Designated Yost Thread... Latest: No accountability and lack of urgency (part 1)

[Roscoe Chill]

But we're talking about last year.

[TooLiveBrew]

My fault. In that case, I'll point to Lee's far superior defense to Fielder's. I agree that the difference wasn't that great when you consider more than offensive stats.

[naivin]

My fault. In that case, I'll point to Lee's far superior defense to Fielder's. I agree that the difference wasn't that great when you consider more than offensive stats.

NDOG doesn't seem willing to do that. His argument appears to be based solely on 2 guys out of 50 - at the plate, because when you throw in the the other 48 players and both sides of the ball, the argument falls apart, and the Brewers ability to make the playoffs is no longer as simple as replacing Ned Yost.

[Thurston Fluff]

I don't like that sometimes he seems bitterly stubborn. Sometimes I feel like he'll stick with a pre-season decision of his until his hand is forced.

 

He's a Bobby Cox disciple. Cox is also known as very loyal to his players and doesn't make changes until it's more than obvious he has to. A couple yers ago, for example, Francour was just horrible for about half the season and Cox didn't so much as drop him one spot in the order. That may not be to everyones liking but I think it certainly makes the players feel respected and helps them from panicing every time they go into a funk. I think it's all about what the manager feels is improtatn for the productivity over the long haul. Some, like Pinnella, tinker constantly, and expect the players todeal with it. Others think players perfrome better overall if they are just left to work things out in the normal spot. That type of maanger will only make a change if it becomes so big a problem they feel they are losing more games now than they will save later. whether we agree of disagree with one particular approach to me is less important than the manager being consistant in his approach.

 

As far as Yost melting down last year or what he did last year Why is that improtatn this year? Keep in mind this was his first go around managing a team with something on the line as well. If he learned from his mistakes and works on improving those areas he'll be better for it. If I felt he and he alone cost the Brewers last season, or even if he was the something more than a very small part of it, thenI'd probably be less forgiving. He was a minor part. The team's inability to field, the very shallow very untalented bullpen, and the lack of quality healthy starting pitching had way more to do with it than whether Ned beaned someone or failed to pinch hit one light hitting bench player for another did.

So far I've seen him put his loyalty to last years set up man on the back burner in favor of the more talented players he has this year. A sign that he's learned where to draw the line in loyalty. His bringing in Simmons as bench coach should also provide evidence that he was looking for another voice to help him in game. If he's got Simmons I think it's reasonable to think Simmons has not strongly disagreed with the moves Ned has made. Simply because he wouldn't have replaced his existing bench coach simply to put a yes man in his place.

He may be stubborn with not changing Hart and Hall around but if we are to believe Bill James about lineups then we have to accept there is very little differance in the long term results of such minor moves. Not that that move is without debate since Hall is slugging at much higher rate and Hart has only really got hot recently.

[Roscoe Chill]

NDOG doesn't seem willing to do that. His argument appears to be based solely on 2 guys out of 50 - at the plate, because when you throw in the the other 48 players and both sides of the ball, the argument falls apart, and the Brewers ability to make the playoffs is no longer as simple as replacing Ned Yost.

And of course no response when I brought up the two players you should have compared DeRosa and Soriano to (Hardy and Hart) in regards to last year's production. The Cubs were not even close to being head and shoulders, no doubt about it better than the Brewers last year.

[Roscoe Chill]

As far as Yost melting down last year or what he did last year Why is that improtatn this year?

 

Huh? We'll see when it is all said and done this year. TO ME, Ned has a pattern that has gone on for a long time, to just throw up your arms and so "Oh Well, that was last year, he'll do better this year" is fine I guess, it doesn't however give any examples on why Ned IS the right manager on this team, those examples are absent in most discussions regarding Yost as a manager. It's always stuff like, 'every manager sucks'...'it was his first time in that situation'...'he wasn't expected to win until now'...whatever I guess.

 

And let me say again that I'm in no means calling for Ned Yost to be fired after an 8-6 start. I just think in the long run he isn't the right man for the job, and I've felt that way for a long time. I don't expect him to be gone at this point, and don't feel there is reason to do so at this point...just hoping it happens sometime. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[TooLiveBrew]

The Cubs were not even close to being head and shoulders, no doubt about it better than the Brewers last year

 

Agreed 100%

 

 

And let me say again that I'm in no means calling for Ned Yost to be fired after an 8-6 start. I just think in the long run he isn't the right man for the job, and I've felt that way for a long time.

Yes, I agree... along with your notion that many of the defenses of Yost have little or nothing to do with how he -- personally -- has done as manager. Also, let me say that I do not root for him to fail; I just get frustrated when the same kinds of mistakes are repeated.

[naivin]

NDOG doesn't seem willing to do that. His argument appears to be based solely on 2 guys out of 50 - at the plate, because when you throw in the the other 48 players and both sides of the ball, the argument falls apart, and the Brewers ability to make the playoffs is no longer as simple as replacing Ned Yost.

 

And of course no response when I brought up the two players you should have compared DeRosa and Soriano to (Hardy and Hart) in regards to last year's production. The Cubs were not even close to being head and shoulders, no doubt about it better than the Brewers last year.

Comparing Derosa and Soriano to Hardy and Hart, doesn't do a whole lot to help your argument. That's a wash at best. If you want to talk about a lack of response, your unwillingness to acknowledge the appreciable differences between the Cubs and Brewers where pitching and defense are concerned, provides a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black.

 

BTW, I don't recall ever saying that the Cubs were head and shoulders better, but I do appreciate the words in my mouth. It was somewhat close, but the Cubs were just better. They definitely lived in the same town, just not on the same street.

[Roscoe Chill]

Comparing Derosa and Soriano to Hardy and Hart, doesn't do a whole lot to help your argument. That's a wash at best.

 

That's my point. You were comparing DeRosa and Soriano to Weeks and Menchkins saying that what advantage the Brewers had with Braun/Fielder over Lee/Ramirez was nullified by the above comparison. But if you take the wash (your words) between Hart and Hardy last year and look at the whole picture, yes, it actually does help my argument when you substitute Hart and Hardy for Weeks and Menchkins.

 

Defense? Sure the Cubs were better.

 

The Cubs were absolutely the better team last year. They won because they had a roster full of veteran players, appreciably better starting pitching, and (as a result) a more dependable bullpen. The Brewers had a roster full of talented inexperienced kids, unproductive veterans, terrible defense, unreliable starting pitching, and (as a result) an unrelieble bullpen. Again the fact that the Brewers finished with virtually the same record should be a testament to Ned Yost, not an indictment. Is Lou Pinellia a good manager?

 

That's what you said. "Absolutely a better team last year." I disagree. A couple of those talented inexperienced kids were awesome last year. So who cares how young or old the two teams were.

[naivin]

Comparing Derosa and Soriano to Hardy and Hart, doesn't do a whole lot to help your argument. That's a wash at best.

 

That's my point. You were comparing DeRosa and Soriano to Weeks and Menchkins saying that what advantage the Brewers had with Braun/Fielder over Lee/Ramirez was nullified by the above comparison. But if you take the wash (your words) between Hart and Hardy last year and look at the whole picture, yes, it actually does help my argument when you substitute Hart and Hardy for Weeks and Menchkins.

 

Defense? Sure the Cubs were better.

 

The Cubs were absolutely the better team last year. They won because they had a roster full of veteran players, appreciably better starting pitching, and (as a result) a more dependable bullpen. The Brewers had a roster full of talented inexperienced kids, unproductive veterans, terrible defense, unreliable starting pitching, and (as a result) an unrelieble bullpen. Again the fact that the Brewers finished with virtually the same record should be a testament to Ned Yost, not an indictment. Is Lou Pinellia a good manager?

 

That's what you said. "Absolutely a better team last year." I disagree. A couple of those talented inexperienced kids were awesome last year. So who cares how young or old the two teams were.

 

First off, the combination of talent and experience matters, but more importantly, you demonstrate yet again, an unwillingness/inability to address the pitching. How can you claim the Cubs were not better when their pitching was so obviously better?

[lukevan]

I can't believe that the Cubs had a significant edge talent-wise in 2007 (or an edge at all) when the division came down to the unfortunate result of one AB between ARam and Coco. Obviously there were other opportunities to change the outcome of the 2007 season, but if Cordero gets Aram out in that single AB, our viewpoint becomes much different.

[naivin]

I can't believe that the Cubs had a significant edge talent-wise in 2007 (or an edge at all) when the division came down to the unfortunate result of one AB between ARam and Coco. Obviously there were other opportunities to change the outcome of the 2007 season, but if Cordero gets Aram out in that single AB, our viewpoint becomes much different.

Unfortunately, you can't play what if with just one game of out a 162 game schedule. The fact is, CoCo didn't get that out, and if you want to hypothetically take that one out of the loss column, you have to be willing to hypothetically take one out of the win column as well, and be willing to conduct the same exercise for the Cubs. In 162 games, you generally get the record you deserve.

[TooLiveBrew]

How can you claim the Cubs were not better when their pitching was so obviously better?

 

Their pitching wasn't better. Their superior defense made the pitching look like it was better, but if you follow through & investigate, you find that the Brewers' pitchers were better.

 

If your response starts with ERA or WHIP...

 

http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

[naivin]

How can you claim the Cubs were not better when their pitching was so obviously better?

 

Their pitching wasn't better. Their superior defense made the pitching look like it was better, but if you follow through & investigate, you find that the Brewers' pitchers were better.

 

If your response starts with ERA or WHIP...

 

http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

Any way you wanna slice it...although I would still argue the Cubs had the pitching advantage, as well as the defense advantage (Unfortunatley you won't allow me to use actual pitching related statistics to support that. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif But, just for fun, the Cubs ranked ahead of the Brewers in hits allowed, BAA, runs, ERA, K's), but for the sake of this discussion I will gladly assume your position. My main point - is that the Cubs were simply better than the Brewers. Not saying they were the '27 Yankees, but they were better. As far as I can tell, NDOGG seems to think that because we had Fielder and Braun we should have walked into the playoffs, but Ned Yost tripped them on the way. That narrow view simply ignores the facts.

[Roscoe Chill]

No, I'm saying that the Brewers lost the division last year. They started out 24-10...brought up a legitimate MVP candidate AFTER that start. Brought up their #2 pitcher who had a solid rookie season. And they blew it. Ben Sheets' injury was A factor. Ned Yost was A factor. You guys that stand up for Yost no matter what always turn things around like people are saying Yost was the ONLY reason the Brewers blew a shot at the playoffs last year. He wasn't. But he was A reason. That's all. He's not the man for the job IN MY OPINION...and I'm still waiting for a really good concrete reason why Ned Yost is the man for the job. No excuses for his job performance, I'd just like to hear what he brings to the table minus the blanket cliches like 'he's good with young players' because that and other ones like 'good motivator' are debatable as well.

[1992casey]

naivin, I think what you ought to do is come up with a list of the positives Ned brings to the table.

[naivin]

naivin, I think what you ought to do is come up with a list of the positives Ned brings to the table.

I've already done that...

 

I think he is a good manager. His moves don't always turn out the way he'd like, but I defy anyone to show me anyone for which that is not the case. I see a team that plays very hard, understands what is expected of them, and do their best to deliver it every night. That shows me they have nothing but respect for Ned. I see a guy who has one goal in mind this year, and that's to win. With all the young players the past several years, that (rightfully) may not always have been the case. But, with that in mind, I also see a team that has developed and gotten progressively better over time. Not sure what more people could ask for.

 

Give him the tools to succeed, and I don't doubt he will. Until perhaps this season, he has not really (or at least not consistently) had those tools. The fact that they have done as well as they have, last year in particular, should be a testament to his abilities, not an indictment.

 

One more thing I will add...I'm gonna go ahead and trust Doug Melvin as he obviously sees some of the same things I do. Barring a rash of injuries or something, if the Brewers aren't in contention right down to the wire this year, I will be the first one in line calling for a change (I do reserve the right to change my mind if the bullpen turns out to be a complete disaster, which clearly remains a possibility.). Obviously I don't expect that to happen.

 

Unfortunately, it seems the people who don't like Ned think that if the repeat "those who support Ned can't come up with any reasons why" enough times, that will somehow make it true. It is easy to utilize the benefit of hindsight to criticize moves that Ned makes or things that he does that cost the Brewers wins on a day in and day out basis. Well, by my count, last season his moves and decisions cost the Brewers 83 losses. Something that hasn't happened around here for 15 years prior. See that's the thing, If you are going to blame him for losses, you also have to give credit for wins.

 

BTW, saying I don't think he's the right man for the job, is not providing reasons.

[naivin]

You guys that stand up for Yost no matter what always turn things around like people are saying Yost was the ONLY reason the Brewers blew a shot at the playoffs last year.

 

Pot, kettle, black.

 

He's not the man for the job IN MY OPINION...and I'm still waiting for a really good concrete reason why Ned Yost is the man for the job.

I've given you those. Now its your turn, please provide those really good concrete reasons why he is not the man for the job, minus the blanket cliches like 'he leaves pitchers in too long' because that and the other ones like 'he chokes under pressure' or 'is a jerk in his post-games' are debatable as well.

[logan82]

I am still waiting for somebody to point out a manager who is clearly better than Yost.

[endaround]

Manny Acta

[xisxisxis]

I am still waiting for somebody to point out a manager who is clearly better than Yost.

 

Manny Acta

Bud Black

Bruce Bochy

Bobby Cox

Terry Francona

Rod Gardenhire

John Gibbons

Joe Girardi

Tony LaRussa

Jim Leyland

Charlie Manuel

Mike Scioscia

Joe Torre

Ron Washington

Eric Wedge

 

Borderline:

Fredi Gonzalez

Ozzie Guillen

[brewcrew00]

I don't know how you'd go about determining if the managers on that list are better or not than Ned, but some of those names? What has Joe Girardi done? He's a career 5 games below .500 (noted it's only been a year essentially). Ron Washington? Same thing as Girardi. This is why threads like this get ridiculous...

[Ennder]

Joe Girardi is on my list of managers clearly worse than Yost.

 

I think Yost is a below average manager but he isn't painfully bad like a Dusty Baker. He does ok with playing young guys in key roles, he just has some questionable decisions when it comes to late game bullpen choices and pinch hitting choices. I like that he doesnt' call that many bunts and that he doesn't let his players play every single game, everyone needs a day off once every 6 weeks or so.

[naivin]

I don't know how you'd go about determining if the managers on that list are better or not than Ned, but some of those names? What has Joe Girardi done? He's a career 5 games below .500 (noted it's only been a year essentially). Ron Washington? Same thing as Girardi. This is why threads like this get ridiculous...

 

Completely agree (I also agree with the two names you point out BTW). Judging managers is 100% subjective. That's why threads like this get ridiculous and frustrating, but its also why they're kinda fun.

[xisxisxis]

What has Joe Girardi done? He's a career 5 games below .500 (noted it's only been a year essentially).

 

Ned Yost is 61 games below 500 in 5 full years of managing, or an average of more than 12 games below 500 per season. Girardi's Marlins were 6 games below 500 in his only season, which is "clearly" better than Ned.

 

 

Joe Girardi is on my list of managers clearly worse than Yost.

 

Yeah he has that better winning %, which is clearly a bad sign ......

 

 

Judging managers is 100% subjective.

 

How come it's subjective when you point out things that are negative about nedly and "concrete" when you point out things for Ned?