Rotation battle

[local hero]

I will say this however: some do raise a valid point when they point to DD's and Bush and question what we have in them as well. I personally have never been a fan of either and I can't say they'll do anything but perhaps marginally outperform Suppan, but, again, I feel confident that will indeed occur and if that's the case, it would be ignorant to move in the other direction.

 

I wasn't around on these boards for the signing of Davis, but I'd like to think with some of the smarts around these parts there must've been a collective thud of heads colliding with walls?

 

Seriously, even with the potential of this offense...are we doomed?

 

James

[Invader3K]

Yeah, I just do not get those comments by Macha. He hasn't come anywhere close to saying anything as damning in regards to Suppan. Before I was somewhat of a Macha defender, but if he keeps saying stupid stuff like this, I will quickly sour on him. There is no reason Suppan should make the rotation instead of Narveson at this point. None. If that is what happens, I will be extremely upset...not just with Macha, but with the entire organization.

[kramnoj]

I struggle to think of any other situations where a vet has been played over soemone with better promise and tolerable performance.

 

Do you not remember Hall getting any starts last year?

 

While it appears they are resolved to giving Suppan another 20+ chances to prove his worth,

 

Demonstrate how this appears to be the case.

[Baldkin]

And Counsell getting starts at 3B and SS as well, while Gamel & Escobar were on the roster, respectively.

[local hero]

^ Well I'm certain his "demonstration" would be based largely upon comments made by Macha regarding Narveson and Suppan, which I won't spend the time or energy rehashing here. Almost certainly, one will be in the rotation, one will not. Since there hasn't been anything said definitively at this point, a person would be left to use his/her inclination based upon what HAS been said at this point- even if this revolves around dialogue strictly regarding individual performances.

 

And I reason he's partially correct, regretfully. Although I do not think they'll plank him out 20 starts is he's as dreadful as expected, I almost certainly think they'll leash him out through May- so call it 7-8 starts.

 

I for one simply haven't seen or hears anything that makes me think they won't give him these starts.

 

James

[Paulus88]

I do remember Hall getting starts but that was mostly before Gamel got called up. I guess he was stealing time from McGehee. Hall did continue to get spot starts after Gamel got called up, I imagine it was mostly against leftys. If it wasn't then a conclusion can be drawn but is that conclusion more likely "macha hates young players" or "hall is on the roster and maybe we can get something out of him".

 

Given Counsell's production can Macha be blamed for playing him?

[local hero]

^ It WAS primarily against lefty's. Counsell, IMO, makes the case for Macha favoring veteran players (even though I do not particularly feel he does).

 

Counsell is part-time player who played WAY too much last year.

 

In 130 games, he scored 60 runs and drove in less than 40, I believe- with nearly all of his AB's almost EXCLUSIVELY against RHP's. Find me another .285 hitter in the league with as many games who was LESS productive (RUNS+RBIS)?

Offensively, the game is about RUNS and RBI's.

 

Who knows what kind of production we'd have seen from Gamel OR Hall over that stretch with such exclusivity? I would be willing to bet either would have eclipsed a 100 run/rbi total. Yes, even Hall.

 

I know I'm almost certainly in the minority here, but I think it's terrible news if he plays half as much this year. Expecting another season over .265 from a 14-yr career .250 hitter is like expecting Christmas in July.

 

^ Bit tongue in cheek here, guys.

 

James

[kramnoj]

"macha hates young players"

 

Strawman. Besides, you are focusing on one of several things that were used as a possible explanation for Macha's remarks rather than the insulting theory that Macha isn't intelligent.

 

Offensively, the game is about RUNS and RBI's.

 

That's the product. The way to do that is to avoid making outs and hitting with power. Counsell can be fairly good at the not making outs thing, especially given his position, but obviously doesn't have the power. And RBI are fairly meaningless if you don't look at opportunities.

[local hero]

"macha hates young players"

 

Strawman. Besides, you are focusing on one of several things that were used as a possible explanation for Macha's remarks rather than the insulting theory that Macha isn't intelligent.

 

Offensively, the game is about RUNS and RBI's.

 

That's the product. The way to do that is to avoid making outs and hitting with power. Counsell can be fairly good at the not making outs thing, especially given his position, but obviously doesn't have the power. And RBI are fairly meaningless if you don't look at opportunities.

Counsell has spent a career making an out 65+% of the time he appears at the dish. That said, you either make more outs and drive guys in with power, or, make less outs and find a way to score more frequently. Nothing in his 14 yr career lends me to believe CC can be relied upon to do either. Again, you either score runs or drive them in. The stars do both. In this day and age of the game, every other player on the field MUST do one...even the backstop. That's why keeping Kendall around also bordered on insanity. Of course either (rbis/runs) is relative, but on a team like this one, there's more than ample opps to do either. I believe they finished 3rd or 4th in runs scored last year.

 

Really, it has less to do with CC and more to do with this team. If he plays often, we obviously have problems.

 

I've not terribly worried about it.

 

James

[sheethead]

Demonstrate how this appears to be the case.

 

Its just my opinion (albeit a bit exaggerated with the number of chances) based on comments from Macha and the press following the team in ST. If you claim that 2 out of the 4 homers given up by a pitcher were not legit, you might be following a predetermined protocol regarding the status of said pitcher. Its a ridiculous comment, and it speaks volumes to what I am now expecting. That said, I will rejoice if/when Suppan is no longer tainting the Brewer uni.

[kramnoj]

Counsell has spent a career making an out 65+% of the time he appears at the dish

 

This appears to be presented as a negative. A .350 OBP for a good SS is more than acceptable. Besides, where did this come from? Escobar is the SS. Counsell is the UI. He's here because he can play acceptable to good defense at 3 positions and has a nice OBP for a PH role.

 

Its just my opinion (albeit a bit exaggerated with the number of chances) based on comments from Macha and the press following the team in ST

 

You are trying to read tea leaves and are letting your own biases affect you. At this point the Brewers haven't even indicated that Suppan has won a spot in the rotation. All we know is that he was slotted to be the 4th starter, but current reports indicate that he is still fighting for a spot in the rotation. And the idea that Suppan can't be demoted to the bullpen because of his salary seems fueled more by sportswriter bias than any kind of background information from the team.

[Paulus88]

"macha hates young players"

 

Strawman. Besides, you are focusing on one of several things that were used as a possible explanation for Macha's remarks rather than the insulting theory that Macha isn't intelligent.

 

It's not really a strawman. I'm asking where the explanation that Macha hates/dislikes/doesn't draw hearts around young players comes from. Macha's lack of intelligence would require the same explanation. Essentially what I'm asking is what leads people to assume that Macha will make his decision based upon emotional or nonrelevant criteria.

[pete]

When Macha came over we were led to believe that he was good with young players. I completely disagree at this point. He doesn't take the Sabermetric thing to far, he missuses it. It gets something in his head and then finds numbers that appear to back it up what he is saying. Look at THT's analysis of how he presented the numbers on Gomez earlier in spring training. Few people who like the sabermetric part of baseball would just drop the run altogether. They would be more selective with who they let steal. I think Macha is a control freak.

 

THT is becoming the Bleacher Report for snobs. That article is worthless. He admits not knowing what Macha and Sveum are doing and makes generic recommendations. Assuming that they don't want him to hit more line drives is idiocy as is thinking that Macha is going to give a manager's briefing and talk about wOBA.

[kramnoj]

It's not really a strawman.

 

You made up something to make your case. What do you call that?

 

I don't think Macha has a particularly bad case of Proven Veteranitis. But I think that bias is built into baseball, and Macha has a few examples of it that have already been presented here.

[pete]

And Counsell getting starts at 3B and SS as well, while Gamel & Escobar were on the roster, respectively.

 

I remember Squeaky Fifer absolutely screaming on the radio when Hardy played. Later it as revealed that there were scouts there to look at him and the season was over as well. There were other times when he complained about Counsell and then it turned out that someone was dinged up. So far this year he has screamed at Macha for playing Counsell and Edmonds in the upcoming season.

 

His latest obsession is paying a fifth of the payroll to a player is certain doom.

[sheethead]

You are trying to read tea leaves and are letting your own biases affect you.

 

What? My bias says cut bait. How does that segue to give him a chance to prove himself?

[kramnoj]

What? My bias says cut bait. How does that segue to give him a chance to prove himself?

 

Yes, you have your bias that Suppan is worthless. You also believe that the Brewers will do the stupid thing you don't want them to do. You are creating a scenario where the Brewers will do the thing that you think is stupid, and looking for reasons to support that.

[jjjf44]

Starters:

Gallardo, Wolf, Davis, Bush and Parra

Relievers:

Hoffman, Stetter, Hawkins, Coffey,

Vargas, Axford, Navrreson

[Funketown]

I wasn't around on these boards for the signing of Davis, but I'd like to think with some of the smarts around these parts there must've been a collective thud of heads colliding with walls?

 

Seriously, even with the potential of this offense...are we doomed?

I don't remember that being the case with Davis. Sure, DD isn't a bona fide #2 starter, but a $5.25 million 1 year plus option deal for an average starting pitcher is nothing to complain about. Again, Davis has consistently pitched around 200 innings, and should be expected to put up an ERA somewhere around 4.5.

 

I'd give the Brewers a 15% - 20% chance of making the playoffs this season, for a variety of reasons. Most projection systems have them at between 77 and 82 wins, which sounds about right to me. However, with so many unknowns (Escobar, Gomez, Parra, Narveson), it wouldn't surprise me too much if the Brewers finished the year anywhere between 72 and 90 wins. I also don't think the NL Central will be very strong this year. The Reds, like the Brewers, have a ton of question marks. The Cubs are aging and don't look much better than the Brewers right now. The Cards are the odds-on favorite for the division, but if any of Carpenter, Wainwright, Pujols, or Holliday goes down for an extended period of time, they could be in trouble.

 

Overall, I'm typically optimistic when it comes to Brewers baseball, but I think this team has potential to be pretty good. Then again, they also have the potential to be pretty bad.

[Paulus88]

It's not really a strawman.

 

You made up something to make your case. What do you call that?

 

Well then I'm sorry for wasting everyone's time. Maybe its a carry over from those Gamel threads last summer or maybe it's reading too much into the posts in this tread that imply that Suppan is being evalauted differently from other candidates. Either way, the argument that Macha is favoring veterens because of their veterniness has not been made, is a figment of my imagination and deserves no further discussion.

[sheethead]

Yes, you have your bias that Suppan is worthless.

 

That is not a personal bias, it is borderline fact and will be proven so within the next year. And my opinion on what I think the Brewers are going to do is formed by reading reports and listening to people who are close to the team (since I am not), and NOT by me thinking the Brewers will do the stupid thing. Its a truly tough decision for management to make considering all the coin involved.

 

If I am Attanasio or Melvin, I want to try every possible method to get some return on this investment. I can understand their personal bias. As a fan, it is clear to me that there is very little chance of squeezing any value out of Suppan this year, and he will likely be out of MLB as early as this season. If you are a fan and actually think Suppan can help the Brewers in 2010, that would be a personal bias that makes no sense to me.

[local hero]

Counsell has spent a career making an out 65+% of the time he appears at the dish

 

This appears to be presented as a negative. A .350 OBP for a good SS is more than acceptable. Besides, where did this come from? Escobar is the SS. Counsell is the UI. He's here because he can play acceptable to good defense at 3 positions and has a nice OBP for a PH role.

 

Its just my opinion (albeit a bit exaggerated with the number of chances) based on comments from Macha and the press following the team in ST

 

You are trying to read tea leaves and are letting your own biases affect you. At this point the Brewers haven't even indicated that Suppan has won a spot in the rotation. All we know is that he was slotted to be the 4th starter, but current reports indicate that he is still fighting for a spot in the rotation. And the idea that Suppan can't be demoted to the bullpen because of his salary seems fueled more by sportswriter bias than any kind of background information from the team.

First, CC's .350 OB isnt't the problem...it's his lack of a suitable total of RBIs and RUNs when you reach base that often. Additionally, I specifically mentioned he (CC) was only a concern if other players went awry. But that's for another thread.

 

Second, of course he (and everyone else) is reading tea leaves. Isn't that the point of this thread?

You indicate that the Brewers themselves had him slotted for the 4th postion, and we have heard nothing thus far that indicates otherwise.

 

Thus, a reasonable person would deduce that he is AT LEAST in-line ofr a spot in the rotation, be it 4th, 5th or otherwise.

 

"bias" is inherent in dialogues such as these. Barring egregious personal interactions, vitually everyone would tell you that their "biases" are not biased at all, but, rather, steeped in reasoning that they feel is sound enough to create a certain inclination.

 

[kramnoj]

If I am Attanasio or Melvin, I want to try every possible method to get some return on this investment.

 

This is where you misunderstand their motive. They both want to win. That is much more important to them than getting any value out of money that has already been spent.

[logan82]

First, CC's .350 OB isnt't the problem...it's his lack of a suitable total of RBIs and RUNs when you reach base that often.

 

The blame for that falls on the hitters behind and ahead of CC. He has little control over hitting RBI's if nobody is on base and little control if nobody behind him is hitting.

[local hero]

I wasn't around on these boards for the signing of Davis, but I'd like to think with some of the smarts around these parts there must've been a collective thud of heads colliding with walls?

 

Seriously, even with the potential of this offense...are we doomed?

I don't remember that being the case with Davis. Sure, DD isn't a bona fide #2 starter, but a $5.25 million 1 year plus option deal for an average starting pitcher is nothing to complain about. Again, Davis has consistently pitched around 200 innings, and should be expected to put up an ERA somewhere around 4.5.

 

I'd give the Brewers a 15% - 20% chance of making the playoffs this season, for a variety of reasons. Most projection systems have them at between 77 and 82 wins, which sounds about right to me. However, with so many unknowns (Escobar, Gomez, Parra, Narveson), it wouldn't surprise me too much if the Brewers finished the year anywhere between 72 and 90 wins. I also don't think the NL Central will be very strong this year. The Reds, like the Brewers, have a ton of question marks. The Cubs are aging and don't look much better than the Brewers right now. The Cards are the odds-on favorite for the division, but if any of Carpenter, Wainwright, Pujols, or Holliday goes down for an extended period of time, they could be in trouble.

 

Overall, I'm typically optimistic when it comes to Brewers baseball, but I think this team has potential to be pretty good. Then again, they also have the potential to be pretty bad.

 

Regarding doug davis, he's 15-22 over the last 2 years, walked every human on earth, has pitched about 175 innings a campaign , and gives up 4 1/2 runs a game. He is a below average ML SP.

 

Ditto for bush.

 

Call Wolf middle of the road because, well, he is: another hair above/below .500 arm who gives up 4.25-4.5 a game. I shudder to think what a leap from LA to Miller Park will do his 35 yr-old arm and stat-line.

 

That leaves: Gallardo/Narveson/Parra/Suppan in one form or another.

 

I wish I could be as hopeful as a 1/5 chance of playoff this year, but this rotation is looking strikingly (or, not so strikingly as far as home plate's concerned, lol) similar to last year's: One bona fide stud (IMO). 1 wild card who could win or lose 15, and 3 others who we just expect/hope to (gulp) just finish with 12 or so losses.

 

It will all come down to the bats pulling 20 or more rabbits out of a hat...again.

 

And that's a lot to ask over 5 months.

 

James