Ned Yost Yay or Nay thread: Hardball Times rips Yost (part 2)

[jeffy]

The thing is that when you look at how closers are used across all of MLB, most are not being used in the best places. Is it more important to use your best reliever in the 9th with no outs up by 3 runs or in the 6th with the bases loaded, no outs and up by 1 run? So when you look at it, managing is done more as an art than a science.

I would not call it an art at all, instead it is a rote formula. Must only use closer in ninth with 3 run or less lead. It is kind of pathetic, but like many other fields it is safer to lose conventionally rather than risk losing unconventionally, even if the unconventional route might give a better chance of winning.

[Ennder]

Any excitement at actually playing meaningful games in September is diminished by the broken-record braying that perpetuates most of this thread...

 

There is no doubt in my mind that if we traded managers with the Cubs we'd be in 1st by ourselves right now. There is no doubt in my mind if we traded managers with the Cardinals we'd have a strong 3 to 4 game lead.

 

My excitement for meaningful games in september is diminished by the fact I know Yost will put us in a postion to lose at least once a week and we'll lose one of those games at least 1 time a month.

[DougJones43]

I would not call it an art at all, instead it is a rote formula. Must only use closer in ninth with 3 run or less lead. It is kind of pathetic, but like many other fields it is safer to lose conventionally rather than risk losing unconventionally, even if the unconventional route might give a better chance of winning.

Bingo. Great post, jeffyscott. I would love to see more managers with the courage to go against the managerial formula that has become so ingrained in baseball. They would probably risk getting torn apart by sports media pundits (like Tom Haudricourt and especially Joe Morgan) who believe traditional baseball "knowledge" is the be all and end all.

 

Also, as long as managerial positions are reserved almost exclusively for ex-players, things aren't likely to change. They learned about baseball in a certain way, and will always think of it in those terms. Some of them seem to think that the intellectual/SABR approach to baseball is just for nerds who don't really understand "The Game." Lots of old school guys still think the Billy Beane way of examining baseball is some sort of an abomination.

[jeffy]

I would love to see more managers with the courage to go against the managerial formula that has become so ingrained in baseball. They would probably risk getting torn apart by sports media pundits (like Tom Haudricourt and especially Joe Morgan) who believe traditional baseball "knowledge" is the be all and end all.

They'd probably not be liked by the players either. So that does present a real problem, even if a manager wants to be unconventional. For example not having a specified closer, who only pitches the ninth with 3 run or less lead apparently creates havoc in bullpens these days, because the pitchers want to know what their "role" is.

 

The funny thing is the really old school would be every bullpen pitcher's role was to be ready to pitch whenever called on and there was a "stopper" who would be called on when it seemed like the game was on the line, whatever the inning might be. Why there is no criticism of the modern style of baseball management, where it is apparently believed that coming in in the 9th inning with the bottom of the order due up and no one on base is a higher pressure situation than coming in in the 7th with two on and the 3, 4, and 5 hitters coming up is beyond me.

 

But, I am just a dumb fan, so what do I know.

[RU Rah Rah]

Why there is no criticism of the modern style of baseball management, where it is apparently believed that coming in in the 9th inning with the bottom of the order due up and no one on base is a higher pressure situation than coming in in the 7th with two on and the 3, 4, and 5 hitters coming up is beyond me.

It's one of the weirder cultural norms in baseball.

 

[mark brouhard is number on]

what I don't understand I guess is this: sure some of the decisions Ned has made has cost us a few games, but you cannot say that if we had another manager he would have made decisions to win those games. Also if we had a different manager who is to say that he would not make decisions that lost us evcen more games. Also what about the games where Ned has made good decisions to help win games. Would another manager have made those same decisions. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if we had another manager we could be better, but we could also be much worse, so I'll stick with the decisions he has made and deal with being unhappy about the bad ones and glad about the good ones, and realize its a whole heck of alot more difficult than we think.

[Fatter than Joey]

Also if we had a different manager who is to say that he would not make decisions that lost us even more games.

 

Well you could say that conceivably for any position player or pitcher on your staff as well. For example Doug Davis v. Jeff Suppan.

 

Assuming we don't make the playoffs for the sake of this thread, I think you have to roll the dice with changing any position that could stand to be upgraded.

[TooLiveBrew]

But, I am just a dumb fan, so what do I know.

 

Shut up! Why don't you get a couch and put it in the dugout!

[jeffy]

But, I am just a dumb fan, so what do I know.

 

Shut up! Why don't you get a couch and put it in the dugout!

Hey, that could be a great new promotion..."win the chance to sit in a couch in the dugout, sponsored by....". Brewers should see about selling this idea to maybe Steinhafels or Ashley.

 

Much better than winning a seat in the outfield from Midwest.

[SoCalBrewfan]

The funny thing is the really old school would be every bullpen pitcher's role was to be ready to pitch whenever called on and there was a "stopper" who would be called on when it seemed like the game was on the line, whatever the inning might be. Why there is no criticism of the modern style of baseball management, where it is apparently believed that coming in in the 9th inning with the bottom of the order due up and no one on base is a higher pressure situation than coming in in the 7th with two on and the 3, 4, and 5 hitters coming up is beyond me.

 

I more often hear the old school guy you describe referred to a the 'fireman,' who would come in when things were the grimmest. Many people believe that the save rule along with big free agent contracts have contributed to current usage patterns. The guy making the biggest bucks is the guy with the saves, so your best veteran reliever pouts if he pitches the 7th against the cleanup hitter with runners on, puts out the fire, and then a lesser pitcher mops up in the 8th and 9th and gets the save.

 

The best situation for a team is when a great young pitcher comes up (or is acquired in a trade) and is installed as the setup man, where he often faces more dangerous situations than the closer. Then if you need to trade your closer, or lose him to free agency, you move the setup man into the closer role, and find a new young stud to put out fires. If you've got talent in the system, or an astute GM, that works great. The Brewers haven't developed many effective relievers for quite some time, though, so they've been prowling the waiver wire and scrap heap for these guys, and then eventually traded for Cordero. The youngsters in the system slotted for this role (Capellan, Sarfate, etc) haven't panned out, and we've paid a price for that.

[logan82]

The best situation for a team is when a great young pitcher comes up (or is acquired in a trade) and is installed as the setup man, where he often faces more dangerous situations than the closer. Then if you need to trade your closer, or lose him to free agency, you move the setup man into the closer role, and find a new young stud to put out fires. If you've got talent in the system, or an astute GM, that works great. The Brewers haven't developed many effective relievers for quite some time, though, so they've been prowling the waiver wire and scrap heap for these guys, and then eventually traded for Cordero. The youngsters in the system slotted for this role (Capellan, Sarfate, etc) haven't panned out, and we've paid a price for that.

 

The Cubs have had this situation this year with Marmol. I have no problem with making Turnbow the closer just because of what you described. That way we can hold Shouse and a Rh stud reliever and use them in the higest leverage situations. Even in the 9th when Turnbow clearly doesn't have it. I think the Brewers benifited from having Villanueva in this type of roll early in the season.

[TooLiveBrew]

I more often hear the old school guy you describe referred to a the 'fireman'

 

Danny Plesac! Nice post, SoCal - not just for making me think of the lefty, either.

[brettac1]

Zumaya is another one (and Rodney though he isn't that young) of those guys. Joba Chamberlain lately. Ryan Madson when he was setting up Wags. Dotel/Lidge also setting up Wagner. There's lot of those kinds of guys, but as stated by SoCal, the ones the Brewers had in line for that role didn't pan out as well as planned.

[jeffy]

Many people believe that the save rule along with big free agent contracts have contributed to current usage patterns. The guy making the biggest bucks is the guy with the saves, so your best veteran reliever pouts if he pitches the 7th against the cleanup hitter with runners on, puts out the fire, and then a lesser pitcher mops up in the 8th and 9th and gets the save.

Yeah, I think this is a very big barrier to any change in the current convention.

[TooLiveBrew]

No Mench against Stanton in the 7th? Double Steal/Hit-and-Run with a free-swinger at the plate? This man is hurting our chances to win in almost any different kind of way. NAY.

 

EDIT: Another "sacrifice a sure AB for Braun" defensive replacement? AARRRGHHHHHH! http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/mad.gif

[DougJones43]

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/8336/makeitstopog7.jpg

[TooLiveBrew]

Hey - he used Cordero in the 8th today to relieve a reeling Turnbow. None of us dumb fans would have thought of that!

 

Jenkins - 2 AB v. LHP (iirc both with men on base), Nix - 1 AB v. LHP, Mench - 0 AB v. LHP

 

Counsell - 1 AB v. LHP, Dillon - 0 AB v. LHP

[DougJones43]

Hey - he used Cordero in the 8th today to relieve a reeling Turnbow. None of us dumb fans would have thought of that!

 

Jenkins - 2 AB v. LHP (iirc both with men on base), Nix - 1 AB v. LHP, Mench - 0 AB v. LHP

 

 

You're just ignorant. It's up to the players to execute no matter what the situation is. Jenkins should have found a way to hit that ball in the dirt (off a LHP) to prevent that weird hit-and-run from failing miserably. And it's just blind luck that Cordero got out of that inning with a strikeout, while somebody like Aquino throws wild pitches and gives up triples. Stop holding Yost accountable for the things that have happened to this team. It's just not fair!

[sheethead]

You're just ignorant. It's up to the players to execute no matter what the situation is. Jenkins should have found a way to hit that ball in the dirt (off a LHP) to prevent that weird hit-and-run from failing miserably. And it's just blind luck that Cordero got out of that inning with a strikeout, while somebody like Aquino throws wild pitches and gives up triples. Stop holding Yost accountable for the things that have happened to this team. It's just not fair!

 

LOL, or to make it more recent, Mitch Stetter.

[don1481]

Stop holding Yost accountable for the things that have happened to this team. It's just not fair!

Hmm... I think players have been held accountable here. However, I think TLB's point was referring to the situational usage of players (i.e. Mench not hitting versus lefties and Jenkins/Nix versus righties). For that, Ned can be - and has been - held accountable for his decisions.

 

EDIT: RoCo's right. Color me jet-lagged... my sarcasm-meter was starting to say something but I was still half asleep. D'oh!http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/frown.gif

[IslandsAC]

You're just ignorant. It's up to the players to execute no matter what the situation is. Jenkins should have found a way to hit that ball in the dirt (off a LHP) to prevent that weird hit-and-run from failing miserably. And it's just blind luck that Cordero got out of that inning with a strikeout, while somebody like Aquino throws wild pitches and gives up triples. Stop holding Yost accountable for the things that have happened to this team. It's just not fair!

 

Yikes. Yost Certainly can and should be held accountable for putting his players in a position to succeed, based on the given situation - basically the only in-game responsibility of a manager. Once those decisions are made, of course the players have to be held accountable for succeeding in that situation. But TLB very plainly outlined a couple situations where, based on past experience (which - other than "gut instinct" - is all there is to go by in baseball), it is fairly plain to see which players would have been put in a better position to succeed. Calling someone ignorant is not intelligent discussion.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Islands, I strongly suspect that he was being sarcastic there.

[jason21nl]

IslandsAC wrote:

---

You're just ignorant. It's up to the players to execute no matter what the situation is. Jenkins should have found a way to hit that ball in the dirt (off a LHP) to prevent that weird hit-and-run from failing miserably. And it's just blind luck that Cordero got out of that inning with a strikeout, while somebody like Aquino throws wild pitches and gives up triples. Stop holding Yost accountable for the things that have happened to this team. It's just not fair!

 

Yikes. Yost Certainly can and should be held accountable for putting his players in a position to succeed, based on the given situation - basically the only in-game responsibility of a manager. Once those decisions are made, of course the players have to be held accountable for succeeding in that situation. But TLB very plainly outlined a couple situations where, based on past experience (which - other than "gut instinct" - is all there is to go by in baseball), it is fairly plain to see which players would have been put in a better position to succeed. Calling someone ignorant is not intelligent discussion.

 

I think what he wrote was tongue in cheek, sarcastic and should have been in blue. At least I'm pretty sure it was. Because I don't in anyway think he would want jenkins batting in that situation.

[IslandsAC]

Ahhhh, yes I see it now. ...well color me embarrassed. Should still be sleeping, I suppose. I didn't even realize it was the same DougJones as my signature.

 

Post: YOSTED.

[DougJones43]

Ahhhh, yes I see it now. ...well color me embarrassed. Should still be sleeping, I suppose. I didn't even realize it was the same DougJones as my signature.

 

Post: YOSTED.

 

It happens to the best of us. I probably should have used blue font, but that kind of takes the fun out of it...I guess I'll have to lay the sarcasm on even thicker next time. http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/wink.gif