Impressions of Roenicke so far (part 2)

[ilovebeer]

A poll was just put up on jsonline and asked what grade would you give RR, so far he is getting a B.

[adambr2]

Most JSOnline readers were baffled that we didn't just trade Jeff Suppan when he was so bad.

[RockCoCougars]

You can question his lineups, in game decisions, etc., but in my view he's better than Macha by far. Under Macha, this team would have likely imploded during and after the long losing streak. In the two years that Macha was here, you could tell in the body language that the team was going through the motions long before game 162.

 

No matter how terrible Counsell is there is a segement that defends him yet Kotsay can do no right and shouldn't be on the team.

 

This is true, though I've noticed that the Counsell backers are starting to stay pretty quiet, when in the past they'd defend him. Kotsay really isn't that bad as a 5th outfielder, but Counsell is a wasted roster spot. He's been on base once this summer (unless he pinch ran at some point), when he got plunked by a pitch.

[TooLiveBrew]

In the two years that Macha was here

 

Team ERA under Macha: 4.71

 

Team ERA under Roenicke: 4.08

 

 

This team under Macha would be at least two wins better, imo, at this point in the season. No matter how much anyone didn't like him, Macha wasn't a knucklehead.

 

 

Kotsay really isn't that bad as a 5th outfielder

 

Kotsay is terrible as anything on a 25-man roster.

[FVBrewerFan]

Taking Narveson out after 7 was classic RR. To be fair to him, it's a move most MLB managers would have made, but that doesn't make it right. In a "normal" Narvy start it would have been the right move. But in this game, Narvy was cruising and coming off perhaps his best inning all night. A good manager realizes when something outside the norm is happening, and you adjust your typical approach.

 

At the very least, you let Narvy pitch to the LH hitter starting off the inning. I'm not sure how that's even debatable the way he was pitching. Then you can bring in KRod. Personally, I would have had him warming up and try to get Narvy throught the 8th. Heck, if he had another strong inning and pitch count was around 100, I would give hima shot to finish the game.

 

All we ever hear is how starting pitchers need to go deeper into games. Well that won't happen if they're never given a chance to extend their outings. I just fear that RR is going to overuse his new toy (KRod.) While he's an improvement over Loe, it's not like he's so dominant you have to find ways to get him on the mound.

[dhoffman19]

RR seems to be great at handling the players and personalities. His managerial strategy can be baffling though. I thought Ned Yost was the only manager who would let a pitcher bat, and then pull him from the game before the next inning. IMO, he also gets way too stuck on making sure everyone has a strictly defined role, which leads to things like Kotsay batting third when Braun is out, and having Loe (and now K-Rod) as the "8th inning guy" regardless of who is coming up to bat. Leaving Narveson in to face at least Kelly Johnson to start the 8th would have made sense. Maybe they pinch hit for Johnson, but then at least you're making the D-Backs use another bench player.

[yoshii8]

The way Narveson was pitching, especially in the 7th, I think most managers wouldn't have even though about pulling him. I thought it was a huge case of overmanaging.

[COBrewerfan]

Most managers don't need to think when you have KRod and Ax at the back end of your bullpen. I am convinced when something doesn't go exactly perfect, people look for a reason to post something and hate somebody. Questioning last nights decision (KRod vs Narveson in the 8th inning) is not even worth discussing. It's a no brainer. Even taking out how Narveson usually blows up late in the game.

[theavrock]

Exactly how is it a no brainer?

[xisxisxis]

Exactly how is it a no brainer?

 

 

Someone with no brain makes that decision?

[yoshii8]

Most managers don't need to think when you have KRod and Ax at the back end of your bullpen. I am convinced when something doesn't go exactly perfect, people look for a reason to post something and hate somebody. Questioning last nights decision (KRod vs Narveson in the 8th inning) is not even worth discussing. It's a no brainer. Even taking out how Narveson usually blows up late in the game.

I questioned the decision before things went wrong, and I'm guessing you didn't watch the 7th inning and see him make Upton and Young look silly. He was getting better and better as the game went on, so in my opinion there was no reason to even think about bringing in KRod.

[RockCoCougars]

I have no problem with him pulling Narvy after 7. He still makes me nervous about his tendency to give up the big inning.

[scrapiron]

Considering Narveson's recent history of this year to suddenly implode and give up a bunch of runs in a millisecond, I don't think how anybody can question his decision to bring in KRod considering as it was only a 2 run lead. To bring in KRod or stick with Narveson could both be defended reasonably. I'd rather have RR yank Narveson an inning to early than to late in this one. KRod was brought in to be your lights out 8th inning guy, Narveson has shown a disturbing ability to suddenly implode, tight game late, I can see RR reasoning.

[The Truth]

I am cautiously optimistic about Roenicke. I like the Morgan/Gomez platoon, I like moving Weeks to the 5 hole, I like the use of K-Rod & Axford. There have been some decisions that make no sense but so far I do like Ron Roenicke

[FVBrewerFan]

This is the part of the opposing argument that makes no sense to me. How could Narveson "blow up" in the 8th? You don't even give him the chance. If he lets a runner get on, you can always pull him. Especially with a LH hitter leading of the 8th, if anything is a no-brainer it's letting Narvy at least start the 8th.

 

Again, this is lazy managing in my opinion. If you were watching, you could see Narvy cruising. All his pitches were working. He dominated the 7th. Oh...he "might" blow up because he has before. Well, KRod has blown up before too. No matter how good the reliever is, you have a known quantity (Narvy dominating) vs. and unknown quantiry (any reliever on any given night.) And lets not pretend KRod is lights out. That's not fair to him, and his numbers say otherwise. He is good. He is a nimprovent over Loe in the 8th, and probably better than Saito. But he's not lights out.

 

If ever there was a night to stretch a starter further, last night was it. Otherwise we'll never have a starter going past 6-7 innings, and that's not a good thing. It helps to have a SP go 8 or 9 occasionally to save wear and tear on the back end of the bullpen.

 

Finally, I don't think it's fair to many of us here to say we find things to pick on after something goes wrong. I'm on record in the game day thread questioning the move as soon as they came back from commerical break to show KRod on the mound.

[SoCal Brew Crew Fan]

I'm no RRR defender, but I'm not going to knock him for last night. Narvy pitched great and had a low pitch count, but he's still been susceptible to a quick drop off. Yes, I'd probably have him out there with K-Rod warming and a quick hook instead, but K-Rod/Axford are about as good as it gets for 8/9.

 

I'm not a big fan of the 8/9 inning roles...I like to use the top guy in the high leverage situation regardless of which inning it is. I'd also have rather seen Ax come in to pitch the 9th against 3-4-5 with Saito a potential save against the bottom of the order...worked out ok, but that's my call over the conventional don't burn the closer on the road. An 8/9 role makes more sense with guys like K-Rod/Ax than it did with committee or Loe/Ax.

[Raw Biz]

This is the part of the opposing argument that makes no sense to me. How could Narveson "blow up" in the 8th? You don't even give him the chance. If he lets a runner get on, you can always pull him. Especially with a LH hitter leading of the 8th, if anything is a no-brainer it's letting Narvy at least start the 8th.

 

Again, this is lazy managing in my opinion. If you were watching, you could see Narvy cruising. All his pitches were working. He dominated the 7th. Oh...he "might" blow up because he has before. Well, KRod has blown up before too. No matter how good the reliever is, you have a known quantity (Narvy dominating) vs. and unknown quantiry (any reliever on any given night.) And lets not pretend KRod is lights out. That's not fair to him, and his numbers say otherwise. He is good. He is a nimprovent over Loe in the 8th, and probably better than Saito. But he's not lights out.

 

If ever there was a night to stretch a starter further, last night was it. Otherwise we'll never have a starter going past 6-7 innings, and that's not a good thing. It helps to have a SP go 8 or 9 occasionally to save wear and tear on the back end of the bullpen.

 

Finally, I don't think it's fair to many of us here to say we find things to pick on after something goes wrong. I'm on record in the game day thread questioning the move as soon as they came back from commerical break to show KRod on the mound.

Everything here, especially bolded. People were questioning the move from the beginning. Nobody was saying they wanted Narveson to pitch the entire inning. That would've been horrible managing if he let a couple get on and you left him out there. The point is he should've at least started the inning but had KRod ready to go. The worst possible situation there (other than another injury) would be if the leadoff lefty hit a HR. Then it's 2-1 Brewers and you bring in KRod.

Also, I've said it before COBrewerfan but once again, you're complaining about people complaining. To say that it isn't even worth discussing is asinine. This is a discussion board. There have been plenty other things posted recently that aren't worth discussing (like the 1st place Brewers being sellers) before questioning whether you take out a guy pitching his best ball all year on a low pitch count.

 

[logan82]

I think you can give the benefit of the doubt to most posters here not just judging things by results. I know I am not going to rush to the board every time DPR makes a move I agree or disagree with just so it is on record. In fact there are often times people post they hated a move even though it worked out.

[Funketown]

I didn't stay up past the 5th inning, but I have absolutely no problem with Roenicke pulling Narv-Dog for K-Rod in the 8th. Narveson was obviously pitching well, but there is no way I'd ever take Narveson in the 8th inning of a game over K-Rod in the 8th inning. How many times have we seen Narveson all of a sudden give up a few runs after "cruising"? I do think this is one case where whatever move Roenicke made, so long as the club gave up the lead, many on this board would have been upset.

 

I think K-Rod was probably more likely to get out of that 8th inning with the lead than Narveson was. I rag on Roenicke for a lot of his decisions, but I think this was a good one. This season Narveson has a .876 OPS against the third time through the order, and for his career his OBP against and OPS against both jump about 50 points when he is going through the order for the third time.

[RockCoCougars]

Normally, I'm in favor of letting a guy with a shutout go out there until he gets in trouble. However, it seems like this season, a lot of guys have went into the mid innings with a shutout only to give up a crooked number- Narveson, in particular has had the tendency to have 'one bad inning'. I really can't argue it either way, especially with KRod in the fold. Now, if Loe was coming in to pitch the 8th, I would have been absolutely irate with Roenecke.

[Raw Biz]

I think you can give the benefit of the doubt to most posters here not just judging things by results. I know I am not going to rush to the board every time DPR makes a move I agree or disagree with just so it is on record. In fact there are often times people post they hated a move even though it worked out.

Quite a few people (including me) posted in the IGT that they still would've walked a guy or two to set up the double play last night. I just thought there was a better chance of getting one ground ball to turn two than getting three outs in a row (without having the runner tag).

 

Those who say they are fine with taking out Narveson because they didn't want the big inning, wouldn't you have at least thought to let him start the inning until he gave up a baserunner? I really don't see the harm in that. Like I said, at worst it's 2-1.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Narveson has such a history of this year of completely imploding, I had no problem with taking him out after 7 innings. 7 innings, and you have 2 supposedly 'lights out' guys behind him. It's not normal or expected that K-Rod will give up 2 runs in one inning. It happens.

 

I'd rather take Narvy out after 7 having given up 0 runs, than bring him in the 8th, get hit hard right away, and shoot his confidence because he once again, couldn't finish an inning. Plus, as others have said, he sat for quite a while during the top of the inning, and might have gotten stiff or whatever.

 

You SHOULD reasonably expect K-Rod and Axford to be shut down guys in 8 and 9. K-Rod giving up 2 runs is somewhat of a fluke, and never happens if Fielder makes that play to begin with on the first batter.

[scrapiron]

Those who say they are fine with taking out Narveson because they didn't want the big inning, wouldn't you have at least thought to let him start the inning until he gave up a baserunner? I really don't see the harm in that. Like I said, at worst it's 2-1.

 

 

Well, why even put Narveson in if the conditions are give up one baserunner and you're gone? If you are that nervous with him to begin with, than why not just yank him at the beginning of the inning so KRod has a clean slate to work with. You should leave Narveson in if you think he has the best chance to get you through the 8th without damage, not because he's pitching a shutout and you want to see if he can get through it.

As I said, I don't think any decision that RR made was a poor one. Narveson was cruising, its reasonable that he let him out for the 8th. Then again he has shown a bad tendency to give up a big inning in a very short period of time and you just brought in a lights out 8th inning guy, its also reasonable to let your money back end pitcher pitch the 8th and protect Narveson from the big inning.

I can see why people wanted Narveson out in the 8th, its a reasonable stance. But so was brining in KRod. People have their preferences. I would have brought in KRod. But just because RR chose plan B over the one you preferred and it went wrong, doesn't make that decision inherently stupid or wrong.

[RockCoCougars]

Like I said, it's a coin flip. Usually, I'm perturbed when guys get pulled while throwing a shutout because of a pitch count, but two factors made me OK with last night. First, how many times this season have we seen a guy cruising along only to give up a three run bomb? Second, this is the reason that they acquired KRod. My guess is that as a closer, he's probably more comfortable coming in to begin an inning (which seems odd, but that's the way the closer role is in today's game).

[DuWayne Steurer]

My guess is that as a closer, he's probably more comfortable coming in to begin an inning (which seems odd, but that's the way the closer role is in today's game).

I don't think that seems odd at all. I think most relievers would tell you that they'd prefer to come in with nobody on base.

Coming in with guys on base I'm sure, is tough. You're not responsible for those guys, but I'm sure you feel bad if someone else's ERA gets jacked because you couldn't hold an inherited runner.

 

I know these guys should just 'perform', but I think inherited runners is definitely something that can easily affect the human element/mental part of the game.