rluzinski

You thought the signing was good at the time, great. Just lease don't insult those who were against the signing by pretending the signing obviously looked good at the time. These boards were roughly split 50%/50% on the signing and the debate was very polarized. A lot of us were repulsed by Melvin's "Big game pitcher" rhetoric.

If Duncan really can perform magic on pitchers, he wouldn't be getting paid like a bench player.

There are a few valid concerns mixed in there (park factors are not perfect by any means, for instance) but most of the criticisms show a lack of understanding of the sabermetric principles involved. If I felt the person was open to new ideas, I would be happy to provide evidence. No amount of evidence can counter dogma, though.

He didn't say anything about a pocket protector or a mother's basement, so I'm not sure.

First, as disappointing as Hart has been the last couple of years, he is still worth millions of dollars to whatever team has his services. I doubt anyone reading this right now can say the same. FWIW, Fangraphs had his performance worth (in average free agent dollars), $3.2 mil last year and $4.6 mil the year before. If he was worth what a school teacher was worth to his employer, he wouldn't even be in the league. Second, a pre-free agent, arbitration eligible player doesn't have to improve to "deserve" more money the following year. Rule of thumb-wise, arby guys are paid something like 40%, 60% and 80% of their free agent value during their 3 arbitration seasons. Maybe Hart is just upset that he was paid only $400k for his great 2007 performance? Maximizing his earnings...it seems unlikely he's going to lose anything by not settling now, it seems the offer will still be there in a few days. Presuming he was subsequently offered something more than the Brewer's arbitration number (as all the rest were), doesn't he run the risk of losing that better offer?

I remember Jerry Royster had that philosophy.

I loved Yount's honesty. It's easy to act holier than though if you know you'll never be put in the situation yourself.

This year will be a contract year as well, so I'm sure he'll get another boost. Heck, if a team was smart, they would sign every player to 1 year deals, so they can get that 20% gain in performance.

There's a reasonable (20%-50%?) chance that Gamel doesn't stick at 3B. I don't know if they'd be willing to move him so soon, though. They seem committed to giving him a chance to develop defensively at 3B.

It seems like the people who think Cam isn't very good also thinks that CFers average an .800 OPS. Shouldn't you take the 5 seconds to look up what an average major league CF hits for before doing something like this? This kind of stuff is just a waste of time anyway. The goal is to win games. It doesn't matter how offensive production is distributed over a season.

Great defense. Terrible offense. If you like ball-in-play outs, you'll like him more than you probably should.

I think everyone realizes this, however I think it's up for debate how much to put on to those projections. They are just a good, unbiased statistical guess. I hope I've never sold them as anything more. I think educated brewer fans have a lot of information to add to those projections, however. Over the long haul, that added information is generally going to raise as many projections as they lower. We can guess that they are all underestimating the talent of the Brewers but that seems more like wishful think that anything else. Weeks, for example. If he hits like he did last season, there is no downgrade at 2nd. I imagine, however, the projections all have him hitting less. It was over 162 PA, so I think common sense suggests that Weeks shouldn't be expected to match those numbers. Hell, I'd say his projections might be too optimistic after you consider his injury (something projection systems don't do). Gomez is another one. Who honestly knows what we have in him. He is such a young player and has to this point not lived up to his talent. Projecting someone his age with his skill-set is extremely challenging.... The same holds true for Escobar. It's hard to take any stock into the projections because no one can really know how he'll perform offensively. I agree that a guy like Escobar is much tougher to project. I disagree about Gomez to some extent, however. At this point, the fact that he was a hyped prospect at one point in his career adds very little to the story, imo. Add on top of all those that the typical projection probably deflates Prince's and Braun's numbers from their performance last season. They do it because typically, that's what happens to a player that had an elite season. After Prince's 2008 year, many were convinced that Prince was that good. Now after 2009, some are convinced he's THAT good. Projections do a good job of taking that step back and looking at all the data. If we were a team of 30 year old players, I'd probably take a lot more stock into the projections. But I think the youth on our team makes projecting them with any sort of accuracy close to impossible. You can look at Marcel projections and they have something called a reliability factor. The higher the factor, the less data there was to make the projection and the more those projections were simply regressed to the mean. Take a guy that's had 500+ AB over the last 3 years and that's the best you can really do, though. Knowing what a 30 year old did when he was 25 has shown to not help statistical projections. All I'm saying is that the projections suggest the Brewers' offense won't be as good. If you think otherwise, I won't call you wrong.

Yes, if you live in a pretend world where HRs don't count and strikeouts count for 2 outs, Cam and Gomez are pretty close, offensively. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

The offense is projected to do worse in 2010. I have it at something like 5 less SLG points and 10 less OBP points. Real rough but I can't see anyone finding valid evidence that suggests its not worse.

Considering we went with DD for $5 mil who has averaged 2.17 wins over the last 3 years, I still don't see how Sheets is worth $7 mil. I think the $4 mil/win is inflated by the upper tier of pitchers. The guys who are left will probably not be paid $4 mil per win. I've seen fangraphs use $3.5 mil/year. I don't think it's less than that. I think Davis was a good signing.

They needed someone better than Doug Davis. If you wanted them to buy a $300,000 house when they only had $150,000, you were going to be disappointed no matter what. What the Brewers did do was get a $200,000 house for their $150,000. They really needed a house, so I can't be too upset.

I just don't see how that is worth $7+ mil with the other FA signings around the league this year. This is how I look at it: League average: 4.5 ERA @ 170 IP Sheets' pretend projection: 4.0 ERA @ 100 IP AAAA Scrub: 5.5 ERA A league average is about 20 runs and 2 wins better than a AAAA scrub. Teams are paying something like $4 mil a win this off season, so that's $8 mil/year for an average pitcher. If a pitcher goes 100 IP with a 4.0 ERA, that's about 17 runs or 1.7 wins better. 1.7 wins x $4.0 mil/win = ~$7 mil.

Just did a real quick look at the starting rotation, using CHONE projections. Teams usually get something like 940 innings from their starters, so I've set Suppan's IP to take up the balance: IP ERA Gallardo 145 3.66 Wolf 164 4.23 Davis 170 4.50 Bush 160 4.78 Parra 170 4.81 Suppan 131 5.43 940 4.56 Still below average but a HUGE projected upgrade over the 5.43 ERA the starters had last year. That's something like 8 wins better. Please don't just add 8 wins to last year's record, though. It doesn't work like that. I'm sure some of you are balking at Yo's and possibly Wolf's IP projection. If we set Yo's innings to 200 and Wolf's to 190 (and lower Suppan's accordingly) we get a team ERA of 4.39. Pitcher health plays a huge role here and if the most difficult to project.

When I first heard DD was signed, I was scared it was some 2/$15 mil guaranteed nonsense. This is fine. As for Bush, the fans (via Fangraphs' poll) think he is substantially better than Suppan, along with every projection system so I've seen so far. Unless Bush stinks it up in spring training (lost velocity or zero command), I don't see Suppan in the starting rotation and Bush not.

Granted this is a very basic scouting report, but with what they are saying it doesn't sound as if he can be a very effective starter this year. You seem to be coming to the exact opposite conclusion that the scouts in attendance came to. He's throwing 91 in January. Pitchers in spring training aren't at max velocity either, so I think scouts see 91 as a positive. He could only go 2.5 (simulated) innings before getting gassed but again, it's January. Teams would be foolish to not expect some drop off in performance but a team can even peg him for a 4 ERA and 100 IP in 2010, he's going to deservingly get $7+ mil from someone. I don't see most teams being comfortable with making that projection after one tryout but if he can stretch out and average 90 MPH over 5+ innings, he'll get his cash.

Russ, does the .195 value for a SB include CS, or does that have to be factored in separately? That is simply the positive run value of a successful steal. To calculate the average run value of a stolen base attempt, you have consider the expected rate of SB to attempts [something like SB / (SB + CS + PO)].

http://mlb.fanhouse.com/2010/01/19/sheets-throws-very-well-cubs-mets-rangers-as-show-most-in/ "Sheets, who turns 32 in July, first threw 20 fastballs, topping out at 91 mph with his usual sinking action." His fastball has more of a rising action, but whatever. He's averaged about 92-93 on his fastball the last few years, so his rehab is going pretty well, velocity-wise. "The scout speculated that the Cubs, Mets and Rangers are the favorites to sign Sheets, a four-time All-Star who from 2007-08 was 25-14 with a 3.39 ERA." I doubt the Brewers are even considering resigning him, so my only hope is that he doesn't sign with another NL Central team (ESPECIALLY the Cubs).

http://mlb.fanhouse.com/2010/01/19/sheets-throws-very-well-cubs-mets-rangers-as-show-most-in/ "Sheets, who turns 32 in July, first threw 20 fastballs, topping out at 91 mph with his usual sinking action." His fastball has more of a rising action, but whatever. He's averaged about 92-93 on his fastball the last few years, so his rehab is going pretty well, velocity-wise. "The scout speculated that the Cubs, Mets and Rangers are the favorites to sign Sheets, a four-time All-Star who from 2007-08 was 25-14 with a 3.39 ERA." I doubt the Brewers are even considering resigning him, so my only hope is that he doesn't sign with another NL Central team (ESPECIALLY the Cubs).

I think it's a good deal for both sides, roughly speaking. Felix and Seattle are sharing the cost of injury risk. Whenever a team signs a starting pitcher to a long term contract, they better not assume he'll pitch 200 innings/year over the course of it.

For what it's worth, Rick Steves Ireland tour book was a great resource and starting point, but certainly not the bible. My wife and I used that book when we went about 7 years ago (wow, long time ago). He tells you not to waste your time with the Blarney stone, which I agree with. We flew into Shannon and drove counterclockwise, finishing in Dublin. Stayed in a bunch of bed and breakfasts. The Cliffs of Mohr are breathtaking. Dingle Peninsula was neat and beautiful (some still speak Gaeilic there). Went to a few castles (can't remember their names). We also did the tour where they make Waterford Crystal. It was neat to see all the people lined up, still filing (what do you call it?) the designs in by hand. Didn't spend enough time in Dublin.