The Brewers' Next Manager; Latest -- Valentine may have inside track to the job; Cora, Melvin, Roenicke also finalists

[MJLiverock]

Kapler got hurt and was done for the year early in September I believe. Gross was long gone by then and really should never have been considered as a lead off option anyway considering he is the LH verson of Mench but with less power and worse against his platoon strength. If Counsell was playing that meant Hardy probably wasn't and he was probably in the two hole filling that spot. Really Cameron with a .330 is OBP wasn't that bad if Weeks was out.

[thebruce44]

Kapler got hurt and was done for the year early in September I believe. Gross was long gone by then and really should never have been considered as a lead off option anyway considering he is the LH verson of Mench but with less power and worse against his platoon strength. If Counsell was playing that meant Hardy probably wasn't and he was probably in the two hole filling that spot. Really Cameron with a .330 is OBP wasn't that bad if Weeks was out.

I think you are right about Kapler and Gross. However, I think Counsell was pretty much manning 3rd.

 

Anyway, I am really surprised by the Dale love or rather that I am the only one who scratched their head at some of his lineup moves. If I am in the minority, so be it. At the same time, I just can't get myself to get behind a lineup like this one:

 

1 - Cameron CF

2 - Bill Hall 3B

3 - Braun LF

4 - Fielder 1B

5 - Hardy SS

6 - Hart RF

7 - Weeks 2B

8 - Kendall C

9 - Pitcher

[kramnoj]

And those strengths played very well in the outfield and out of the 5 spot in the order. As a leadoff hitter, not so much.

 

What evidence do you have to support the notion that power and baserunning aren't strengths for a leadoff hitter?

 

I also remember Dale being interviewed on the move before his first game as head coach and he said the reason was to get a veteran up at the top of the lineup.

 

I have no idea if that was the actual reason that Sveum moved Cameron up, but I wouldn't take the fact that he said so to the press to mean he thought that. People say things we think are silly to the press because that's the conventional wisdom, and they won't get challenged by the press. If I was a manager, the last thing I want to do is spend more of my day talking to the press, so I would say whatever they want to hear so I can spend the rest of my day with the team.

[Oldcity]

I can't help but really hope they don't hire anyone from the Angels. I hate their brand of baseball.

What's to hate about winning nearly every year? That's the only brand of baseball i care about.

They won because of their pitching and defense, and in spite of "Sciosciaball." He bunts, hits and runs, and steals way too much.

[thebruce44]

kramnoj[/b]]And those strengths played very well in the outfield and out of the 5 spot in the order. As a leadoff hitter, not so much.

 

What evidence do you have to support the notion that power and baserunning aren't strengths for a leadoff hitter?

 

I also remember Dale being interviewed on the move before his first game as head coach and he said the reason was to get a veteran up at the top of the lineup.

 

I have no idea if that was the actual reason that Sveum moved Cameron up, but I wouldn't take the fact that he said so to the press to mean he thought that. People say things we think are silly to the press because that's the conventional wisdom, and they won't get challenged by the press. If I was a manager, the last thing I want to do is spend more of my day talking to the press, so I would say whatever they want to hear so I can spend the rest of my day with the team.

If a player takes advantage of that power to draw more walks it is helpful no doubt. In terms of using that power, I think it is more effective down farther in the order. As I said before, OBP is key before Braun and Prince get to the plate.

 

Let me ask you this. At the end of 2008, who would you have rather had as the leadoff hitter, Weeks or Cameron?

 

In terms of Dale saying one thing to the press but not thinking it, I can't really dispute that since its just fairly baseless conjecture on your part. There is no proof either way, so I really don't want to start guessing the thoughts of a man I don't know. I will however say that in many of his lineup decisions, he showed that he preferred veterans to younger and in my opinion better options. He said it, then did it. Maybe he thought something else, but I doubt it.

[logan82]

Don't forget starting Suppan over Gallardo in a playoff game.

[Sage]

I can't help but really hope they don't hire anyone from the Angels. I hate their brand of baseball.

What's to hate about winning nearly every year? That's the only brand of baseball i care about.

They won because of their pitching and defense, and in spite of "Sciosciaball." He bunts, hits and runs, and steals way too much.

Now this is interesting. Lack of bunting, hit and runs, and stealing seems to have been one of everyone's main issues with Macha. If we had a manager who would use the bunt, hit and run, and sends the runners, I'd be very happy. Of course, to every man his own.

So, when did this become the "Why Dale Sveum is a terrible manager" thread? lol

Anyway, I'm a little sad. I haven't heard any rumors about our next manager in over a day. I'm getting bored. I need something, anything. Tell me we're bringing someone in for an interview.

[BrewCrewForever]

Don't forget starting Suppan over Gallardo in a playoff game.

I'm still not 100% sold that was all Sveum's call.

[thebruce44]

What's to hate about winning nearly every year? That's the only brand of baseball i care about.

They won because of their pitching and defense, and in spite of "Sciosciaball." He bunts, hits and runs, and steals way too much.

So, when did this become the "Why Dale Sveum is a terrible manager" thread? lol

Anyway, I'm a little sad. I haven't heard any rumors about our next manager in over a day. I'm getting bored. I need something, anything. Tell me we're bringing someone in for an interview.

I think you answered your own question. The Packers are all injured and theres no other Brewers news to talk about. We're reduced to rehashing Dale's couple of weeks as a manager.http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[RockCoCougars]

Don't forget starting Suppan over Gallardo in a playoff game.

I'm still not 100% sold that was all Sveum's call.

I'd bet my car that it was not Sveum's call. Mark A. wanted his 'big game pitcher' to justify his contract. He had used smoke and mirrors to limit the Cubs the previous Friday, so I'm sure Mark thought that he could do it again as he was his biggest fan. Though there is obviously no proof of this, Attanasio obviously meddled in the Yost firing so I have no doubt that he had some say in this matter.

[Eddiehitsthefoulpole]

Let's not forget that when the 2008 play-offs started Yo had a total of 21 major league starts under his belt, 4 in all of 2008.

[1992casey]

Lack of bunting, hit and runs, and stealing seems to have been one of everyone's main issues with Macha.

 

Not at all. At least here at Brewerfan, I think those who've complained about those things are in the minority. The majority seem to be against using up outs.

 

There have been complaints about not executing in bunt situations. But that's different. Just because a team doesn't bunt a lot doesn't absolve the players from knowing how to pull one off.

[jerichoholicninja]

I'll throw a couple names out for discussion.

 

Ted Simmons - Somewhat of a retread but I think I've read that he's the top candidate for Seattle.

Ron Wotus - Bench coach for the Giants. Purely a guess on my part. Managed in the Giants system, won manager of the year once.

[logan82]

I complained that Macha had his pitchers and Gomez bunting to much. Last year I didn't like the stranglehold Macha had on the running game but he seemed to loosen up this year. At least with some of the guys.

[kramnoj]

In terms of using that power, I think it is more effective down farther in the order.

 

Sure, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have any use in the leadoff spot. If Cameron hits a double, he's a lot easier to drive in. I think that's more useful than someone who is going to get on base 4% more of the time, but is more likely to be on 1B.

 

At the end of 2008, who would you have rather had as the leadoff hitter, Weeks or Cameron?

 

I think relying on small sample sizes like September OPS is useless, so based on 2008 and years before, I think Cameron is going to add more contribution with the bat than Weeks in the end of 2008. I don't think the 11 points of OBP is worth more than the 69 points of OPS. Weeks in 2008 was a below average hitter.

 

Don't forget starting Suppan over Gallardo in a playoff game.

 

I must be the only person who doesn't have a problem with this. Gallardo threw 75 pitches on October 1 walked 5 batters (one of which was IBB) and gave up 3 runs in 4 IP. I wouldn't think he would be a good choice to start on 3 days rest, when he wasn't fully stretched out from coming back from his injury. An injury where at least two moderators here said some combination of we shouldn't talk about him coming back in the season or blaming the pitching staff if they allowed him to pitch again in the season. Gallardo pitched 3 IP in relief in that elimination game, I don't know that he was going to pitch much more than that if he had started.

[danzig6767]

I can't help but really hope they don't hire anyone from the Angels. I hate their brand of baseball.

What's to hate about winning nearly every year? That's the only brand of baseball i care about.

They won because of their pitching and defense, and in spite of "Sciosciaball." He bunts, hits and runs, and steals way too much.

Ahhh, so if it wasn't for that idiot Mike Scioscia, then the Angels would have won an even bunch more games than all the games they won under him? He was holding then back.

 

Just a hunch here, but i think the GM who built all those 90-100 win teams and yearly division winners would disagree with you, unless he also has no clue about how to run a team either. He just got lucky building all those 90 plus win teams who were so stupid to not just wait for three run homers instead.

 

BTW, i'm not against the Earl Weaver philosophy either for winning games if the roster fits, there is very sound reasoning behind that philosophy then. All that matters to me though is winning and i just don't buy your belief that Mike Scioscia not only wasn't an overall asset to the Angels, he instead was a terrible manager that the team won in spite of him. Or basically saying that a GM who was smart enough to build all those yearly winning Angels team, he was also stupid enough to not notice that his long time manager was hurting the team.

 

Mike Scioscia has been around baseball a long time. I'm very confident that if he instead took over a roster lacking in speed/athletes, but full of lots of power hitters and guys who consistently take walks, he would easily adjust and not be trying to have a bunch of slower power hitters bunt and steal bases. He doesn't strike me as a very stubborn man who would refuse to adapt to the rosters strengths he had in place.

[trwi7]

I must be the only person who doesn't have a problem with this. Gallardo threw 75 pitches on October 1 walked 5 batters (one of which was IBB) and gave up 3 runs in 4 IP.

 

And all three of those runs were unearned.

 

Gallardo pitched 3 IP in relief in that elimination game, I don't know that he was going to pitch much more than that if he had started.

 

Even if he could only go three innings, I would much rather have him pitch those innings when the score is 0-0 than have him come in when we were already down 5-0 thanks to Suppan.

[pingman]

getting back on point: NEXT MANAGER

 

....the conventional wisdom is that you want to hire a manager who's on his 2nd MLB manager opportunity.....for example Charlie Manuel was a bozo for the Indians before becoming the Phillies manager ....another example is Terry Francona who's 2nd job was with the Red Sox after failing in his 1st try as a MLB manager

 

thoughts?

[trwi7]

....the conventional wisdom is that you want to hire a manager who's on his 2nd MLB manager opportunity.....for example Charlie Manuel was a bozo for the Indians before becoming the Phillies manager ....another example is Terry Francona who's 2nd job was with the Red Sox after failing in his 1st try as a MLB manager

 

thoughts?

I think talent matters much more than the manager and we're lacking it right now.

[brewmann04]

we all still waiting for Melvin to come up with the Crieteria but still not one offical interview as of Yet. I starting to believe everyone is correct that he has Another Melvin ready to take over as new manager.

[logan82]

The reason most managers are generally more successful in their second job is because GM's usually don't hire rookie managers for good teams. Also if you have some managing experience you have more managing options. The whole process is self fulfilling.

[kramnoj]

And all three of those runs were unearned.

 

Yes, but those 4 walks in 4 IP didn't show that Gallardo really had good control yet.

 

 

Even if he could only go three innings, I would much rather have him pitch those innings when the score is 0-0 than have him come in when we were already down 5-0 thanks to Suppan.

 

If those are the only known factors? Sure. But the bullpen had already thrown 4 IP in Game 1, 4.1 IP in Game 2, and 3.2 IP in Game 3. I would be hesitant to know that I would need to get at least 6 IP out my bullpen in Game 4, and then have CC pitch game 5 when he was shelled in his last start (I don't know if that would have been on 3 days rest or more, which would have also been a factor).

 

And, Gallardo's last start didn't really give any indication that he would be so good as to believe that you would be guaranteed 3 scoreless innings.

[giffted1]

If those are the only known factors? Sure. But the bullpen had already thrown 4 IP in Game 1, 4.1 IP in Game 2, and 3.2 IP in Game 3. I would be hesitant to know that I would need to get at least 6 IP out my bullpen in Game 4, and then have CC pitch game 5 when he was shelled in his last start (I don't know if that would have been on 3 days rest or more, which would have also been a factor).

Yes the bullpen had a lot of work, but there was an off day in there, and I think there would have been another one before game 5. And game 5 should have had zero impact on Sveum's decision. You play to win game 4 and worry about game 5 later.

[kramnoj]

And game 5 should have had zero impact on Sveum's decision. You play to win game 4 and worry about game 5 later

 

That's easy for a fan to say. A manager who has to manage a pitching staff needs to have more strategy than that.

 

Sveum could have got lucky and Suppan could have had a decent start. But there wasn't going to be any luck in how long Gallardo could go, there was going to be a limit regardless. Sveum rolled the dice and hoped that Suppan could keep them in the game. It didn't turn out well, but that wasn't unexpected.

[trwi7]

Yes, but those 4 walks in 4 IP didn't show that Gallardo really had good control yet.

 

So? I'll take the guy with less than stellar control but who actually has the ability to get major league hitters out over a guy whose stuff consisted of junk and a prayer.

 

But the bullpen had already thrown 4 IP in Game 1, 4.1 IP in Game 2, and 3.2 IP in Game 3.

 

I don't see how games 1 and 2 matter all that much since there was an off day after game 2.

 

I would be hesitant to know that I would need to get at least 6 IP out my bullpen in Game 4

 

And they ended up needing 6 innings because Suppan sucks. So once again, Gallardo starts and goes as long as he can, then you still have Parra, Mota, McClung, Stetter, Shouse, possibly Villanueva and Suppan if you need to cover innings.

 

If they win game 4 they go back to Philly with an off day so there's rest for the bullpen and Sabathia starting on normal rest.

 

And, Gallardo's last start didn't really give any indication that he would be so good as to believe that you would be guaranteed 3 scoreless innings.

What in Suppan's 2008 season gave us any indication that he would be decent? That's an elimination game, you go with your best option and Suppan clearly wasn't the best option. Other than the walks, which are admittedly important, what was so bad about Gallardo's game 1 outing? Weeks dropped a ball which led to three runs and even with Weeks' error he still should've gotten out of the inning. Cameron had the ball in his glove on the "double".

 

Suppan was awful in September. Even his "decent" start against the Cubs he was getting shelled. The ball was just finding outfielder's gloves.