Ron Roenicke Hired as Manager

[RightFieldCoder]

Successfully stealing 2nd in the 13th, and it get's a .01? It sounds like the batters behind him failed. Either that, or a lot of runs were scored in the top of the 13th before the steal.

[topper09er]

Yeah they were actually winning by 3 at that point. They scored 9 in the 13th to win 17-8 in extra innings, odd game...unfortunetly reminds me of the Matt Kemp extra inning GS against us a few years ago, although the brewers may have scored a few more to close the gap a little bit.

[sbrylski]

I ran the WPA number on Angels stealing plays last season.

 

Note: I used Fangraph's play logs, and came up with the Angels having 154 plays last season where they ran (had the word steal or stole in the play description). Five of those were double steals. That means there should be 159 SB+CS for the team, but Fangraphs lists it only as 156. Not quite sure why there's a discrepancy, but these numbers should be decently close.

 

Best Steal: June 25th, B11, 3-4: Bobby Abreu advanced on a stolen base to 2B for .07 WPA.

Worst Steal: July 5th, T10, 4-4: Alberto Callaspo was caught stealing for -.136 WPA.

Average WPA on successful steals: .0145

Average WPA on unsuccessful steals: -.0451

Average LI on running plays: 1.112

Total WPA on all running plays: -.92

 

That means the Angels lost nearly a full game off their record last year on running plays.

 

1st Inning: 26 attempts, .000 WPA

2nd Inning: 15 attempts, -.009 WPA

3rd Inning: 19 attempts, .007 WPA

4th Inning: 16 attempts, -.016 WPA

5th Inning: 14 attempts, -.009 WPA

6th Inning: 17 attempts, -.020 WPA

7th Inning: 20 attempts, -.005 WPA

8th Inning: 21 attempts, .002 WPA

9th Inning: 3 attempts, -.028 WPA

Xtra Innings: 3 attempts, -.007 WPA

 

That's kind of troubling. When the value of scoring one (and only one) run is at it's peak, the Angels stopped being aggressive.

 

2 outs: 79 attempts, .001 WPA

1 out: 46 attempts, -.007 WPA

0 outs: 29 attempts, -.025 WPA

 

When there's more outs, the team runs more. Good or bad?

[1992casey]

What's LI? http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[thumperden]

I don't need classical music to increase my IQ...I just go here.

[homer]

When there's more outs, the team runs more. Good or bad?

Without researching, my gut tells me that's good but obviously it depends on the situation. I don't mind the #7 hitter running if there's two outs and the #8 guy is up. With the pitcher on deck my opinion is you need to be a little more aggressive in that situation. But I can be convinced otherwise if someone has data to back up their argument.

[cadillacjosh]

Using the Angels last year is kind of an off reference. Their best thief was gone and they played pretty awfully the whole year. Anytime Tori Hunter is okay with not playing CF something on your team is not good.

[sbrylski]

To clarify LI... it stands for Leverage Index. It represents the importance of each play in terms of it's impact on win expectancy. 1.00 is the average play.

 

For example, if a home run was hit in a 2.00 LI situation, it would add twice as much win probability than if the same home run was hit in a 1.00 LI situation.

 

So the Angels stole more often when the stakes were higher, because the average LI of their running plays was 1.112. That's going to amplify both the positive and negative potential impacts of the stealing attempt.

[sbrylski]

Using the Angels last year is kind of an off reference. Their best thief was gone and they played pretty awfully the whole year. Anytime Tori Hunter is okay with not playing CF something on your team is not good.

Yeah, I don't think we can make any definitive conclusions from the data, necessarily, but it's something to look at.

 

Like, despite the fact that they didn't quite have the best basestealing personnel, they continued to run a lot and it eventually hurt the team more than it helped.

 

And I think the tiny steal totals in the 9th and Xtra innings is significant as well.

[bacon06]

Really interesting read by Adam McCalvy on Roenicke after the Adenhart tragedy.

 

http://milwaukee.brewers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101103&content_id=15987402&vkey=news_mil&c_id=mil

[PrinceEatMeat]

I've gotta say after reading up on Roenicke, and seeing that story McCalvy has on him, I am starting to like this hire. Seems like he could be a really good leader for this clubhouse. I think that is something we desperately need right now.

[MNBrew]

My question, then, is why are so many clamoring for a drastic change in our offensive approach when we've had a top offense for the last several years?

The problem with our "top offense" wasn't total numbers. While there were plenty of games in which the Brewers' offense went bananas, this "top offense" was also SHUT OUT 14 TIMES, which was terrible.

 

When the power switch is on, the balls are flying out, and the team's hitting like there's no tomorrow, you don't necessarily need much of a running game. The dumbest thing about Macha is that the 2010 Brewers, whose offense was very "feast or famine," had more tools/skills at its disposal than he ever made an attempt to fully use. Macha simply & blatantly refused to utilize some of those tools when the "power" tools weren't clicking. Last winter Macha even said they'd run more, but that turned out to be just a line. In the end, speed was one very under-utilized skill that MAY have helped (note that I'm not asserting that that would've guaranteed different results, only that Macha pretty much didn't even try). Somewhere mid/late year, he even mentioned that in 10 years of managing, he'd never attempted a single suicide squeeze.

 

Carlos Gomez has as much or more speed than Pat Listach (54 SBs in '92), Darryl Hamilton (41 SBs in '92), and possibly even Scotty Posednik (70 SBs in '04). However, Gomez got 7 of his whopping 18 SBs (40%) in the last 3 weeks of the year (SB #12 came on Sept. 11th). Gomez is one of the fastest Brewers ever and he had 11 SBs on Sept. 10th. Regardless of his DL time, 11 SBs with his totally sick speed is absurdly poor under-utilization.

 

I'm also inclined to think that Sveum's comments at the end of '08 and again this offseason about taking a more aggressive offensive approach, including using the running game more (SBs, hit & runs, etc.), aren't rooted at all in ditching the power game but rather in utilizing ALL the team's various offensive skills to take better advantage of any opportunities to score, not just the meat-pitch fastballs or hanging sliders over the heart of the plate.

[logan82]

While there were plenty of games in which the Brewers' offense went bananas, this "top offense" was also SHUT OUT 14 TIMES, which was terrible.

 

Is it? How many times was every other team in the league shutout? Without context numbers are meaningless.

 

However, Gomez got 7 of his whopping 18 SBs (40%) in the last 3 weeks of the year (SB #12 came on Sept. 11th). Gomez is one of the fastest Brewers ever and he had 11 SBs on Sept. 10th. Regardless of his DL time, 11 SBs with his totally sick speed is absurdly poor under-utilization.

 

Gomez had DL time, was platooned and he was really bad at getting on base. He only had about half a season worth of PA. 18 SB for half a year isn't to bad for a guy with an OBP under .300. That is a higher SB/PA than any year he was with the "small ball" Twins. Macha did fine overall with the offense.

[GAME05]

i definitely see your argument about Gomez, but what about Weeks, then? what about Hart? Braun has some speed, and i'd bet getting to hit in front of Fielder that he would have been able to take some tremendous leads off of first or get ignored and have stolen 15 more bases than he did.

 

i also wonder if our SB% would have been higher having a manager who at least considers the SB as an option. how much did Macha really spend on teaching the players when and how to steal a base when he doesn't like stealing bases? obviously i don't know the clubhouse, but how apprehensive was Gomez this season in stealing a base if getting thrown out is made to be a tremendous sin. having 40% of your SBs come in the last two weeks of the season has to have a lot to do with that, and not merely a lack of opportunities over the course of a full season.

[logan82]

How much would a few stolen bases really matter in any one game? A run or two maybe? Seems to me we would be better off getting some pitching and keeping the games closer. We did okay in close games. There was no reason to steal more bases. Our offense was fine.

 

Margin of victory

1 run 26-23

2 runs 13-10

3 runs 6-6

4 runs7-13

5 runs 10-9

6 runs 3-8

7 runs 4-3

8 runs 2-7

9 runs 0-1

10+ runs 6-5

[MNBrew]

me: While there were plenty of games in which the Brewers' offense went

bananas, this "top offense" was also SHUT OUT 14 TIMES, which was

terrible.

 

logan: Is it? How many times was every other team in the league shutout? Without context numbers are meaningless.

 

Yes, 14 shutouts is a lot. I'm not comparing it to other teams. I'm saying 14 shutouts for a supposedly "top" offense is neither consistent nor acceptable. It's not an assertion that requires comparative analysis. That's a large number of games for any team to have absolutely zero chance to win: You score zero runs, you won't win, period.

 

Sure, the Brewers' overall offensive numbers were strong. But as has been extremely well documented and discussed, the Brewers' offense was quite inconsistent.

 

 

logan: Macha did fine overall with the offense.

Then you & I simply have different expectations or standards. It's

been made clear he had certain tools in his toolbox, so to speak, that

he refused to use. Gee, Ken, no thump tonight? Gonna try something

different to create some runs? No? Then I guess your team won't have

much of a chance tonight, huh?

 

Plain & simple, the Brewers ultimately would've had a better record in 2010 if they'd scored more runs. Yes, the largest part of the problem really was the lousy pitching for much of the year. But since the pitching was so consistently underperforming, the offense needed to do even more to help overcome that. Macha's conscious decision to limit his tactical options on account of risk aversion cost this team chances to win more games. (Note that I'm saying he cost the team chances, not games, though clearly the occurrence of the former eventually leads to the occurrence of the latter.)

 

The '92 Brewers were a very solid & well-rounded offensive team which had several guys w/ excellent offensive seasons. Part of what made them good was that they also had 256 SBs and wreaked havoc on pitchers' & catchers' concentrations by being such base-stealing threats. Sure, they ran into some outs at a nearly 30% CS rate. But they advanced runners 256 additional bases' worth, which is huge. And it was a total-team approach: 11 guys w/ 10 or more SBs, including 3 w/ more than 30 SBs (Listach - 54, Hamilton - 41, Molitor - 31). Even Jaha & Seitzer were in double digits.

 

logan: Gomez had DL time, was platooned and he was really bad at getting on

base. He only had about half a season worth of PA. 18 SB for half a

year isn't to bad for a guy with an OBP under .300.

 

True, true, & true. For a guy w/ decent speed, I can accept your logic. But again I'm not comparing Gomez to his contemporaries. I'm comparing Gomez's results to his skill set & ability. My points is that Gomez has uber-elite speed and easily should've had double as many SBs for that number of PAs even w/ his lousy OBP.

[DannoMac21]

Really interesting read by Adam McCalvy on Roenicke after the Adenhart tragedy.

 

http://milwaukee.brewers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101103&content_id=15987402&vkey=news_mil&c_id=mil

If any of you reading this thread scroll past this link...think again. Fantastic read. I can't wait to see what Roenicke can do.

[Invader3K]

Yeah, this quote really struck me in particular:

 

"Nobody knew what to say," (Scott) Boras said. "There was an air in the locker room of shock, bewilderment. None of the players knew if they should approach Mr. Adenhart. And Scioscia said, 'Ron would like to say a few words.'

 

"Let me tell you something -- I've met presidents, I've heard a lot of people speak. And the 10-minute conversation he had with the Angels that day, the eloquence of it, the depth of it, and the impact of it, it was one of the most dynamic conversations that I've ever heard in my life. In the most difficult situation you can be in, this man was clearly at his best, and it was natural, it was instinctive. I realized that this was a born leader."

[crewcrazy]

To actually answer logan's question, here's how many times every team in the league got shut out, arranged by order of finish in their division:

 

TB - 9

NYY - 8

BOS - 4

TOR - 8

BAL - 11

 

MIN - 8

CHW - 5

DET - 10

CLE - 15

KCR - 8

 

TEX - 5

OAK - 7

LAA - 9

SEA - 15

 

PHI - 11

ATL - 13

FLA - 9

NYM - 11

WSN - 14

 

CIN - 13

STL - 13

MIL - 14

HOU - 13

CHC - 15

PIT - 15

 

SFG - 16

SDP - 12

COL - 10

LAD - 17

ARI - 11

 

First thing that popped out to me -- the Brewers weren't much different than the rest of their division. Second thing -- it doesn't really matter how many times your offense gets shut out when your pitching is giving up a ton of runs in those shut out losses. In the games the Brewers got shut out, the pitching gave up 8, 9, 3, 8, 5, 8, 2, 5, 5, 6, 1, 4, 1, and 4 runs. Even if you scored 3 runs in all of those shutouts, it's still a loss in all of those games but 4.

[Funketown]

That's a very good read. With what little information I've scrounged up on the guy since the hiring, I'm pretty confident that he will at the very least be very well liked off the field, and respected by the players. If he's a solid tactician that would be great.

 

Let's just not blow this whole Scott Boras thing out of proportion, eh?

[hawing]

I am endlessly impressed with Ron's approach to the Adenhart tragedy. I feel very good about having this guy in the Brewers' organization.

 

There will be a press conference at 1:30 CT today officially introducing Roenicke. Let the uniform-number debate begin. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

As a player, his uniform number history includes 50, 40, 21, 41, 10, 17 and 39. A Google image search shows he wore 10 with the Angels.

[PrinceEatMeat]

I am endlessly impressed with Ron's approach to the Adenhart tragedy. I feel very good about having this guy in the Brewers' organization.

 

There will be a press conference at 1:30 CT today officially introducing Roenicke. Let the uniform-number debate begin. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

As a player, his uniform number history includes 50, 40, 21, 41, 10, 17 and 39. A Google image search shows he wore 10 with the Angels.

I'll go with 10. That seems like a manager's number to me. Plus Loe is 50, Jeffress is 41, Escobar is 21, Cappy is 39, Gotta leave 17 for Ganter, and 40 was Macha's number so bad karma.

 

[trwi7]

Here's my thinking.

 

21-17=4 add 39 to that and you get 43, subtract 40 and you get 3. He's going with Yost's old number. I know it. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[1992casey]

Shouldn't that be written as an equation, complete with parentheses and brackets?

[rluzinski]

I ran the WPA number on Angels stealing plays last season.

Thanks for your hard work.

I think Homer is correct that the situation is going to heavily affect whether it's better to attempt a stolen base with 0, 1 or 2 outs. We can look at straight run expectancy to get an idea, though:

http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902.html

 

Let's look at the just a runner at 1st:

0 out: SB = .236 runs, CS = -.656 runs, breakeven = 73.5%

1 out: .152, -.456, 75.0%

2 out: .093, -.251, 73.0%

Doesn't matter much in terms of maximizing runs in a generic situation.

But let's make something clear, this kind of stuff is just SO SMALL when you compare it to the WPA of everything else. Over the course of a season, teams generally win by doing the BIG things right.

 

(cleaned out textless link --1992)