2017-06-01: Brewers (Anderson) at Mets (Wheeler) 12:10 PM CDT [Brewers win, 2-1]

[liveforoctober]

Not that I want to trade him ... but Knebel might have sneaky good trade value at the break.

[adambr2]

Marty Foster in the Dodgers/Cardinals game making another great argument for machines calling balls and strikes.

[rcc]

No way trade Knebel. They thought they had a lights out closer in Feliz and pay him as such. That didn't work out. Now they have one in Knebel and unless they are 20 games under .500 I say keep him. It's exciting to have a closer hitting 98 and striking out a batter in a close game in the bottom of the ninth.

[jerichoholicninja]

Are there stats on getting runners in from 2d and 3d with 0 out or 3d with 1 out?

 

This is what I'm curious of too. Stats with runners in scoring position likely generally parallels overall offensive production. Getting runners in from 3rd with less than two outs is a bit different. Or...maybe it's not?

 

Not exactly what you're looking for but this year with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs there's slashing .340/.422/.577 (.254/.327/.444 overall) and striking out 23% of the time (24% overall), and have 75 RBI is 116 PA. In theory, they're scoring about 65% of the time (75/116) and actually hitting much better than other situations.

 

Numbers from baseball reference.

[trwi7]

No way trade Knebel. They thought they had a lights out closer in Feliz and pay him as such. That didn't work out. Now they have one in Knebel and unless they are 20 games under .500 I say keep him. It's exciting to have a closer hitting 98 and striking out a batter in a close game in the bottom of the ninth.

 

You absolutely trade Knebel if someone makes you a good offer. He wasn't good last year, walks quite a few guys and isn't going to keep his 94% strand rate. If some team is willing to overpay for 50-60 innings of relief, I say let them.

[NYChez]

I'm looking forward to the part of the rebuild where, everytime a Brewer hits a home run or strikes somebody out, the initial reaction isn't trading him.

[rcc]

I'm looking forward to the part of the rebuild where, everytime a Brewer hits a home run or strikes somebody out, the initial reaction isn't trading him.

 

Agreed.

[BuckyBrewer61]

Not exactly what you're looking for but this year with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs there's slashing .340/.422/.577 (.254/.327/.444 overall) and striking out 23% of the time (24% overall), and have 75 RBI is 116 PA. In theory, they're scoring about 65% of the time (75/116) and actually hitting much better than other situations.

 

There you go - thanks for the research. Turns out with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs this year we are actually...really really good.

 

People seem to assume you should score at least 1 run 95% of the time in that situation, but the actual norm is far from that. Would be curious how that compares to the rest of MLB, but I'd figure pretty favorably.

[brewcrewdue80]

No way trade Knebel. They thought they had a lights out closer in Feliz and pay him as such. That didn't work out. Now they have one in Knebel and unless they are 20 games under .500 I say keep him. It's exciting to have a closer hitting 98 and striking out a batter in a close game in the bottom of the ninth.

 

You absolutely trade Knebel if someone makes you a good offer. He wasn't good last year, walks quite a few guys and isn't going to keep his 94% strand rate. If some team is willing to overpay for 50-60 innings of relief, I say let them.

 

Nope. If he's pitching this filthy in what is his 3rd? Of 7yr team control, you have a shut down for the future. Sorta doing what was expected out of him out of that trade. He was pegged to be a great late inning reliever. You keep him til his final year. Maybe all the way through the end of team control. He keeps to these stats a QO is possible.

[trwi7]

A QO by the time he's a free agent will probably be $20 million if not more. It would be ridiculous to risk paying that to a reliever. I would constantly be cycling through relievers with trades whether we were rebuilding or contending. They just don't have enough value and are too erratic to hold onto them for any length of time.

 

John Axford had a couple of years like Knebel is having and turned into a replacement level player afterwards.

[brewcrewdue80]

John Axford was not similar in prospect pedigree. There are RPs who can succeed for multiple seasons. Especially ones with a high K Rate. Things like David Robertson happen for a RP with a QO. I'd imagine if we made it to that kind of point, keeping him through all of team control, he'd be seeing some 4out saves.

I suggested it in the extreme good case, to keep him through his control. But itd be simple to trade him in the last offseason before he would be a FA. Say if he rrurns in to a Kenley Jansen. He's going to have a 10+mil final arb year where trading him off as small markets do to a big market because of salary, yet get a high return. We've already gone through a number of blown saves due to a shaky bullpen. Part of the rebuild is acquiring some future at the end of the pen. Except some of the future need happens to be in the present.

[trwi7]

Just about the last thing I'd be looking to acquire in a rebuild is players at the back end of the pen.

 

Say the Nationals bullpen still sucks come late July and they're really desperate and want to shore up their pen for a playoff run and offer Victor Robles and a lotto ticket like Jesus Luzardo for Knebel and say Torres.

 

Are you really going to turn that down? And yes I'm fully aware that the Nats wouldn't include Robles in a package for pretty much anyone but say they're desperate enough to actually do it. I would hope Stearns would accept that trade in an instant because he knows having a potential all-star outfielder along with a SP lottery ticket is far more valuable than a couple of relievers.

[brewcrewdue80]

Just about the last thing I'd be looking to acquire in a rebuild is players at the back end of the pen.

 

Say the Nationals bullpen still sucks come late July and they're really desperate and want to shore up their pen for a playoff run and offer Victor Robles and a lotto ticket like Jesus Luzardo for Knebel and say Torres.

 

Are you really going to turn that down? And yes I'm fully aware that the Nats wouldn't include Robles in a package for pretty much anyone but say they're desperate enough to actually do it. I would hope Stearns would accept that trade in an instant because he knows having a potential all-star outfielder along with a SP lottery ticket is far more valuable than a couple of relievers.

 

You throw out a trade idea that would make any GM a complete idiot to hold on to Kneble. Its about what it cost to get Chapman as a rental for the Cubs. Problem is Robles wouldnt fit Milwaukee, so I would turn it down to the effects of finding a 3rd team to trade Robles to, and get a player who'd fit Milws needs.

 

Everyone has a price, when they will be traded for Golden Tickets but, where this team is already at, that is what it must take for me to trade Kneble this early in his career. As theres a huge need for a player of his potential.

[SomewhereInTime]

Not exactly what you're looking for but this year with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs there's slashing .340/.422/.577 (.254/.327/.444 overall) and striking out 23% of the time (24% overall), and have 75 RBI is 116 PA. In theory, they're scoring about 65% of the time (75/116) and actually hitting much better than other situations.

 

There you go - thanks for the research. Turns out with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs this year we are actually...really really good.

 

People seem to assume you should score at least 1 run 95% of the time in that situation, but the actual norm is far from that. Would be curious how that compares to the rest of MLB, but I'd figure pretty favorably.

 

Found the stats I was looking for, last year we were 28th. This year 24th. 47% is not good.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2017-situational-batting.shtml

[MillerParkSouth]

If you get offered Robles for Knebel you immediately accept it and figure out the logjam later. Knebel is great, but if someone blows away Stearns he should deal him, relievers are too volatile to hold.

[adambr2]

Just about the last thing I'd be looking to acquire in a rebuild is players at the back end of the pen.

 

Say the Nationals bullpen still sucks come late July and they're really desperate and want to shore up their pen for a playoff run and offer Victor Robles and a lotto ticket like Jesus Luzardo for Knebel and say Torres.

 

Are you really going to turn that down? And yes I'm fully aware that the Nats wouldn't include Robles in a package for pretty much anyone but say they're desperate enough to actually do it. I would hope Stearns would accept that trade in an instant because he knows having a potential all-star outfielder along with a SP lottery ticket is far more valuable than a couple of relievers.

 

You throw out a trade idea that would make any GM a complete idiot to hold on to Kneble. Its about what it cost to get Chapman as a rental for the Cubs. Problem is Robles wouldnt fit Milwaukee, so I would turn it down to the effects of finding a 3rd team to trade Robles to, and get a player who'd fit Milws needs.

 

Everyone has a price, when they will be traded for Golden Tickets but, where this team is already at, that is what it must take for me to trade Kneble this early in his career. As theres a huge need for a player of his potential.

 

I'm not trying to make fun of you, but in your first sentence you say 'that would make any GM an idiot (to not trade Knebel for Robles), then in the very next sentence you say 'I would turn it down.'

 

I agree with your first instinct. It would be utter insanity to turn that down. If you get offered a top 5 prospect for Corey Knebel you take it regardless of the position. Value is value. It's not like Robles wouldn't be tradeable later if you wanted to go down that road.