Jump to content
Want to get your head around free agents the WORLD CHAMPION Brewers can spend on this winter? Click here and check out our top 75 free agents ranking! ×
Brewer Fanatic

rluzinski

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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

  1. rluzinski
    I have to remember to take that into account when I draft my FBB team... http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif Considering that it's not even true, I wouldn't do that if I were you. For every example a person can throw out proving the "contract year" myth, I can throw out a counter-example. If Sheets is going to have a good year, it's because he stayed healthy.
  2. rluzinski
    while 2 games is practically nothing, it is the difference between playing in the playoffs and watching the playoffs. 2 games is huge That has nothing to do with why it was even brought up in this thread. When you are trying to use season win totals to say team A had more talent than team B because team A won 2 more games, you are fooling yourself. That difference is pretty insignificant. The fact that one AB accounts for the difference in win totals is a perfect illustration of that. It really tells us very little with respect to what team cumulatively had more talent. The other problem with using team win totals from the previous year and then looking at personnel changes is that such an approach assumes that the players that haven't changed have the exact same performance expectations as the previous year. If team A and team B both had 81 wins but the average age of team A was 25 and the average age of team B was 33, that needs to be considered.
  3. rluzinski
    I watched the episode with three other Lost fans and I think this season has been awesome but I thought last night's episode was the worst episode I've ever seen, regardless of the season That's funny because, while being pretty down on the series as a whole lately, I mostly enjoyed last night's episode. It was a lot more sci fi adventure, which I suspect doesn't appeal to the average Lost fan (I could be completely wrong). The part I hated, though, was when Faraday was trying to justify the need for Desmond to find a "constant" and relating it to the constant in algebra. Yeh, OK, that makes so much sense. I realize it's simply a plot device but it should be justified somehow. I did like how there wasn't two Desmonds, only the single Desmond going back and forth. I don't understand why the default Desmond was the 1996(?) one, however. The gentlemen on the boat with the same affliction seemed to be the present version of himself (if that makes any sense). Did I miss something?
  4. rluzinski
    I have no problem with people thinking the Cubs are the favorites in the NL Central because they are. Most projections I've seen have them beating out the Brewers by 2 or 3 wins. What gets me is when they pretend that the Cubs should be expected to win the Central by 10+ games. That just sin't realistic. The Brewers and Cubs are pretty close in talent.
  5. rluzinski
    Why is it that in every other sport, managers/coaches who come up with new and innovative strategies are praised but in baseball they are almost automatically labeled fools? Even if we pretend that all baseball strategies were perfected 90 years ago (which is pretty much an impossibility), why should we assume that they are still optimal in today's game?
  6. rluzinski
    I'm baffled as to why Yost would want to "fix" what isn't broken. Unless the Brewers had won the World Series last year, it's hard to pretend that last year's performance in any area was good enough. If shifting around the lineup could give the offense extra runs, I don't see why you shouldn't do it. The tradational lineup isn't a bad one but it's most likely not the optimal one. Here's an article on the subject (if it hasn't been posted somewhere else already): http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=363160 I don't think think it's worth the hassle of moving the pitcher for a couple extra runs in a season but the typical #2 and #3 hitter doesn't fit very well where they are tradationally put. The fact that the average #2 hitter isn't a very good hitter overall should suggest that managers might want to rethink their batting orders. That move is more common sense than anything else. As for protection, it's always talked about as if it has a huge effect but there simply is no evidence that. Most likely, the effect is quite small. For every example of protection proving itself, you can find examples of the opposite occuring.
  7. rluzinski
    I was very happy to see Melvin willing to own up to prior mistakes and move Braun and Hall from their 2007 defensive positions. Cameron was an OK signing but there wasn't much to choose from in CF in the free agent market. Melvin spent a lot of money on a suspect bullpen, though, so that's a check mark against him, IMO. He also hasn't been able to turn any of his excess arms into anything (yet). It's so hard try and compare GMs to each other. I'd rather they just try and summarize the off season moves and let the reader decide who did better.
  8. rluzinski
    I think he has a better chance at 30 SB than 30 HRs.
  9. rluzinski
    I don't think it's worth the hassle of moving the pitcher to the 8 spot for around 2 runs. I do like putting one of your best hitters in the 2 spot, though.
  10. rluzinski
    I guess what I find appealing about this program is that it takes only a few minutes to throw something together and see what it does. I made a pitching machine and took some batting practice! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif
  11. rluzinski
    Free download right here: http://www.acc.umu.se/~emilk/ Let's see some baseball themed creations!
  12. rluzinski
    It's a neat site. Guess who won the coveted Golden Sledeghammer award last year?
  13. rluzinski
    I think we should start including positional player's win/loss record in our analysis of his performance.
  14. rluzinski
    If people are saying that win totals are important with respect to what it says about durability, just look at IP. What we are really talking about is win% and what it says about a starting pitchers' overall performance. While it's obvious that a starting pitcher has a great deal of influence over whether his team is going to win a particular game, it's also obvious that there are many factors outside of his control. Now, for a starting pitcher with 1000+ innings, his win/loss record can generally represent career performance pretty well. But if you are talking about a win/loss record over a single season, there are many better ways to judge performance. The same goes for a pitcher who's gotten especially good or bad run support over his career. None of this takes sabermetrics to prove. Just common sense.
  15. rluzinski
    I'm pretty sure that even Branyan's fans don't want to see anything more than a few ABs from him at the major league level. His Marcel projection is .237/.337/.452/.789, so I'd be fine with him in some kind of bench role. As a pinch hitter, I'd take his projection over Counsell's (.244/.331/.350/.681).
  16. rluzinski
    If Sheets had even gotten average run support in 2004, he probably would have been a 20 game winner. Of course, why would that have any effect on his expected performance in 2008, anyway? If Stone was really referring to Sheets' injuries over the last 3 years, fine. Anything else and it's just the same old "analysis" I've learned to just ignore. Also, predicting in February that any team will run away with any division race is pure fantasy. To me, a run away race is something like a 10+ game lead. Does he expect the Cubs to win 95 games or something?
  17. rluzinski
    Trying to gauge a GM's performance, relative to his peers, is very difficult, since each GM is working under drastically different circumstances. What you definitely don't do, is just look at wins and titles. I think Melvin has done an excellent job getting the Brewers back to respectability without much money. I'd be comfortable with labeling him as an above average GM. It's the next three or four years that's going to prove whether he deserves to be mentioned as one of the best, however. He was given time to develop his own players and now he's being given a reasonable payroll.
  18. rluzinski
    Why would a macro be more desirable than doing it with a function?
  19. rluzinski
    If this is the price increase for being 4 games over .500 for the first time in almost two decades, The Brewers aren't setting prices based on what the franchise did 10 or 20 years ago. When the Brewers were bad, their prices were low: http://www.teammarketing.com/fci.cfm?page=fci_mlb2006.cfm Times have changed. Vegas odds have the Brewers' at 85 wins for 08. Fans know that the Brewers are better, so demand and prices have gone up accordingly. Just be happy that the Brewers play in a small market. That fact will keep Brewer costs much more reasonable, compared to a big market club (less demand!). You want to believe that professional teams have to earn the right to raise their prices. That just isn't reality.
  20. rluzinski
    The greatest irony in the world would be Cappy having a nice April and people calling him the team's new ace. Why not?
  21. rluzinski
    This assumes that the first and last name is separated by a space and there are no other spaces. Also, if the last name is greater than 10 characters, it will only return the first 10. The name is in the A1 cell: =CONCATENATE(MID(A1,FIND(" ",A1,1)+1,10),", ",LEFT(A1,FIND(" ",A1,1)-1)) As always, there is probably a better way to do this.
  22. rluzinski
    I'd like to point out that while driving to the gas station (5 minute drive) I was treated to a Nickelback song. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif
  23. rluzinski
    Don't get me wrong, I was all for the stadium tax because I want MLB in the city, but again, this isn't a business we're talking about. The goal of a business is to maximize profits and expand, the goal of a sports franchise is, or should be, to win. It's a business that received a subsidy with no strings attached. Mark A and company will continue to do what they think will maximize their profits. Luckily for us fans, that usually involves improving their product by being as successful on the field as possible.
  24. rluzinski
    Like any other business, if you don't like their product for the price they are offering it, don't buy it. While I'd obviously prefer the prices stay low, I'm not going to try and villanize a company for trying to maximize profits. The product they are offering continues to gain value and we all know it.
  25. rluzinski
    If I am reading the chart right, a sac bunt increases your chances of scoring one run from 17.6% to 23%, but at the same time decreases your overall chances of scoring runs from 43.7% to 40.6%. Yes you are. That's why I always just look at the chance of scoring at least 1 run. Alll managers usually end up doing with small ball strategy is shift the chances of scoring multiple runs to a 0 and 1 run inning. But again, we are talking about a traditional sacrifice bunt attempt. Catch the defense off guard and a sac bunt attempt also has a reasonable chance to turn into 1st and 2nd and no out. That's why you shouldn't take it out of the bag o' tricks completely. The less a team uses it, the less the opposition guards against it and the more valuable an attempt is.
×
×
  • Create New...