rluzinski
-
Posts
9,362 -
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 rluzinski
-
I love that it's not the traditional crappy offset view (Milwaukee has one of the worst). You can actually see where the ball crosses home plate. I realize the pitcher partially obscures the strike zone during the wind up but there is usually a clear view after the delivery. I'll take that over having to guess if an outside pitch really was a strike. Brewers' view ranked 26th here: http://www.fangraphs.com/not/index.php/ranking-baseballs-center-field-camera-shots/ Cardinals' is ranked 4th.
-
Pretend a team just switches their crappy 8 and solid 5 hitter around in the order. The 4 hitter is now "unprotected". His runs scored are going to go down for obvious reasons. His RBI's will also go down a bit because of intentional walks. In most cases, though, those intentional walks actually increase expected runs scored vs facing him Yeh, you don't have your better batters bunched up, so that hurts run production. But protection isn't about optimizing batter order, its about not having a good batter to put after your slugger to begin with. Long story short, your unprotected batter will produce less runs (R + RBI -HR) but your team might actually score more runs because the average IBB increases expected runs scored. Yes, there are specific situations where those IBB will hurt you. For instance, if it's the bottom of the 9th with 2 out and your team is down 1 with runners on 3rd and 2nd, the IBB will lower your odds of winning. As you pointed out, that isn't going to hurt the batter's rate states, though.
-
They've beaten plenty of good teams, just not at the same rate as the poorer teams. Funny how that works.
-
Need a recommendation for a restaurant in Milwaukee
rluzinski replied to Harry Doyles JD's topic in Off-Topic Forum
I like Bar Louie's outdoor area when it's nice out: http://www.barlouieamerica.com/locations/Water-Street.aspx -
It's hard to argue that a player that is surrounded by good players won't contribute to winning more games. Again, not sure what that has to do with the classic definition of protection.
-
I don't think that is true. The distribution of player talent in any sport is something like a bell curve, with the distribution of talent in MLB on the extreme end of one tail. You end up with a kind of pyramid shaped distribution. If what you are suggesting is true, there would be a glut of above average (but not elite) MLB players being consistently underpaid and/or overpaid. That would represent a major market inefficiency that could be exploited by other clubs.
-
Weeks's bad half season turned his contract from great to good, going forward: Preseason ZiPS projection: .260/.350/.460/.810 Current Projection: .241/.342/.425/.767 League Ave 2B: .260/.320/.390/.710 I am presuming Weeks is an average defender (even if that might not be true this year). Many fans have been predicting the demise of Hart and Weeks for years. Unfortunately, a few of them are still searching for an "I told you so" on the matter. It's OK to be wrong about a player; we all are often enough.
-
Lock. Total lock. Done deal. 2 weeks ago. Yeah how is Olt still on the Rangers I thought he was on the Marlins? When did Olt get traded back to the Rangers? Someone must have missed a tweet. Only way I get my information.
-
That is the correct answer.
-
I have pointed this out to you about once a year for a decade. You have it completely backwards as you always do. He got the money because he proved himself to be consistently good. That's why guys who got paid get big ropes. Sometimes those guys still play themselves out of the league but the odds are much better that they rebound.
-
If Micheal Phelps were on the team, he'd be the most gifted athlete on the team. That doesn't mean that I would want him batting in front of Braun. I want guys getting on base in front of Braun. Everything else is secondary. Gomez is an excellent base runner but he also runs into some foolish outs on occasion. Based on interviews this year, I never really got the impression that Weeks lost his confidence. Frustrated at times? Sure. But he might be the most even keeled guy on the team. It just seems like the average professional athlete has unshakable confidence, to the point of delusion (which annoys fans from time to time). It's simply a defensive measure that protects them from the ups and downs of a typical season. Guys like Jeff Cirillo were/are hard on themselves about their poor play. I believe that probably isn't a good thing.
-
I still think the Byzantines will be the favorite in 1013. While I was fixing that, I KNEW it wouldn't be in time to avoid being quoted.
-
How about 450+ official AB's? He can lose a bunch of starts and still reach that. If I win, you can send the $50 here: http://www.alz.org/ Feeling pretty good about this bet right now. FTFY. Since June 14th: .280/.365/.507/.871 This is why GM's can't afford to over react with proven talent. It was a distinct possibility that Weeks could have continued to struggle for the rest of the year. The odds said that it wasn't going to happen, though. The reality is, more often than not, players bounce back. Even his overall line is starting to look reasonable: Current Line: .212/.330/.377/.708 He's going to still have a down year but a strong finish bodes well for 2013.
-
I would agree with you if we were talking about the difference between 1 and 6 but 10 and 16 matters little, no?
-
That 90% success rate is a rough estimate based on maximizing runs in an average base-out situation with a man on 3rd. There are very limited instances were a manager can justify only playing for 1 run. At the very least it better be the 7th inning or later. RR will do it in a 0-0 game in the first inning, in contrast. Also, RR will try squeezes with no out, and with 2 or even 3 runners on! Run expectancy is greater than 1 in those cases, so you should almost never attempt a squeeze unless you truly only need 1 run (it wins the game). The best time to try a suicide squeeze is in the bottom of an inning in a tie game, where a run ends it. There should be a runner at 3rd with 1 out and the defense should not be expecting a suicide squeeze attempt. Also, the batter would be a terrible hitter but a great bunter. If that represented something even CLOSE to the kind of situation that RR typically employs the squeeze strategy, I would have nothing to complain about. In a perfectly average situation, here is the average of scoring at least 1 run: Man on 3rd, no out:86% Man on 3rd, 1 out: 66%
-
What does sample size have to do with anything? I'm not suggesting that if the Brewers attempted 10,000 more squeezes, they would continue to succeed 83% of the time (or whatever the real number is). I am only saying that it has been a losing strategy this year based off the actual results.
-
The Brewers have now scored as many runs as they have given up and will be at 8 games under after this win. Ouch. How many times has the runner at third taken off, with the batter not even offering at the pitch? At least once. Whatever they are reporting is misleading at the very least. With the failed attempt today, you have to put the real numbers at something like 10-15? If that's right, that's embarrassing.
-
Nice to see Weeks' OPS above .700. I'm glad RR didn't do something stupid like regularly sitting Weeks earlier in the season. So another failed squeeze attempt today? 1. I swear there have been at least 3 botched squeeze plays 2. An 83% success rate does not make it a worthwhile strategy. Everyone but RR seems understand that it has to be above 90% on average.
-
I find it hard to believe that he has "a lot more value" at 1B. It's a popular theory right now but the facts suggest otherwise. Defensive studies show that the average defender gains no value by moving down the defensive spectrum. He typically plays better at that position but that performance is worth less at the easier position. Same effect from moving up the defensive spectrum. On average, it's a wash. Hart's defensive skill set might make him a natural first basemen (and I believe that to be true myself), but I still don't think that results in anything but a modest gain in value. Defense at first base just isn't worth as much as at other positions. That why when you are trying to minimize the effects of having a poor defender in the lineup, you typically put him at 1B. It's the last stop before DH.
-
The entire boards is criticism about things we "technically" don't know about. It's OK for someone to not like a Brewers player and still be a Brewers fan. Trust me, read the boards, there are plenty. Heck, there are guys who hate on players who have done a lot more for the Brewers than that scrub has. Down boy... DOWN! The issue is not liking or disliking a player. The issue is personal attacks of players based on speculation, rumor and hearsay. It's tabloid-esque and i believe that Brewerfan.net strives to be above that.
-
Why do people post this kind of nonsense on these boards? There are any number of message boards you can post this stuff on and you will have plenty of guys responding with, "Yeh! He's lazy and dumb and doesn't want it enough!" Go there.
-
That is evidence of the idiocy of sports media, nothing more. What does that even mean? Everyone on the 25 man roster? Certain players? How can they tell? Let me guess, the Brewers haven't been winning games lately so they "obviously" quit. It's embarrassing.
-
Ramirez's contract now has negative value (it was very backloaded). I would trade him for nothing. Hart is worth what he's getting paid.
-
It's a simplification of course but I'm just trying to suggest a basic framework for starting off these kind of discussions. Most of the media and baseball fans seem content on skipping the analysis portion and just start fabricating trades. Then someone says that trade is silly/unrealistic and proposes another trade that inevitably gets shot down. No one can convince anyone they are right or wrong because there is little provided to argue for or against. To have a possibly more fruitful discussion, I am just suggesting to first attempt to estimate what the net market value of a player under contract is and THEN talk about the specifics of a particular trade proposal. Someone thinks WAR is stupid? Use some other way to estimate value. But not to even mention the contracts these guys are under when proposing trades kind of misses what should be at the center of discussion, IMO. Now if you will excuse me, I will scurry back to the major league forum, before I get tarred and feathered!
-
I haven't read the whole thread but has anyone even attempted to estimate the net value of Gallardo's current contract? That is the first thing that we should in these kind of discussions. Not to beat it to death but great players are worth nothing in a trade if they are being paid like a great player. What is he, a 3.75 ERA pitcher that we can pencil in for around 185 IP/year? Makes him worth around 3.0-3.5 WAR. Assuming $4.5 mil/win, that gives us a value of around $13.5 - $16 mil/year. Let's call it $14.5 mil for discussion purposes. Here is what the Brewers are on the hook for: 2013: $7.75 mil 2014: $11.25 mil 2015: $13 mil club option with $.6 mil buyout That gives a net value of Gallardo's contract of something like $11.5 mil (assuming his option is picked up). Great contract for the Brewers.