Yost: Rickie's "doing fine," but has "never achieved"

[AJAY]

Take a look at what Ned Yost has to say about Rickie Weeks . . .

 

http://blogs.jsonline.com/brewers/archive/2008/07/20/yost-defends-weeks.aspx

 

After reading Ned's latest comments about Rickie Weeks, I continue to be amazed at how ridiculous Ned always sounds. It's a good thing Ned Yost is not the President of the United States. He would probably defend the economy and gas prices by insisting that everything is fine and the American public knows nothing. Seriously, the Brewers should now make another trade and acquire some masking tape to shut Ned Yost's mouth. The more he talks, the more ridiculous he always sounds.

 

Weeks has been terrible this year and is playing nowhere near the expectations of a number two draft pick. Everyone knows it and there is no point in Ned trying to sugar coat everything and insult our intelligence. They should just cancel his press conferences because it's just a waste of time.

[BrewCrewForever]

I'm not saying Ned should play Durham everday, but it better at least be a hard platoon of Durham against RHP and Weeks against LHP. If not Yost will once again prove he is a moron.

[Bucky Rules]

Weeks has been terrible this year and is playing nowhere near the expectations of a number two draft pick. Everyone knows it and there is no point in Ned trying to sugar coat everything and insult our intelligence. They should just cancel his press conferences because it's just a waste of time.

I think where he was picked is irrelevant at this point. If that's the criterion you want to use, I can spin that and say that he's had a better career to this point than the #1 pick in that draft.

 

I agree that the press conferences are a waste of time. But, he has to attend them, so he's going to continue to defend his players. You might as well get used to it.

 

I'm not saying Ned should play Durham everday, but it better at least be a hard platoon of Durham against RHP and Weeks against LHP. If not Yost will once again prove he is a moron.

Then I guess I'm a moron. Because I really don't want them to do that. Not now anyway. Durham is some nice insurance, and a nice bat off the bench (to go with his probable 1-2 starts per week). I don't want to see Weeks benched just yet.

[BrewCrewForever]

Then I guess I'm a moron. Because I really don't want them to do that. Not now anyway. Durham is some nice insurance, and a nice bat off the bench (to go with his probable 1-2 starts per week). I don't want to see Weeks benched just yet.

 

I don't think your a moron, your not Yost http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif. I don't want Rickie benched, just platooning with Durham. Maybe starting against a RHP here and there for Weeks.

[olliegjw]

I'm not saying Ned should play Durham everday, but it better at least be a hard platoon of Durham against RHP and Weeks against LHP. If not Yost will once again prove he is a moron.

By that reasoning, Rivera should be starting at catcher every day. He is the better offensive option. If you haven't realized, Durham makes Weeks look like a gold glover.

[olliegjw]

I don't think your a moron, your not Yost http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif. I don't want Rickie benched, just platooning with Durham. Maybe starting against a RHP here and there for Weeks.

Your second sentence totally contradicts your first. I don't think anyone here is saying Durham shouldn't get the occasional start at 2nd. It just shouldn't be a strict platoon.

[logan82]

Weeks has better 3 year splits against RHP than Durham.

 

2005-2007 RHP

Weeks .249/.346/.404/.750

Durham .266/.334/.419/.753

 

2005-2007 LHP

Weeks .252/.393/.436/.829

Durham .276/.352/.504/.856

 

Which to me means that Weeks and Durham should not be platooned. I prefer Weeks high OBP against LHP over Durham's high SLG.

[Ennder]

Durham was more or less completely the wrong guy to get. We needed someone who mashes righties and was weak vs lefties and that is not who he is. He is one of the few 2B in baseball that is clearly worse than Weeks defensively as well. I'd rather just play Weeks full time than trade for Durham.

[danzig6767]

Durham was more or less completely the wrong guy to get. We needed someone who mashes righties and was weak vs lefties and that is not who he is. He is one of the few 2B in baseball that is clearly worse than Weeks defensively as well. I'd rather just play Weeks full time than trade for Durham.

 

What guy in baseball was available that plays second, gets on base, mashes righties, plays good defense, doesn't have a bad contract, and wouldn't cost us any premium prospects?

All i see this trade being was basically trading Joe Dillon for Durham. When you consider that the "prospects" we gave up were very marginal and the Giants ate half of Durham's contract, i'd much rather have Durham on the bench than Dillon. In pinch hitting situations, Durham provides switch hitting that Dillon doesn't. Even though Durham is bad defensively, Dillon is worse at second.

 

I wouldn't play Durham in a strict platoon with Weeks and i doubt Ned will either. I see Durham getting maybe a start or two a week when a starter that is very tough on righthanded batters is on the mound, the rest of the time Durham takes Dillon's role of bench pinch hitter. If we actually had given up a good prospect or two, then i'd maybe have had an issue with the trade.

 

If over the rest of the season, having Durham on the team vs Dillon ends up helping the Brewers win one more game, that's well worth to me spending an extra roughly million dollars and two fringe prospects.

 

 

 

 

[TooLiveBrew]

I don't think Ennder's 'player' had to play 2B. Durham happens to play there.

[danzig6767]

I don't think Ennder's 'player' had to play 2B. Durham happens to play there.

Where else would another position player play besides some at second?

Kendall isn't losing PT. Prince sure isn't. Hardy isn't platooning with anyone. Unless we waived Branyan and traded for a lefty thirdbaseman, there are no at bats available at third. No chance whatsoever than any of our outfielders lose playing time.

That leaves second and Rickie Weeks who has been miserable his year vs righthanded pitchers. Now i can understand some who feel Weeks losing some starts against righties to Durham isn't a net gain given Durham is worse defensively and they hold some hope that Weeks will stop being garbage at the plate when righties are on the mound.

 

Other than somehow trading for a clear upgrade to Weeks like say Roberts and either losing Weeks in the trade or basically bench him so Roberts can play, along with having to give up much more in return, i'm not sure where else that "other possible player" would end up playing and who loses at bats in the starting lineup?

 

[Ennder]

I don't know who the right guy is and Durham is an upgrade over Dillon so I exaggerated my point a bit. I'm just saying that Durham really isn't the fit for our need. He isn't a utility type player that can fill in all over, he pretty much is just a guy to platoon with Weeks and I dont' see it as much of an upgrade.

[RU Rah Rah]

After the Durham trade, per the JS:

 

"Rickie's doing fine," Yost said.

 

Again, I can kind of understand this. You don't want to blast a young player in the media, etc. But, by the same token, do you want to give an underperforming player the impression that he's living up to your expectations?

[jeffy]

I would not assume that because Yost says "Rickie's doing fine" to JS reporters means that this is the same message being given to Rickie. In fact it seems pretty clear it is not, since they just made a trade that gives them an alternative at 2nd.

[Invader3K]

Well, the Hall/Branyan platoon has been working so far...hopefully a Weeks/Durham one will net similar gains.

[sheethead]

The quote that stood out to me was:

 

"I wouldn't say he has underachieved," said Yost. "He has never been a .300 hitter (in the majors), so who says he is underachieving?'

 

"He's working his way up. He's getting better in all phases of his game. For me, he has never underachieved because he never achieved up here. How can you say he has underachieved?"

 

Hmmm...

[naivin]

Well, everybody knows it is far better for a Manager to say something along the lines of, "Yeah we traded for Durham because even though we have invested all of this time and money in Weeks based on the potential we saw, he really sucks."

 

I think they teach you that on the first day of Manager school.

 

he goes out of his way not to bash his players and is very clear that he isn't going to do it. I defy anyone to explain to me what would be gained by doing so. Does anyone seriously think Rickie doesn't fully understand the situation and is really going to think he's doing fine if he happens to read the paper?

[DHonks]

I think to Yost, Rickie is fine because he's making progress. I sometimes wonder if we'd see more progress with him hitting 6th where he could let it rip (like his first half season). But still, Rickie's numbers would be so much better if his average would climb to the .250-250 range. Yet looking at his splits this year, he hasn't had a decent month in terms of average or obp.

[FVBrewerFan]

Yost said he does not plan to install a platoon between Durham and Weeks.

"I will not, probably, right now," Yost said. "Rickie's doing fine. I'll play Ray a couple days a week, maybe. We'll see how it goes. I'll take it day by day.

"I don't know what I'm going to do," Yost added. "We'll find out when it happens."


I think I've found my new signature.

[davego]

If Dhonks is suggesting a flip of Hart for Weeks in the batting order; I'd consider that an interesting idea.

[naivin]

If Dhonks is suggesting a flip of Hart for Weeks in the batting order; I'd consider that an interesting idea.

 

I'd consider that a potentially disaterous idea. It may provide some uptick at the leadoff spot, but would create a giant hole after Braun and Fielder. Hart is far too valuable in that 5 spot and needs to stay there.

[sheethead]

he goes out of his way not to bash his players and is very clear that he isn't going to do it. I defy anyone to explain to me what would be gained by doing so. Does anyone seriously think Rickie doesn't fully understand the situation and is really going to think he's doing fine if he happens to read the paper?

See to me, Yost's comment was a little bit of player bashing. Yost said, "For me, he has never underachieved because he never achieved up here."

 

This comment leads me to wonder why Rickie Weeks deserves to remain as a starter, especially when the GM just traded for a better producing achiever. Rickie should be relegated to the bench, and Ned's comments/reasoning confirm this is what is best for the club. Why start a guy who has not achieved?

[Bucky Rules]

If Dhonks is suggesting a flip of Hart for Weeks in the batting order; I'd consider that an interesting idea.

 

Corey Hart's '08 OBP: .327

Rickie Weeks' '08 OBP: .326

 

Corey Hart's career MLB OBP: .336

Rickie Week's career MLB OBP: .350

 

 

I'm not sure why anyone would think we'd be better off flipping Hart for Weeks in the leadoff spot.

[logan82]

Well, the Hall/Branyan platoon has been working so far...hopefully a Weeks/Durham one will net similar gains.

The splits on Hall/Branyan suggest that platooning would be a big benefit. The splits on Durham/Weeks suggest they would not.

[sheethead]

logan3825[/b]]The splits on Hall/Branyan suggest that platooning would be a big benefit. The splits on Durham/Weeks suggest they would not.

Exactly, which is why Durham needs to be installed as the starter. Rickie didn't get it done this year (surprise surprise), so its time to move on to an achiever. Give Weeks a start or two a week, and he has proved to be an effective pinch-hitter. We are going for it, and .326 OBP in the leadoff position isn't gonna get it.