Is 2008 Yost's last shot? Latest: What are we doing? I am getting worried! (reply #212)

[GenoSeligPrieb]

"We had one of the worst defensive players for their position in MLB history and our fans are ripping on Yost for replacing him so he doesn't cost us a game because of it? It just doesn't make sense to me... I know that Counsell ended up coming up to bat in some critical situations but Yost really had his hands tied in those late game situations with Braun's defense."

 

area:

 

You act as if having Ryan Braun at 3B was like having a cardboard cutout of Mary-Kate Olson standing there on defense. He was bad, defensively. No question. But I'd wager that in many of those cases, Counsell may never have seen a ball hit his way...but he DID eventually bat. That wasn't avoided. The CHANCE that Counsell could get an opportunity to do better at 3rd (and believe it or not, Counsell IS capable of committing an error, too) is not worth losing your top hitter the rest of a tight game in a pennant race.

 

"I also don't understand why Ned is looked at in a negative light for the beanball situation while it was completely ok for LaRussa to act like he did... "

 

Because, as opposed to Ned, LaRussa had nothing to lose, in this situation. Don't believe me? here's the url:

 

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=668037

 

To refresh, that night, September 26th, there's less than a week left in the season, the Cubs had already been defeated, but the Brewers were losing 3-2 in the 8th inning. We desperately needed this one.

 

Prince was drilled in the 2nd inning, and both dugouts were already warned. 6 damned innings later, with the bases empty, Yost brought in expedable hack Seth McClung just to face, and inevitably plunk, THEIR best hitter, Albert Pujols, putting a runner on. Given Ned's usual unwavering penchant for having Turnbow pitch the 8th inning, and knowing full well that McClung would have been ejected anyway, the next pitcher summoned was Turnbow, who gets as distracted by baserunners, as Frank Costanza is by tinsel. Turnbow had a 6.32 ERA when coming in with men on base and 2.48 ERA with nobody on. Think Ned didn't know that? But anyway, to no one's surprise, Turnbow gets torched, a hit, 2 walks, and 3 earned runs later, we lose again.

 

Wasn't a good chunk of this, Turnbow's fault, you'll say? Of course. But, by waiting until the game was on the line, late, to extract his pound of flesh at the expense of St. Louis's best hitter, Ned goes against what a manager's job is supposed to entail, and intentionally places his fragile setup man in a situation he doesn't tend to succeed in. Vengeance was the top priority, over possibly winning a key game in late September. Go ahead and argue against that, but you won't get many takers on it.

 

That's 4 games that were blown due to decisions Ned made, in the heat of the pennant race, which damaged his team's chances.

 

"Is it because we ended up losing a game because of it?"

 

Is that a rhetorical question?

[adambr2]

The bottom about the beanball game to me, is that we were in a pennant race. We would have been 1 game out of the division lead with a win that day going into the final series. I know it's tough to recall the environment, but at the time, it was an absolutely crucial game.

 

So as a fan who hasn't seen my team make the playoffs in over 25 years, I'm not going to just excuse the fact that Yost decided that proving that his nuts were bigger than LaRussa's was more important than doing everything necessary to win the game.

 

LaRussa was in an entirely different position, that being eliminated from playoff contention. Had we also been out of playoff contention, the decision wouldn't have fazed me in the slightest.

 

I'm not questioning that Yost was heavily scrutinized last year, sometimes unfairly. Just as he will be even more scrutinized this year, sometimes without cause. That comes with the terrority, even in a small market.

 

However, I also believe that Yost is in one best situations that any manager could be in. He took over a rebuilding franchise with no expectations which hadn't had a winning season in ages. Suddenly, the draft talent emerged into stars like Braun and Fielder, semi-stars like Hart and Hardy, and potential stars like Gallardo and Weeks. Suddenly, the Brewers got an owner willing to spend $90 million dollars on payroll. So now, any success that the Brewers have reflects well on Yost, because the franchise and fans are so conditioned to a losing Brewers franchise that they don't expect success even with the current talent level of the team. If they lose, he can cite a young team, act like the team is still taking baby steps, and remind us that hey, at least this is better than the Brewers of the 90's and early 00's, because we cracked .500 again. Meanwhile, the service time of Fielder, Braun, Hart, Hardy, Weeks, and Gallardo continues to tick.

[logan82]

How do we know that McClung hitting Pujols was intentional? McClung isn't exactly known for his pinpoint control.

[TooLiveBrew]

I don't think that anyone who experienced that game, real-time, can say with any amount of honesty that they didn't think it was a plunk-job. I remember when McClung was announced... against a RH batter... in the 8th/Turnbow inning... my only thought was, 'Well, we're plunking Pujols.'

 

Perhaps there are those out there who can legitimately say they didn't see that coming, but I just can't say I saw it or see it as anything other than bean-time.

 

But, by waiting until the game was on the line, late, to extract his pound of flesh at the expense of St. Louis's best hitter...

GSP, only you could work in some Shakespeare whilst discussing our Brewers. Well done! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[adambr2]

How do we know that McClung hitting Pujols was intentional? McClung isn't exactly known for his pinpoint control.

Well:

 

- McClung was brought in for Turnbow's 8th inning in a 1 run game, McClung was seldom used.

- McClung hit Pujol's immediately

- It just happened to be Pujols', their star player

- Our star player was beaned earlier that game

- Turnbow was already warming

 

That's more evidence than you'll see in almost any beanball case. That's like being caught at the murder scene holding a bloody knife over a body but maintaining your innocence based on the fact that you weren't seen doing it. No, short of having bugged the dugout, there's no way to prove Yost's intentions, but I think it's pretty generally accepted that it was intentional.

 

[logan82]

LaRussa an Pujols disagree with you.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=270926108

[endaround]

No they don't. They may say they don't know, but right after the game Pujols was saying what a foolish thing to do to give them baserunners.

 

McClung got out of the suspension mostly because it would likely have been career ending and thats a stiff penalty for following your mangers instructions.

[ozzybourne]

ned yost will make it through this year if there are no major injuries. if there are no major injuries(apart from sheets losing 6-10 starts), the brewers will have a successful season. the cubs will be improved and the division overall will have a better record. if the crew ends up with 90 wins and doesn,t make the playoffs (that should get them in), ned will be back.

 

i say this because with all the questionable manuvering ned has done over the last 2-3 seasons-- well documented in this thread, and one thing you can add is his stubborness to be consistently inconsistent --the time to fire hin was after the 2006 season, or in august last year. dm will have him on a short lease for the first half of this year, but if he was looking for a reason to fire him--that point in time has come and gone. the extension only means the 'lame duck' tag is gone--nothing more.

 

bottom line for me--i wish yost was gone, but he is here--and my desire for the brewers to win means i have to watch yost lead this team. i'll take the wins with yost.

[Tbadder]

Interesting question: would I like the Brewers to tank it and get Yost fired, or be successful and retain Yost long term. I'd definitely vote for the former.

[adambr2]

LaRussa an Pujols disagree with you.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=270926108

 

Yes, I read the recap. No, it doesn't mean anything at all. LaRussa basically even makes it a point to subtley call Ned a blockhead by saying that being down 1 run is a terrible time to do that.

 

It's all part of the show.

[giffted1]

That's more evidence than you'll see in almost any beanball case. That's like being caught at the murder scene holding a bloody knife over a body but maintaining your innocence based on the fact that you weren't seen doing it. No, short of having bugged the dugout, there's no way to prove Yost's intentions, but I think it's pretty generally accepted that it was intentional.

 

Wasn't it shown that there was a hitch in his delivery on the pitch, and that it was a mechanics problem, not intentional?

[endaround]

Bullcrap. McClung and Turnbow are in no way simultaneously warming up to start the 8th in any normal circumstance.

[jason21nl]

i was at the game, and there is no doubt in my mind or anyones else's mind that the beaning was intentional. Yost should have been fired on the spot.

 

 

reading the IGT for that game is something else.

[Fatter than Joey]

Wasn't it shown that there was a hitch in his delivery on the pitch, and that it was a mechanics problem, not intentional?

 

Nope

[adambr2]

That's more evidence than you'll see in almost any beanball case. That's like being caught at the murder scene holding a bloody knife over a body but maintaining your innocence based on the fact that you weren't seen doing it. No, short of having bugged the dugout, there's no way to prove Yost's intentions, but I think it's pretty generally accepted that it was intentional.

 

Wasn't it shown that there was a hitch in his delivery on the pitch, and that it was a mechanics problem, not intentional?

 

I suppose the hitch would be that he aimed his arm towards Pujols and beaned him with the baseball on his first thrown pitch. Other than that, I can't imagine some kind of way to prove by his delivery that it wasn't intentional.

 

Seriously, I guess I'm impressed with Ned that he has some people doubting, but this is open and shut. If Turnbow isn't warming at the time, or Turnbow starts the inning and beans him with the first pitch, there MIGHT be some doubt.

 

I know Ned is a bit smug at times, but there is no way he or McClung is coming out after the game, looking into the camera, and saying, "I sure did. He had it coming!"

[giffted1]

Wasn't it shown that there was a hitch in his delivery on the pitch, and that it was a mechanics problem, not intentional?

 

Nope

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3041362

Yep.

 

 

[TooLiveBrew]

That's kind of taking it out of context, though. This is from the article:

 

"McClung wrote out his comments for the appeal and had a videotape of the pitch that showed a hitch in his delivery -- indicating bad mechanics rather than intent to throw at Pujols."

 

 

This was the way McClung was presenting his side of the story. The ruling wasn't 'his suspension was overturned was due to his mechanics on the pitch in question' or anything to that effect... at least not publicized. I know endaround alluded to something else related to the suspension (career-ending, he called it?) - care to follow up, end?

 

Besides, if the ruling was, 'well, it was just bad mechanics,' then every beanball hit-man just has to double-clutch a bit on his delivery to get off scot-free. I think the fact that Yost's suspension was upheld says something.

[logan82]

How would a suspension for McClung be career ending? The reason Yost's suspension was upheld was because there is no appeal process for managers. They don't have a mega union behind them.

[TooLiveBrew]

So no suspensions can even be reviewed? Even at the discretion of MLB?

[GenoSeligPrieb]

"How would a suspension for McClung be career ending? "

 

A 3-game suspension could be, given that he shouldn't earn his way onto a Major League mound ever again!

[1992casey]

McClung is likely to end up being a Triple A pitcher continually awaiting an emergency callup. It's not practical to recall a guy for emergency use if he has to sit out a suspension first.

[Fatter than Joey]

How would a suspension for McClung be career ending?

 

Basically McClung is a garbage pitcher -- I can't imagine a team wanting to keep him on their roster for 3 games w/o him playing or being able to play.

[Fatter than Joey]

So no suspensions can even be reviewed? Even at the discretion of MLB?

 

I think the key is "there is no formal appeal process". I am sure that a manager could get some facetime with Bob Watson and plea their case --- but they would have to have a pretty substantial argument -- rather than McClung's "Hey I suck real bad" argument.

[logan82]

Sorry, but thinking that a 3 game suspension would end a players career is just silly in my opinion. This is a relief pitcher. You can easily go 3 days without pitching as a relief pitcher.

[Fatter than Joey]

Sorry, but thinking that a 3 game suspension would end a players career is just silly in my opinion.

 

No, it's really not -- There are a ton of pitchers out there like Seth McClung -- why would you sign him if the first thing he had to do was serve a 3 game suspension. The only way McClung should ever be on a MLB roster is if someone gets hurt, and he is needed in a pinch/emergency callup -- a 3 game suspension would make it hard for him to contribute immediately.