rluzinski

I have no problem with a manager jogging out to find out if a pitcher is fatigued.

It seems like Yost and Maddux is always telling their pitchers to stop nibbling and throw a strike. Of course, to maximize the chance of a pitch being a strike, the pitcher has to basically throw a fastball down the middle. I've never been a big fan of mound visits to begin with. Why not just allow plate visits as well? Maybe Yost can explain the finer points of hitting to Prince, after he works the count to 2-2. What's the darn difference?

I have tickets for the game but I can bring a cooler full of beer and soda and throw in $10 for food for the wife and I.

I think by and large baseball hitters particularly the big swing lefties are so regimented in their approach that they are deathly afraid of changing for 1 AB for fear of messing themselves up for weeks afterward. I don't know what motivates them but I agree that they generally aren't interesting in changing their approach to combat a shift. The old, "hit it where they ain't" is a tall task for a batter. I think the majority of them are just trying to get solid contact and that's about it. As for disallowing certain shifts, there isn't a whole lot of strategy left to employ in the current HR era. Why would we want to simplify the game even more?

"It definitely is a factor that we started 24-10 and are 60-55 right now, because momentum is an enormous part of baseball." Powell just talked about this during the last game and seemed to have the same opinion I do. Teams are hot until they aren't. Then they slump until they start winning again. The last time the Brewers had a horrible stretch, they immediately went on to win 9 of 10. Other than the impact personnel changes have on a team, you aren't really going to see any kind of streaks that can't be explained by random chance. It would be more surprising if teams didn't have some bunching of wins and loses over a 162 game season. I use a crappy little simulator I wrote that guarantees that a team has the same chance of scoring x number of runs every game. You should see what kind of momentum they can build up at times!

Ned should publicly freak out and say the season is doomed. It would be the sign of a good manager and not only would his players appreciate it, more importantly, the fans would as well.

If the Cubs lose tomorrow, the Brewers will have gained a game and a half on them over the last week. Is that not crazy? Some might just say that illustrates how pathetic the NL Central really is, but does it really matter? The only reason the Brewers were expected to have any shot at the playoffs before the season started was because of how bad the Central was to begin with. Over the short term, I'd rather root for a slightly above average team that made the playoffs than for a better team that didn't.

The problem is other than Gallardo and Sheets the entire pitching staff likes to nibble instead of throwing strikes, that seems true with both C's behind the plate. It has nothing to do with what the pitchers "like" to do, IMO. Yo and Sheets has the ability to locate their pitches better than the rest. When fans get mad at a pitcher for nibbling, they sould really be mad that the pitcher has inferior command. And no, I don't think Estrada can be blamed for the pitching troubles of late. Blame him for having a mediocre stick and bad defense. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

Joe Dillon had a nice game!

I'm no expert but I'll share my thoughts: It is a literal "hitting machine" that allows Bonds to release his front arm on the same plane during every swing. It largely accounts for the seemingly magical consistency of every Bonds stroke. Reasonable theory but to matter-of-factly conclude that it "largely accounts" for anything without offering any actual evidence makes me question the author right off the bat. The locked arm forms a rigid front arm fulcrum that allows extraordinary, maximally efficient explosion of the levers of Bonds' wrists. The elbow itself does basically the same thing and I really picture how that produces a mechanical advantage anyway. Just like how a pitcher's throwing motion is a long kinematic chain, I would think you maximize bat velocity by maximizing the angular acceleration of each joint. Heck, wouldn't it better if a bater's elbow was double jointed, so he would use his triceps to add energy over a greater angle? When Bonds swings, the weight of the apparatus helps to seal his inner upper arm to his torso at impact. Thus "connected," he automatically hits the ball with the weight of his entire body - not just his arms - as average hitters ("extending") tend to do. I just can't see it working like that. Bonds has performed less well in Home Run Derbies than one might expect because he has no excuse to wear a "protector" facing a batting practice pitcher. As he tires, his front arm elbow tends to lift and he swings under the ball, producing towering pop flies or topspin liners that stay in the park. When the apparatus is worn, its weight keeps his elbow down and he drives the ball with backspin. That, or swinging 30 times in a row is different than swinging 4 times in an AB? Maybe he's right but it's nothing more than speculation. Bonds enjoys quicker access to the inside pitch than average hitters because his "assistant" - counter-intuitively - allows him to turn more rapidly. Everyone understands that skaters accelerate their spins by pulling their arms into their torsos, closer to their axes of rotation. When Bonds is confronted with an inside pitch, he spins like a skater because his upper front arm is "assistant"-sealed tightly against the side of his chest. Ignoring whether that's even analogous, isn't the goal to generate bat speed, not angular velocity? At impact, Bonds has additional mass (the weight of his "assistant") not available to the average hitter. The combined weight of "assistant" and bat is probably equal to the weight of the lumber wielded by Babe Ruth but with more manageable weight distribution. Reasonable theory, although adding weight at the elbow wouldn't help nearly as much as at the end of the bat, would it? I never played past little league and have never given much thought about the actual mechanics of a bat swing, so I could be way off on one or many of these comments. I don't completely understand the physics behind a batted ball. Does the bat spend a relatively short time in contact with the ball or does a batter add significant energy by driving through the ball? I guess I could at least try googling a popular mechanics article before spouting off. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif Overall, it just sounds like the author is trying awfully hard to overstate the advantage that the guard gives Bonds, however.

I find that his list goes from questionable to absurd very quickly. I'd be curious to think what another engineer thinks.

I just hate the MLB injury reports. They seem to be so inaccurate. At first, Yost says it was the best injury that Sheets could have and said he would miss a start. Then they said 1 to 2 weeks. Then they tell us two to 4 weeks. And then the next report was the current 4 to 6 weeks. About a week after his injury, we knew he'd be out until around early September but that it was hard to pin an exact date down. There's really nothing more to report, now. He's throwing with a splint and breaking up fights. I see little chance of him coming back. What information do you have that we all don't?

Until Sheets comes back, I'm afraid we are stuck with, "he knows how to pitch out of jams" Vargas.

Remember when two months convinced some that Vargas was good because he had a knack for getting out of jams? How did that small sample work out? I hated the Davis trade when it went down and I still hate it. Is Estrada and Vargas all Melvin could really get for Davis and Eveland?

Wow, that actually makes me feel better about this team. You'd assume a 4-4 record and the Brewers only have 2 less wins. To be fair, they've actually outperformed their expected record when you just look at runs scored and against.

It's this way in any sport I've seen usually. Young teams very often have difficulty on the road due to the mental aspect being vastly different. I know that's the theory but I've never seen any real evidence of that. It might be true but it might just by a myth, as far as I'm concerned. Obviously, if you have any evidence, I'd love to see it. I know some have pointed out young teams that have dominated on the road, so it's not an absolute rule. Otherwise, vet teams are probably better on the road on average because they are just plain better overall. It seems like a huge portion of the Brewers' road woes can be traced to Coco's insane home/road split. It doesn't explain it all but it certainly exaggerates the difference. I don't buy that it's a team-wide problem.

When a guy gets hurt enough to not even be able to finish running to a base, it's fair to assume that it's pretty serious.

I'm still enjoying the season as a whole but actually watching the games is getting tough to enjoy. I like nice tight games but it's also nice to have games that are in hand from beginning to end. When a 6-1 game is stressful, it's tough to let your guard down.

Offensively, a little worse than expected but not by much. His defense certainly adds to his value. Overall, I'd call him an average corner outfielder, which isn't bad considering his 2006 campaign.

When have the Brewers ever had good luck? You don't think luck played any part at in the 24-10 start?

Wise was warming up tonight when it was a close game, so I don't think he's going anywhere, anytime soon.

I doubt this amounts to much at all, Ajay. A little yelling in the dugout is not something that generally turns into anything bigger. They'll take care of it internally and that will most likely be the end of it. I don't see how the Brewers' emotional approach to the games has anything to do with their losing as of late. They aren't hooting and hollering because they aren't winning. To turn that around and say they aren't winning because they aren't showing emotion just doesn't make much sense, IMO. Fans like to see players get mad because it let's them know that the players want to win as much as the fans want them to. I have no reason to question their dedication, however. I don't want the batters swinging angry and I don't want the pitchers throwing angry. I want the players to remain confident and trust in their physical abilities to win games.

The 3 most likely pitchers to replace would be Suppan, Cappy, and Vargas. A team is wowed by his 5.0 ERA and Suppan waives his no trade clause?

The Brewers started off 24-10. Since then they are 34-40. So what team are they really? That team that played ridiculously well for 5 weeks or the team that has been below average in a below average division for 3 months? I'm not a big fan of looking at the season like that, as you can use selective end points to come to many different conclusions. For instance, it's just as valid to say that, since starting 34-30, the Brewers have gone, 24-21 over the last month and a half. The more objective approach, IMO, is to judge the Brewers on their entire year, where they've been good but nothing special. Will "good" be good enough to win the Central? With Sheets still out, I'd have to give the edge to the Cubs but I don't see anyone running away with it.