Ned Yost Yay or Nay thread: Hardball Times rips Yost (part 3)

[strawbossisevil]

It's a twist off the word pedophile, not exactly a word you want to be affiliated with, and definitely not something to be joking about at all. Don't you think?

 

Also, I'd say the hindsight posts probably outnumbered the foresight posts about 20-1. So I'll stick by my "every now and then".

[Thurston Fluff]

I agree the second-guessers were more numerous, but especially in 2007's IGTs/chat there were plenty of people who made their comments/'moves' well before the outcome was determined on the field. It was most certainly more than 'every now & then.'

 

This is true but there were also times when the move Ned made worked and someone thought he should have done something differant. Ultimately no one will be perfect as an arm chair manager if they had to make every move like a manager does. What I'd like to see is someone give his opinion on every move he makes log it and see who made more correct calls Ned or the fan. I have a feeling if we had some sort of statistical evidence how many times Ned was right vs a fan we'd have a differant opinion of both.

[strawbossisevil]

That would be impossible though Backup, seeing how the opposing view might not have worked out either. For example, if Jenkins is up vs a righty, but you are clamoring for Mench (which wouldn't be so smart, but I'm trying to make a point), and Jenkins makes an out. It isn't that you were more right than Ned in that situation. Often the "right" move might not work out, or the "wrong" move does work out. And even with the "right" or "wrong" moves, the difference in either one succeeding over the other is often 10% or less.

 

Having statistical evidence would be almost impossible. Plus it wouldn't take into account any of the times Ned would use a different player because of an unannounced injury, RP arm fatigue etc. For example, its pretty hard not to be "right" putting Cordero in, in every single game of the season, but that just isn't possible.

[Fatter than Joey]

It's a twist off the word pedophile

 

No it's not -- "phile" is a Greek suffix for "having an affinity for" -- like a bibliophile likes books or a ailurophile loves cats, or an audiophile loves his stereo. It's a word I made up, nothing more nothing less. If someone called me misoyostic, I'd think that was clever.

 

To say otherwise would be ridiculous.

 

Hey, all I am saying, is that the data is there real-time. Pump it into a spread-sheet and show us how wrong we were.

[whizkid]

Hey, all I am saying, is that the data is there real-time. Pump it into a spread-sheet and show us how wrong we were.

 

Anyone who posts something different from what Ned does is never wrong because it's never tested and it's assumed to be right. The data isn't there. And there are plenty of times Ned's choice works out but of course a poster's choice would always have worked out too.

[strawbossisevil]

Seriously? I do know what the Greek of it is, but sound these out for me Nedophile, Pedophile. They sound almost exactly alike. It's a "catchy" name, because it is sounds so much like the other one. There is no real reason other than that to use the Greek, is there? And really, I consider it not only distasteful, but completely out of line. Many on here may have come into contact with Pedophiles during our lifetimes, and to make light of it is foolish. If that's not what you meant by it, it takes 10 seconds to edit it out of your post. The fact that you haven't to this point, but maintain your "right" to call others names really is distressing, and like I said, quite frequently is something that has merited a strike on this board.

[sheethead]

Like Ennder, I too was a fan of Yost going into 2007. I liked his motivational technique, his passion for the game, etc. My problem with him now is I think he is stubborn, close-minded, brash, and not smart enough for his job. Can he change my mind in 2008? Yes. He can do so by showing me he learned from last year, not blaming the fans for the heat he is feeling if things start to go south, not calling out players on the field in the middle of the game, etc.

 

Also, I like to think of myself as a ballparkophile in the summer and as a theaterophile in the winter. If you like Ned and the job he has been doing with the Brewers, there's no shame in thinking of yourself as a nedophile. Embrace the things you have an affinity for, unless of course its pais (Greek) - don't embrace that then please.

[deeswan]

Just curious, but if Ned is horrible, what was Davey Lopes? Or Royster? Sure, Ned makes decisions that we disagree with, every manager does. Tony LaRussa (who some consider a great manager) often bats his pitcher in the 8th spot. Absolutely insane. But it happens.

 

While I think Ned did not properly manage the bullpen, by the time he figured it out it was probably too late. How many of those huge leads the team blew started with one of the "other" relievers in, with Ned thinking he could rest the finishers (Turnbow, Cordero, Linebrink, etc.). IIRC, it was quite a few of them. At that point, Ned had to go to the finishers. And, often, that didn't help. I think a lot of it was momentum. After a couple of huge leads were blown, everybody seemed to be waiting for it to happen again. It did, and it's often difficult to break out of those ruts for sports teams, as well as individual players.

[Ennder]

Tony LaRussa (who some consider a great manager) often bats his pitcher in the 8th spot. Absolutely insane. But it happens.

 

There is actually a lot of statistical evidence that this is smarter than batting him 9th so I don't find it insane at all. in fact it won't surprise me too much if in 20 years most teams are doing it.

[Fatter than Joey]

Just curious, but if Ned is horrible, what was Davey Lopes? Or Royster?

 

Lopes & Royster weren't any better than Ned -- As a side note I find it odd that Yost gets a lot of free-passes for having subpar talent, while Lopes and Royster don't.

[deeswan]

There is actually a lot of statistical evidence that this is smarter than batting him 9th so I don't find it insane at all.

 

You've kind of made my point for me. You can give me evidence to back up that theory, I can say it makes no sense to bat the weakest hitter on the team any more than you have to. The argument about Ned is equally subjective because it's so difficult to quantify a "correct" move, determine how the outcome would have changed and determine what kind of effect there would be on wins and losses.

[TooLiveBrew]

Also, I'd say the hindsight posts probably outnumbered the foresight posts about 20-1. So I'll stick by my "every now and then".

I think your recollection is heavily skewed. 20-1 is hardly fair.

 

You've kind of made my point for me. You can give me evidence to back up that theory, I can say it makes no sense to bat the weakest hitter on the team any more than you have to.

I don't see how Ennder made your point for you, he pretty much refuted it 100%. Because you choose to ignore evidence and cite your gut doesn't mean Ennder's indirectly supporting your claim.

 

The argument about Ned is equally subjective because it's so difficult to quantify a "correct" move, determine how the outcome would have changed and determine what kind of effect there would be on wins and losses.

Now this I can get on-board with, big-time.

[jason21nl]

Sure, every now and then someone would say he'd do something differently before hand, but that was far less frequent than the multitudes of 20/20 hindsight second guessers. To say otherwise would be ridiculous.

I was in most of the chats, and go through every IGT and the second guessing is not hindsight most of the time. In fact most people freak out in the chat room with disagreement of what ned is about to do. About the nedophile nickname, its funny. I think you really don't like it is because its taking a jab at the people that support ned. Just like I am a "hater" because I don't like him.

[Fatter than Joey]

you would be "misoyostic" Jason.

[Gopher74]

I think your recollection is heavily skewed. 20-1 is hardly fair.

Not from what I've seen. In fact, that'd look about fair. I can see how that may not seem to be the case with every other post somehow coming back to Ned Yost, even when the topic has very little to do with him.

 

I don't see how Ennder made your point for you, he pretty much refuted it 100%. Because you choose to ignore evidence and cite your gut doesn't mean Ennder's indirectly supporting your claim.

 

I do. First of all, he didn't provide any evidence. He simply said that some existed. Not that I question Ender, however him just saying there is evidence is no different than saying it's not good to bat your worst hitter more than you have to.

[logan82]

You are only looking at 18 PA per position in the batting order so moving any player 1 position in the order makes very little difference over the course of an entire season. Taking into account that a pitcher probably doesn't make all the PA for an entire season it is even less. I believe that in many cases the Cardinals' 8th or 9th hitter was a worse or equal hitter to the pitcher in many cases. Even if you disagree with any of that, putting another good hitter in front of your top of the order hitters will give you more base runners while the top of the order is hitting.

[TooLiveBrew]

Not from what I've seen. In fact, that'd look about fair.

 

The IGTs are/were full of plenty examples to the contrary.

 

It feels pointless to go back over Yost, we just seem stuck at this point in the argument.

 

You can give me evidence to back up that theory, I can say it makes no sense to bat the weakest hitter on the team any more than you have to.

 

Original claim was that it was "crazy" to bat a P 8th. It's hardly crazy.

 

 

------------------------------------------

http://www.brewerfan.net/images/icons/lock.gifLocked and superseded by a new designated Yost thread:

 

Is 2008 Yost's last shot?

 

--1992casey

------------------------------------------