Designated Yost Thread... Latest: No accountability and lack of urgency (part 5)

[Bucky Rules]

Personally, I won't praise Yost for what has happened so far this year, but I certainly won't be/haven't been screaming at every lose, every move I disagree with, or every decision that doesn't work. If this team collapses and fails, than Yost should be shown the door. If this team comes on and and makes the playoffs, he should be given an extension. Why not let the season play out and have things unfold until we know the direction the team will take before throwing a fit?

Amen and Allelulia!

[RU Rah Rah]

I got an idea, take that attitude with everyone you meet from now on an see how far that gets you, especially your kids if you have any. Screaming at failure and not praising success doesn't make you tough or someone who demands accountability, it only makes you (forgive the language) an unreasonable, mean, backside of a horse.

See above comment: "I'm just trying to encourage people to be cordial, and to avoid the kind of personal attacks that infect other discussion boards."

Also, I don't think the parent or boss analogies are fair ones. I am neither Ned Yost's father, nor his boss. Neither his sense of self-worth nor his financial security depend on what I think, or say. So we're talking about a completely different power dynamic.

[Bucky Rules]

I got an idea, take that attitude with everyone you meet from now on an see how far that gets you, especially your kids if you have any. Screaming at failure and not praising success doesn't make you tough or someone who demands accountability, it only makes you (forgive the language) an unreasonable, mean, backside of a horse.

See above comment: "I'm just trying to encourage people to be cordial, and to avoid the kind of personal attacks that infect other discussion boards."

 

Seriously now -- About how many of your 1260 posts would you say have been spent in a forum policing function? And of those, what % do you think were in response to the posts of people that were arguing a point that you agreed with? I'm just curious. For all I know, you're a Ned Yost supporter, and some of us have just crossed a line for you.

 

One more thing... does condescension and telling people that maybe they shouldn't be taken seriously because of their opinion cross the line for you? Or is that simply not as bad as anticipating disagreement, like buc did. I just want to get your version of the forum rules straight so I don't offend.

[Fatter than Joey]

Does "I'm not sure I can take anyone who defends the Tavarez in the 12th decision seriously" qualify? That's a not so thinly veiled attempt to call someone ridiculous, stupid, or idiotic.

 

I would agree with you that this is not cool.

 

But, I really think the "straw-man" comment was a bit over the top. And I think anyone who isn't acting as the semantics police would recognize the point that was being made.

 

It was a straw man argument, plain and simple -- It's not semantics either. If I say something about Yost that you take issue with, I would enjoy to debate you about it -- however i am getting tired of the "you would have been mad if Yost did the other thing" -- I try to be very consistent with my arguments and observations about Yost.

[logan82]

Bucky Rules wrote:Seriously now -- About how many of your 1260 posts would you say have been spent in a forum policing function?

From my recollection, very few.

[TooLiveBrew]

Maybe one or two would be an accurate count. How many of Bucky Rules's posts have been abrasive & argumentative to the point where other posters have taken issue?

 

 

Screaming at failure and not praising success doesn't make you tough or someone who demands accountability, it only makes you (forgive the language) an unreasonable, mean, backside of a horse.

 

Yost is praised by people who criticize him, but I admit that number is small (as is the number who criticize him while often praising him)

[RU Rah Rah]

Seriously now -- About how many of your 1260 posts would you say have been spent in a forum policing function? And of those, what % do you think were in response to the posts of people that were arguing a point that you agreed with? I'm just curious. For all I know, you're a Ned Yost supporter, and some of us have just crossed a line for you.

 

I think I'm pretty average in terms of invoking my understanding of what the rules are. I hope I am not too much of a narc. I really can't say how often I have called out someone with whom I agree.

 

But, yeah, if someone who was on my side of a particular issue somehow called me a "backside of a horse" and suggested that I might not be an effective parent, then I think I would take issue with it.

 

 

[Bucky Rules]

If I say something about Yost that you take issue with, I would enjoy to debate you about it -- however i am getting tired of the "you would have been mad if Yost did the other thing" -- I try to be very consistent with my arguments and observations about Yost.

I intended nothing of the sort. So, either I was really bad at trying to make my point, or you misinterpreted what I was saying. I can live with accepting either explanation. I said/intended to say that there is a bias in judging his decisions, and some people start left of center when making those judgments. I stand by that. I believe that. Maybe you think that every judgment is made solely on each of his decision's individual merits. If so, we'll just have to disagree on that one.

[Bucky Rules]

But, yeah, if someone who was on my side of a particular issue somehow called me a "backside of a horse" and suggested that I might not be an effective parent, then I think I would take issue with it.

 

I don't want to belabor this, and I realize the discussion is getting old. But you neglected to answer the second part of my post. The part about condescension and the "can't take someone seriously" question. Because I didn't notice you coming to our defense when those comments were made. IMO, those were clearly worse than the comments that buc made that offended you so.

Keep in mind... I really wasn't overly offended being on the receiving end of the "taking seriously" comment. I just use it as an example of what I interpret as hypocrisy involved in the seemingly selective policing... allegedly. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[kiwi brewer]

i was hoping a Sex And The City message board with this type of discussion would be created alongside the release of the film!!!

 

more Nighties and Knighties discussion please. much more interesting to me, at least.

 

go Crew! go W Sox!

[RU Rah Rah]

But, yeah, if someone who was on my side of a particular issue somehow called me a "backside of a horse" and suggested that I might not be an effective parent, then I think I would take issue with it.

I don't want to belabor this, and I realize the discussion is getting old. But you neglected to answer the second part of my post. The part about condescension and the "can't take someone seriously" question. Because I didn't notice you coming to our defense when those comments were made. IMO, those were clearly worse than the comments that buc made that offended you so.

Keep in mind... I really wasn't overly offended being on the receiving end of the "taking seriously" comment. I just use it as an example of what I interpret as hypocrisy involved in the seemingly selective policing... allegedly. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

Sorry, but I haven't gone through all 82 pages of the thread, line by line, to comprehensively police everything directed at everyone. I really just have objected to comments that I think have been unfairly directed at me as a person.

 

 

 

[scrapiron]

I apologize if I came off as abrasive and rude, the comment I quoted just struck a nerve with me.

 

I am neither Ned Yost's father, nor his boss.

Neither his sense of self-worth nor his financial security depend on what I think, or say

Not necessarily true on either account, well, I am quite certain you are not his father.

 

1) If enough fans scream, yell, and cry for Yost to be fired, no matter what their record, you don't think that has any bearing on what Attanascio does? Articles are suggesting that Willie Randolph was fired because thats what most people wanted and assumed would happen. Fan opinion can have A LOT of affect on how teams operate. If fans are unhappy, they won't attend games, and no owner wants to have their franchise thought of in a bad light amongst the fan base. They might never return if things get bad enough.

 

2) If fan opinion can effect Ned's job, than it most certainly can effect his job and financial security.

 

3) While some heat goes with the business, I don't think being booed or called an idiot on an almost daily basis on the radio makes anyone a happy camper. Lombardi's kids often talk of the strain their dad being a coach had on their family on how it affected their father emotionally, and he was successful by any definition. Yost isn't just a coach, he's also a human being, somebody trying his best to do his JOB. Any person, be it his boss or others that constantly berate him and call him incompetent can't have a good affect on the man's mindset. I'm sure Ned understands the game, he knows if he fails he will lose his job. Booing and screaming at him only belabor the point and make for an ultimately hostile, stressful environment that IMO will make it harder for him, and therefore the team, to succeed, making booing and unreasonable complaining a self defeating act.

 

Being fair and reasonable towards an individual shouldn't just apply to those that have a great impact on your life or who you are close to, it should be towards everyone. Yost should be given every chance to succeed this season. Up to now, he certainly hasn't failed. If he ultimately does fail, than fire him, but give him that chance.

 

EDIT: BTW, I wasn't suggesting you were a bad parent, just stating that you wouldn't take that sort of attitude toward your child, because of how destructive it would be. Just trying to point out that destructive behavior is destructive behavior regardless, and using the parent/child analogy to stress that point.

[trwi7]

1) If enough fans scream, yell, and cry for Yost to be fired, no matter what their record, you don't think that has any bearing on what Attanascio does? Articles are suggesting that Willie Randolph was fired because thats what most people wanted and assumed would happen. Fan opinion can have A LOT of affect on how teams operate. If fans are unhappy, they won't attend games, and no owner wants to have their franchise thought of in a bad light amongst the fan base. They might never return if things get bad enough.

There were plenty of fans screaming for Yost to be fired after the Boston series. If he wasn't fired then I doubt Attanasio or Melvin is going to listen to the fans screaming as to when they would fire Yost.

[Bucky Rules]

I really just have objected to comments that I think have been unfairly directed at me as a person.

That's strange because you policed my comments in #1563 (with your post #1564). Yet my comments were directed in no way, shape or form at you. The were directed squarely at sheethead, and the fervor with which he was defending his point.

 

Sorry, but I haven't gone through all 82 pages of the thread, line by line, to comprehensively police everything directed at everyone.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't see post #1529 (starting with the condescending "um") or post #1546 (with the "can't take you seriously" comment) -- even though on the top of the very next page you were quick to police my comments. Of course, like I said, it's entirely possible that you didn't read that dialogue. However, since that time, I've referenced the comments on at least a couple of occasions, and asked you directly about them, and yet you're strangely mum on the subject. Now, if you're sitting in my seat, what would you think? Would you see a double standard?

 

So, I ask you... are you truly trying to make sure that the board maintains a civil dialogue? Or are you just attempting to make the people that you don't agree with look "uncivil" - to borrow your term.

[jazzytrav]

You know, I kinda like this thread. Is there any chance this whole thing about who was being civil and who was policing who and all that crap can be dropped so it doesn't get locked? Most of the stuff doesn't even have to do with Yost anymore.

[MadisonBrewerBlue]

brewers are 19-9 since the season low 4 games under .500 back on may 18th. are the brewers better off now then they were after a miserable may ? my quote says it all about the turn around.

[Diskono]

brewers are 19-9 since the season low 4 games under .500 back on may 18th. are the brewers better off now then they were after a miserable may ? my quote says it all about the turn around.

 

Russell Branyan says "You're welcome!"

[sheethead]

Ned has been doing a fine job recently. Taking Soup out in the 2nd gave the Brewers a chance, and man did they have a ton of chances to score runs. The players *Bill Hall* really let him down in key spots. Tough loss.

 

One more thing... does condescension and telling people that maybe they shouldn't be taken seriously because of their opinion cross the line for you?

 

What I did say was, "I'm not sure I can take anyone who defends the Tavarez in the 12th decision seriously." I admit it could be construed as a tad harsh, but it was stated as my opinion and did not in any way tell other people to not take this position seriously. I feel better, Bucky, that you were not overly offended by this comment. I love the Badgers. I was just expressing my opinion and it wasn't even an absolute opinion. I just wasn't sure, but there was wriggle room to reverse my stance.

[Bucky Rules]

What I did say was, "I'm not sure I can take anyone who defends the Tavarez in the 12th decision seriously." I admit it could be construed as a tad harsh, but it was stated as my opinion and did not in any way tell other people to not take this position seriously. I feel better, Bucky, that you were not overly offended by this comment. I love the Badgers. I was just expressing my opinion and it wasn't even an absolute opinion. I just wasn't sure, but there was wriggle room to reverse my stance.

Hehe... that's a very nice two-step around that issue. I like it. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif And seriously... it didn't bother me. What did bother me was the selective policing that was going on.

 

I agree with you on Ned's decisions in this game. I'm sure there will be some that wanted to hit Branyan instead of Hall. The post-game shows were loaded with those people. And I saw some complaints in the vent-thread, but it is just a vent-thread, so maybe its more emotion than a core belief. I'm not sure how anyone that complained about hitting Mench in a similar situation last season could possible have a problem with this move. But, I'm sure those people exist.

 

And it is further evidence that Ned's in-game management is changing, which should please many of his critics.

[brewcrew00]

You know, I kinda like this thread. Is there any chance this whole thing about who was being civil and who was policing who and all that crap can be dropped so it doesn't get locked? Most of the stuff doesn't even have to do with Yost anymore.

I agree, I used to love this thread, but I just can't even post in it anymore. Is this one of those strange times I'm WITH jazzytrav!?

 

[endaround]

I have completely given up on Ned being able to manage a bullpen:

"When we first got him (Shouse) everbosy told me he was a situational lefty and he might have been. He has proven to be more than a situational lefty."

 

Shouse's splits in Milwaukee:

 

2006: vs LHB .238/.319/.350 vs RHB .309/.422/.515

2007 vs. LHB .214/.258/.262 vs RHB .295/.352/.337

2008 vs. LHB .157/.157/.294 vs RHB .250/.358/..386

[sheethead]

Those splits look to be those of a LOOGY. When did Yost make those comments?

[brewcrew00]

Just going off the top of my head here as I can't check the numbers right this second, but I feel Shouse has been used effectively for the most part this year against both right and left handed pitching. Maybe more so as of late, but I feel like his vs. righty numbers are higher from a poor early season against them.

[endaround]

Those splits look to be those of a LOOGY. When did Yost make those comments?

Yesterday

[jazzytrav]

I wouldn't mind if he could consistently have those 2008 stats against righties, but I don't think he can. He had a pretty ridiculous stretch last year where he was our best reliever no matter the situation. I still think he should be saved for lefties, though. I don't mind if he faces a righty between two lefties or something like that, but I don't he should be considered some kind of all-around great reliever.