Impressions of Roenicke 2012

[logan82]

The offense is bad right now and we still see the contact play killing innings. Quit. Giving. Up. Outs.

[Nottso]

I'll take Roenicke's style over Macha's style any day. In all reality, one is likely no more or less productive than the other, but Roenicke's is a whole lot more fun to watch.

[logan82]

One is definitely less effective, but more fun to watch, unless you like winning.

[Nottso]

One is definitely less effective, but more fun to watch, unless you like winning.

 

That's a bold statement. Do you have anything to back it up or is it just your opinion? I'll stay with neither being much more or less productive. Roenicke's style has certainly hurt us at times but it has also won us some games that we would in all likelihood have lost with Macha at the helm.

[jjfanec]

One is definitely less effective, but more fun to watch, unless you like winning.

 

I read this here a lot but then watch very successful managers like LaRussa do it all the time. So did he hurt St. Louis with bunts and stuff like that? This is not meant to sound sarcastic but I have read this a lot and I just want to know the statistics

[markedman5]

Macha's problem wasn't his decision making...it was his personality.

 

The players hated him and this group can't win with a guy they don't like.

 

They like RRR...that doesn't mean he knows more then Macha but relationships are a big part of managing and Macha didn't have that skill.

[RockCoCougars]

Macha is great on paper. Similar to managers I've seen in the workplace with a great resume. The problem was in practice Macha's personality didn't lend itself to a leadership role. I've personally seen this before several times, the manager may be smart as a whip, but shoddy people skills cause most of their employees to not buy into the program. If people don't buy into the program, communication suffers, goals aren't met and there are personnel issues galore until the whole department is overhauled, with the manager usually the first out the door.

 

From my experience in the workplace a 50/50 mix of smarts and personality seems to work in management. My guess is that in baseball, things swing way towards the personality end, because let's face it, managing a ball game is not rocket science.

[Marc Newfield of Dreams]

I'll take Roenicke's style over Macha's style any day. In all reality, one is likely no more or less productive than the other, but Roenicke's is a whole lot more fun to watch.

 

For funsies, I like watching my team make a crap ton of needless outs at home plate.

[logan82]

One is definitely less effective, but more fun to watch, unless you like winning.

 

That's a bold statement. Do you have anything to back it up or is it just your opinion? I'll stay with neither being much more or less productive. Roenicke's style has certainly hurt us at times but it has also won us some games that we would in all likelihood have lost with Macha at the helm.

Read anything on small ball or bunting and it will tell you it needs to be very situational and should generally be a surprise. With our manager it is way overdone. He is trying way to hard to force the offense to score runs.

[Nottso]

One is definitely less effective, but more fun to watch, unless you like winning.

 

That's a bold statement. Do you have anything to back it up or is it just your opinion? I'll stay with neither being much more or less productive. Roenicke's style has certainly hurt us at times but it has also won us some games that we would in all likelihood have lost with Macha at the helm.

Read anything on small ball or bunting and it will tell you it needs to be very situational and should generally be a surprise. With our manager it is way overdone. He is trying way to hard to force the offense to score runs.

 

That I can agree with. I'd still rather have Roenicke's style over Macha's, assuming that Roenicke will slack off some on the squeeze play. If I know when it's coming I have to assume that the other team also knows.

[adambr2]

http://milwaukee.brewers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120519&content_id=31724774&notebook_id=31727204&vkey=notebook_mil&c_id=mil

 

Normal person's reasons why we are struggling this year:

- Nyjer and especially Weeks, key parts of our offense this year, are really struggling

- The bullpen is terrible, sorely missing Hawkins and Saito, and K-Rod has not been successful as a setup man

- Ramirez not picking up the slack in Prince's old spot, OPS'ing .667

- Starting pitching has been awful being Greinke and Marcum

- Defense has not improved, and Izturis and Ishikawa are poor players receiving a great deal of playing time

- Giving up too many outs on the basepaths

 

Roenicke's reasons why we are struggling this year:

- Not enough "personality" on this club

- Clubhouse is too quiet

- Prince is missed because of his "big personality"

- Naked golf not being played in the clubhouse

[ninja33]

I think that Roenicke knows most of those "normal person" reasons (save for the outs on the basepaths, the jury is out on that one), but he's not the type to call his players out for underperforming. Most managers would handle interviews like that, in the words of John Axford most managers go with "cliche...cliche...another cliche" approach

[adambr2]

I think that Roenicke knows most of those "normal person" reasons (save for the outs on the basepaths, the jury is out on that one), but he's not the type to call his players out for underperforming. Most managers would handle interviews like that, in the words of John Axford most managers go with "cliche...cliche...another cliche" approach

 

I agree for the most part and I think he's well aware of what's wrong, I just found it hilarious that somehow a lack of naked clubhouse golf from Hairston, Kotsay, and Hawkins was used as a possible partial explanation of why the clubhouse is too stressed and thus losing games.

[logan82]

 

That's a bold statement. Do you have anything to back it up or is it just your opinion? I'll stay with neither being much more or less productive. Roenicke's style has certainly hurt us at times but it has also won us some games that we would in all likelihood have lost with Macha at the helm.

Read anything on small ball or bunting and it will tell you it needs to be very situational and should generally be a surprise. With our manager it is way overdone. He is trying way to hard to force the offense to score runs.

 

That I can agree with. I'd still rather have Roenicke's style over Macha's, assuming that Roenicke will slack off some on the squeeze play. If I know when it's coming I have to assume that the other team also knows.

If he would sure, but I think over the last year plus he has shown he will not. He gives up outs way to much. He is a bad manager. Macha would have been fine for a wining team. DPR is a good manager for a losing team. Not a guy push a team to a few extra wins.

[TooLiveBrew]

I'd still rather have Roenicke's style over Macha's, assuming that Roenicke will slack off some on the squeeze play. If I know when it's coming I have to assume that the other team also knows.

I actually haven't had much problem with the squeeze calls; they seem to have had a very high success rate so far.

 

It's the "contact play" that makes me want to break things. It's almost always a bad call if the player on 3B isn't Carlos Gomez. Can we come up with a new name for this 'strategy'? I feel like "contact play" makes it sound like it's got a shot to work. "Give-up play" maybe?

[trwi7]

Can we come up with a new name for this 'strategy'? I feel like "contact play" makes it sound like it's got a shot to work. "Give-up play" maybe?

 

The annexation of Puerto Rico.

[TheCrew07]

I want to like RR, generally I'm pretty supportive of Managers/Coaches because I know how difficult it can be to manage personalities. Macha was the first Brewer manager I absolutely despised and that was mostly because he was a horrible choice for an organization that will have to continually rely on young talent to remain competitive. You just cannot sit down a rookie every time they go 0-10 or 1-10 for poor performance and expect them to build confidence and progress, it doesn't work that way for the vast majority of athletes. RR has proven to be more of a veteran player manager as well but I was hoping we were getting a Maddon type who was good with young players and would be willing give them a long leash, I still wish Davey Johnson would have been in consideration as well.

 

I'm with TLB on the contact play, I'm not sure whatever happened to educating the players so they could make the determination of whether or not to try to score from 3rd on their own, but the contact play on a ball hit to the left side has proven to be an out. Then again we're in the era of pitches being called from the dugout as well so apparently baseball players aren't able to make good decisions on their own anymore.

[RobertR]

- Defense has not improved, and Izturis and Ishikawa are poor players receiving a great deal of playing time

 

No offense, but Ishikawa who entered today with an .850 OPS and a positive WAR according to Fangraphs, isn't one of the problems with the Brewers on the year to date. He may turn into a liability before too much more time passes, but assessing the problems of the Brewers for the year to date excludes Ishikawa from the list of culprits.

 

That is if we're being objective.

 

Robert

[TooLiveBrew]

Can we come up with a new name for this 'strategy'? I feel like "contact play" makes it sound like it's got a shot to work. "Give-up play" maybe?

The annexation of Puerto Rico.

I'd like to thank & credit you for being able to make me laugh about the contact play. Nicely done.

[ninja33]

that play actually worked though.....

[monkeyman343434]

Wow, does Roenicke not have any balls? How do you let an ump toss your pitcher in the 9th inning in a 15 run game and not get tossed yourself?

[Blancofan1]

In what world would Roenicke getting thrown out done any good?

[TooLiveBrew]

While I think as Brewers fans we can clearly see that Dillard wasn't trying to hit anyone, he just stinks... I can't blame the ump much for running him. And Blancofan is totally correct; RR getting ejected would've just been satisfying the collective Id of some of the fanbase.

[monkeyman343434]

It would have shown he has the team's back. The only way I could have seen a pitcher get thrown out in that situation was if he hit the batter in the shoulders or above. He never gave any team a warning, and why would a team want to hit a batter in the 9th inning of a 15 run game? He wanted to use a mop-up pitcher to get through the rest of the game without using a RP that is actually used in close games, so why risk that? I would think a side-armer coming in on a right hander isn't that out of the ordinary, seeing as how when he lets the ball goes, it's pretty much coming at the batter already. The ejection by the umpire was just assinine, and RR coming back to the dugout with his tail between his legs shows where this team gets its personality from.

[Hitman_Hart]

Getting tossed would have accomplished nothing. He argued the point, that shows he "has his players' back." Getting tossed is what Gardenhire would've done. Don't be like Gardenhire.