"The Brewers are so much greater than the sum of their parts, so consistently, that they could make a reasonable observer wonder whether he or she knew anything about baseball math at all. They lead MLB with 68 wins as of Tuesday despite spending about a third as much on their payroll as the sport’s highest spenders. They do not hit for much power, and they let go of big stars year after year, only to find they did not need them much anyway. The Brewers are the best team in baseball. That shouldn’t be possible."
From "Milwaukee has the most wins in the sport despite fielding a largely anonymous roster. 'You don’t know why, and I don’t know why,' its manager says" (WaPo).
49 टिप्पणियां:
I'm not plugged in - but I think It might be safe to say the Colorado Rockies are the opposite.
Well, I am glad to see that you have taken the mantle of responsibility for the Brewers inevitable decline off of my shoulders. (A responsibility I assumed a week or so ago by looking up the Brewers' record for the first time this season.)
If only there were an entire book and movie based on this concept.
The Brewers have been something to see, playing dominant baseball now for what seems like 6 weeks. My Cubs are looking up at them from 2d place with the second best record in baseball.
One of friends texted me the other day, asking Don't those MFs ever lose?
And, yet, when October rolls around they will still likely go tits-up against L.A. or the Phillies/Mets.
Ah well the Sun shines on different dog's backs during the season. For a while my San Diego Padres looked invincible--just at the start of the season. Then the wheels came off. Maybe the Brewers will win the World Series. And maybe I'll be 20 again.
A diversity of individuals, minority of one. DEIsm is a progressive ideology with rotten roots.
Money is not a deciding factor in spirit or performance. Another epiphany.
Having the best record does not necessarily mean they are the best team
Wasn't there a movie about this? Brad Pitt was in it.
If only there were an entire book and movie based on this concept
…that’s where my thoughts went but the low-hanging fruit of better metrics has all been picked now that every team has a stat guru. Good farm? Your guys mature early that would let you compete with a lower payroll…and yes, sometimes two plus two is five…
…that’s where my thoughts went but the low-hanging fruit of better metrics has all been picked now that every team has a stat guru.
Me too. I always thought that the "Moneyball" paradigm would bring us to a new equilibrium as every team applied its precepts, after which the power of the payroll would again reassert itself. Guess not.
Everybody says that the Red Sox took the moneyball idea and won the WS with it by having just a few more bucks, but really they managed to engineer a sale involving two teams where the Red Sox got a chance to snag Josh Beckett and Mike Lowell, two of the key players in that Marlins WS team, through self dealing to fill out an already solid roster. But sure, analytics have changed how every sport is played.
Can no one who works for a major newspaper write anymore? That headline (of the blog post) is like a bad machine translation of Japanese or something.
The Brewers are doing great things, but it's not really Moneyball. The Brewers have two advantages - a lot of good pitchers under the tutelage of the best pitching coach in the major leagues in Chris Hook, and a crusty old-school manager in Pat Murphy, who understands the talents of his players and insists they play good fundamental baseball. The Moneyball conceit was always too clever by half and you'll note that the A's of that era, while good, never won anything. It remains to be seen if the Brewers win anything, but they're not trying to outsmart their opponents; instead, they play the game as it's been traditionally taught.
Theo was publicly upfront about stats and those Red Sox teams- moneyball with money was part of it but only part, and personnel was the second major element. We were close to the team that year in a few ways- Lowell moved in down the hall from my wife’s business partner- she started leaving her condo door open so the Lowell’s little dog would wander in and Mike would have to come get…haha. Theo and the brain trust moved in to a big box on the 1st base side and one of the public radio stations like BUR os something had a contest where the prize was you got to sit in that box with Theo for a game. Well the contest was rigged as said business partner ‘won’ and sent the sons of a friend to the game. Interesting to me- Theo was asking the boys where they went to school and the older one attended some Division 2 school I never heard of but when they told Theo he immediately recited the names of half the players on the team and some of their stats, all from memory….
what @Wilbur said.
Eamus Catuli. Time to straighten out and feast on that second half schedule, Cubbies. This team is better than it has shown after the break.
The Seattle Pilots are having a good year...
Maybe this is the next iteration of baseball management excellence. Maybe they've started with the principles of statistics, a-la Money Ball and added to this the strength of good, old-fashioned, grey-haired coaching and player management. Hope their success continues unexplained for as long as possible, because sports-talk is part of the game, too.
The Brewers spend money on scouting and development. You don’t need superstars to win. You just need a lot of solid pitchers, hitters, and defenders
Given how much starting pitchers get hurt, it’s poor strategy to pay them so much. Last month, the Dodgers had $70 million of pitchers on the injured list.
Ha. I thought of "Major League." Filmed in the old County Stadium in Milwaukee.
Best record in baseball does not mean best team. Brewers have played the easiest part of the schedule at the 2/3 point, it gets tougher from here. It also matters when you play teams. Seems everyone the Cubs have played in the last 3-4 weeks are hot (example the Sox who are terrible had won 5 in row, as did Baltimore.) But 162 usually tells who's best in the end.
"One of friends texted me the other day, asking Don't those MFs ever lose?"
My thought s too.
The Brewers and Cubs play a five game series (4 regularly scheduled and a rain out Make up) at Wrigley later this month. I'm going to the 8/21 day game. Hopefully the Cubs can close the gap in the interim.
As an aside both teams will be in the playoffs.
a week ago the Cubs were the best team in baseball, before that the Mets, Yankees, Dodgers, Phillies, etc.
Teams get hot and go cold. Long season. A game of attrition.
Wake me for the playoffs.
The Cubs are the Cubs. They don’t have the pitching to hang with the Brewers.
Moneyball only goes so far. As someone pointed out above, the Oakland A's never won anything. And the 2004 Red Sox did not win because of Kevin Youkilis.
They had the following high-priced players who they obtained through free agency or trades, in addition to Josh Beckett and Mike Lowell: Pedro Martinez, Curt Schilling, Johnnie Damon, Keith Foulke, Manny Ramirez, Kevin Millar, Bill Mueller. David Ortiz came cheap several years earlier but that was pre-Moneyball. I may have left some out.
"mccullough said...
The Brewers spend money on scouting and development. You don’t need superstars to win. You just need a lot of solid pitchers, hitters, and defenders"
This is true...sort of...for regular season success. The game is different during the 162 game season. You play every day pretty much. So a deep starting staff and bullpen are necessary. Playoffs you have regular off days so deep isn't as important, you're seeing just the top pitchers so superstars are more important.
The Brewers have Dan Turkenkopf on payroll. He’s their stats and metrics guy, so you know the Brewers ain't all old school fundamentals… (he’s also from Saratoga like me)
Superstars help in the playoffs. That’s why the Dodgers have the best chance. But the days of starting pitchers throwing 7-8 innings are long over. The teams with the overall best pitching have the best chance.
This year that’s the Rangers & Brewers
"mccullough said...
The Cubs are the Cubs. They don’t have the pitching to hang with the Brewers."
We'll see. We picked up three pitchers at the deadline, although one is now on the IL after two innings. Jameson Taillon pitched very well earlier this year and will be off the IL shortly.
My favorite player = Abner Brismaury Uribe
Coolest Guy in MLB right now is Shohei Ohtani. The Japanese Babe Ruth.
"rehajm said...
The Brewers have Dan Turkenkopf on payroll. He’s their stats and metrics guy, so you know the Brewers ain't all old school fundamentals"
Metrics and fundamentals are unrelated. Metrics are about strategy, fundamentals are about execution.
Wasn't this the whole premise of the book and film "Moneyball"? Coupled with Scottie Scheffler's recent recognition that life is much bigger than these games we play, I wonder why we pay these guys nearly as much as we do. (I use the term "we" generously).
I'm off sports. If I get a free ticket, cool, but with what it costs to be "entertained" by people who don't really care anyway in a game in which I have no skin, no thanks.
"RCOCEAN II said...
Coolest Guy in MLB right now is Shohei Ohtani. The Japanese Babe Ruth."
Not sure how "coolest" is defined but seven players have a higher WAR than Ohtani.
There are plenty of examples of well-run organizations making the playoffs despite spending much less money than the usual big players, but there are few if any examples of these organizations winning a championship.
Yancey Ward said...And, yet, when October rolls around they will still likely go tits-up against L.A. or the Phillies/Mets.
Exactly. Moneyball was the story of a team that couldn't quite make it across the finish line.
Tim Maguire you are correct. The Detroit Tigers have such a roster. They will be good. They will make the playoffs. But this roster will not win a championship. Nor will Milwaukee. In the end, it still takes some big stars to do it.
Ohtani pitches and is the second best hitter in MLB. WAR is a useful metric but is based on models not actual games. Yelich has 73 RBIs in 454 plate appearances. His WAR underrates him based on his OPS.
Metrics and fundamentals are unrelated
..and my point, yes…
The Detroit Tigers have such a roster. They will be good. They will make the playoffs. But this roster will not win a championship.
AJ Hinch got the Astros a championship with a cheap payroll. There was the cheating scandal [run by Alex Cora], but most of the ALCS and WS wins were on the road (when they couldn’t cheat). One thing I don’t think AJ gets credit for was platooning his starters during the playoffs. He took a six starter rotation, and doubled them up. Games starts with 3 to 4 innings of Verlander, and after 2 chances at bat, you got the number 4 starter for 1 or 2 looks before the Closer ended the game. Your 4, 5, 6 rotation starter didn’t have to be Aces, just better than their late reliever.
Championships create excitement because, in the short term, luck and hot streaks (and cold streaks) take precedence over how good the players are in the abstract.
"This is true...sort of...for regular season success. The game is different during the 162 game season. You play every day pretty much. So a deep starting staff and bullpen are necessary. Playoffs you have regular off days so deep isn't as important, you're seeing just the top pitch."
With a shorter rotation, I think the Brewers are even scarier. The question is whether the bats will be there.
Just makes sure they don't saddle you with a WNBA franchise. Boston and Connecticut are fighting over one now, but they ought to be fighting to give the other place all the headaches.
We are only 2/3 of the way through the season. We might yet see regression to the mean.
The Brewers are 53-29 since May 1. They were 16-15 in March and April. So which is the anomaly? A .500 team over first 31 games or a team that wins almost 2/3 of its games for the next 82 games?
"Milwaukee has the most wins in the sport"
That's...awkward. Tell me the author isn't a baseball fan without telling me the author isn't a baseball fan.
Anyway, the Brewers are winning because they're getting career years out of a lot of players. Every starting player but one (Ortiz) is playing above-average offensively (an OPS+ over 100, IYKYK) and 14 of their top 15 pitchers (in innings pitched) has an above-average ERA+. Many championship teams do this, then revert to mediocre-to-good the following season. For Milwaukee, the time is now.
And yet, EVERY time someone has mentioned MLB expansion in the past 30 years, the response has been, "Oh, NO, we can't further dilute the pool of talent! There aren't enough talented players to stock yet another MLB team!" This has always smelled like bullshit to me. I have never seen the claim directly rebutted. Indirectly, "moneyball" refutes the argument. But the naysayers still say that it doesn't because reasons.
Kismet, but only for now. D.D. Driver and others have good point. Go Mets. And Sliwa. It would be magical. But it ain't gonna happen. Detroit seems more solid in endurance now. Playoffs will go to the big dogs like Houston, Dodgers, Philly. Heartbreaking year for the Braves. Why? I refuse to pay the 99 cents per month the AJC keeps trying to sell me on.
At least the Yankees are stumbling. That's better than my teams winning. And the Pope is not praying hard enough for the White Sox. Who is a White Sox fan anyway? I've never met one. Wear a hairshirt if you're going to be that way.
Imagine if he invited world leaders to a game. Perfect optics. I'd pay to see it. We need more of that. They'd lose anyway, but what fun! Intersperced with tedium, sausages, and humility, of course, but that's Catholicism.
एक टिप्पणी भेजें
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.