RealGM

Through 13 games:

Run differential: -32, worst in MLB
Starting rotation ERA: 6.05, worst in MLB

Keep it rolling!!!

My better than expected prediction was kind of predicated on the starting pitching being better by default of can't be much worse...so far I'm wrong, lol.

Interesting offensive items: They're 3rd in the NL in walks, 9th in OBP, they're leading the league Swing%.

LUKE23 wrote:Through 13 games:

Run differential: -32, worst in MLB
Starting rotation ERA: 6.05, worst in MLB

Keep it rolling!!!

Wow that is bad

The pitching is so damn bad.

They've stolen some wins, which could be a bad thing. Should be 4-10 at best considering their schedule and run differential. Also, I'm not convinced the pitching is that bad if they put Peralta out to pasture. It's nice to see vets like Braun, Carter, Gennett, and Villar hit for trade value purposes. But it's a risky proposition because the schedule is pretty soft until the 2nd week of June and I think there's a legitimate risk of them being above .500 for a while, and we know Mark A's history when it comes to being fooled by fluke stretches of solid baseball.

coolhandluke121 wrote:They've stolen some wins, which could be a bad thing. Should be 4-10 at best considering their schedule and run differential. Also, I'm not convinced the pitching is that bad if they put Peralta out to pasture. It's nice to see vets like Braun, Carter, Gennett, and Villar hit for trade value purposes. But it's a risky proposition because the schedule is pretty soft until the 2nd week of June and I think there's a legitimate risk of them being above .500 for a while, and we know Mark A's history when it comes to being fooled by fluke stretches of solid baseball.

I don't think we have to worry about Mark A. Stearns seems to know what he's doing.

The bottoming out thing may not happen, though. I don't think we'll be good by any means, but we've probably upgraded across the field at most positions. Could be closer to .500 than the bottom of the standings.

While it will be difficult to even be bottom 5 I see no scenario where they are closer to 500 than the bottom of the standings.

Outlander wrote:While it will be difficult to even be bottom 5 I see no scenario where they are closer to 500 than the bottom of the standings.

Last year the bottom of the NL had winning percentages of .389 and .395

I could see the Brewers end up something like 74-88 (.457) to 76-86 (.469), thus being closer to .500 than the bottom of the standings.

I see no way we win mid 70s.

This team is really bad. We will win low 60's I think, it really looks like we have the worst starting pitching in the entire MLB. There will be a point this season where we go like 4-16 over a stretch of 20 games, infact we are lucky we are facing the twins right now or we would already be buried. At least the batting is better than I expected

You guys are underestimating how much better the offense is going to be.

I would say you're underestimating how bad the pitching is. I would definitely put money on under 70 wins

H2tObes wrote:I would say you're underestimating how bad the pitching is. I would definitely put money on under 70 wins

Yea, when teams have terrible starting pitching and the season starts dragging along, things tend to get ugly. Unless Peralta and Jungman turn things around, this could end up being the worst rotation in the league. Not only will that lead to lots of early deficits, the pen will get overworked with starters struggling to just complete five innings.

ReasonablySober wrote:

coolhandluke121 wrote:They've stolen some wins, which could be a bad thing. Should be 4-10 at best considering their schedule and run differential. Also, I'm not convinced the pitching is that bad if they put Peralta out to pasture. It's nice to see vets like Braun, Carter, Gennett, and Villar hit for trade value purposes. But it's a risky proposition because the schedule is pretty soft until the 2nd week of June and I think there's a legitimate risk of them being above .500 for a while, and we know Mark A's history when it comes to being fooled by fluke stretches of solid baseball.

I don't think we have to worry about Mark A. Stearns seems to know what he's doing.

The bottoming out thing may not happen, though. I don't think we'll be good by any means, but we've probably upgraded across the field at most positions. Could be closer to .500 than the bottom of the standings.

Don't agree with you on the team finishing somewhat close to .500, but i'm with you on Steans and Attanasio. When Attanasio hired Stearns and thus agreed to a rebuild, i'm nearly 100 percent certain that he'll then allow Stearns to see things through without forcing a change in direction if the team were to have a stretch playing better than expected.