Examining some raw data: Milwaukee's reliance on the home run as compared to other National League teams

[The stache]

So, I've been kicking this thought around in my head for some time-a hypothesis that the Brewers more heavily rely on the home run to score than other teams in the National League. It seems to me that Milwaukee has great difficulty, or, should I say, comparatively greater difficulty putting runs on the board when they're not sending baseballs into the seats. But, as sveumrules and select other members of our forum are quick to point out, perception and reality are often quite different animals. When the Brewers stumble for a time, it's easy to let that recent impression color our perception of the season, as a whole. Tonight, I re-upped my monthly subscription to Baseball-reference's play index, and decided to actually look at the raw data to see if the numbers support my hypothesis.

 

I'll preface this by stating that the numbers we're about to look at include all games through August 18th; baseball-reference has not yet updated for games completed on the 19th.

 

First, I want to look at where the Brewers rank in the National League in home runs hit. As the season is still ongoing, and not everybody has played the same number of games, the best way to look at this is home runs hit per game played.

 

 

Currently, the Brewers are second in the NL with 202 home runs, and second in home runs per game played at 1.63. The National League averages are 171 home runs, and 1.38 per game. The last column displays each team's projected 162 game home run total based on their current rate. Just as an aside, these numbers are insane. In National League history, only ten teams have hit 225 or more home runs. Nine teams are currently on a pace to top 225 in 2019. I find Rob Manfred's public comments regarding the increase in home runs spurious, as something is clearly amiss; but that's a discussion for another time.

 

Next, let's look at how the Brewers compare to other National League teams as far as runs scored is concerned. Again, this is on a per game basis.

 

 

While the Brewers are the second best team in the National League (out of 15 teams) hitting the long ball, we're tied for seventh in runs scored per game with the Mets. We score 4.85 on average, which is a tick above the 4.82 league average.

 

Now comes the interesting part. How many runs have we scored this season via the home run, and what overall percentage of runs scored came as a result of the long ball?

 

 

Though perception often distorts reality, occasionally, ones instincts are dead on. Though the Dodgers (348) and Braves (318) have both scored more runs via the long ball than Milwaukee (316), as a percentage of runs scored, the Brewers have relied on the home run more than any other team in the Senior Circuit.

 

52.6% of the runs Milwaukee has scored in 2019 have come via the home run. That's nearly 2.5% more than Los Angeles, who came in second with 50.2% of runs scored via the home run. With only one other team realizing 50% or more of their runs via the home run (Chicago, though San Diego is nearly at 50%), a 2.5% gap between Milwaukee and Los Angeles is statistically significant.

 

Of great interest, to me, is the average return Milwaukee gets from home runs, relative to the rest of the National League. We hit a lot into the seats, but on average, we realize 1.564 runs per home run; that's ninth best in the NL, and slightly below the league average of 1.578.

 

 

Now, the Brewers are ninth in the National League with a .251 AVG. But because of their walk rate, their .330 OBP is fifth, and right behind the fourth place Cubs at .331. They get on base. Scoring opportunities beyond the home run abound. This walk rate helps to somewhat mitigate their awful strikeout rate. We already know they hit the long ball, so one would expect they'd have a competitive overall SLG, relative to the rest of the National League. Surprisingly, their .447 SLG ranks only seventh-about the middle of the league. While they hit a lot of home runs, they don't rack up the doubles and triples. Their 212 doubles puts them twelfth in the NL, and having only 12 triples ranks them thirteenth.

 

The ability to hit the home run is a real asset for any team. Point in case, the Brewers were down three runs in the ninth inning against the Nationals just a few nights ago. Christian Yelich homered. Keston Hiura doubled. Mike Moustakas homered to tie it, and Ryan Braun homered to give Milwaukee a one run lead headed into the home half of the ninth. Without the ability to hit the long ball, coming back from a three run deficit in the ninth would have been highly improbable. Obviously, power is a boon to a team's chances for success. However, a problem arises when the long ball is the only real weapon in the offense's arsenal.

 

And now we arrive at runners left on base, the numerical evidence of a team's failure to capitalize on opportunity.

 

Milwaukee's National League rank in: AVG, walks, OBP, strikeouts, SLG, OPS and runners left on base.

 

That last list is highly problematic for the Brewers. We're stranding better than 7.2 runners, per game. To date, the Dodgers have actually left nine more runners on base, but they've also scored 92 more runs.

 

So, the Brewers are competitive in terms of getting on base. And, not only do they have outstanding team power, they are ranked second in the National League in power-speed index. Only the Nationals are better, and that's in a dead heat:

 

 

The stolen base is seemingly a lost art in the year 2019. Though the Brewers rank third in the National League in stolen bases, they only have 82 swipes. But their best two hitters in the second half, Christian Yelich and Ryan Braun, have been incredibly efficient. Yelich is among the league leaders with 24 steals (and has only been caught twice). And Ryan Braun, while no longer the same player that stole thirty bases in both 2011 and 2012, has swiped 9 bases in 10 tries. 33 steals in 36 attempts is a 92% success rate.

 

They hit the long ball. They get on base. They can steal bases. So, why are the Brewers lagging so far behind other playoff contenders where scoring runs is concerned?

 

The Brewers have been very poor situational hitters. Though they rank fourth in the National League with 2,927 total base runners (with BR being the total number of base runners when a batter is at the plate), the percentage of base runners that scored is worst in the National League. Yes, they are behind even the Miami Marlins.

 

Total baserunners, baserunners that scored, scoring %

 

First, a word about this metric, and how I am reading it. Obviously, the Brewers have not had 2,927 base runners in 124 games. That would be nearly 24 each and every game. This counts the opportunities for each batter. If the Brewers load the bases to start the game, and the cleanup batter comes to the plate, they had three men they could have driven in. If he strikes out, the #5 batter comes up. It's the same three base runners, but now that batter has the chance to drive in all three men. Thusly, the metric counts each batter throughout the season, and the total number of scoring opportunities those individual base runners represented.

 

This conversion rate is more than just a problem. I believe it is emblematic of a fatal flaw in how the Brewer offense is constructed. Building around power been the predominant thinking in Milwaukee going back to the days of George Bamburger and Harvey Kuenn. Remember, the Brewers have scored 316 runs via the home run in 2019. Recall, too, that they have left 894 runners on base. Compare those numbers. A rational baseball fan would sacrifice some power in order to be more productive situationally.

 

Let's look at some other indicators. First up, a metric considering the opportunities to ground into a double play. Baseball-reference defines this as instances with a runner on first and less than two outs. DP is defined as two or more force outs on a ground out. The Brewers have the fourth worst rate, currently, in the National League. In plain English, opposing teams are highly successful at forcing the Brewer hitters into double plays. It's just one way the opposition can eliminate Brewer scoring threats. The Brewers also have the second worst productive out metric in the NL. Created by Elias and ESPN for three possible situations: Successful Sac for a pitcher with one out. Advancing any runner with none out. Driving in a baserunner with the second out of the inning. Failed means the batter made an out without advancing the runner(s). This is baseball fundamentals. Being able to move the batter over, even at the cost of an out, can benefit a team tremendously.

 

Here's yet another example of Milwaukee's inability to generate runs absent the long ball. How many times has somebody mentioned this in an In Game Thread? Having a runner at third base that we can't get across home plate. This metric measures the number of plate appearances with less than two outs, and a runner at third base. Again, this demonstrates very poor fundamentals on the part of the Milwaukee Brewers. The Brewers get the runner home only 44.6% of the time. The NL average success rate is 51.7%. Shockingly, there's one team better at converting than the Dodgers' 57.1%-the lowly Miami Marlins, who get the runner in 58.2% of the time. Lastly, one more incriminating statistic. This one measures instances where a runner is on second base with no outs, and that runner was successfully advanced. It doesn't mean the runner scored. They were simply moved to third. Is it any coincidence that the teams who make it to the World Series perform well in this last metric? The personnel change. Injuries happen. Players get older, and rookies and new acquisitions come in. Yet, if you look at the Giants, Cubs, Cardinals and Dodgers-these teams have all gotten to the Series in the last few years. The Giants have won it all three times. The Cubs once. The Cardinals have been to the Fall Classic four times in the last fifteen years, winning two. And while the Dodgers haven't won the Series in some time, they've won the last two National League pennants, and they're the best team in baseball currently at 82-44. They can hit home runs. But, they also do the little things well. And the Braves? They're a team definitely on the rise again, and loaded with talent.

 

Opportunities for GIDP converted, Productive out percentage, Runner on 3rd base, <3 outs conversion rate, Runner on 2nd base, no outs, runner advanced

 

When the Brewers are locked in, and hitting home runs, we can score runs by the truckload. But if you look at last night's game, one in which the Brewers were one hit, if the Brewers cannot trot around the bases at their leisure, they stumble far too often. Christian Yelich was walked three times last night. He has a very realistic chance at winning back-to-back MVP Awards, and could go over 50 home runs. The Cardinals put Yelich on, and forced the rest of the lineup to come through. They didn't.

 

Strikeouts, like home runs, are way up. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that strikeouts do not in any way benefit a team. The Major League record for strikeouts by a team in one season is 1,594 by the White Sox last year. And directly behind them? The 2017 Brewers, with 1,571. And in third place? The 2016 Brewers with 1,543. After 8 strikeouts last night, we have 1,188 in 125 games. At that pace, we'd end up with 1,540. The fourth highest strikeout total in history (though there are some other teams in 2019 that will challenge that dubious mountain peak).

 

I will make no summation. The data speaks for itself. Hopefully, this generates some inspired debate.

[JosephC]

'stache, you did such an excellent summary of this, that you probably have killed any debate because, as you say, the data speaks for itself.

 

All I would say is that the Brewers play in a plus-plus home run friendly park, but still a park that generally plays "above average" in terms of offense...so I would anticipate the correct approach for the front office would be to be more home run geared then the average team. But yes, they are skewed to an extreme and it takes what probably should be a plus offense and makes them into an average offense. And that's exactly what they are, 8th in the NL in runs per game, overall a completely average offense when it comes to run production.

[tmwiese55]

Extremely well done, thanks.

[benji]

Excellent analysis. Really the question is how do they improve the offense next year while more than likely losing Grandal and probably Moose. Do they find OBP/contact guys for 3b, SS and C (if any exist). Just hope Cain bounces back and Hiura and Grisham are real? I am sure the front office is as disappointed as I am in the offense. Granted they are an average offense but I think the expectation was to be a top 5 offense.

[Brew crew 92]

First off, thank you for what had to have been exhaustive time consuming work gathering up that truly astounding amount of factual information. The eye test, watching this team, outside of opening day, flail away in what has to be approaching a thousand times with runners on base, has me wondering why some on this site want Arcia Moose Grandal Shaw anywhere near this team, moving forward. Isn’t it obvious we should move on from these players and re-tool at at least 3B SS C and get some hitters with higher BATTING AVERAGES.

 

Travis Shaw? Trade low, don’t care. Arcia? Trade or option him for year, get him out of this lineup. Moose > OUR WORST HITTER WITH RISP, let him go. Grandal not good in the second half, could be just wore out, which if true could have been remedied by calling up you know who, but nonetheless 15-20 million probably could be used in other area’s.

[tmwiese55]

Right. Well, for the sake of argument assume Moose/Grandal are back just to eliminate variables. One would think this would improve simply by Cain returning to form (even if not fully 2017 level) as this is exactly what he was brought in to counter. Second, not having about 700 ABs going to Shaw, Jesus, Perez when they're beyond awful. Several hundred of those would be replaced by Hiura. In theory a chunk of Jesus' would be replaced Grisham with Braun going to 1B. Things like that improve it right away. A high contact backup IF instead of Perez would be great as well.

 

Then of course is the Arcia question, that's another 500+ PA that can easily be improved with a target on this type of hitter.

 

Dealing with Moose/Grandal replacements is a whole other thing to figure out.

 

Note: having a 370 + OBP C is not part of the problem. Almost anyone you repalce him with his going to have at best a similar BA, less OBP and less power.

[MrTPlush]

Miller Park being a launching pad is a myth:

Left is HR Rank / Right is Runs Rank

 

2019 - 16th 15th

2018 - 10th 15th

2017 - 12th 8th

2016 - 9th 17th

2015 - 1st 7th

2014 - 9th 15th

2013 - 5th 5th

2012 - 1st 7th

2011 - 11th 10th

2010 - 6th 15th

2009 - 10th 27th

2008 - 22nd 22nd

2007 - 10th 15th

2006 - 14th 15th

2005 - 10th 16th

2004 - 18th 1st

2003 - 4th 11th

2002 - 20th 22nd

2001 - 8th 14th

 

---That is an average of 10th in baseball. That simply is not plus-plus...it is above average.

 

---I decided to also do runs scored and that came to 13.5th in baseball. This right here...is average.

 

Miller Park is not the launching pad nor is it the hitters park it is made out to be...this is a myth likely supported by park dimensions and a few years where it is touted every night because we have a team loaded with HR hitters.

[sveumrules]

What is the correlation between this year's results versus last year's results?

 

The thing with situational hitting is it is mostly noise. On June 12th our wRC+ with RISP was at 112, 8th best in MLB. Turned out that wasn't predictive of our next two months, which luckily means these last two months likely aren't very predictive for the rest of the season.

 

Even a great hitter like Braun, who has the 5th highest RBI% (min. 2,000 runners on) & 12th highest wRC+ with RISP (min. 1,000 PAs) since his debut in 2007 has pretty big year to year swings if you look at his yearly OPS splits with RISP...

 

990 (-128) 862 (+109) 971 (-123) 848 (+201) 1049 (-88) 961 (-43) 918 (-65) 853 (+204) 1057 (+31) 1088 (-400) 688 (+227) 915 (+2) 917

 

Add it all up & one of the best run producers of the last decade plus has an average yearly swing of 135 points of OPS w/RISP.

[jerichoholicninja]

 

---That is an average of 10th in baseball. That simply is not plus-plus...it is above average.

 

---I decided to also do runs scored and that came to 13.5th in baseball. This right here...is average.

 

Miller Park is not the launching pad nor is it the hitters park it is made out to be...this is a myth likely supported by park dimensions and a few years where it is touted every night because we have a team loaded with HR hitters.

 

Ya, I never understood the idea that Miller Park was an ban box, offensive park. That reality may have been distorted by the utter crap pitching we had the first decade or so of it's existence coupled with always seeming to have a couple big time sluggers like Sexon, Jenkins, Burnitz, Prince, Braun, etc.

[xisxisxis]

The Brewers have been very poor situational hitters. Though they rank fourth in the National League with 2,927 total base runners (with BR being the total number of base runners when a batter is at the plate), the percentage of base runners that scored is worst in the National League. Yes, they are behind even the Miami Marlins.

I wanted to see the underlying player contribution to BRS% for the Brewers, but couldn't find the individual data for BRS%. I did find individual data for OBI%, which is similar (or ABI% = All Batted In %) and measures the percentage a batter is successful in converting a baserunner into a RUN.

 

Here are the Brewers numbers so far for 2019:

 

 

As we've expected there are at least 3 player that have been hurting the team this year and they clearly have low efficiency with getting men in (2018 numbers):

 

Travis Shaw (14.40%)

Lorenzo Cain (9.66%)

Orlando Arcia (12.44%)

 

The other issue is that while Moustakas (17.48% in 2018 w/MKE) is having a very good year looking at traditional saber stats, he has been part of the problem with runners on. Funny thing is that if you look at last years BRS%/ABI%/OBI% for the Brewers, the numbers are almost the same as this years. So the team was pretty crappy last year, but the pitching hid the struggles of this group of players converting baserunners into runs. All adding Grandal did was mask the huge drop in Shaw and Moustakas being worse in 2019 compared to 2018. This team is (2019)/has been (2018) near the bottom of major league baseball in their ability to convert baserunners to runs.

[Thurston Fluff]

The other issue is that while Moustakas (17.48% in 2018 w/MKE) is having a very good year looking at traditional saber stats, he has been part of the problem with runners on.

 

Doesn't that just show what Sveurules said about situational hitting being volatile from year to year? I think the 'Stache did a great job of explaining where the team is failing but I don't think it says much about the players going forward. It just seems like something that fluctuates a lot from year to year with most players. What should help is getting more players who an hit for average. Something as old school as batting average might be due for a comeback.

[MNBrew]

Great details, 'stache, and dead on.

 

I'm not anything near a deep-stats brain, but that OP above summarizes and statistically backs so well their issues:

 

- HRs are great, but if you don't do so well at getting runners in otherwise, eventually it's a problem.

- If you make too many outs by striking out (way too much) rather than by making contact, it's eventually going to be a real problem.

- If you don't hit well w/ RISP, even if you survive decently (record-wise) in bursts, eventually that's a real problem.

- If you don't focus on advancing runners over in any way possible, especially when HR-hitting is in a slump, eventually it's a problem.

 

For all the infatuation with (and value in) HRs and power-numbers-driven OPS, and the glitz of high velocity and K-rates for pitchers, there's just too much fundamentally sound hitting that's NOT happening for the Brewers when the ball doesn't end up over the fence. . . . For all the arguments about the statistical inefficiences of bunts, stolen bases, and whatever else, I think any team's prime directive offensively has to be to utilize any means possible to accomplish getting runners on, over, and in. If power or even general hitting is in a dry spell, especially a prolonged one, teams have to focus instead on generating offense by any other means possible. The '92 Brewers, for instance, were good, consistent, all-around threats to opponents' pitching staffs and their defenses, and that team would've won the AL Central had there been 3 divisions at the time. . . . If you consistently get runners both on AND over -- no matter how -- more likely than not you're also going to be getting them in -- the ultimate and only truly meaningful offensive result.

 

In this "post-moneyball" era of 3TO, launch angles, and the like, the Brewers for a couple years have been among the very worst at having that those emphases come back to bite them (read: crappy RISP). . . . The wins by that approach can be really rewarding and exhilarating, but the rest of the time, it can be quite a problem, and that's what we're seeing bear out yet again.

 

On the flip side of the coin, the 2018 Brewers' bullpen's success (and "bullpen days," which may have predated or at least happened more frequently than Tampa's "opener" thing last year) was really just borne out of necessity, but I think it was among what many thought was the start of a new trend away from traditional starting pitching (or at least the perceived value of it). This year the results of a "focusing on bottomless, flame-thrower-filled killer bullpens" approach - at least in terms of the surface-level (but nonetheless telling) stat of bullpen ERA - indicates it's failing pretty miserably in terms of being anything realistically sustainable. . . . not unlike how, as Washington's announcers pointed out on FS1 during the 15-14 barn-burner, hitters are now adjusting to all the 96-100mph fastballs to the point where it's quickly become no longer necessarily an absolute game-changing, nearly guaranteed-dominant "tool" for a reliever.

 

Point of this ramble: Any team's key best odds for significant success seem to lie in one of two things: (1) Simply playing better all-around baseball than most any other team -- NOT the '19 Brewers' strength for sure, unfortunately; OR (2) Figuring out the "next" way in which to gain a consistent advantage over other teams in a way that puts your team out in, front results-wise, of most others. The Brewers entered the season with a seemingly good chance at (1). But it's not turning out that way and David Stearns & the FO need to focus on (2) instead to better increase the odds of (1) being the result. Continuing to favor the current hitters' "profiles" that are seemingly hurting the Brewers more than helping is very likely NOT going to change their status quo.

[DHonks]

 

---That is an average of 10th in baseball. That simply is not plus-plus...it is above average.

 

---I decided to also do runs scored and that came to 13.5th in baseball. This right here...is average.

 

Miller Park is not the launching pad nor is it the hitters park it is made out to be...this is a myth likely supported by park dimensions and a few years where it is touted every night because we have a team loaded with HR hitters.

 

Ya, I never understood the idea that Miller Park was an ban box, offensive park. That reality may have been distorted by the utter crap pitching we had the first decade or so of it's existence coupled with always seeming to have a couple big time sluggers like Sexon, Jenkins, Burnitz, Prince, Braun, etc.

 

Don't forget, our pitching staffs helped pad opponents HR totals as well.

 

One stat I'd like to look at is extra base hits. It seems rare when the Brewers have more doubles+triples than homers. Yet we've had several games where we get doubled to death. While our homers are good, doubles are often part of sustained rallies. So are our doubles down compared to prior years or opponents? We rank 6th in homers, but we rank 20th in doubles and 28th in triples. We're 11th in SLG. So our homers are good, but we're not scoring enough runs off them as stated by the tremendous statistical information posted previously. We're also clearly hot hitting enough other extra base hits.

[MNBrew]

p.s. to my ramble above:

 

1) For as stellar as Arcia's defense has been for now-45-or-so errorless games, I question the wisdom of trading our most advanced SS prospect when Arcia yet again goes months on end swinging at nearly every slider thrown his way.

 

2) It's ironic that Pina was horrific w/ RISP last year but is one of our better guys at that this year.

 

3) I'd swear Mike Moustakas must be among our "best" at unproductive outs this year, esp. w/ RISP. It's so often painfully frustrating to watch him hit nearly anytime a clutch hit is really, really needed.

 

4) One point on Miller Park: I remember when it was in the design process, there was talk about how they consulted with Robin Yount about how to construct the Miller Park outfield walls (dimensions, angles, etc.) so that it might be one of MLB's best parks for triples -- a Yount specialty and one of the most exciting (and longest actually lasting) plays that can happen in a game.

[treego14]

I like numbers and math and all that ... but all this analysis will lead to nothing than what is just painfully obvious ... this team lacks contact hitters/fundamental/situational hitting approaches. Too many strikeouts along with overswinging.

 

I would really like to see this team move towards an overall organizational approach of going for/drafting speed-contact players.

 

Speed kills! Batting skills kills!

[Brew crew 92]

Great details, 'stache, and dead on.

 

I'm not anything near a deep-stats brain, but that OP above summarizes and statistically backs so well their issues:

 

- HRs are great, but if you don't do so well at getting runners in otherwise, eventually it's a problem.

- If you make too many outs by striking out (way too much) rather than by making contact, it's eventually going to be a real problem.

- If you don't hit well w/ RISP, even if you survive decently (record-wise) in bursts, eventually that's a real problem.

- If you don't focus on advancing runners over in any way possible, especially when HR-hitting is in a slump, eventually it's a problem.

 

For all the infatuation with (and value in) HRs and power-numbers-driven OPS, and the glitz of high velocity and K-rates for pitchers, there's just too much fundamentally sound hitting that's NOT happening for the Brewers when the ball doesn't end up over the fence. . . . For all the arguments about the statistical inefficiences of bunts, stolen bases, and whatever else, I think any team's prime directive offensively has to be to utilize any means possible to accomplish getting runners on, over, and in. If power or even general hitting is in a dry spell, especially a prolonged one, teams have to focus instead on generating offense by any other means possible. The '92 Brewers, for instance, were good, consistent, all-around threats to opponents' pitching staffs and their defenses, and that team would've won the AL Central had there been 3 divisions at the time. . . . If you consistently get runners both on AND over -- no matter how -- more likely than not you're also going to be getting them in -- the ultimate and only truly meaningful offensive result.

 

In this "post-moneyball" era of 3TO, launch angles, and the like, the Brewers for a couple years have been among the very worst at having that those emphases come back to bite them (read: crappy RISP). . . . The wins by that approach can be really rewarding and exhilarating, but the rest of the time, it can be quite a problem, and that's what we're seeing bear out yet again.

 

On the flip side of the coin, the 2018 Brewers' bullpen's success (and "bullpen days," which may have predated or at least happened more frequently than Tampa's "opener" thing last year) was really just borne out of necessity, but I think it was among what many thought was the start of a new trend away from traditional starting pitching (or at least the perceived value of it). This year the results of a "focusing on bottomless, flame-thrower-filled killer bullpens" approach - at least in terms of the surface-level (but nonetheless telling) stat of bullpen ERA - indicates it's failing pretty miserably in terms of being anything realistically sustainable. . . . not unlike how, as Washington's announcers pointed out on FS1 during the 15-14 barn-burner, hitters are now adjusting to all the 96-100mph fastballs to the point where it's quickly become no longer necessarily an absolute game-changing, nearly guaranteed-dominant "tool" for a reliever.

 

Point of this ramble: Any team's key best odds for significant success seem to lie in one of two things: (1) Simply playing better all-around baseball than most any other team -- NOT the '19 Brewers' strength for sure, unfortunately; OR (2) Figuring out the "next" way in which to gain a consistent advantage over other teams in a way that puts your team out in, front results-wise, of most others. The Brewers entered the season with a seemingly good chance at (1). But it's not turning out that way and David Stearns & the FO need to focus on (2) instead to better increase the odds of (1) being the result. Continuing to favor the current hitters' "profiles" that are seemingly hurting the Brewers more than helping is very likely NOT going to change their status quo.

 

One of the best posts I’ve seen, nailed it.

 

92 brewers were easily my favorite team of all time for the exact reason you gave. Definitely not the most talented offensively, but it didn’t matter, they were the best I’ve ever seen at moving runners over, stealing bases, the hit and run, going the other way, bunting, clutch hitting and most important team play. The polar opposite of the 19 crew. I don’t expect any team in this day and age to play the game like that team did, but the point of the matter is a team has to be able to manufacture runs. The Braves and dodgers do, look at their records. For whatever reason, Stearns has built a team devoid of this art. Imo, it’s organizational, not focused on, not “taught”, in the brewers minor league system. I believe the analytics show the opposite of what I’m preaching, and this is where the team can imo, improve the most offensively by this type of attack. More Trent Grisham’s.

 

I believe Dayton Moore has already started this by stressing speed and contact over power. It’s less volatile. A more consistent way to score runs. The dodgers just happen to have both, power and great situational hitting, which definitely makes them the team to beat in the NL.

[tmwiese55]

I like numbers and math and all that ... but all this analysis will lead to nothing than what is just painfully obvious ... this team lacks contact hitters/fundamental/situational hitting approaches. Too many strikeouts along with overswinging.

 

I would really like to see this team move towards an overall organizational approach of going for/drafting speed-contact players.

 

Speed kills! Batting skills kills!

 

Thing is, this is pretty much the exact opposite of what they whole league is going to during this HR, launch angle, juiced ball revolution happening. HRs and Ks are up everywhere. Everyone is doing it this way and it's working. Seems though we've been hit hard on the variance of RISP combined with 3 guys just flopping this year. Think of this simply, how many dozens if not hundreds more runs would they have if Cain was say 285/375, Jesus was 270/340, Shaw was 265/340. Those are not crazy numbers for any of them. Arcia is what he is and actually improved from last year. Idea is simply stack as many good hitters as possible in a row and the numbers will all put together for a bunch of runs scored, in this case they seemingly had 7. Even with all that going bad they're league average (not terrible as some say), so just those guys doing mid level norm performances they'd almost for sure be top 5.

[sveumrules]

2) It's ironic that Pina was horrific w/ RISP last year but is one of our better guys at that this year.

 

It's not ironic at all. There is very minimal year to year correlation between RISP/clutch stats.

[MrTPlush]

4) One point on Miller Park: I remember when it was in the design process, there was talk about how they consulted with Robin Yount about how to construct the Miller Park outfield walls (dimensions, angles, etc.) so that it might be one of MLB's best parks for triples -- a Yount specialty and one of the most exciting (and longest actually lasting) plays that can happen in a game.

 

I think that was mostly just some goofy "get excited Yount helped build this palace" kind of thing. They did the angled walls in CF for him and while I wouldn't recall personally something tells me he also was in charge of the corner outfield dimensions too and where Miller Park gets 99% of it's triples. A big misconception about Miller Park is the dimensions are pathetic, but they actually aren't outside of the gaps which I think tend to be a little shorter than average (CF is pretty average). Directly to the poles though...second deepest in baseball at 345 feet. Only the Cubs at 355 feet have deeper corners than us. Most teams in baseball are 10-15 feet shallower...some even more than that. So that HR landing zone in RF actually isn't as shallow as it is made out to be. Before they installed that area we had a RF corner depth of about 360 feet (I couldn't find the exact number) which would have been deepest in baseball and way farther than most.

[Thurston Fluff]

2) It's ironic that Pina was horrific w/ RISP last year but is one of our better guys at that this year.

 

It's not ironic at all. There is very minimal year to year correlation between RISP/clutch stats.

 

You've said this a couple times, and I agree with you, but it seems to be getting ignored? I don't know if it's because accepting that variance makes it harder to blame somebody or if sometimes we all get caught in oversimplifying a players ability. Ability, or talent however one wants to put it, isn't a set number that stats like WAR leads people to see it as. Players ability is a range dependent on a lot of factors.

[xisxisxis]

2) It's ironic that Pina was horrific w/ RISP last year but is one of our better guys at that this year.

 

It's not ironic at all. There is very minimal year to year correlation between RISP/clutch stats.

 

You've said this a couple times, and I agree with you, but it seems to be getting ignored? I don't know if it's because accepting that variance makes it harder to blame somebody or if sometimes we all get caught in oversimplifying a players ability. Ability, or talent however one wants to put it, isn't a set number that stats like WAR leads people to see it as. Players ability is a range dependent on a lot of factors.

I'm ignoring it because:

1) It provides no information

2) It doesn't address the current discussion.

3) Generalizations tend to have very poor correlation with specifics.

 

Sure, subsetting data leads to problems with sampling issues and introduces noise, but more specifically reduces the signal to noise so signals are harder to detect. Looking at a teams data for almost a year, reduces the signal to noise issue. The Brewers have been at the bottom of baseball for 2 years in a row as a team converting baserunners into runs. There's no small sample issue there.

 

If you go back and look at the numbers, the Brewers will score 30 less runs in 2019 compared to a team that can convert baserunners into runs at the MLB average, and 50 runs less than a team at the top. Using 10 runs per win as an estimate, that means the Brewers lose 3 games a year compared to the average offense and 5 games per year compared to teams like the Braves and Dodgers. That's a huge inefficiency in the offense.

[benji]

It is important though.

 

What you just did was accurately describe the problems of the offense of the last two years.

 

Point is how is it fixed? Obtaining a player who happens to drive in a lot of runs in one year does not mean he will in the next. That is why it’s important.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Thurston Fluff]

 

You've said this a couple times, and I agree with you, but it seems to be getting ignored? I don't know if it's because accepting that variance makes it harder to blame somebody or if sometimes we all get caught in oversimplifying a players ability. Ability, or talent however one wants to put it, isn't a set number that stats like WAR leads people to see it as. Players ability is a range dependent on a lot of factors.

I'm ignoring it because:

1) It provides no information

2) It doesn't address the current discussion.

3) Generalizations tend to have very poor correlation with specifics.

 

Sure, subsetting data leads to problems with sampling issues and introduces noise, but more specifically reduces the signal to noise so signals are harder to detect. Looking at a teams data for almost a year, reduces the signal to noise issue. The Brewers have been at the bottom of baseball for 2 years in a row as a team converting baserunners into runs. There's no small sample issue there.

 

If you go back and look at the numbers, the Brewers will score 30 less runs in 2019 compared to a team that can convert baserunners into runs at the MLB average, and 50 runs less than a team at the top. Using 10 runs per win as an estimate, that means the Brewers lose 3 games a year compared to the average offense and 5 games per year compared to teams like the Braves and Dodgers. That's a huge inefficiency in the offense.

 

-The information it gives is how well a player is doing as a situational hitter. Making conclusions about any player's ability to situation hit based on any given season is not reliable. It is informational as to what the problem is but it does nothing to help us figure out who is the problem. What it might do is help us find a type of hitter who is naturally going to be better at it. Even then it appears most hitters situational hitting is pretty volatile so I'm not sure if it even helps that.

-It also helps prevent us from making changes to the current situation based on misleading information. It is no better to address a situation based on misleading information as it is than it is to do nothing at all.

-While I agree with you generalizations don't correlate well to specifics, specific players will have very different results in situational hitting from year to year. So where is the generalization?

 

The past two seasons we've had at least two really subpar everyday offensive players. Three if you count third until Huira came up for good this season. That takes a toll on the team's situational hitting. That's where volatility of players from year to year comes in. If a couple have a down year, which given the volatility of situational hitting is bound to happen, you get what we have the past couple seasons. When a third of the batting order is subpar overall we are bound to have bad situational hitting.

The remedy is to get better overall hitters. But we already know that. The problem is at what cost? It will cost more money, defensive, pitching or prospects. So the real question should be is making sure we fix our situational hitting worth it or should we fix things that are easier to address?

[danzig6767]

 

I believe Dayton Moore has already started this by stressing speed and contact over power. It’s less volatile. A more consistent way to score runs. The dodgers just happen to have both, power and great situational hitting, which definitely makes them the team to beat in the NL.

The Dodgers are only one percentage point away from being tied for second in the NL in team batting average, the Brewers are 10th. Should be no surprise then that they do a better job at driving in runners on base.

 

They have pretty much everything you'd want in an offense. They hit for average. They hit for power and they lead the NL in walks drawn. That said, for as good as their front office is, they do have the luxury of a 200 million dollar payroll. Give Stearns another 75 million to spend and odds are the Brewers have a better team than they currently have.

 

As for Dayton Moore and the Royals, they are 27th in runs scored this year, only three teams worse in MLB, mainly because they are 28th in home runs.

[645]

Miller Park is a Home Run Park. So it's a given the Home Runs are always going to be there.