I loved the 2016 Brewers season

[molitor fan]

The expectations going into this season were a bit odd for me as I knew the Brewers were going to not be a contender. I thought they had a chance to be a fun follow however. In reality, they were more fun than I expected. The final 73-89 record is better than expectations (the 9th pick in the draft is good enough for me, though I know many wanted a higher pick) and I think the fact they did not lose 90 is a big deal. Players such as Thornburg, Perez, Villar, and Carter surprised and excelled.

 

I come out of this 2016 Brewer season with a great deal of positive memories, as well as expectations for the future, and that is about the best comment I could have hoped for in March of 2016.

[Point Beer Is Best]

Before the season, a buddy and I decided to wager a lunch based on an agreed-upon over/under of wins. Neither of us were as pessimistic as some who pegged them as a 100 loss team, so we established the over/under at 72.5 wins. It all came down to an extra innings scenario in game 162, so we may have been the most interested in that game as anyone.

[CheezWizHed]

Before the season, a buddy and I decided to wager a lunch based on an agreed-upon over/under of wins. Neither of us were as pessimistic as some who pegged them as a 100 loss team, so we established the over/under at 72.5 wins. It all came down to an extra innings scenario in game 162, so we may have been the most interested in that game as anyone.

 

So who won?

[Point Beer Is Best]

Before the season, a buddy and I decided to wager a lunch based on an agreed-upon over/under of wins. Neither of us were as pessimistic as some who pegged them as a 100 loss team, so we established the over/under at 72.5 wins. It all came down to an extra innings scenario in game 162, so we may have been the most interested in that game as anyone.

 

So who won?

 

Ha, not me unfortunately.

[pacopete4]

I loved the season because it felt as though we overachieved when looking back upon the pitching that we had.

 

Yes, Guerra and Davies stepped up. But it was another season of Garza injuries, Peralta and Nelson had long and horrible stints in our rotation and we traded away our second best player on the roster along with a closer that got the job done. No matter what type of rebuild happens, if they cannot find starting pitching, it will not matter. I'm not talking about a team full of aces but a rotation of 2-3 that give you a significant chance of winning and 2 others that keep you in games. If we can't find that, none of this will matter.

[Thurston Fluff]

I think is some ways seasons like this are easier to enjoy because there is no angst about winning. The biggest stress was seeing who was traded and or what. I think the downside to doing better than expected is it's hard not to expect better next season. I doubt we will be. In fact we may even be worse because we won't have half a season of Lucroy or the bullpen and maybe not even Braun, Gennett or some of our pitchers. Instead we'll have young guys getting their feet wet and more reclamation projects.

This is a bit off subject but for all the talk of teams purposely tanking it's kind of surprising how well all the supposed tanking teams did. Some of the supposed tanking teams actually did better than teams who were supposed to be good.

[gregmag]

That point about the lack of angst-stress is spot on. I lost no sleep or hair over this season. It really was a lot of fun to watch. Also, the people in charge all seem smart, well informed, and conscious of a coherent strategy.

[logan82]

I don't know. I had a lot of angst about how much we won. About 5 fewer wins would have been great.

[rickh150]

Losing isn't fun.

[bork]

Only one 90 loss season in 12 years.

[AJOHNSON104]

I was relatively happy with the season. I thought they could win about 72 games, but thought that could end up being optimistic based on expected trades and injuries. I really expected them to fall off at the end of the year with all the games on the road and against winning teams and they held their own, which was fun to watch. I was disappointed in some of the performances early in the year (starting pitching, outfield performance) but I think that the front office and coaching staff did a nice job finding and developing some talent. It could have been a lot worse.

[adambr2]

I can understand those who think we'll take a step back next year, but i think it could go either way. I'm excited for a full season of Broxton, and I think Nelson and Peralta certainly have a ton of room for improvement. On the other hand, most of our prospects won't be arriving next year. I think we can expect to see Hader and Brinson in Brewers uniforms next year, but not until mid season.

 

I'd say 70-75 wins next year, around .500 in '18, contenders in '19.

[MrTPlush]

I don't know. I had a lot of angst about how much we won. About 5 fewer wins would have been great.

 

If Villar and Guerra played like garbage all year would you still want the 5 less wins?

[And That]

I don't know. I had a lot of angst about how much we won. About 5 fewer wins would have been great.

 

If Villar and Guerra played like garbage all year would you still want the 5 less wins?

Why are Villar and Guerra playing like garbage all year a prerequisite for the Brewers winning fewer games? The Brewers could have easily lucked (or unlucked I guess) their way into 5 fewer wins with exactly the same production from those two.

[AdvantageSchneider]

It was a good season because for the most part we didn't have John Vanderwal batting cleanup. We all know we are in a rebuilding mode, but all indications are that the front office is competent and can identify and acquire good players. That makes the losing go down a lot easier.

[pacopete4]

Losing isn't fun.

 

 

I look at it like this. While this season losing wasn't fun, but it was like watching your kid go through a tough season but mature and grow before your eyes. Lots of positives to take from an 89 loss season. Whether you want to look at it that way is your call.

[logan82]

They went 5-2 in one run games in September alone. There are 5 games right there where losing every single one would have very little effect on individual numbers. 5 wins without really digging. Heck include the two games in October and they are 6-2. One less hit here and there and we are easily 68 or fewer wins and little impact to individual stats.

[AdvantageSchneider]

Yes, but losing is a disease.

[pacopete4]

Yes, but losing is a disease.

 

 

That's why it was important they didn't suck and lose 100 games. This team competed. They played well. It's a good thing.

[MNBrew]

Losing isn't fun.

 

 

I look at it like this. While this season losing wasn't fun, but it was like watching your kid go through a tough season but mature and grow before your eyes. Lots of positives to take from an 89 loss season. Whether you want to look at it that way is your call.

Here's a similar way to word that: Yes, 89 losses sure weren't fun. Inevitably, lots of aspects of it weren't good. However, there were enough positives and reasons for optimism to make it pretty interesting much for much of the time. I'm not sure in other similarly crappy Brewers seasons -- at least post-1990 -- we had as many plusses as the MLB SB leader & being the top NL SB team (with huge success rates from many guys), NL co-HR champ, one of the best rotations from mid-August onward, guys who went to AAA and redeemed their crappy initial MLB work this year with great work post-callup (Broxton & Peralta, especially), AND a nice increase in our pool of upper-end prospects and a farm system viewed as one of the tops in all of baseball.

[Greenleaf1]

Yes, but losing is a disease.

 

I'm sure the Cubs would disagree with you on this one.

[MrTPlush]

I don't know. I had a lot of angst about how much we won. About 5 fewer wins would have been great.

 

If Villar and Guerra played like garbage all year would you still want the 5 less wins?

Why are Villar and Guerra playing like garbage all year a prerequisite for the Brewers winning fewer games? The Brewers could have easily lucked (or unlucked I guess) their way into 5 fewer wins with exactly the same production from those two.

 

Because it doesn't really work that way. In reality to lose you must be worse not "lucky". 5 games is a pretty notable difference in the grand scheme of things. To lose you must sacrifice something. And cherry picking one run wins doesn't exactly work in reality because you win some of those and lose some.

[And That]

Because it doesn't really work that way.

That's exactly the way it works. There is a lot of luck that goes into determining a team's final record.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

[tmwiese55]

Looking at the standings though you would have had to lose 5 more games to move up more than 1 spot. In an ideal world we would have lost like 7 more games but I'll take the quality play from guys like Broxton, Villar, Santana and good improvement from guys like Peralta and Anderson at the end vs picking up a few more draft spots.

[gregmag]

I don't know. I had a lot of angst about how much we won. About 5 fewer wins would have been great.

 

If Villar and Guerra played like garbage all year would you still want the 5 less wins?

Why are Villar and Guerra playing like garbage all year a prerequisite for the Brewers winning fewer games? The Brewers could have easily lucked (or unlucked I guess) their way into 5 fewer wins with exactly the same production from those two.

You're right, of course, but there's a general point here that seems important. (I know this is nothing you don't already know.) If you want to maximize losses, you need to sacrifice the goal of identifying and developing useful contributors at the big league level. If on the other hand you want to identify and develop useful players at the MLB level, you're going to win some games with those guys. Of course we can root for the best of all possible worlds, and I often did. Give me a game where Davies makes a great start, Broxton, Villar, and Arcia perform well, and then Boyer coughs up the lead for a loss; that checks all my boxes. But realistically it's a tradeoff. The Brewers opted to find more guys now who can help -- trading for and playing Villar, bringing up Arcia, persevering with Broxton, effectively replacing Jungmann and first half Peralta with Guerra and Davies, etc. Tank fans have reason not to like that tradeoff, but I think most of us are happy with it.