Impressions of Roenicke 2012

[Thurston Fluff]

Coat it however you guys want, RR made some really puzzling calls and when asked to explain them showed a complete lack of logical decision making ability.

 

I agree but my point was those stupid, illogical decisions are made by every manager. It's not just some who do it. If you believe is Ron does it more than others I'm not sure how we measure that. Nobody has figured out how to quantify decision making to know who actually is good at it. We have to rely on anecdotal evidence. Which is where we get stuck going in circles.

While all we have is anecdotal evidence to go on that has some value. Just keep in mind anecdotally speaking if you can still remember all the mistakes that happened last season there can't be that many.

All in all the team last year was not projected to be a 96 win team. At bare minimum it wasn't expected to be any better than a 96 win team if everything went right. If the team won as many or more games than they should have on paper there was one of three things going on that I can think of. The players must have played amazingly over their heads to compensate for poor decision making, the decision making wasn't that bad or it just doesn't matter in overall wins and losses.

If it's the players playing over their heads shouldn't the manager get some credit for that? If the decision making wasn't that bad then he can't be judged a bad manager because of it QED. If it really doesn't matter then what sense does it make to judge the competence of the manager based on it?

[thebruce44]

Coat it however you guys want, RR made some really puzzling calls and when asked to explain them showed a complete lack of logical decision making ability.

 

I agree but my point was those stupid, illogical decisions are made by every manager. It's not just some who do it. If you believe is Ron does it more than others I'm not sure how we measure that.

 

I can't disagree with any of that, even though I personally do feel as though RR made or makes more bad calls than other managers. My main point was the complete lack of logic in his explanations.

 

Yes, other managers make stupid calls, but it seems to me (and yea, there isn't a way to measure this either) that they either learn from them or have a way of justifying them. That justification may be as simple as "my pitcher wanted to stay in," "this guy has been battling for me all season, there isn't anyone else I would want up to bad in that instance," or whatever else. It shouldn't be "well this guy is 3-4 against this guy" when that 3-4 came in 1998.

[Thurston Fluff]

I can't disagree with any of that, even though I personally do feel as though RR made or makes more bad calls than other managers. My main point was the complete lack of logic in his explanations.

 

I have no way of knowing he's good at it either so we are pretty much on equal ground there. It really is just a gut feel. As far as his explanations I take them with a grain of salt. I don't even know how much we can believe when it comes to explanations. He may have thought what he said was true or there may be a reason for it that he doesn't want to divulge in public for whatever reason. I've come to believe post game interviews with managers are completely useless. I can never tell if they are telling the truth or not anyway. Same goes with newspaper quotes the next day. He's telling us what he wants us to hear not what he's actually thinking. That goes for every manager with the possible exception of Ozzie Guillen. Frankly if that is what we get with frankness I'm not sure I want any part of it.

[thebruce44]

I can't disagree with any of that, even though I personally do feel as though RR made or makes more bad calls than other managers. My main point was the complete lack of logic in his explanations.

 

I have no way of knowing he's good at it either so we are pretty much on equal ground there. It really is just a gut feel. As far as his explanations I take them with a grain of salt. I don't even know how much we can believe when it comes to explanations. He may have thought what he said was true or there may be a reason for it that he doesn't want to divulge in public for whatever reason. I've come to believe post game interviews with managers are completely useless. I can never tell if they are telling the truth or not anyway. Same goes with newspaper quotes the next day. He's telling us what he wants us to hear not what he's actually thinking. That goes for every manager with the possible exception of Ozzie Guillen. Frankly if that is what we get with frankness I'm not sure I want any part of it.

 

If he has gone through the trouble to look up and memorize some obscure stat you think thats all just a smoke screen? I think that's giving him way too much credit, but okay.

[reillymcshane]

My 2011 Roenicke issues:

 

1. Sticking with McGehee all year when we had an option at AAA in Green - including making excuses to the effect that all rookies fail (and his citing of Mat Gamel's poor performance earlier as proof). It was inane logic. Maybe this was partly Melvin's influence, but Casey was horrible all year. The leash we gave him was staggering.

 

2. Lineup - that we kept Lucroy in the 8th spot all year was maddening. I'm not saying he was any great shakes, but when you have McGehee and Yuni ahead of him, that was odd.

 

3. Bunting, bunting and more bunting. I don't have a problem with bunting, but he seems obsessed with it at times. It has its place, but we did it way too much.

 

4. Wolf/Kottaras - this is fairly minor. If it really makes Wolf pitch that much better, I guess it's okay. But it's an insult to Lucroy, and it wastes Kottaras decent left handed bat at times. Perhaps this isn't totally RRR's decision.

 

5. Slow to make changes - I know RRR likes consistency. He likes roles. He tells players what's happening and sticks with it. There's a lot to like about that. But it also gives you an excuse to make some foolish decisions (such as never changing McGehee or 'Loe is my 8th inning guy'.).

 

I give RRR a lot of credit as well. He clearly has created a positive environment in the clubhouse. He's doesn't get caught up in the moment and jerk players around (I remember Ned Yost starting Joe Dillon 3 or 4 days in a row because 'he was hot'). I believe it helps the players to give them their roles and stick to them. But it also requires some flexibility if players aren't performing, or if you don't have a player(s) that fit a specific role that you want filled.

[Thurston Fluff]

If he has gone through the trouble to look up and memorize some obscure stat you think thats all just a smoke screen? I think that's giving him way too much credit, but okay.

 

I think any good manager probably works to know every bit of information he can get no matter how obscure. It's his job to know as much as he can about his players and their opponents. Even to the point of knowing irrelevant stuff as a way of leaving no stone unturned. That does not mean he did so simply to use as a smoke screen later even if it gets used that way. Ultimately if he uses something like the guy was 3-4 against him 5 years ago as a real reason I take it to mean either there is something he doesn't want us to know or there were a hundred factors that went into the decision and he just doesn't feel like going through every detail of it afterward. When the time comes to explain it he just says he as 3-4 against him and moves on. Seems lot easier to do then sit down after the game and give some sort of long winded explanation of every little factor that went into it including some that he may not want out in pubic. I just don't believe anything a manager says when he knows it's for public fodder.

All that said, hypothetically speaking, if all other factors equal each other out and it's a coin flip decision why not use it instead of flipping the coin?

[TooLiveBrew]

Picking Ishikawa for a bench spot over the more versatile Conrad, & the better hitter in Green is definitely a 2012 reason to complain about Roenicke.

 

I don't mean to belabor the more extreme point that RRR is 'stupid' or a terrible manager (I don't believe he's either), but he definitely appears to have a hard time correctly evaluating talent.

[PrinceEatMeat]

Picking Ishikawa for a bench spot over the more versatile Conrad, & the better hitter in Green is definitely a 2012 reason to complain about Roenicke.

 

I don't mean to belabor the more extreme point that RRR is 'stupid' or a terrible manager (I don't believe he's either), but he definitely appears to have a hard time correctly evaluating talent.

 

I just came here to say the exact same thing. This move makes absolutely zero sense. Either go with the versatile Conrad or the good hitter in Green. Either way it makes a lot more sense to carry another middle IF. Izturis as the only backup at 2B and 3B on top of SS is a horrible idea. To me the choice should've been either Conrad or Green. Ishikawa just doesn't have the versatility.

[ELCABALLO45]

It's Melvin's decision. As much as RR can ask and say what he wants done with the roster, it's Melvin's call.

[dlk9s]

Conrad is pretty bad, anyway, so him not being on the roster doesn't bother me.

[TooLiveBrew]

It's Melvin's decision. As much as RR can ask and say what he wants done with the roster, it's Melvin's call.

I don't think this is entirely true. At the very least, RR has relatively significant input, & I want to say I remember Melvin making a comment last season that Roenicke has his call on a lot of players... my guess would be things like stashing guys with options at AAA would be all Melvin, but things like keeping Ish over Conrad would be RR's call.

[Warning Track Power]

Conrad is pretty bad, anyway, so him not being on the roster doesn't bother me.

 

Conrad might not be a world beater but he can at least play 2B and 3B or positions that Ishikawa cannot.

 

A couple more thoughts:

-I am all for anything that means Izturis sees less PT. This means Conrad or Green.

-If Ishikawa is this years Kotsay, then this means he is the backup RF, LF & 1B. As well as the power hitting PH. I don't quite see that from Ishikawa but ok. I can tolerate it.

-If Ishikawa NEEDS to be this year's Kotsay...it seems to make way too much sense to me with Mike Fontenot still on the FA market, to sign him, make him our backup SS, 2B & 3B and release Izturis.

 

The I-Boys (Ishikawa and Izturis) just became the 2012 version of Kotsay and Yuni.

[Ennder]

Mike Fontenot should not really play SS, I think I'd rather have Izturis than him to be honest.

[TooLiveBrew]

I'm guessing quite literally there are guys in low-A ball that could outhit Izturis at the big-league level. Even if he's a significantly better SS defender than Fontenot, there is no way I want Izturis instead of Fontenot. I'll take my lumps in the field for the few times Fontenot would have to play SS in exchange for having a competent hitter instead.

[Thurston Fluff]

Does it really matter this early who is on the bench? The bottom couple guys are interchangeable as the season goes on anyway so why sweat it?

[Baldkin]

Because, as was shown last year, RRR picks "His guy" in spring training and doesn't change from that.

The fact that Kotsay was getting ABs and starts in CF over Morgan proved that last season. The fact that Kotsay started in the freaking playoffs proves that.

 

The idea that an inferior hitter (and defender) in Ishikawa may very well get PAs and starts over Aoki is a horrible thing.

The fact that it all but eliminates giving Weeks or Ramirez an early rest in a blowout is a bad thing.

The fact that that it kills double switching in a blowout is a bad thing.

[TooLiveBrew]

And it matters because this season projects to be a very close race for both the NL Central & both WC spots. Every game obviously counts against your record, even though there's no 'panic mode' if things don't start off well.

[logan82]

The idea that an inferior hitter (and defender) in Ishikawa may very well get PAs and starts over Aoki is a horrible thing

I was actually thinking Gamel not Aoki.

[Baldkin]

The idea that an inferior hitter (and defender) in Ishikawa may very well get PAs and starts over Aoki is a horrible thing

I was actually thinking Gamel not Aoki.

 

I'm worried it will be both.

[fondybrewfan]

And we know that Aoki is superior to Ishikawa how?

 

Granted he is probably better but his performance in Japan and ST isn't proof.

 

Other than an occasional day off for Gamel it makes zero sense to start Ishikawa at 1st. He might start against tough righties in the OF occasionally but I just don't see a scenario where he takes anymore than 1-2 starts away from Gamel a month.

[logan82]

And we know that Aoki is superior to Ishikawa how?

 

Granted he is probably better but his performance in Japan and ST isn't proof.

 

Other than an occasional day off for Gamel it makes zero sense to start Ishikawa at 1st. He might start against tough righties in the OF occasionally but I just don't see a scenario where he takes anymore than 1-2 starts away from Gamel a month.

We were saying similar things about Kotsay and Morgan last year. How did that play out?

 

DPR strikes again.

[TooLiveBrew]

And we know that Aoki is superior to Ishikawa how?

 

I don't think Aoki is going to be lightyears better than Ishikawa against RHP (but I do think he'll be better), but one thing that's also being discussed is the possibility of Ish playing the OF, which Aoki is lightyears better at.

[RobertR]

And we know that Aoki is superior to Ishikawa how?

 

I don't think Aoki is going to be lightyears better than Ishikawa against RHP (but I do think he'll be better), but one thing that's also being discussed is the possibility of Ish playing the OF, which Aoki is lightyears better at.

 

Get playing time in the OF or start in the OF? In late game situations, some situational substitution and positional flexibility might be tactically useful. I'd agree that I see little to no reason for Ishikawa ever to get a start, other than due to injuries, in the OF over other options, but I'm not about to get riled up about Roenicke over things he might do at this point.

 

Robert

[xisxisxis]

I'm not about to get riled up about Roenicke over things he might do at this point.

 

So we should give him the benefit of the doubt? When last year he repeatedly met our worst expectations of being clueless. i could see that making sense last year when we didn't know where actions related to words, but we have a full season plus of our worst fears often coming true to just etch-a-sketch away what he says.

[Oxy]

I'm not about to get riled up about Roenicke over things he might do at this point.

 

So we should give him the benefit of the doubt? When last year he repeatedly met our worst expectations of being clueless. i could see that making sense last year when we didn't know where actions related to words, but we have a full season plus of our worst fears often coming true to just etch-a-sketch away what he says.

 

And what a horrible season it was! Our worst fears come to life in the form of a division championship.