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
-
Impressions of Roenicke so far (part 1)
rluzinski replied to adambr2's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
I agree that they have been more exciting. Unfortunately, I don't think more exciting equals more wins. RR takes much more risk than the possible reward justifies, IMO. If I have to adjust the curve to make the current average MLB manager be a C, RR is a D. I think the the average MLB manager kinda sucks though, so there you have it! -
Greinke Really Does Get Stronger as Game Goes On?
rluzinski replied to rluzinski's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
My whole point is that for the vast majority of pitchers, you don't know if they are "on" just based off of the results. Most likely, they will have much poorer results than in the start of the game. -
I agree that the Brewers had the element of surprise, so any half way reasonable bunt would have scored Braun. I also think that "terrible" is probably too strong of a word to use. The two scenarios I believe that make the suicide squeeze to a poor strategy in general is: 1. Fouled bunt. It adds a strike to the batter, which dramatically shifts the probability of the AB ending poorly for the batter. I believe this occurs fairly often. 2. Missed foul attempt. Very good chance that the runner at 3B is out. Even if this only occurs 5% of the time, it really makes the suicide squeeze look bad. With the bases loaded and one out in the bottom of the 9th, the Brewer win the game about 5 out of 6 times without the suicide squeeze. I dunno... Plus now RR will just remember that play when he's trying to justify making the 100th out at home plate in mid August. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif
-
Love the results, hate the call.
-
The left side of that infield is a black hole.
-
You know how it is, if you don't touch it, it's not an error. "Kotsay only played because of injuries. Part of being liked in the clubhouse and having players want to play for you is rewarding guys for doing what you want them to do. Gomez did what RR wanted him to do in Spring Training, and he was rewarded by batting in the 2 spot. When the results didn't follow, and his approach changed, he was moved down in the order/was benched. Kotsay played over Morgan during the first couple of weeks because Kotsay was with the club all Spring and Morgan joined the team a day or to before the season. It makes sense that Kotsay would get playing time over Morgan early in order to develop a good team atmosphere. It's not like the discrepancy between them was so great as to make much of a difference for a couple of games anyway. Now that Morgan has paid his dues and his healthy, I don't think you'll see Kotsay in center again." I'd rather RR just play the best players and so would a lot of other people.
-
This is what running Ron wants. We could have just rehired Royster if this what Melvin wanted.
-
How about this for a Sunday, "give up" lineup: Weeks 2B Counsell 3B Braun LF Hart RF Kotsay CF Rivera 1B Wilson SS Nieves C SP
-
4 of the Brewers 13 positional players have a projected OBP of .300 or less. 46% of the position players are shortstops or catchers. I'm sure there's a master plan somewhere in there.
-
Well of course. The farther you get from an average situation, the less that chart represents your particular situation. The Book DID attempt to look at the more favorable situations for a sac bunt and still found it to be a relatively poor choice. Now if Betancourt tries to bunt when the defense isn't ready and has a shot of a hit, that changes things dramatically.
-
The lineup optimizer at baseballmusings is junk. It's based on a study that took the weighted value of BA (I think), OBP and SLG at each batting position in an average lineup. This tool suggests that you can make a non-traditional lineup and those weights are still all the same. Not even close. This simulator is much better: http://lineupsimulator.com/FAQ.aspx
-
Russ, Do you have any advanced simulators in excel or are you just creating simple-ish ones?I have a lot of simple ones and one that I have probably 200 hours into. It's not a full game simulator, however. Using a monte carlo approach, it's relatively easy to make a spreadsheet that you could enter batting lines for everyone in the order and it could spit out average runs scored/game. It will assume an average starting pitcher, average park, average base advancements on a hit, etc. It would miss a lot of the nuances of the sport but should give you a good idea of how to create an optimal batting order.
-
You are making a big mistake with this analysis, yes the AVERAGE runs scored decreases, but the chances for scoring 1 run increases. I was asked to comment on run expectancy (average runs scored), so that's what I did. If you want to frame the question around playing for 1 run.... Chance of scoring exactly 1 run... Your goal is to score AT LEAST 1 run, not EXACTLY 1 run. Odds of scoring at least 1 run: 1B/0 out: 43.7% 2B/1 out: 40.6% Obviously, that is not the beginning and end of the analysis. Inside The Book has an entire chapter devoted to bunting: http://www.amazon.com/Boo...ks&qid=1306444962&sr=8-1 Click on the "look inside" link and search bunt. It's been awhile but I thought they concluded that letting anyone straight sacrifice (defense knows it's coming) other than a pitcher is generally a bad idea. They also concluded that attempting to bunt for a base hit with a runner at first CAN be a good move. The other thing worth noting is that there really aren't too many options where playing for 1 run is generally the best move. I haven't looked at it closely but I'm pretty sure RR's first inning sacrifices is bad strategy.
-
Yeah but that is their overall projection. If Morgan faces almost exclusively or mostly RHP he will hit better than that. Off the top of my head I believe Morgan's OBP was about .350 vs RHP and .300 vs LHP and he was hitting LHP as well as Gomez was, or close to it.I listed their overall numbers as evidence that they should be strictly platooned. One batter would have to have a significantly higher projection to justify giving him AB's against same handed pitchers. As for personal splits, Morgan only has 253 career AB against lefties: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=morgany01&year=Career&t=b#plato Much too small of a sample to be useful at all.
-
Greinke Really Does Get Stronger as Game Goes On?
rluzinski posted a topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
It's somewhat of a baseball cliche when an announcer says that a starting pitcher is getting stronger as the game goes on. On average, starting pitchers perform substantially worse as they work through the order a second or third time. Sure, there are times when the results get better in the later innings of a particular game but we generally aren't going to expect that. We can see that just from looking at league splits: http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/split.cgi?t=p&lg=NL&year=2010#times And that's going to understate the effect, as only the better starting pitchers typically get to face a batter a third and (especially) the 4th time. There are exceptions though: "Some pitchers, like Zack Greinke, who expertly mixes his pitches, seemingly get more effective as the game goes on. Some, like CC Sabathia, who maintains his velocity throughout, show no observed split." I noticed Greinke's unusual split yesterday when I wanted to provide evidence for why I thought he should be pinch hit for (I still think he should have been http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif ): http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=greinza01&year=Career&t=p#times I don't know how statistically significant that is but we aren't talking about 100 PA either. It's interesting to speculate on WHY Greinke might break the mold. -
The "1B/0 outs" state includes any subsequent "2B/1 out" situations but not the other way around (can get any base state at any time but cant subtract outs). This gives us the average runs scored after reaching a particular base/out state: http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902.html (1) 1B/0 out: .95 runs(2) 2B/1 out: .73 runs When talking about a straight sacrifice attempt, the fact that some managers choose base/state (2) after being in base/state (1) only serves to bring DOWN the average runs scored in 1. Studies suggest that a straight sacrifice bunt should only be attempted by pitchers and I believe even a 1 out sacrifice attempt has questionable value. Of course, that doesn't mean a batter should never attempt a generic bunt. There are a number of base/states beyond (2) above that can result from a bunt: (3) 1B/1 out (runner out at second)(4) Empty/2 out (double play)(5) 1B,2B/0 out (bunt hit or error)(6) 3B.2B/0 out (ball thrown away on out attempt) If a bunter is good enough, he can make (5) and (6) occur often enough to make the bunt attempt a good choice. And just the threat of a bunt might force the defense to align sub-optimally for a non-bunt attempt. It can all get very complicated but a manager has to have SOME idea about all of this before he can make an educated decision.
-
"K rate was the tip of the iceberg - and it is not invalid, hardball times recently did an article about incorporating k rate into wOBA " You mean this one: "As you'll see here, the difference is incredibly small. So really, it's not a big deal to ignore strikeouts when using a context-neutral method like linear weights and wOBA. But it can be done. When all is said and done, we're talking about a run or two of difference." http://www.hardballtimes....ain/blog_set/2011/04/23/ It's a blog post, where the guy wanted basically to see how small the K rate component was. There are probably half a dozen other things you could include into wOBA if you wanted to (and nothing is stopping anyone from adding them). It's not a "flaw" that they are omitted in the original incarnation of wOBA; it was a conscious decision by its creator. "Don't get my wrong, overall it is a good tool when evaluating players but bottom line is wOBA is not all encompassing and I'll stick to my original point, there is no reason to use a single stat when comparing 2 players when we don't have to" There is a GREAT reason to. Brevity. You can save a lot of time and still get a darn good feel for what player is more valuable offensively.
-
I love Morgan's great start but let's not overestimate his offensive value because of it. ROS ZiPS projections: Morgan: .272/.331/.357 Gomez: .243/.300/.350 Both are excellent defenders, so I would just go with a straight platoon. What do I THINK is going to happen? I have given up trying to anticipate RR.
-
What I'm saying is it's speculation whether batting #8 actually hurt Hardy's production is speculation, whether he attributed it to it or not. I'm sure you will disagree and that so we'll have to agree to disagree.
-
There's just is no good reason to assume causation. With what you are suggesting, Braun is in big trouble next year. There have been a number of studies that looked at production as a function of BOP. The problem of course is that it doesn't matter what studies show... if the player believes he won't be successful batting in a certain spot in the order, he won't be, it's a self fulfilling prophecy. Like Hardy with the 8 hole... I agree, if the player wills himself to not play well in certain circumstances, he... won't play well. Of course, we'll never know who they are. Your claim about Hardy is 100% speculation.
-
"I get it, your a big wOBA fan, but I'm pretty sure we aren't talking about wOBA anymore but rather the value of a K vs a ball in play for an out." You criticized wOBA because it doesn't take into account K rate. I am pointing out why that is an invalid criticism. Same goes for productive outs. The fact is, wOBA will take into account anything that is tied to the skill of a batter and has value (in terms of runs created). For instance, it takes into account RBOE (reached base on error) because studies have found a meaningful correlation between the speed of a batter and error rates. Reaching base is a skill and has real value, so it is accounted for. K rate is a skill but because its value is basically equal to a ball-in-play out, they are all just considered outs. There are times when a productive out can win a game but the average productive out reduces run production AND win probability. This stuff is not being ignored as a result of ignorance or spite. Also, keep in mind that that wOBA is context neutral stat. It does not take into account what the state of the game was at the time of production by design. If you want to know the actual impact of the production in terms of winning games, you can use WPA or WPA/LI (both can be found at Fangraphs.com).
-
Well Ryan Braun would also be raking from the 8 spot, just less RBI and runs scored Perhaps. Perhaps not. Twice now, Braun and Fielder have been switched in the lineup and both times, they both fell off dramatically. There's just is no good reason to assume causation. With what you are suggesting, Braun is in big trouble next year. There have been a number of studies that looked at production as a function of BOP. If there is a effect, they couldn't find it (beyond IBB, which isn't necessarily a bad thing). When Prince leaves, I will expect Braun's IBB to go up but will not expect any other change in production. That said, I have to see a lot more of Lucroy before I'll be screaming to move him into the 2 or 5 spot. With either Gomez or Bentancourt in the lineup, he shouldn't be batting 8, IMO.
-
Axe may very well have let RR know his arm was getting tired.
-
Come on Hawkins. Limit it to 1 run. I agree, I think people are/were expecting a Sabathia type performance out of him, which isn't realistic. I think he's been fun to watch for the most part so far. I think fans were expecting better than a 6 ERA from the guy who won the AL Cy Young two years ago. Once he gets back to a respectable ERA I think people will appreciate him. Well of course. I was just referring to today's start and really anytime he starts. He's going to have his share of games where he gives up 3 or more runs. In the long run, that should be offset by some dominating starts as well.
-
I always find it interesting that the 100+ pitch count numbers are the best. The book also tries to address why the trend is reversed but there is no solid explanation. I always thought that the only time guys pitch that deep into games is when they have their best stuff It's been awhile since I have read that chapter. I do recall that they could find no evidence that early domination or struggles changed the performance expectation going forward. Of course, lack of evidence does not prove the negative, so I guess it is an open question. Did they look at the KINDS of pitchers that are allowed to go 100 pitches more often?