are you really done with the season?

[craigharmann]

I've now returned off the ledge. I'm still on the cautiously optimistic approach, but there's hope. They've got to take 2 of 3 from the Pirates, and hope that the Cubs take 2 or 3. Then we're talking! My bigger concern is the starting rotation from here on out. Sheets is a huge question mark, Suppan hasn't been the dominant stretch pitcher he was signed to be, Bush has been pretty good, and CC. Then who? McClung? Parra? A combo? That's the scary part.

[homer]

I want to give up but 1.5 back can be overcome - especially with how uninspiring the Mets have been.

[kramnoj]

Gallardo is a possibility to start a game this week, if they think he's the best option. He's been stretched out enough that he could go 4-5 IP. Right now we have

 

Tuesday: Bush

Wed: CC

Thursday: Suppan

Friday: McClung

Saturday: Sheets?/Bush on 3 days rest?/Parra?/Gallardo?/DeFelice?

Sunday: CC

[GormanHarvey]

Gallardo is a possibility to start a game this week, if they think he's the best option. He's been stretched out enough that he could go 4-5 IP. Right now we have

 

Tuesday: Bush

Wed: CC

Thursday: Suppan

Friday: McClung

Saturday: Sheets?/Bush on 3 days rest?/Parra?/Gallardo?/DeFelice?

Sunday: CC

I like the idea of Bush on 3 days rest on sat if/when Jenny Sheets cant go. As far as thurs day goes, I think they should just treat it as a 9 inning extra inning game and go with the committee and leave Soup out of it. Maybe start with Villa/DeFelice/Dillard for 2 or 3 and then go from there. Soups got nothing right now and I would hate to see us wait and be down by 4 or 5 runs again before they realize it

[giffted1]

Gallardo is a possibility to start a game this week, if they think he's the best option. He's been stretched out enough that he could go 4-5 IP. Right now we have

 

Tuesday: Bush

Wed: CC

Thursday: Suppan

Friday: McClung

Saturday: Sheets?/Bush on 3 days rest?/Parra?/Gallardo?/DeFelice?

Sunday: CC

If Gallardo is available to start, I'd love to pencil him in Soup's spot on Thursday. Get him a start before the playoffs.

[kramnoj]

Thinking a bit more about it, I agree that I would prefer Gallardo to start Thursday if he pitches this week. If he pitched against the Cubs, he might just get super amped and lead to bad results (either pitching wise or physically). The games all mean the same of course, but I think he might have a little less pressure against the Pirates. I think I would still give Suppan the start on Saturday, but he would be pitching on the the shortest leash of his life and every pitcher except for CC would be available (and Sheets of course, because if he is available, he would be pitching).

[WisconsinSportsRule]

When Braun looks like Braun as he did today and Fielder is hitting as he has for a week, anything is possible even overcoming 4 K's by the leadoff hitter.

Better than 4 groundouts. He sucked up 16 pitches in those ABs.

 

Hardly a consolation prize, but strikeout bashing is getting old.

It's really hard to avoid 'strikeout bashing'. He's not even putting the ball into play. You at least give yourself a shot to get on base with a ball in play, but Cameron can't put the bat on the ball. It's rediculous.

[razzzorsharp]

[rluzinski]

He's not even putting the ball into play. You at least give yourself a shot to get on base with a ball in play, but Cameron can't put the bat on the ball."

 

That reminds me, I've really enjoyed Hardy and Hart's combined 35 GIDPs this year. Sometimes 1 out, no matter how it was made, isn't the worst possible outcome.

[ewizabeff]

I lied. I'm not done. Tonight was fantastic.

[LouisEly]

What life was sucked out after the Cubs debacle was just pumped back in by the Fielder HR. That exactly what this team needed.

[LouisEly]

That reminds me, I've really enjoyed Hardy and Hart's combined 35 GIDPs this year. Sometimes 1 out, no matter how it was made, isn't the worst possible outcome.

 

The Brewers have grounded into 94 double plays and struck out 1162 times this season. Yes, 7.48% of the time the K is a better outcome, but 92.52% of the time it isn't. From another standpoint, the National League average for errors committed this year is 96 compared to the 94 GIDPs the Brewers have committed, so at worst there is roughly an equal chance that the opposition will commit an error as there is that they will ground into a double play. Proof - out of 6035 plate appearances the Brewers have GIDP'd 1.56% of the time, and the National League average fielding percentage is 98.4%, or teams make an error 1.6% of the time. Thus it is not statistically possible that over the course of the season a team will be better off striking out than putting the ball in play.

 

Seriously Russ, that is a statistical argument you can not win.

[logan82]

An error can be commited at any time. A double play can only happen if there is a runner on base. The Brewers have reached base on error 24 times with runers on and grounded into double plays 94 times.

[sbrylski]

Seriously Russ, that is a statistical argument you can not win.

 

I don't think he ever said that a ball in play out is always worse than a strikeout. I think he was just illustrating how strikeouts are not nearly as bad as often advertised - one of the "benefits" of a strikeout over a BIP is it removes the possibility of a DP. Anyone would take the guy with less strikeouts, all else equal.

 

And not that its going to change the conclusion of your numbers, but you can't compare the quantities of strikeouts to double plays directly because they have different values. If a double play was 10 times worse than a strikeout (its not, just demonstrating) and for one player occurs 5% of the time, while another player strikeout 45% of the time, it would still make the guy who strikeouts 45% of the time more valuable, all else equal.

[LouisEly]

If a ball is put in play, there is a 1.6% chance that it will result in an error and a 25.4% chance that it will result in a hit (otherwise known as batting average). Thus there is a 27% chance that there will not be an out; there is much less than a 27% chance that there will be a double play. Thus, over the long run, putting the ball in play statistically will result in more net baserunners than striking out.

 

And Logan, you are right that a double play can only happen when there are runners on base; but it is highly unlikely that there will be a double play if there are runners on 2nd or 3rd and 1st base empty; thus in that scenario putting the ball in play is an infinitely better statistically than striking out. I don't know what the numbers are, but the odds of a double play with runners on 2nd or 3rd but not first has to be microscopic, far less than the odds of the opponents making an error.

 

Sorry, but there is no way that over an entire season that putting the ball in play will not yield more baserunners than striking out. Yes, there are scenarios where it is a better outcome, but the larger the sample, the more baserunners will result from putting the ball in play. End of discussion.

[Bruce Ciskie]

Well, don't I look like a dope.

 

They're sucking me back in. I hate baseball. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/ohwell.gif

 

 

[IslandsAC]

Today was my first time at Wrigley. 2008 is over for me. I have tickets to next Friday's game, so I don't know exactly how to approach that. .............. I am officially emotionally disconnected until 2009, and it's more than a little relieving.

It blows my gourd that only a week ago, I honestly didn't know if I'd be able to watch another brewer game again this year. I mean, just absolutely broken. I started getting pulled back in with Fielder's walk-off-strip-off, but Braun sealed the deal tonight. If that makes me a bandwagoner than so be it - but I will be yelling tomorrow.

[jason21nl]

I have been it since day one, taking every kick and punch that the Brewers could throw at me. A couple times they knocked me down and it hurt so bad that I wasn't sure that I wanted to get up off the mat but I did. Games like this is why I never will give up on my team and will be there til the end.

[rluzinski]

"Thus, over the long run, putting the ball in play statistically will result in more net baserunners than striking out. "

 

For the nth time, it'comparing a ball in play out to a strikeout. Yes, I would like to magically convert every Brewer strikeout to a 30% chance of a hit but it doesn't work that way.

[recte44]

Ok, I jumped the gun out of anger. I'm still very much involved with the Brewers.

[BrewCrewRising]

As luck would have it, I'm at all three games this weekend starting tonight. I kind of wish I wasn't going. I'm not optimistic about our chances at the WC. Cubs are tougher than the Marlins by far, and I think Braun's homer last night was a fluke, given how much he's been hurting.

If the Crew somehow pulls it off, I'll be glad I'm there, but I'm not expecting anything.

[sausage racer]

As frustrating as this past month has been, the Brewers have gotten a break from some team or another almost every time we have needed it to stay within reach of this thing. Well here we are, all the cards are on the table, and I'm all in till the end. The stars keep aligning it seems.

 

The Marlins have nothing to play for other than being the spoiler, and that may make them just dangerous enough to help us. We just need to be able to beat the Cubs triple A team.

[BillScottCanRake]

Sorry, but there is no way that over an entire season that putting the ball in play will not yield more baserunners than striking out. Yes, there are scenarios where it is a better outcome, but the larger the sample, the more baserunners will result from putting the ball in play. End of discussion.

 

Thank goodness we finally have definitive word on the subject. We can all simply refer back to this post anytime the discussion crops up again!

 

If a ball is put in play, there is a 1.6% chance that it will result in an error and a 25.4% chance that it will result in a hit (otherwise known as batting average). Thus there is a 27% chance that there will not be an out; there is much less than a 27% chance that there will be a double play. Thus, over the long run, putting the ball in play statistically will result in more net baserunners than striking out.

 

I have two problems in general with this line of thinking, and none of them are related to double-plays or the value of a strike out vs other outs.

 

My biggest problem with this is most people only see a change in approach affecting the at-bats in which a player strikes out, and they forget about the other 2-strike at bats and what happens to them. Ryan Braun, for example, has hit 15 doubles, 3 triples and 18 home runs this year with a 2-strike count- that's 36 extra base hits with two strikes. How many of those extra base hits would he have produced if he took a "just put it in play" approach? Half? A third? Heck, how many of those just plain singles might turn into weak ground outs or pop outs? Personally, I'd rather Braun strike out 130-140 times a year and continue to have the ability to hit a home run at any time, regardless of the count, than have him try to become a slap-hitter with two strikes.

 

The other issue I have is the assumption that a strike out will turn into something positive (i.e. a hit) at a reasonable rate. I'm pretty sure that JJ Hardy, circa April-May 2005 proved that is definitely not always the case. Hardy's statistics all took an upturn when he lost the "put it in play" swing and started taking a normal hack and striking out more often. Regardless, I doubt that using a "put it in play" swing with two strikes will result in hits 25% of the time.

 

I guess there appears to still be room for discussion here after all.

[jeffy]

My biggest problem with this is most people only see a change in approach affecting the at-bats in which a player strikes out, and they forget about the other 2-strike at bats and what happens to them. Ryan Braun, for example, has hit 15 doubles, 3 triples and 18 home runs this year with a 2-strike count- that's 36 extra base hits with two strikes. How many of those extra base hits would he have produced if he took a "just put it in play" approach? Half? A third? Heck, how many of those just plain singles might turn into weak ground outs or pop outs? Personally, I'd rather Braun strike out 130-140 times a year and continue to have the ability to hit a home run at any time, regardless of the count, than have him try to become a slap-hitter with two strikes.

I was thinking the same thing...I don't think I want Braun, with 2 strikes, to become equivalent to Counsell or Kendall.

[dlk9s]

I'd just like to say hello to everyone who gave up on this team of losers.