Swagger of this team, almost epic "Cool Hand Luke"

[jhart05]

Didn't want to start a new thread for this. It kind of relates to the "swagger of this team" theme thou...

 

I've been waiting for a story about this or some explanation, haven't seen one yet or maybe I missed it.

 

What's the meaning of the "bear hug / tiger claws" thing they have been doing for quite some time now? I'm sure T.Plush started it. Also what are they calling it?

[jjfanec]

I dont think anyone is saying RR is the complete difference for why this team has more wins than last. We are just saying some on this board act like he has no clue how to manage yet he has a team on pace to equal or eclipse even the most optimistic projections. I posted a link in another thread that this board on average expected the Brewers to win 88-90 wins. At 70-51 they have 41 games left. If they go 21-20 they are a 91 win team. BP has them projected to go 23-18 down the stretch which has them at 93 wins. RR has to get at least a little credit for this right?

[brwrsfan]

Didn't want to start a new thread for this. It kind of relates to the "swagger of this team" theme thou...

 

I've been waiting for a story about this or some explanation, haven't seen one yet or maybe I missed it.

 

What's the meaning of the "bear hug / tiger claws" thing they have been doing for quite some time now? I'm sure T.Plush started it. Also what are they calling it?

Prince explained this recently. It's apparently from the movie Monsters, Inc. His kids were watching it in the clubhouse one day or something and they were doing it. And the players I guess caught on and thought it was funny, and now when they do good stuff, they're monsters apparently. Kinda funny.

 

 

[carniesandrubes]

Didn't want to start a new thread for this. It kind of relates to the "swagger of this team" theme thou...

 

I've been waiting for a story about this or some explanation, haven't seen one yet or maybe I missed it.

 

What's the meaning of the "bear hug / tiger claws" thing they have been doing for quite some time now? I'm sure T.Plush started it. Also what are they calling it?

See here: http://larrybrownsports.c...bration-after-hits/82201

[YoGasKpose]

I'm reminded a little bit of the Twins 2006 season as well. That was the group Ozzie Guillen termed "piranhas" for the folks that remember. I think this team certainly has a different style than that team, but this hot streak they've been on is a lot like the one the Twins ripped off to catch the Detroit Tigers and win the division.

 

I mention it because I've always felt like Ron Gardenhire sort of typifies this player's manager vs. statistical genius dichotomy. I've never thought Gardy was a very strong in-game manager, but he's always been able to get his teams to play well over the course of a 162-game season. The 2006 team especially seemed like one that really got along and played hard for each other.

 

The problem for the Twins, of course, has been postseason success. And I think that's where a manager's deficiencies can be put under a magnifying glass, as every in-game decision takes on so much additional importance. For that, the jury is still out with RR.

 

Of course, if RR can get the Brewers in the thick of the things year in and out while getting players to overachieve consistently, I don't think anyone would complain.

[Thurston Fluff]

They have never had much adversity and it is very easy to get along when things are that easy.

 

Ron must be good. Not only did he get his players to forget the bad times he got the fans to as well. Remember that 7 game losing streak at the end of April beginning of May that had the Brewers four or five games under 500 and looking terrible? They went 17-6 the rest of May. Remember how the team couldn't win on the road? They've gone 10-6 on the road since the break. That included an 11 game west coast trip that almost always ends up badly for the Brewers. Remember when key players like Greinke and Weeks went down? They kept winning anyway. Just because the team handled adversity well doesn't mean it didn't have any. They just overcame it. How much RRR has to do with that is debatable. I think the team is mature and experienced enough now to handle it but Ron must have something to do with it.

[The Truth]

The biggest differences this season have been Greinke, Marcum, K-Rod and Nyjer Morgan, and not allowing Morgan to bat against LHP (i.e. using him correctly). I complain about Doug Melvin alot but that is one helluva influx of talent.

 

Swagger comes with winning

[craigharmann]

Swagger comes with winning

Also, swagger comes from playing the game plushdamentally sound, which this team excels at.

[Nottso]

I believe Macha would have won more with the current team than he did with the team he was given; however, I don't think he would win as much with this team as RR is. Tony Plush alone would have made Macha's head explode.

[The Truth]

Swagger comes with winning

Also, swagger comes from playing the game plushdamentally sound, which this team excels at.

I know (or at least think) you are kidding or at least having a fun play on words, but fundamentals is part of this teams biggest weakness:

 

Our defense is pretty bad, especially for a 1st place team. We don't have very many high OBP guys, and Roenicke seems determined to keep allowing very poor hitters like Kotsay, Lopez & Counsell to get significant playing time. Thats all well and good when you are playing teams like the Pirates & Astros and the pitching is great, but I seem to remember this team looking horribly outmatched against the Yankees & Red Sox this year, and my concern is that come playoff time the free-swinging and poor defense is going to come back to bite us...

[jjkoestler]

Swagger is an overused and stupid word. Thanks Kayne.

[greeg35]

yes, we should shorten it to "Swag"

[logan82]

Backupcatchers wrote:

They just overcame it. How much RRR has to do with that is debatable. I think the team is mature and experienced enough now to handle it but Ron must have something to do with it.

Don't forget starting 0-4. They had very little adversity in my opinion. Even good teams go through bad stretches.

 

One or two players getting hurt isn't going to kill a season. Look at the Twins last year. They lost Morneau and Nathan.

 

I agree it is debatable how much credit to give the manager. I think just about anybody could have come in and managed the team and matched the record. We just happened to go from a guy with no personality last year to a guy who actually keeps up communication with his players like he is supposed to.

 

I also think many people are projecting their own feelings onto the team and players at least a little. Everything is better when the team is winning.

[Thurston Fluff]

They had very little adversity in my opinion. Even good teams go through bad stretches.

 

Isn't adversity something that bad team have more of simply because being bad increases the amount of adversity? I think a lot of adversity ends up being injury related. I think they have had an normal amount of injuries to go through. They lost all of their lefties in the pen, Hawkins and Saito both missed time, they went without their ace starter for a month, their all star second baseman for a month plus and started the season without their all star RF. That is enough to say they had some adversity. It isn't a huge amount of injuries but it what one would expect over a 162 game season.

[rluzinski]

I feel like the Brewers have been a very carefree, confident group since at least 2008. As we all know, they've even gotten a bit of a reputation for it. The biggest difference this year is that they have the most talent they've had since perhaps the World Series year. They have certainly made the most of it recently but I give the players 99% of the credit for that.

Nothing about last years team looked carefree. They looked lifeless.

It's the whole chicken and egg thing. Any team would look confident and carefree if they won every game. And I'd LOVE to see a 50 win team look confident and carefree. Running around, looking oblivious to the fact that they get destroyed yet again. Fans would simply say they were apathetic towards winning and delusional for acting so confident.

My comment was with respect to the general personalities of the players. Many of them have come up as a group and they come across to me as pretty laid back (well, Fielder may have matured a little slower http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif ).

 

[Menace II Sobriety]

Just my personal opinion, not based at anyone directly. If a person who uses stats in the majority of their posts can't back up their posts with anything but conjecture their posts are not as valid. If a stat was present to prove that point it would be used, instead people try to using dominant and convincing words to prove the point when the stats are not available or cannot be found. The readers of this site get beat over the head with stats telling people why they are right or wrong so if a person who is a stat based poster makes a declaration without backing it up statistically a portion of the time they are passing off something as a fact that is merely an opinion.

[cwolf2012]

"If a stat was present to prove that point it would be used, instead people try to using dominant and convincing words to prove the point when the stats are not available or cannot be found"

 

I may be misinterpretting your point, but it seems to come down to this:

 

If a stat doesn't exist to measure something, then anyone who consistently uses stats in their posts when important to the context no longer holds a valid viewpoint? Or, that person's viewpoint can be dismissed as less valid than someone else who doesn't consistently use stats when they are available?

[Menace II Sobriety]

I don't want to get into a semantics issue with you, that is why I used about 12 qualifiers in my post. I don't have time right now to defend the idea, but my post is simple when a person has 12k or 18k posts and most have definitive statements are meade ,when a declarative statement is used but not supported it is an opinion not a fact.

[rluzinski]

I don't want to get into a semantics issue with you, that is why I used about 12 qualifiers in my post. I don't have time right now to defend the idea, but my post is simple when a person has 12k or 18k posts and most have definitive statements are meade ,when a declarative statement is used but not supported it is an opinion not a fact.

Most of what I post here is an opinion that I attempt to support with various levels of evidence. In this case, I offered no evidence, as the topic itself doesn't really allow for it. In those cases where I am relying on only my gut, I do my best to make that clear. Indeed, the very first sentence I posted on this topic was:

"I feel like the Brewers have been a very carefree, confident group since at least 2008. "

That post appeared to prompt you to write:

"... instead people try to using dominant and convincing words to prove the point when the stats are not available or cannot be found."

If you want to charge me with trying to write convincingly, guilty as charged. Anything else seems unfair. These days, you will often find me using disclaimers like "I think", I feel", "IMO" (does anyone even use that anymore?) to make it clear when what follows is only a personal opinion (I say "these days" because I'm sure rereading my posts from 2005 would make me cringe).

[Baldkin]

It's the whole chicken and egg thing. Any team would look confident and carefree if they won every game. And I'd LOVE to see a 50 win team look confident and carefree. Running around, looking oblivious to the fact that they get destroyed yet again. Fans would simply say they were apathetic towards winning and delusional for acting so confident.

I'm pretty sure thats why we got Nyjer Morgan for Cutter Dykstra.