Jeffress Comes Home Again; Tayler Scott's home is now with the Rangers

[MrTPlush]

I for one am not counting on Jeffress to do well. If he does, then great. But I wouldn't get too excited.

 

Yah I think he might be a lost cause this year, but maybe being back sparks him. However the down velocity makes me think it is more than just a mental game with him. I think he could bounce back next year and be even more helpful than this year. Hard to envision him leaving Milwaukee any time soon after the disaster on and off the field he experienced in Texas.

[adambr2]

SRB posted a link that pretty well establishes the velocity dip was more of an early season problem.

 

Best case scenario is he rediscovers it again here and becomes a solid late inning option once more. Worst case scenario, we lose Taylor Scott. Nothing not to like about this.

[hawing]

The final piece for setting Jeremy right again might be to re-relocate Will Smith. I mean, why couldn't he just live in Milwaukee while he rehabs for SF?

 

(This is mostly intended to be blue)

[adambr2]

The final piece for setting Jeremy right again might be to re-relocate Will Smith. I mean, why couldn't he just live in Milwaukee while he rehabs for SF?

 

(This is mostly intended to be blue)

 

I remember last year right before the deadline when Smith and Jeffress talked about their friendship and how much they enjoyed being in Milwaukee together and how tough of a time of year it was with the uncertainty.

 

It was the right business thing to do in both cases, of course, but I remember feeling terrible for both of them after they were dealt. Sometimes it's easy to forget that these are still actual people that have lives and friendships uprooted this time of year. I'm glad Jeremy is back home, and I hope he finds success again.

[MrTPlush]

SRB posted a link that pretty well establishes the velocity dip was more of an early season problem.

 

No that is not correct. It shows his velocity was WAY down at the start of the year and has improved. However it shows his velocity is still notably lower vs. last year. Hopefully it continues to rebound, but as it stands his velocity is problematic and likely causing some of the struggles.

[trwi7]

However it shows his velocity is still notably lower vs. last year. Hopefully it continues to rebound, but as it stands his velocity is problematic and likely causing some of the struggles.

 

His average fastball was 95.1 last year and has been 94.7 and 94.8 in June and July. That's lower but certainly not notably lower.

[Jenkins5]

However it shows his velocity is still notably lower vs. last year. Hopefully it continues to rebound, but as it stands his velocity is problematic and likely causing some of the struggles.

 

His average fastball was 95.1 last year and has been 94.7 and 94.8 in June and July. That's lower but certainly not notably lower.

 

[sarcasm]Please, 95.1mph is tough to hit, 94.75.... mid as well have Suter out there trying to blow fastballs past hitters[/sarcasm]

 

His velocity is pretty much back. Moreover, as Peralta show velocity means little if you don't hit spots, have little life, or your secondary stuff is keeping hitters off it. There was more important issues than velocity at work. Stuff he hopefully fixes again now that he is back.

[dacbrewers]

I absolutely love this move because I don't see any real downside to it. The player the Brewers gave up seems to be the longest of long shots. I don't care how anyone attributes this acquisition to who got bumped off the 25- or 40-man roster...if it was really a swap with Peralta or Nieuwenhuis...in the end a bad Jeffress will not be any worse than the player that would be occupying that spot. I do think this is more of a move for 2018 and 2019 but the potential is there for a real payoff. Hopefully he can hold his own for the rest of this season and rebound next year.

Just because someone is picked up for basically nothing doesn't mean there isn't a real downside. Pitching bad and losing games is a real downside...If he pitches great, well then there is a real upside. I hope he turns it around and the Brewers get someone else out of it down the road, or better yet he sticks around and performs. In the end, it is about winning games.

[Never Outhustled]

Jeffress lived in the bottom of the strike zone. The new stike zone has hurt him. DJ will have to make the same changes with Jeffress that he did with Hughes. It'll take some time, but Jeffress will be back.

[MrTPlush]

However it shows his velocity is still notably lower vs. last year. Hopefully it continues to rebound, but as it stands his velocity is problematic and likely causing some of the struggles.

 

His average fastball was 95.1 last year and has been 94.7 and 94.8 in June and July. That's lower but certainly not notably lower.

 

I think you have to account for the change in recording velocity this year. So it is more like 1.4 MPH change. The other thing about this year that would be a slight red flag is the fact the Rangers do not use Jeffress often. He rarely has ever pitched consecutive days this year and many times gets 3 days rest in between. He might just be throwing harder than in April because they don't use him often. Just a possibility there. Other thing with his velocity is Fangraphs has him at a perceived velocity of 90.7 MPH. Not sure what he is for his career, but that seems oddly low for him.

[agent39]

However it shows his velocity is still notably lower vs. last year. Hopefully it continues to rebound, but as it stands his velocity is problematic and likely causing some of the struggles.

 

His average fastball was 95.1 last year and has been 94.7 and 94.8 in June and July. That's lower but certainly not notably lower.

 

I think you have to account for the change in recording velocity this year. So it is more like 1.4 MPH change. The other thing about this year that would be a slight red flag is the fact the Rangers do not use Jeffress often. He rarely has ever pitched consecutive days this year and many times gets 3 days rest in between. He might just be throwing harder than in April because they don't use him often. Just a possibility there. Other thing with his velocity is Fangraphs has him at a perceived velocity of 90.7 MPH. Not sure what he is for his career, but that seems oddly low for him.

 

 

Go look at his useage through may. He led the majors on appearances and when tex realized what they were doing they did a 180 amd barely threw hom and when they did it was square peg round hole as a long guy

[djoctagone]

I'm assuming (if no other moves made today), that they will DFA Kirk when Jeffress is added, and then option WCW and recall Phillips (if the 10 day window has passed yet).

phillips won't be eligible for recall yet, but keon broxton will.

 

i'm predicting dfa-ing nieuwenhuis and carlos torres, and recalling broxton and activating jeffress.

if jeffress isn't able to report to milwaukee by tuesday night, the brewers can hold off on activating him. thus, there would be an opening on the 25-man roster that could allow the brewers to recall keon broxton, and then make a roster move after tuesday's game to activate jeffress.

jeffress should be activated before tonight's game. at present, he would take the roster spot vacated by kirk nieuwenhuis. any other transactions would require a 25-man roster move.

[gregmag]

Nice to know that there is someone else on this forum that understands that there is an emotional and psychological effect on performance.

For me, and I suspect a lot of others would agree, it's entirely obvious that emotions and psychology affect performance. It's curious that you think you're the only person who understands that pretty basic insight. I can't recall a time when anyone here denied it.

 

What I think is an important corollary to that insight is that emotional and psychological effects on performance are very hard to measure with the information available to us as baseball fans. I suspect from what I know of psychology that those impacts are often hard to measure for a player's own therapist.

 

People who don't like sabermetrics often complain about the role statistical analysts ascribe to luck, or random variation, in baseball performance. Those complaints are often overblown -- random variation really is a thing -- but the complainers have a point. When people don't have concrete information about what causes an effect, we often default to finding the cause in something we can't measure. It's an attractive strategy (or a comfortable impulse), because nobody can prove you're wrong about something if you're basing your argument on something that can't be measured.

 

I hope coming back to Milwaukee is a tonic for Jeffress. There's certainly some evidence that it might be. But even if it is, we have to consider the possibility that other causes -- coaching and park factors most obviously -- might account for the difference, rather than (or at least in conjunction with) emotions and psychology. It's also possible that his performance variations have little or nothing to do with being in Milwaukee. Relievers just fluctuate.

[clancyphile]

Go look at his useage through may. He led the majors on appearances and when tex realized what they were doing they did a 180 amd barely threw hom and when they did it was square peg round hole as a long guy

 

That could very well explain it.

 

At his point ,the Brewers got ground to make up. Lots of ground.

 

The Cubs got some upgrades, and taking two of three in Miller Park will give them a boost.

 

At this point, try to get the offense on track enough to get a starter through six, then have Hader/Jeffress/Knebel shut things down. Maybe some others can rebound or prove solid (Wang/Webb/Hughes), but right now... the offense has to get on track.

[mertonmonk]

 

At this point, try to get the offense on track enough to get a starter through six, then have Hader/Jeffress/Knebel shut things down. Maybe some others can rebound or prove solid (Wang/Webb/Hughes), but right now... the offense has to get on track.

 

Agreed - Jeffress can hopefully help the bullpen, but the glaring problem has been 0-for-RISP. To some degree that's a product of a lot of all-or-nothing hitters and right now we're getting more of the nothing part. It's way too reminiscent of the 2014 campaign, but the offense isn't as centered on Braun/Lucroy so there's a lot more hope that this offense can get untracked.

[djoctagone]

jeffress should be activated before tonight's game. at present, he would take the roster spot vacated by kirk nieuwenhuis. any other transactions would require a 25-man roster move.

technically, keon broxton recalled before jeremy jeffress activated. another roster move is likely today.

[djoctagone]

let's wait until tomorrow. jeffress isn't expected to be activated today.

[Humans Need Water]

Nice to know that there is someone else on this forum that understands that there is an emotional and psychological effect on performance.

For me, and I suspect a lot of others would agree, it's entirely obvious that emotions and psychology affect performance. It's curious that you think you're the only person who understands that pretty basic insight. I can't recall a time when anyone here denied it.

 

What I think is an important corollary to that insight is that emotional and psychological effects on performance are very hard to measure with the information available to us as baseball fans. I suspect from what I know of psychology that those impacts are often hard to measure for a player's own therapist.

 

People who don't like sabermetrics often complain about the role statistical analysts ascribe to luck, or random variation, in baseball performance. Those complaints are often overblown -- random variation really is a thing -- but the complainers have a point. When people don't have concrete information about what causes an effect, we often default to finding the cause in something we can't measure. It's an attractive strategy (or a comfortable impulse), because nobody can prove you're wrong about something if you're basing your argument on something that can't be measured.

 

I hope coming back to Milwaukee is a tonic for Jeffress. There's certainly some evidence that it might be. But even if it is, we have to consider the possibility that other causes -- coaching and park factors most obviously -- might account for the difference, rather than (or at least in conjunction with) emotions and psychology. It's also possible that his performance variations have little or nothing to do with being in Milwaukee. Relievers just fluctuate.

Clearly he doesn't think he's the only person who understands this since he was responding to my post. That would make 2 of us. Additionally, and I missed it the first time, LiveforOctober was the first person to reference his mental/psychological affects and Milwaukee being a place of comfort. So that makes 3. And no, there isn't "some" evidence suggesting this there's a lot of evidence.

 

If it was so blatantly obvious to you and everyone else then why did it take until the end of page 2 (liveforoctober), middle of page 4 (me) and middle of page 5 (LouisEly) to be the only people to address this "obvious" issue regarding Jeffress? None of us said this was the ONLY issue regarding his performance. There's a difference between denying and acknowledging. And while nobody denied it, nobody else acknowledged it either.

[And That]

If it was so blatantly obvious to you and everyone else then why did it take until the end of page 2 (liveforoctober), middle of page 4 (me) and middle of page 5 (LouisEly) to be the only people to address this "obvious" issue regarding Jeffress? None of us said this was the ONLY issue regarding his performance. There's a difference between denying and acknowledging. And while nobody denied it, nobody else acknowledged it either.

At least for me, if something is blatantly obvious I tend not to mention it, because it's blatantly obvious.

 

My first thought upon hearing about the trade was that I recall there being a positive connection between Jeffress and the team's psychologist (I forget his name), so if there is anything blocking him mentally at the moment, perhaps that could be cleared up. Beyond that, Jeffress has pitched his best ball in Milwaukee and seemed to feed on the positive environment, which was encouraging for his prospects here the rest of the season.

 

I feel that most of that paragraph and especially the last sentence is common knowledge though, which is why I felt no particularly strong need to acknowledge it. But that's just me.

 

And in the end, I think it's kind of a silly thing to be arguing about.

[LouisEly]

People who don't like sabermetrics often complain about the role statistical analysts ascribe to luck, or random variation, in baseball performance. Those complaints are often overblown -- random variation really is a thing -- but the complainers have a point.

I'll say, evidence is in this threat. Some jump right to his velocity this year versus last year.

 

I say, why is his velocity down? I'm a root cause type of person (Lean Six Sigma - "the five why's"), and there is a reason why his velocity is down but he's in his physical prime. Statistics can almost always find an explanation... but what's the reason behind the statistics?

 

If you've been around here long enough, you know the story of my friend Jak Kraus. You look at that OPS in rookie ball, and then Beloit, and then Stockton, and the immediate reaction of many is "college player... dominates rookie ball because lower level of competition... old for his league... never had the upside... small sample...".

 

What you don't see is that he got off to a terrible start in Beloit... because he found out his girlfriend was pregnant, and then under pressure proposed to her. He was a little distracted. But after he got that behind him and his mind right he went on a tear and finished strong... until he broke his arm in a collision at 1B. Thus only played 86 games.

 

He was promoted to Stockton... where he was 2000 miles from his wife and kid. And wasn't making any money. And his wife reminded him constantly of all those things. The stress caused him to play poorly, and he hung it up and went home. He didn't have the power, but he had a sweet swing and a great eye. Career 90 BBs to 59 Ks in 708 career PAs.

 

I'm sure the stats would have found something with his swing-and-miss %, line drive %, etc. But that wasn't the cause.

[Austin Tatious]

Well, we will all find out. JJ has a great chance to be the poster boy for showing a guy who ends up playing better in environs where he is more comfortable.

 

Speaking only for myself, I'm a big believer in situational performance. In the NFL, for instance, you can get numbers on QB's and how they perform on 3rd down, in the fourth quarter, on final drives, etc. Some guys thrive and some don't.

 

In baseball, it can be things like batting average with runners in scoring position, hitting performance after the seventh inning, hitting with two outs, etc. Not all stats are equal. Sure, you can try to run numbers to compensate for conditions such as ball parks or the theoretical idea of taking luck out of the equation and factoring in seeing eye singles. Maybe it's not just luck. Wasn't it Wee Willie Keeler who said "hit 'em where they ain't?"

 

Just like numbers under pressure mean something, so can the comfortability factor. It's no given with JJ, but I like the risk/reward factor that our coaches may be able to tweak him because they've been successful with him as recently as last year, and/or because he's comfortable here and able to perform.

[DHonks]

Well, we will all find out. JJ has a great chance to be the poster boy for showing a guy who ends up playing better in environs where he is more comfortable.

 

Speaking only for myself, I'm a big believer in situational performance. In the NFL, for instance, you can get numbers on QB's and how they perform on 3rd down, in the fourth quarter, on final drives, etc. Some guys thrive and some don't.

 

 

With the NFL, that's something few talk about. Many players look good/great thanks to their systems, but fail when the go elsewhere. In baseball, familiarity is something we've seen time and time again. We have stud players that fail in big markets. I'd love to see JJ thrive in Milwaukee, and continue to be here

[djoctagone]

let's wait until tomorrow. jeffress isn't expected to be activated today.

paolo espino optioned to make room on the 25-man for jeffress. espino was recalled 28 july after michael blazek and wily peralta gave up those crooked numbers in washington. espino was never used during this recall, and was an obvious candidate for optioning with matt garza set to return to the rotation this week. it just happened under slightly different circumstances and timing.

[JosephC]

I absolutely love this move because I don't see any real downside to it. The player the Brewers gave up seems to be the longest of long shots. I don't care how anyone attributes this acquisition to who got bumped off the 25- or 40-man roster...if it was really a swap with Peralta or Nieuwenhuis...in the end a bad Jeffress will not be any worse than the player that would be occupying that spot. I do think this is more of a move for 2018 and 2019 but the potential is there for a real payoff. Hopefully he can hold his own for the rest of this season and rebound next year.

Just because someone is picked up for basically nothing doesn't mean there isn't a real downside. Pitching bad and losing games is a real downside...If he pitches great, well then there is a real upside. I hope he turns it around and the Brewers get someone else out of it down the road, or better yet he sticks around and performs. In the end, it is about winning games.

 

The only downside if he pitches worse than the player he replaces. Figuring he now "officially" replaces Paolo Espino (6.11 ERA), a 30-year old below replacement level pitcher, I'll stand by the statement that there is no real downside.

[Humans Need Water]

If it was so blatantly obvious to you and everyone else then why did it take until the end of page 2 (liveforoctober), middle of page 4 (me) and middle of page 5 (LouisEly) to be the only people to address this "obvious" issue regarding Jeffress? None of us said this was the ONLY issue regarding his performance. There's a difference between denying and acknowledging. And while nobody denied it, nobody else acknowledged it either.

At least for me, if something is blatantly obvious I tend not to mention it, because it's blatantly obvious.

 

My first thought upon hearing about the trade was that I recall there being a positive connection between Jeffress and the team's psychologist (I forget his name), so if there is anything blocking him mentally at the moment, perhaps that could be cleared up. Beyond that, Jeffress has pitched his best ball in Milwaukee and seemed to feed on the positive environment, which was encouraging for his prospects here the rest of the season.

 

I feel that most of that paragraph and especially the last sentence is common knowledge though, which is why I felt no particularly strong need to acknowledge it. But that's just me.

 

And in the end, I think it's kind of a silly thing to be arguing about.

It is silly to discuss, I won't say argue because it's a quick discussion that won't be expanded upon. Even obvious aspects need to be addressed and acknowledged and it happens daily in almost every discussion. Jeffress having a poor year statistically is obvious and it was acknowledged plenty in this thread. I see his mental/psychological aspect being no different.