Ned Yost's midseason grade

[Fatter than Joey]

If we had the 2003 roster, and were way out of the playoff chase -- with crappy players -- would Yost get a D?

 

I think so. I think he was a horrible manager then as well, I think the difference was that Yost needed some time.

[MadisonBrewerBlue]

i give Ned a B... The Brewers are 10 games over .500 on July 10 2008 same as we were last year on this date.

[The Ignitor]

Easy B. He cost us a few games, but I reckon he also won us a couple as well. Can't argue with the results, especially considering their road schedule and Gallardo's injury.

[SoCal Brew Crew Fan]

Does anyone else think Simmons has helped the Yost stubborness factor? He was extremely stubborn last year, but has been less so this year. I think Sveum has a similar personality to Ned and it compounded the issue. Since Simmons has a more calming personlity and has nothing to gain or lose by being brutally honest with Ned, I'm guessing he's been able to make progress on Ned.

[Gobias Industries]

I'd give him a B-. He's doing a lot of things better than he did last season. There are times I say "there's no way they can blame Yost for this loss" to myself after a close one, but sure enough the Yost thread is at the top of the page.

 

Post game interviews are A+ for me. I like how he's so short with the media. He's gotten a little bit nastier since the Tom H fiasco, and he has every right to be.

[iluvlamp]

Meh. I will give him a C. Seems he has been better. Seems he is doing a better job of putting the team in a position to win. But the Mota thing pops up. His biggest weakness has always been the bullpen and when to pull his starters. I guess that happens with all managers but, to me, he reacts more slowly. I think people are correct when they say Melvin has to make moves to MAKE Yost not use pitchers. I was surprised that Mota wasn't DFA'd.

[logan82]

I would give him a C+ if he had stuck with the pitcher batting 8th since it is a slightly better strategy. I am however going to give him a C since he is not doing anything that seperates him from an average manager.

[DougJones43]

C-

The team is doing pretty well, but I'd still feel much more comfortable with people other than Yost/Sveum leading the Brewers during a playoff chase. Doug Melvin has more or less removed most of the players Ned would normally misuse (Mench, Gwynn, Turnbow, etc.), but I will still be uneasy until that last temptation (Mota as the "8th inning guy" -- based on a handful of productive April innings) is gone. The team still seems to make a lot of mental errors, particularly on the bases, and I wouldn't exactly call them fundamentally sound. Yost still makes some strange decisions, but perhaps not as much as in previous years.

I do like how Yost has sprinkled in Counsell and Kapler to spell struggling Weeks/Cameron, without overdoing it. He was also quicker to platoon Hall than he would have been with players in years' past (see: Jenkins, Geoff), and it paid off with Branyan providing a nice offensive spark. The team's overall record, and outstanding record in close games, indicates he's been pulling some of the right strings (although a lot of luck may be involved - who knows).

[Baldkin]

F.

 

Tony Gwynn DHing when he brings only speed and defense to the table is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen.

 

Mota.

 

Despite what others have said, Mota is not Melvin's fault.

There's 7 pitchers in the pen, he doesn't need to throw Mota in the 8th inning. He's perfect for the Chris Spurling role.

 

I just don't think Yost knows the difference between a good result, and good execution.

 

If you walk three guys and the 3rd guy lines into a triple play, thats a good result, with poor execution. Its what Mota had done the first 20 games he pitched.

[dadofandrew]

Anything other than an A is just wrong.

 

Ned's done a fine job and ran his team very well, especially considering the injuries and Turnbow's fall from grace.

 

I think it is pretty apparent when Cecil Cooper can't get through a half-season without his players questioning his moves to the press, and that we have not seen anything like that in Yost's 5.5 year tenure...not even a released player complaining, if memory serves. He might get an extension at any time, especially if Mark is concerned about the ATL rumors.

[Gormans sideburns]

D and absolutely no higher. This guy has lost more games for the team than he has won any. My neck is sore from shaking my head at all of his boneheaded decisions during games, and until my neck feels better, this guy gets a D.

[naivin]

It's interesting to see how many people vote based on his talent.

What's funny about that? Are you suggesting that a manager shouldn't be judged on the teams performance relative to the talent? Should he have been expected to win 90 games back in 2003?

Seems to me those that have made up their minds that Ned is bad want to have it both ways...He was bad back then - and was the reason they have been bad, but now that the players are better, so we still don't have to give him any credit, or consider him competent.

If we had the 2003 roster, and were way out of the playoff chase -- with crappy players -- would Yost get a D?

Silly question, but no, many here in the lunatic fringe would give him an F, desperately wanting to believe that if only we had a different manager, the team would be better. Anyway, that's not the case, we are here in 2008 with the second best record in the national league, holding the wildcard -- with good players -- and many still choose to give him less than even an average grade, pretty much for one reason -- they made up their minds long ago that he was a bad manager due to how the Brewers played with bad players, and are unwilling to look at him objectively.

[naivin]

I think it is pretty apparent when Cecil Cooper can't get through a half-season without his players questioning his moves to the press, and that we have not seen anything like that in Yost's 5.5 year tenure...not even a released player complaining, if memory serves.

Well, actually we did hear Jenkins and Hall complain for about 5 minutes when Ned had to inform them that they would be put into a platoon rolls. Yet, once they dealt with the initial (understandable) disappointment, they accepted it and it was a complete non-issue.

 

But, he isn't polite to reporters, so I give him an F.

[DougJones43]

and many still choose to give him less than even an average grade, pretty much for one reason -- they made up their minds long ago that he was a bad manager due to how the Brewers played with bad players, and are unwilling to look at him objectively.

Thanks for filling us in on how our collective minds work, and the utter simplicity behind our reasoning. I'm glad you have been able to totally shield yourself from the thousands of posts dissecting and analyzing all aspects of Ned's managerial tenure, and very un-objectively (I know, I noticed the irony too) decide you know the "one reason" some people are grading him poorly.

[mark brouhard is number on]

I agree that the whole "isn't nice at answering reporters questions argument for why he is a bad manager"is absurd. Why does this have any impact on how he manages the team. To answer some of these questions, especially after a hard loss, must be very difficult and should have no bearing on what he does as a manager. I don't think he should have to let the fan's know everything that is going on behind the scenes. its really none of our business. And no its none of our business because "we pay for tickets and their salaries therefore we should no everything". That argument doesn'e hold any weight in my book.

I would give Ned an A- this year. He has done very well with this team, and after a slow start have rallied and he has to be somewhat of a reason for this, although they probably would have anyway. He has done better managing his pitchers and although there have been questionable decisions, if you watch any other team, those mangers face the same decisions that back fire just as much.

[naivin]

I'm glad you have been able to totally shield yourself from the thousands of posts dissecting and analyzing all aspects of Ned's managerial tenure, and very un-objectively (I know, I noticed the irony too) decide you know the "one reason" some people are grading him poorly.

 

No, actually, I've seen them, and they provide plenty of reason for me to stand by my comments.

 

Is this the point where someone throws out the term strawman?

[Bruce Ciskie]

I agree that the whole "isn't nice at answering reporters questions argument for why he is a bad manager"is absurd. Why does this have any impact on how he manages the team. To answer some of these questions, especially after a hard loss, must be very difficult and should have no bearing on what he does as a manager. I don't think he should have to let the fan's know everything that is going on behind the scenes. its really none of our business. And no its none of our business because "we pay for tickets and their salaries therefore we should no everything". That argument doesn'e hold any weight in my book.

I don't need to or want to know the team's shower schedule, but I do think the fans deserve a better answer than "He's a good pitcher and he threw a great game", "He had a bad night. Everyone has a bad night.", or "Well, the Red Sox make a bunch of errors, too" from the manager when he's pressed with a reasonable question.

 

That said, I have seen what I perceive to be improvement in Ned's performance this year. He is still dumber than the proverbial fifth-grader when it comes to handling the bullpen, but maybe he can get better there. Soon. Please.

[naivin]

I don't need to or want to know the team's shower schedule, but I do think the fans deserve a better answer than "He's a good pitcher and he threw a great game", "He had a bad night. Everyone has a bad night.", or "Well, the Red Sox make a bunch of errors, too" from the manager when he's pressed with a reasonable question.

 

Why? For what purpose? What do you expect to be accomplished by him saying more?

[mark brouhard is number on]

I don't need to or want to know the team's shower schedule, but I do think the fans deserve a better answer than "He's a good pitcher and he threw a great game", "He had a bad night. Everyone has a bad night.", or "Well, the Red Sox make a bunch of errors, too" from the manager when he's pressed with a reasonable question.

We'll have to agree to disagree then because I think his responses to these questions are inconsequential to the job he's doing as manager and have absolutely no bearing on the job he's doing. In the grand scheme of things as long as he's good with the players and the players enjoy playing for him and respect him and play hard for him that is what should matter. Not some answer to a silly question in a post game interview. Who cares if he's not good with the media.

 

 

(edit: nested quote --1992)

[homer]

The Brewers are three games ahead of Pythagorean. Does that count for anything?

[Bruce Ciskie]

Why? For what purpose? What do you expect to be accomplished by him saying more?

 

The media is Ned's middle-man to communicate with the 35,000+ that the Brewers are averaging per game, among other people.

 

I don't want to hear him call out specific players unless he feels he has to, but I also don't want to hear him make excuse after excuse for poor performances. The comment about the Red Sox making errors is right up there. There's nothing wrong with saying "We have to improve our defensive play if we're ever going to turn this around". Instead, I get an excuse about how the Red Sox make mistakes, too.

 

That's bunk, and I feel I deserve better from him. When even I can see the problem, and I don't hear the manager address it, it does tend to upset me a bit.

 

Oh, well. We can certainly agree to disagree. I do see your point.

[1992casey]

I wouldn't draw conclusions from Pythagorean unless the sample were larger or the discrepancy were a lot more extreme.

[DougJones43]

Is this the point where someone throws out the term strawman?

I'm not entirely sure you understand the concept of what the strawman argument is. I responded to a direct quote that you made.

[Bruce Ciskie]

we'll have to agree to disagree then because I think his responses to these questions are inconsequential to the job he's doing as manager and have absolutely no bearing on the job he's doing. In the grand scheme of things as long as he's good with the players and the players enjoy playing for him and respect him and play hard for him that is what should matter. Not some answer to a silly question in a post game interview. Who cares if he's not good with the media.

Oh, I don't think it matters when it comes to the job he's doing.

 

I do think it's an important part of the overall job, though. I don't feel that a major-league manager should treat the media like garbage. I see Ned as doing that, though he stops well short of guys like Hal McRae, etc., in that department. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif

[naivin]

Oh, well. We can certainly agree to disagree. I do see your point.

And I see yours. While I understand you want to hear him say those things, judging by your comments, it appears to me you know that often what he is thinking or says to the team, and what he says to the media are probably two distinctly different things. He obviously doesn't see much to be gained from making more critical comments, nor do I. So while it may make you feel better, Ned's focus appears to be what goes on in the clubhouse, and ultimately between the lines, as it should be.