubs overall are smarter and faster baserunners. I tend to agree with Russ -- I think the Cubs and Brewers are pretty evenly matched.

I disagree with your 1st base assessment. I don't think Fielder is clearly better than Lee. Lee is a better average hitter and a better fielder, to boot. I call this even at best for the Brewers. I agree 100% with this. The difference that may exist in OPS is probably more than made up for on the field in D. Lee makes a lot of plays Prince can't. Plus Lee gets on base much better.

And the Royalty really came out a-head there. Ouch. I actually winced when I read that. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif Peasants want their pie though. I'm sure Ned Yost likes cake -- probably Carrot Cake -- or some sort of cake with vegetables in it. or maybe even fruit cake. That's really the clinching argument though -- everyone likes fruit pie, no one likes fruitcake. We have really steered the vent thread off-course. Sorry about that. I'm going to go home and kick the dog for the Brewers loss today. I'd kick the cats, but they are too fast for me.

Retired: Jack Lazorko Current: Julian Tavarez

I am very disappointed in you FTJ. Join the club or get in line or take a number. You will know the line when you see my parents.... I usually enjoy your posts for their thoughtfulness and insight. Huh. you probably should raise that bar a little bit, if you are looking to my posts for thought or insight -- I am about on the same level as Larry King, or that seaweed guy on the infomercials. There is no band (I've ever heard of) called "Pie" whereas Cake is a screaming fun band. I am not aware of any bands named Pie. Cake's contribution to music will come and go, if it hasn't already. Pie's contribution to sexual innuendo will continue to entertain all until the endtimes. But no pie is greater than:Cheesecake, Chocolate Cheesecake, Chocolate Cherry Cake, Black Forest Tort Speaking strictly to the sciences... Cheese Pie > Cheese Cake Chocolate Cherry Pie > Chocolate Cherry Cake Black Forest Pie > Black Forest Cake. etc. Nobody says, "you can't have your pie and eat it too". Thats because you can have your pie and eat it too. If Pie is so great than why didn't Marie Antoinette let the peasants eat that? Well, duh -- Cake is for peasants, pie is for royalty. Why isn't an easy task a "piece of pie?" Because cake is easy. Pie requires much more. Why doesn't a rascally act "take the pie?" "rascally"? -- I am going to need you to stay on this side of the 19th century. You are clearly wrong. You are clearly insane. Your other posts however are pretty good. The ones I have the interns write aren't bad -- mine clearly suck. (The above could have been written in blue to show that I did not mean this as a call out to FTJ, but for effect, I did not write it in blue. And I apologize to the whole forum for not truly venting with this post.) I never post in blue -- I wouldn't expect you to either. Blueberry Pie...... mmmmmm.....http://www.ageslibrary.com/temp/Jasper_blueberries_05.jpg

Happy Birthday Brian! Best Wishes!

Pie > Cake

Bucky Harris died on his birthday --- I suppose that would be worse. I wonder what is the proper thing to do with gifts? -- Do you let the estate keep them or to you just take them back?

In baseball, if you're not in first then they are as bad as they appear to be--period. The Wildcard says hello

I was 2nd at state. I won the Golden Trough Invitational

I mean, when will people learn that things aren't as good as when they're going their best, and not as bad as it is when it's going it's worst? I think at the end of the day -- some people are hardwired to be optimistic and some are set up to be pessimistic. I don't think it should be expected that tigers are going to change their stripes.

Could it be that we're still in first place and have 60 games left to play? That is certainly one way to look at it. However I think the point Valpo is trying to make, is that the way things are currently trending, and the Brewers track record, it is not unreasonable at all to conclude that the Brewers are in trouble. Now I think had the Brewers and the Cubs won games at their current clip all season, people would now probably be on a more even keel. I think though with the peaks and valleys that both teams have had this year, some people are thinking more in trends of peaks and valleys and not in a more even distribution of wins and losses, which can be very disheartening.

Ryan Braun's season this year reminds me a lot of Fred Lynn's with the exception that Lynn was probably one of the best OFers in the game as well. The Red Sox had a pretty special young OF with Lynn, Rice and Evans.

And this manager is not Buck Rodgers. Right, Buck Rogers actually had winning records in MTL and MIL -- He is not Bamberger or Harvey either -- he is probably more like Alex Grammas.

Sheets won't be back until September.... August & the remainder of July are crucial as well. Yes -- and Sheets may be out even longer, in that regard the trade makes sense, I have pointed that out earlier. FTJ you are way too smart to make such a poor statement as that. Studies show I am not that smart and make poor statements almost hourly. By any metric you want Linbebrink's been one of the top setup men in baseball the last several years. I will chose WHiP 2007 or K/BB 2007. I guess I see Linebrink regressing, I am not sure the last several years apply here. There are a bunch of setup guys better than Linebrink Wise and Tbow -- of course many are probably not available. I still think Linebrink has very little to do with whether or not the Brewers make the playoffs. Agreed 100% and we're going to get some nice draft picks when he walks. Unless he sucks and choses arby. Thatcher has been excellent in AAA, but I think we all know that it doesn't guarantee major league success (see Balfour, Grant). Balfour hadn't pitched in MLB since 2004, and has only pitched in 3 innings -- I really don't think that we should use this as evidence.

What does losing Sheets have to do with acquiring one of the best set-up men in all of baseball? Well -- First, Sheets coming back pushes Yo to the pen -- Who is pitching as well as anyone. I would assume Yo would pitch in games where set-up pitchers would be used, i.e. non-mop-up situations. Secondly -- I do not see Linebrink as one of the best setup guys in baseball. Spurling is a mop-up, innings-eater pitcher with less than stellar 'stuff.' Absolutely -- which is why it makes sense for him to pitch in mop-up situations, not Linebrink, Wise, Yo or Tbow. We're talking about shoring up the backend of the bullpen Why? -- so we can hold a team in a 8-0 game from scoring more runs? and giving us insurance in case Turnbow melts down I do not subscribe to the Turnbow "melt-down" theory. Everyone knew that we needed to gain more reliable arms to get us to Coco in the 9th. I guess I don't see Linebrink as an upgrade to either Wise or Tbow -- perhaps he is incrementally better, I doubt it will translate into wins. If you want to say we upgraded Tbow and Wise -- fine. However, I think we did so in a small fashion (if at all) and it cost us 3 arms to do so. We have too many pitchers who don't take us beyond the 5th inning of games and I don't know about you, but I sure feel more at ease with Linebrink helping out Wise and Turnbow to get some holds as the 6th, 7th, 8th inning guys if need-be from now until the end. I can buy into the idea that Yost is bad at managing his BP -- heck, I have purchased that concept a long time ago. If DM thinks that Yost will continue to misuse pitchers, then I suspect this trade makes sense. If mop-up pitchers are going to be used in high-leverage situations, -- then I suppose they better be good pitchers. In this light I can see wisdom in this trade.

If you think July 8 was a colossal blunder, then you must be convinced that Ned was screwing up on purpose last night If I thought he was that capable, to screw up on purpose, maybe you would be right. I thought on July 8th he was trying to screw up the rest of the season though. To each his own I suppose, I vented about it on firenedyost -- so I feel somewhat vindicated. -- I am petty in that regard.

He sure isn't what he used to be and he sure isn't average this season. The Cardinals had a much better D than we currently do... Plus that lineup that Yost threw out there, probably didn't help Suppan's chance of winning much either.