Designated Yost Thread... Latest: No accountability and lack of urgency (part 4)

[jazzytrav]

The Brewers could finish 100-62 on the season, and Ned's record in the eyes of some would be 0-62. The 100 wins would come out of hatred for the manager.

 

Point being, when is there ever a point in time where the PLAYERS are responsible?

 

There are a whole bunch of threads here talking about the players, and quite often it's about how badly the players are doing. This thread is about Ned Yost. Those that don't like him use this thread to hold him accountable (or at least make us feel like we are), and we use the other threads to point out instances when the players are responsible.

 

As for your comment about the W-L record, it really has never had anything to do with wins and losses necessarily. Many of us have been angry with Ned after a win and satisfied with Ned after a loss. It's not about the result; it's about creating a situation that has the best probability of achieving a good result. I'm sure you could pinch hit Craig Counsell for Ryan Braun with the bases loaded and every once in a long while, Counsell will hit a grand slam. But that doesn't mean you should do it every time after just because it worked once, and it doesn't mean that the manager that decided to do that is a genius. The result would be a grand slam, but it would still be a stupid move regardless of the result.

(In reference to having runners on 1st and 3rd in the 1st inning with 1 out and failing to score runs)

 

"There's no such thing as missed opportunities when you're going against Oswalt"

 

(In reference to Cameron's misplayed ball in CF)

 

"If Mike doesn't catch that ball, no one does. That ball was smoked"

The one about Cameron doesn't necessarily bother me. Cameron is a very good CF, so I think he has a point when he says that. As for the pitching thing, his words would carry much more weight if he hadn't already said things like that about every crap pitcher that has held us to a run or less this year. It's like the boy who cried wolf...it just doesn't mean anything anymore.

[LetsGoBrewCrew]

One thing I did notice about Cameron's route to the ball.... granted I don't have the replay in front of me to totally confirm what I'm about to say, but from what I saw Cameron came in for the ball, ever so slightly. I played OF in HS and the first rule of a ball hit directly at you, take 1, 2, 3 steps back so something like that doesn't happen. Its easier to come in on a ball than race back. Plus, if the ball lands in front of you its a single, not a triple/inside the park homerun. If he goes back maybe he makes a really good catch, but i'm not gonna come close to saying he should have caught it. Just needs to take a different route.... but Ned is getting on my nerves for sticking up for every Fing player/play. I wish he could light a fire under his team like Ozzie Guillen does. But if Ned were to rant now, people would just laugh at him.

[Jay Zahn]

A one run deficit on the road is not the highest leverage situation. Look at the Brewers' bullpen right now. DeFelice is mop-up, and the game's too close. Let's say for the sake of argument that Torres will cover the 9th and 10th if you tie or get ahead. That leaves 5 guys. You have two innings to cover. You could try to get a two inning stint out of someone, but realisticly down one in the 7th there's a fair chance you're not going to come back and win (which they wouldn't have.) So I'd probably try to use two guys so I'm not blowing someone out in a game I'm not going to win anyway.

 

Villanueva's only been used in games where the Brewers are tied or in the lead. Higher leverage games. Use him in games when you're trailing and you risk too many innings, which happened with him last year.

 

You could use Shouse (Shouse did pitch the eighth), but that still leaves the seventh anyway. You're down to Tavarez, Mota, and Dillard. Dillard hasn't pitched much in key situations yet; he's pitched well so far. I guess it's a judgment call when you elevate him to tougher situations, or let him build a little more confidence. Taking a slower route with some guys like McClung seems to have paid off this year.

 

I don't see much of a difference between Mota and Tavarez if those are your choices. Tavarez didn't pitch well for Boston but he's been better for the Crew, only gave up one earned run tonight anyway, and made some pretty nasty pitches anyway. Look up the stats of Tavarez and Mota - they've had similar careers. I'd probably say Tavarez has been more impressive.

 

Simply put, if you're down even one run and need a couple of innings pitched you're probably going to see the fourth through sixth best relievers on any team.

[adambr2]

That's great and all, but it still puts you in the minority. If your voice is to be truly heard, a seriously compelling argument needs to be laid out. Possibly even via a study. Hey, someone just had an idea about that, who was that again?

That really doesn't bother me that I'm in the minority considering some of the greatest points made in human history started in the minority. I could come up with the "seriously compelling argument", but I'll just let this all play out and when the Brewers make the playoffs a couple times in the next few years, the study won't even be needed, because Ned Yost will have brought us to the playoffs and that will be something no other manager has done since some guy named Harvey Kuenn. That will be enough for me to think Yost is a good manager. Will it be good enough for you? Hypothetically?

Absolutely it will be. Now what in the sand hill have you seen in the Yost era to make you so confident that that's going to happen?

 

[logan82]

TuesdaysWithRillo wrote:

when the Brewers make the playoffs a couple times in the next few years, the study won't even be needed, because Ned Yost will have brought us to the playoffs and that will be something no other manager has done since some guy named Harvey Kuenn. That will be enough for me to think Yost is a good manager. Will it be good enough for you? Hypothetically?

Won't make much difference to me. A manager is a manager is a manager in my mind. Some managers might manage closer to any given person's preference, but in the end they all lose games for their teams.

 

Coop got to make a point without any impact on his tactical management of the inning. Yost made a point at the expense of the tactical management of the inning.

 

Just because he might have wanted to IBB Braun doesn't make it a good choice. I see absolutley no reason to ever IBB anybody in the top of the first inning.

[sheethead]

I am pretty sure Ned knew they weren't going to score anymore runs, so that's why he stuck Tavarez out there in the 7th.

 

The pre-game and post-game comments from Yost have become comical. At least that is what I am making myself believe in order to cope.

[Thurston Fluff]

Point being, when is there ever a point in time where the PLAYERS are responsible?

 

I think it's every point in time. That's my biggest beef witht he whole Yosting thing. They never seem to recognize yost gets Yosted by his players all the time.

 

I simply asked if anyone here thought bringing in Tavarez was a good move.

 

No I'd have had someone else in instead. But Mota isn't exaclty lights out at the moment and Dillard is unproven. Still for myself I'd have went with unproven instead of someone who has proven himself to be pretty bad. Even though I like him I've always been able to admit I don't like Yost's bullpen decisions. He's been better this year largely because he has more tlaent to work with out there but still...

 

Big difference in thinking. Coop got to make a point without any impact on his tactical management of the inning. Yost made a point at the expense of the tactical management of the inning.

 

Really? Tejada on base in front of Berkman means Berkman has to hit at least a double to score Tejada. Braun has the ability to steal second and all Prince has to do is hit a single to score Braun. So the tactical management would seem to favor Ned on this one. Quite frankly it's not a good idea to put anyone on in fornt of either of those guys but if I was to forced to chose between putting Tejada on first in front of Berkman or Braun on first in front of prince I'd put Tejada on every time.

[joepepsi]

Why have Dillard warming up and then bring in Tavarez?

Why have Shouse warming up and not bring him in to face Berkman with the bases loaded? Why have him pitch next inning when the game is already over?

 

[Jay Zahn]

Why have Shouse warming up and not bring him in to face Berkman with the bases loaded? Why have him pitch next inning when the game is already over?

Because Berkman is a switch-hitter and long term (2005-2007) Tavarez has a .260 average versus rightys while Shouse is .314?

[Baldkin]

Really? Tejada on base in front of Berkman means Berkman has to hit at least a double to score Tejada. Braun has the ability to steal second and all Prince has to do is hit a single to score Braun. So the tactical management would seem to favor Ned on this one. Quite frankly it's not a good idea to put anyone on in fornt of either of those guys but if I was to forced to chose between putting Tejada on first in front of Berkman or Braun on first in front of prince I'd put Tejada on every time.

It doesn't matter which was 'better' its a bonehead move to put anyone on in front of the 2nd best hitter in the league this year.

 

[Thurston Fluff]

It doesn't matter which was 'better' its a bonehead move to put anyone on in front of the 2nd best hitter in the league this year.

 

Never said it wasn't. All I was doing is responding to the commnet that Yost's move was tactically stupid but Coopers wasn't. Taken in that context I'd still say it is dumber to put a bonfide base stealer on in front of a power hitter as opposed to a non stealer in fornt of one. That is not to say one is dumb and the other isn't. Both are it's just one has a higher % chance of scoring than the other.

[joepepsi]

Why have Shouse warming up and not bring him in to face Berkman with the bases loaded? Why have him pitch next inning when the game is already over?

Because Berkman is a switch-hitter and long term (2005-2007) Tavarez has a .260 average versus rightys while Shouse is .314?

Silly me, I forgot he was a switch hitter! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/embarassed.gif

 

[shelmark]

Tavarez had good stuff and he was a fine choice for that situation. I wish we had more players like Braun that rubbed people the wrong way. It was incredibly stupid to hit Tejada to get Berkman up, but I think McClung did it all by himself. I think the next time the Rockies play in Milwaukee I would like to have a ticket when Jeff Baker comes to the plate.

[JohnBriggs12]

As to Braun getting drilled, you may recall the final game of the home series vs. the Astros (Brewer 10-1 win), Braun hit a monster HR. I was watching on MLB Extra Innings which now offers both sets of broadcasts and I was switching back and forth. On the Brewer telecast, BA noted that Braun put his head down and ran and did not show up the Astros. But the Astro telecast had a completely different take. Braun did take off right away, but he turned and yelled something toward the Brewer dougout. The Astro telecast team made a huge deal about it, that it was bush etc.

 

As soon as Braun got drilled I knew it had to do with that. I don't buy that they would have walked Braun in front of Fielder. The Brewer broadcast team suspected something but didn't know what. It also accounts for the booing Braun got when he homered the next time up which they also could not figure out.

 

I have no problem with McClung retaliating. You cannot let teams have free shots on your players and expose them to injury without sending the message back. The problem was that Fielder fanned, and Berkman homered. If it was the other way around, which manager would have looked bad?

[Thurston Fluff]

Excellent take JB. On baseball tonight one of them commented on how that was the way it was supposed to be done. One guy gets hit, the other team retaliates, player takes his base, no benches clear and all is done. It's no coincidence that both managers came from the era and team where that was the norm. McCLung is sort of growing on me. He seems like a throw back type guy. Combine his attitude with his heat and erratic control and he can intimidate. It doesn't hurt that he's pitched well in three of his four starts either.

[rluzinski]

I think in football, to retaliate for a cheap shot, they should purposely fumble the ball, so they can cheap shot the opponent back when he recovers it. That would make about as much sense.

[1992casey]

One guy gets hit, the other team retaliates, player takes his base, no benches clear and all is done.

 

From an umpiring and rule enforcement standpoint, I agree.

 

But I hate putting a runner on base. Can't the pitcher just throw high and tight and accomplish about the same thing?

[Thurston Fluff]

I think in football, to retaliate for a cheap shot, they should purposely fumble the ball, so they can cheap shot the opponent back when he recovers it. That would make about as much sense.

 

As a stat guy you should realize that fumbling a football has a far greater chance of allowing the opponent to score than putting someone on first with one out. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

If you allow teams to hit your players without fear of retaliation I think you end up with a team afraid to get hit and allow the pitcher to take control of the inside of the plate and your pitcher will not have the same luxery. I'm sure you can see the problem that can cause.

[jazzytrav]

But I hate putting a runner on base. Can't the pitcher just throw high and tight and accomplish about the same thing?

To be fair, Casey, if he can control the pitch enough to throw it just high and tight, can he control it enough to nip the outside corner? http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif With McClung, I wouldn't be too amazed if he was actually trying to throw high and tight.

[rluzinski]

If you allow teams to hit your players without fear of retaliation I think you end up with a team afraid to get hit and allow the pitcher to take control of the inside of the plate and your pitcher will not have the same luxery. I'm sure you can see the problem that can cause.

 

Unless the pitcher is headhunting (and in that case, all bets are off) I'd love the opponent's pitcher to intentionally hit 4 or 5 guys a night. I suppose there's a chance of injury but I think it's pretty low. I don't really buy the "controlling the inside part of the plate" theory (not to say I couldn't be wrong but I've seen no evidence of it).

 

If there is a need ot cut down on HBPs, the rules should be changed to increase the punishment for it (2 bases under some circumstances, or something along those lines). Of course, baseball perfrected their sport 75 years ago, so it will never happen.

[Thurston Fluff]

I'd love the opponent's pitcher to intentionally hit 4 or 5 guys a night.

 

I bet the players feel differantly about that than you do. Even if the injury factor is low having to constantly play with welts and bruises isn't going to help players productivity any. After the allstar break we'll be down to a bunch of guys with slider bat speed limping around the bases because they can't run anymore. Not really a compelling brand of baseball to watch. There is no need to change the rules when there is a system in place to monitor that sort of thing already.

[jazzytrav]

Dave Bush owns the inside.

[pebadger]

I never said Cooper's move to put Braun on was tactically impeccable, though it is at least defensible in terms of bypassing the opponent's best hitter to get to the team's co-leader in GIDP, and then some K-machines. As quick as the whole thing happened it appears that the predesignated gameplan was to stay away from Braun and go after Fielder in those types of situations (RISP, less than 2 out) anyway. Cooper increased the probability that the Brewers would score more than one run, but he also increased they probability that they would score zero.

 

Yost put a guy on base just to show that he would put a guy on base. Since he did it with two outs, he automatically extended the inning. The only thing Yost did was increase the odds Houston would score more than one run.

[jeffy]

I have no problem with McClung retaliating.

But did he have to hit the #3 batter, just because Braun bats 3rd?

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

The problem is, he keeps on making the wrong decisions. Just because something works out in hindsight, doesn't mean it was the right decision.

Then how come the Brewers have the talent of an 85 win team and they are on track to win um.. 85 games? You saying that means that in the long run, Yost's decisions will cost the team and they really aren't any more than any other manager in baseball.