Impressions of Roenicke so far (part 1)

[thebruce44]

"Hopefully at some point DPR will figure things out and the string of excuses will stop."

If only we could go on a tear, like winning 8 of 9 home games or 13 of 15 games overall--then maybe we could give Roenicke some credit. Oh wait, it's all his fault when we lose, but if we win it's because our players overcome all of the poor decision making and managing.

Hopefully at some point we, as a fanbase, will figure out that every manager will make decisions that fans don't agree with. Then again he is the manager of an MLB team and we aren't so maybe there is something that he knows that we don't.

Questioning moves and decisions is one thing, but the overall DPR thing is taking things way off the deep end. The team is 5 games over .500 and it's Memorial Day. We haven't been eliminated from the Playoffs, none of the players seem to have quit on Roenicke and we are finishing off a strong three weeks of games. The sky isn't falling and Roenicke is trying to pull it down on our heads.

Nobody ever said talent can't overcome poor management. I think we as fans we are entitled to a desire for that talent to be somewhat maximized though.

[TheCrew07]

Actually as fan we possess no entitlements what-so-ever.

[cwolf2012]

"Actually as fan we possess no entitlements what-so-ever."

 

Okay, then the ownership group is entitled to it (since they pay for the product and the management). And since the ownership group essentially reports to the fans since we pay the money, we are somewhat entitled to that feeling as well.

[rluzinski]

"Many people on here call RR a small ball manager while also stating that he is too aggressive on the base paths. That is an oxymoron you cannot have it both ways. He is not a station to station manager therefore it is not small ball"

To small ball strategy is scoring runs with low power players. That includes steeling bases and taking an extra base. That's the way I've always seen it, at least.

And I don't think manager talent correlates 100% with team wins. Not even close. Skill and just luck play huge roles

[logan82]

I think we as fans we are entitled to a desire for that talent to be somewhat maximized though.

Actually as fan we possess no entitlements what-so-ever.

 

Gotta disagree on this one. We are in fact entitled to our desires. We are not entitled to have those desires fulfilled.

 

Winning does not mean good choices were made.

[TheCrew07]

Anyway you want to spin it, fans aren't entitled to anything. An entitlement is a guarantee, neither the team nor MLB make any guarantees along the lines you suggest.

 

Fans may feel entitled to certain things, but that simply isn't the reality of the situation, and never has been. As a fan you are purchasing a product, that's it... a pair of jeans, a coke, a pepsi, whatever product you want to choose. Your "rights" only extend as far as you have the ability to choose which product you purchase or if you want to make a purchase at all, but you have no say in how the product was produced or what it contains. You many look for products that contain certain items, but in the end the only true power you have is to buy the product or not. Some season ticket holders may think they are shareholders, but they are most assuredly not.

 

As Americans for whatever reason a very large group of us walks around thinking they "have a right" or "are entitled to" things that simply aren't true. People have come to this message board claiming that they had the "right" to say whatever they wanted to say, free speech, etc... and none of them have lasted very long. The drama surrounding how the Super Bowl tickets were awarded and were made available was an excellent reminder for me of how far some people's sense of entitlement as a fan goes this last winter.

[Ayt]

We are entitled to point out when we think RR is making a mistake. That is all I see people on here doing.

Your last post doesn't have anything to do with the discussion.

[gregmag]

I took "entitled to a desire" to mean that it's reasonable for fans to expect that the team will maximize its talent. That may be a slightly roundabout way of putting the point, but I don't see how it's a controversial point. It just means that, in conversation, a fan should be able to say "I'm bent out of shape that the team isn't maximizing its talent" without expecting to be condemned for somehow going out of bounds.

 

If the statement had been something like "fans are entitled to a good team," or a good effort, or x number of wins, then I would at least understand your objection -- although if you really wanted to extend that objection into a generalized critique of American society, you'd have to be a lot more detailed and precise (which, in fairness, would probably get you into territory that Brewerfan users aren't entitled to enter).

[logan82]

"I think we'll see how it goes," Roenicke said. "I think [Mark] Kotsay

is still in the mix there and I think whoever's hot and swinging the bat

well that they're going to be out there more often."

Still in the mix. Oh brother. I, again, want to just chalk this up to manager speak. I will say this about DRP, he doesn't usually say things he doesn't believe. Not necessarily a mark in his favor in this case.

[NievesNoNO]

logan3825[/b]]

"I think we'll see how it goes," Roenicke said. "I think [Mark] Kotsay is still in the mix there and I think whoever's hot and swinging the bat well that they're going to be out there more often."

Still in the mix. Oh brother. I, again, want to just talk this up to manager speak. I will say this about DRP, he doesn't usually say things he doesn't believe. Not necessarily a mark in his favor in this case.

Yikes, with both Morgan and Gomez healthy Kotsay shouldn't be in the mix for anything except a few pinch hitting opportunities and Gatorade attendant.

 

 

[PrinceEatMeat]

I really wish Morgan hadn't gotten hurt. Then this whole Kotsay in CF nonsense never would've started. Kotsay should only be a pinch-hitter, and maybe get a start once in awhile in RF. I'd rather not see that happen either, but it's better than him playing CF.

[danzig6767]

I suspect a manager is most important in how he handles and relates to players -- unless he's making obvious bonehead moves like killing his pitchers or sac bunting early in the game, which I don't see RR doing.

 

He's had guys sac bunting pretty often in the early innings. Nyjer Morgan was asked to sac bunt in the first inning just today. He is what he is, a classic small-ball manager.

In defense of Roeincke there, guys like Morgan and Gomez have a decent chance at any time to turn a sac bunt into a hit given their speed, especially Morgan since he seems to be a pretty skilled bunter.

 

When pretty much anyone else in the lineup puts a bunt down, it's only to advance the runner a base. If Morgan gets a quality bunt down there, he can not only move Weeks to second, he can end up with a hit.

 

I don't really ever watch American League games, so i was expecting mass amounts of bunting from the way some of you guys here talk about the Angels. So far this year though, i haven't seen any excessive amounts of bunting and i don't count Morgan/Gomez the same as other players because of their fabulous speed. Strikes me as a very reasonable decision and with Gomez having such terrible on base skills, a bunt by him at least advances the runner and as i said before, if he gets the bunt in a good spot, it's gravy with a hit.

Hart was sac bunting in the first inning in one of his first games back.

I don't recall Hart bunting since. I don't get the small ball lover label being put on Roenicke, at least from the bunting aspect. Some people were predicting that we'd be bunting all the time when he got hired and i just don't see it happening.

 

My issues have been his seeming to be ok with the often incredibly reckless baserunning, hm keeping Gomez in the two hole to long, he loves Kotsay to much for my liking, and that stretch where he used Loe nearly everyday. His amount of calling for bunts hasn't struck me as excessive at all.

[Menace II Sobriety]

Well this makes a lot more sense, http://www.mlbtraderumors...kings-update.html, but at the same time it still ties into my post, if Gomez was a type B which he is borderline it would help out the team greatly.

[Baldkin]

In defense of Roeincke there, guys like Morgan and Gomez have a decent chance at any time to turn a sac bunt into a hit given their speed, especially Morgan since he seems to be a pretty skilled bunter.

 

When pretty much anyone else in the lineup puts a bunt down, it's only to advance the runner a base. If Morgan gets a quality bunt down there, he can not only move Weeks to second, he can end up with a hit.

 

I don't really ever watch American League games, so i was expecting mass amounts of bunting from the way some of you guys here talk about the Angels. So far this year though, i haven't seen any excessive amounts of bunting and i don't count Morgan/Gomez the same as other players because of their fabulous speed. Strikes me as a very reasonable decision and with Gomez having such terrible on base skills, a bunt by him at least advances the runner and as i said before, if he gets the bunt in a good spot, it's gravy with a hit.

Hart was sac bunting in the first inning in one of his first games back.

I don't recall Hart bunting since. I don't get the small ball lover label being put on Roenicke, at least from the bunting aspect. Some people were predicting that we'd be bunting all the time when he got hired and i just don't see it happening.

 

My issues have been his seeming to be ok with the often incredibly reckless baserunning, hm keeping Gomez in the two hole to long, he loves Kotsay to much for my liking, and that stretch where he used Loe nearly everyday. His amount of calling for bunts hasn't struck me as excessive at all.

They have 14 sac bunts not including the #9 spot in the order. 14. That's 14 outs they have given away. That's more than half a games worth of outs.

 

Personally, I find that to be excessive.

[danzig6767]

Hart was sac bunting in the first inning in one of his first games back.

I don't recall Hart bunting since. I don't get the small ball lover label being put on Roenicke, at least from the bunting aspect. Some people were predicting that we'd be bunting all the time when he got hired and i just don't see it happening.

 

My issues have been his seeming to be ok with the often incredibly reckless baserunning, hm keeping Gomez in the two hole to long, he loves Kotsay to much for my liking, and that stretch where he used Loe nearly everyday. His amount of calling for bunts hasn't struck me as excessive at all.

They have 14 sac bunts not including the #9 spot in the order. 14. That's 14 outs they have given away. That's more than half a games worth of outs.

 

Personally, I find that to be excessive.

So 14 sac bunts in 54 games by non-pitchers, that's one every four games roughly. I have a few questions/thoughts relating to that.

 

1. How many of those sac bunts were from Gomez who gets on base at a terrible clip and who has the speed to potentially beat out any bunt along with advancing the runner, even if a team expects it, so long as the bunt is in the right place?

 

2. How many times has one of those 14 sac bunts by a non-pitcher turned into a run or two runs as the next batter or two hit a single/sac fly? I know it has happened at least a few times because i recall reading game threads where some posters complained about the sac bunt, but then a single drove in a run or two.

 

3. Is there a place where can i find the stats which list the number of sac bunts by non-pitchers for every other team in the NL, to see if our number of 14 is out of whack compared to most other NL teams?

 

4. You say that Roenicke has given up 14 outs by calling for 14 bunts by non-pitchers so far. Well, aren't you being disingenuous there given the average OBP for all players is likely around .320 or so? That means Roenicke has roughly given up an extra 5 outs or so by calling for those 14 bunts since about 68% of the time an average player would make an out swinging away vs sac bunting. If though it was say Gomez and other poor OBP hitters on the Brewers which account for the vast majority of those 14 sac bunts, then it's more like only around 4 extra outs Roenicke has used up by those bunts over 54 games vs swinging away each time instead. One out every 13 games or so, pretty hard for me to get worked up over that.

 

Plus, the next batter can also hit into a double play without the sac bunt and we have scored some runs after a sac bunt advanced a runner to 2nd or 2nd and 3rd, then one of the next two batter hit a single or sac fly. So in the end, i don't want a manager going bunt crazy either, but i think Roenicke has been far from the bunt fiend that many feared and analyzing those numbers in context makes me reasonably comfortable with how often Roenicke has called for bunts so far.

[Baldkin]

Well, I lied, my numbers are off.

 

They are 14 of 20 on Sac Bunting. So they've given up 20 outs so far this season. I'm getting this data from baseball-reference.

 

The 20 only includes actual sac bunts attempted. Attempts made early in the count are not included.

 

I went back through the play by play data (somehow I missed two games, I'm too lazy to go back through again) and found 12 successful and 1 unsuccessful -- those dates aren't logged.

 

April 4th: (2nd inning) Morgan bunts Yuni to 3B with 0 outs. With Nieves and Narveson following. No runs score.

April 8th: (2nd inning) Morgan bunts runners to 2B and 3B in front of Kottaras and Wolf. Kottaras grounds out, scoring a run. Wolf makes an out.

April 9th: (1st inning) Morgan bunts Weeks to 2B. Both Bruan and Fielder follow with doubles. Run scores.

April 18th: (Top 12th) Gomez bunts Weeks over. This is one of the few I agree with. Run scores.

April 23rd: (Bot 7, down 6-3) Gomez bunts Counsell over. Run scores on a Braun HR.

April 27th (bot 5, down 4-3) Gomez bunts Weeks over. Braun walks. Weeks scores on a groundout and an error.

May 2nd: (Top 1st) Gomez bunts Weeks over. No run scores.

May 5th: (Top 6, tied) Morgan fouls out on a bunt.

May 5th: (Top 8, tied) Morgan bunts Weeks over. No run scores.

May 17th: (Top 3rd, down 2) Weeks bunts Wolf over. No run scores.

May 20th: (Bot 1st, tied) Hart bunts Weeks over. Weeks scores.

May 20th: (Bot 13th, tied) Gomez, bunts Rivera over. No run scores.

 

So, out of the 12 successful I found, we scored a run 5 times. I do not like those odds.

 

Bunting in front of Braun and Prince is just not smart. Bunting in the first 5 innings is not smart. Buunting in the 7th when you're down 3 runs is a horrible idea. Gomez and Morgan are not the type who get doubled up, and Weeks scores on almost any double they hit from first. Giving away that out, unless it's tied and very late in the game, is just foolhardy.

[danzig6767]

Thanks for putting in the research on that Baldkin.

 

When it comes to Gomez, i simply have no big issues with Roenicke having Gomez sac bunt in most cases except when we are down by multiple runs given he gets on base so poorly and if he gets a good bunt down, it can result in a hit since he's so fast. Gomez will make an out over 70% of the time swinging away, so he's a near automatic out either way. I don't like ever using Weeks or Hart to bunt, but it was only one each in 54 games.

 

Morgan in most cases i'd prefer he not be asked to bunt, but he at least is a skilled bunter and very fast, so some sac bunts can potentially become a hit like with Gomez. Looking at the five you listed involving Morgan, i'm reasonably ok with the first two given who was coming up next, don't like the third one at all, don't like the 4th one either, the last one i could go either way on.

 

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this topic because i only see about 5 bunts over 54 games that i have a big issue with. One every 13 games or so.

[Funketown]

Horrible night for Reineke tonight.

 

As for Roenicke, I'm hopeful about his lineup construction. I love Lucroy in the six-hole for now and I can understand breaking Nyjer back into the game in the 8-hole.

[rluzinski]

Bunting in front of Braun and Prince is just not smart. Bunting in the first 5 innings is not smart. Buunting in the 7th when you're down 3 runs is a horrible idea.

 

If we are specifically talking about sac bunting, where the defense is given an opportunity to anticipate the attempt, I believe those are all absolutely correct. A couple of those sacrifices might have been more of a drag bunt, or at least the defense was not ready for it. In those cases, the non-zero chance of the bunter reaching base changes things a lot.

 

I have just not been impressed with any of the analysis RR uses to make his decisions (well, what he's been willing to share with the public). He never gives me the sense that he has a firm understanding of what evidence he should be looking at, much less know how to use it.

[Mr QL]

Right now, I would prefer that we hadn't hired Roenicke.

 

Ask me again after our next home series and maybe I'll have another answer.

[brwrsfan]

His insistance on having Loe pitch the 8th inning in close games, the ENTIRE 8th inning, despite the situations or the hitters up, etc may have just cost us yet another game.

 

RRR and his poor decisions are really getting to me. And really starting to cost us way too many games.

[Marc Newfield of Dreams]

His insistance on having Loe pitch the 8th inning in close games, the ENTIRE 8th inning, despite the situations or the hitters up, etc may have just cost us yet another game.

 

RRR and his poor decisions are really getting to me. And really starting to cost us way too many games.

Agreed. He had to have known Votto's numbers against Loe going in. That should have been Hawkins or Axford in that situation.

I hate that he's strictly by the book when it comes to the bullpen, but then goes against every conventional wisdom by batting Gomez second for 2 months and playing Kotsay in CF.

But the players like him, and he's not a jerk to the media, so he gets a pass.

 

[logan82]

Marc Newfield of Dreams wrote:

But the players like him, and he's not a jerk to the media, so he gets a pass.

Easy to be nice to the media during your honeymoon period especially when you are winning.

[rluzinski]

"Agreed. He had to have known Votto's numbers against Loe going in"

 

What was it, 6 AB? Let's not get crazy.

[Marc Newfield of Dreams]

What was it, 6 AB? Let's not get crazy.

With 2 HR in those 6 AB. He used the pen last night like it was a playoff game with a 5 run lead. Even with that small sample, why not show that same urgency in a 1 run game tonight?