Designated Yost Thread... Latest: No accountability and lack of urgency (part 2)

[Thurston Fluff]

Sure. Just as long as you're not going back half a decade when recent past shows that a half decade ago is ancient past.

 

Or the first 2/3 of last year. If I was Ned at this point I would be worried but in no way would I be letting that concern be known publicly.

 

Phil Garner just did it three years ago in Houston.

 

Just sayin'.

 

It hardly ever happens because the majority of teams that replace their managers during the season are bad.

 

That Houston team had more in common with the 82 Brewers than the 08 Brewers do.

 

Forget the Cards have been missing their #1 and #2 pitchers all season, and the Cubs went 9-4 or something close without Soriano. The Brewers have suffered one real injury, and that was to a good but young pitcher. Saying the Brewers have been hit harder with injuries than the Cubs or Cards is not true in my opinion.

 

If you mean the two pitchers who they knew coming into the season are injured then we have two pitchers as well with Cappy and YoGa. Soriano was lost about a week more than Sheets was asn the Brewers won without Sheets during that time as well. The Brewers also won without YoGa to begin the season. Neither the Cubs or the Cards have suffered a seaosn ending injury to a player they expected to be playing so this season.

 

They still strikeout way to much. That's all in spite of bringing in far more talented players, many of whom didn't carry these warts in the minors.

 

Oh, and Yost's team is 6-6 vs. sub .500 teams. If they can't be over .500 vs. sub .500 teams, how can you possibly think the Brewers can be above .500 at all? Yost will not have this team above .500 at the end of this year (easily fathomable, even for the hardest core optimistic Brewers fan), so the only way the Brewers finish above the Cards is if the Cards are further below .500 than the Brewers. I have much doubt the Brewers can finish above the Cards, simply based on the facts that Ned Yost is the manager of the Brewers and Budweiser sells more beer than Miller.

 

I guess the counter to that arguement is they are 10-10 against teams with a winning record playing mostly on the road. You say Yost will not have this team above .500 at the end of the year yet he has yet to be below .500 in a very tough stretch of the season. When they do get to play more at home than the road and against the teams the Cards and Cubs have been beating up on I see no reason why they would be a sub .500 team (event he most hard core pessimist should be able to imagine this).

 

Isn't it telling that Yost's ejection inspires absolutely no signs of life from his team.

 

What is it supposed to be telling? Is an ejection supposed to somehow get the team to concentrate more or play harder? If he's been doing his job all along playing harder wouldn't be an option since they are already doing that.

 

 

Overall player performance is not improving. Yes, the talent level has definitely increased, but the same poor overall fundamental play is the same as when Ned arrived in Milwaukee. Every aspect of this team is either flat-lining or regressing. The still run the bases poorly. They still play poor defense. They still have no obvious approach at the plate. The pitchers still walk far too many hitters. They still don't know how to move a runner over. They still grossly lack in situation hitting. They still try and pull every outside pitch. They still strikeout way to much. That's all in spite of bringing in far more talented players, many of whom didn't carry these warts in the minors. New faces, same mistakes and same poor results. The one constant...Ned Yost.

 

 

They are playng much better defense this year. They are not great but far improved from last season. They are better at running the bases. I think maybe your view of this was overly influenced by two runners getting trown out at home. They may not be hitting very well right now but since they have all hit better under the same manager maybe it's a bit to early to blame the slow start hitting wise on the manager. Unless of course you wish to also give him credit for getting more out of those very same players in the past. As far as the players who didn't carry the same warts as they now have just which player didn't have those warts in the minors? JJ never hit in the minors like he did the first half of last year. Prince and Weeks were most definately poor defenders in the minors. When Prince was struggling in the minors it was when he wouldn't take his walks when teams pitched around him. He seems to have improved on that. Weeks is far better defensively than when he came up. Bill Hall put up better numbers and is vaslty improved on defense from what he was in the minors. I think you over rated how good they were when they came up. Maybe we all did. Every one of them had things they needed to work on and still do. But it doesn't take a very in depth look to see they have improved since they've come up. Unless of course you chose not to remember how they were then.

[Fatter than Joey]

That Houston team had more in common with the 82 Brewers than the 08 Brewers do.

 

Yes that is a true and great point -- The Astros were veteran heavy much like the 82 Brewers, unlike the 08 Brewers

 

When they do get to play more at home than the road and against the teams the Cards and Cubs have been beating up on I see no reason why they would be a sub .500 team

 

I do think the road/home arguments are getting out of line. I really do not think (overall) teams play better at home or on the road (unlike FB and BKB), I am not saying there is no

advantage, but I think waiting for a team like the Cards to struggle because they are playing the Giants in SF rather than STL is a bit of a stretch.

 

I will concede that one of my big mysteries is why the Brewers struggles so mightily on the road last year -- I think that was an anomality

[jazzytrav]

They are playng much better defense this year. They are not great but far improved from last season.

This was almost a given with the Cameron signing and the move of Braun to left and Hall to 3rd.

 

They are better at running the bases. I think maybe your view of this was overly influenced by two runners getting trown out at home.

I have never seen such horrible baserunning from a team in my life. Hall getting picked off at second. Numerous players getting caught in pickles at completely random times. And yes, the two runners getting thrown out at home, but there wasn't an entire thread devoted to Sveum because of those two runners. There are been enough baserunning mistakes to be noticeable, and that's not a good thing. I didn't notice it last year, which to me means they weren't quite so bad at it.

 

As far as the players who didn't carry the same warts as they now have just which player didn't have those warts in the minors?

Rickie absolutely tore up AAA ball. Didn't seem like he had a whole lot of hitting warts back then.

[naivin]

Just to jump on the Houston thing, I know you are just sayin', but that is a terrible example.

 

First of all, he took over a .500 team mid-way through 2004, and while they went on to win 92 games, they did not make the playoffs. They won the NL in 2005. Both teams (04 and 05) had a starting rotation that included Clemens, Oswalt, and Pettitte. Did he make a difference in that second half? Perhaps, but no way to know for sure - especially in light of what happened the following year...

 

and here is where it gets very interesting...in 2005, after 32 games, the Astros were 12-20. On May 27th they were 16-31, dead last, and 15 games out of first place. After 88 games, they were 44-44...the exact same record they had when they fired Williams the previous season. Based on that, i have a difficult time concluding that Garner was a primary reason for the turnaround the year prior.

[Never Outhustled]

Ned Yost is 77-85 in his last 162 games. I'm predicting his Brewer tenure will be over Friday morning.

[Invader3K]

Ned Yost is 77-85 in his last 162 games. I'm predicting his Brewer tenure will be over Friday morning.

I tend to doubt that. Melvin hasn't shown a penchant for making rash decisions. I wouldn't cry over it though...I'm personally very "neutral" on Yost at this point. I don't think he can be blamed for all the team's problems thus far, but sometimes a managerial change can give a team the kick in the pants it needs to turn a corner.

[Paulus88]

jazzytrav wrote:

I just don't understand why it has to be so black-and-white.

This statement seems to sum up most of my feelings regarding Yost. It's more than just the "by the book " managing but the unequivocal way in which he chooses to express himself. When challenged he makes it seem like the way he decided is the only option and any challenge to that is insulting and ridiculous. As opposed to justifying his position he feels there is no need because he's the manager. Baseball is a sport with shades of grey where managers have a plethora of options and accepting this is important part of being a manager (and a fan). It's not about making the right decisions all the time it's about recognizing that there are other options and being open to them in the future. I'd rather Yost didn't foreclose the option of changing Ganges role in the future as an example.

[naivin]

sometimes a managerial change can give a team the kick in the pants it needs to turn a corner.

I'm not picking on you, so please don't take it that way, but I hear this thrown around quite a bit, but my weak memory has a hard time coming up with more than a very small handfull of cases where a mid-season change actually had any real positive results. Wondering if the collective group can't compile a list because I am far from convinced that it is anything more than wishful thinking on the part of many here.

 

Harvey Kuehn in '82 is an obvious one.

Jack McKeon in 2003 is another.

For reasons I think I previously documented pretty well, I would be very hesitant to include Garner in '03 on a list of successes, but he's worth mentioning.

 

That's all that really comes to mind for me.

[naivin]

As an adjunct to the post above, as I see absolutely nothing to be gained by simply elevating Simmons who had coached or managed in a grand total of 0 MLB games prior to this year, are there any realistic external candidates who might be options to come in and manage mid-season?

[Teatoe993]

I'm actually more in favor of Kremblas getting the job. Is he even on the radar anymore? I love Simmons, but I wonder if he'd accept the promotion if offered.

[Invader3K]

naivin, to be honest, those are the only two instances I can really think of off hand as well, I admit. I suppose one downside of a mid-season managerial change is that the Brewers are a very young team, and may not react as well to a sudden change as an older team might.

 

On the radio the other day, they made a point to mention that in their entire history, the Brewers have only had a grand total of one manager with previous MLB managerial experience. Might be something for Melvin to think about whenever Yost finally is cut loose.

[jeffy]

I'd be bothered if he isn't at least thinking "Hey, our closer is blowing a lot of saves. If this keeps up, that could lead to a lot more losses. Maybe I should keep my eye on the situation and make a change if need be!"

 

But even if he were thinking that, would you want him stating those thoughts publicly?

[jazzytrav]

There's a difference between saying one thing and saying nothing. Yost didn't just keep those thoughts from the media, if he is in fact having them. He came out and made it seem like anyone that even thinks about that is an idiot because...IT'S ERIC GAGNE.

 

Edit: Or maybe it was Melvin that said that last part. I don't know, it's all getting blurry lately...

[Never Outhustled]

As an adjunct to the post above, as I see absolutely nothing to be gained by simply elevating Simmons who had coached or managed in a grand total of 0 MLB games prior to this year, are there any realistic external candidates who might be options to come in and manage mid-season?

A career winner who is available right now is Mike Hargrove. He hasn't returned since losing a power struggle in Seattle to Ichiro. I find it funny that Ichiro is struggling this year. Hargrove is considered a terrific leader of men, and prefers to let his hitters hit, the preferred methodology of Doug Melvin.

[Thurston Fluff]

I don't think we'd be talking about how the managerial change would have won the Brewers the divison that year if Dalton didn't trade for Sutton. I think that had more to do with the Brewers getting to the post season tahn the manager did.

[naivin]

I don't think we'd be talking about how the managerial change would have won the Brewers the divison that year if Dalton didn't trade for Sutton. I think that had more to do with the Brewers getting to the post season tahn the manager did.

 

This is an excellent point.

[Never Outhustled]

I don't think we'd be talking about how the managerial change would have won the Brewers the divison that year if Dalton didn't trade for Sutton. I think that had more to do with the Brewers getting to the post season tahn the manager did.

Sutton wasn't aquired untill September. What did he make, 3-4 starts? That team would have qualified as the wild card without Sutton if the present format had been in place. That team improved dramatically in the won loss column before Sutton came along.

[tristarscoop]

I posted this about Yost in my blog back on April 23 and 24...

 

It's in our nature to find someone to blame when things go wrong and though I've tried to stay objective, Ned Yost has won no points in my book this week. His post-game press conference demeanor couldn't be more off-putting. Even if I didn't already have questions about him, that right there would be enough to put him on my [expletive deleted] list. He acts like it's above him to be there, like all the questions are ridiculous and that he shouldn't have to answer them. I'm sorry Ned, but press conferences are part of the job. You don't have to like them, but you're not endearing yourself to a fan base that is already iffy on you. When you make a move in a game that turns out to be questionable, don't act like it's unfathomable that a reporter will ask you about the decision. You made the decision for a reason - we just want to know what it is.

 

I have great respect for Doug Melvin and he likes Ned, which gives Ned a lot of cred in my book. Just as I think it's ridiculous when actors/actresses get up upset about being in the limelight, I think it's ridiculous that Ned is so obnoxious during press conferences. His tendency towards "non-answers," snide remarks and defensiveness has got to stop.

 

A lot of fans think that Ned Yost is an awful manager and while I sometimes agree, I think I dislike him for a different reason. I feel that Ned's ego and pride tend to get in the way of his making good decisions. I think he's too stubborn and he's trying to prove people wrong too often. He doesn't like to change his path. He doesn't like to admit to mistakes. He sticks with things longer than he should in an apparent attempt to wait for things to right themselves so that he doesn't have to say he was wrong and he can look like he was right.

 

 

(edit: language --1992)

[naivin]

Sutton wasn't aquired untill September. What did he make, 3-4 starts? That team improved dramatically in the won loss column before Sutton came along.

 

This is a better point. Sutton actually made 7 starts during the season (Brewers won 5). He's probably the reason they were able to overtake Baltimore, but not necessarily a huge impact on the overall W-L.

[naivin]

Ned Yost is 77-85 in his last 162 games. I'm predicting his Brewer tenure will be over Friday morning.

 

Just for comparison sake, in their last 162 games...

 

Jim Leyland is 80-82

Ron Gardenhire is 79-83

Bobby Cox is 81-81

Bruce Bochy is 68-94.

 

Which of those guys is a bad manager? Not sure record in the last 162 games is a great way to judge a manager.

[jazzytrav]

I'm sorry, but in no way can you start comparing Yost to Leyland or Cox. When Yost has some serious success, then he might get a free pass for a season or two. But he hasn't had that success yet.

[xisxisxis]

Ned Yost is 77-85 in his last 162 games. I'm predicting his Brewer tenure will be over Friday morning.

 

Ain't gonna happen. Melvin and Nedly got all the cover they need if this team doesn't meet expectations when Gallardo went down with a season ending injury. I can hear it now, "the team simply failed to meet expectations due to injuries. If we had only had Yo for the whole year we would have made the playoffs" It's not like they haven't used it before.....

[jazzytrav]

Ned Yost is 77-85 in his last 162 games. I'm predicting his Brewer tenure will be over Friday morning.

 

Ain't gonna happen. Melvin and Nedly got all the cover they need if this team doesn't meet expectations when Gallardo went down with a season ending injury. I can hear it now, "the team simply failed to meet expectations due to injuries. If we had only had Yo for the whole year we would have made the playoffs" It's not like they haven't used it before.....

I know, and it's making me sick already.

[brewcrew00]

I'm sorry, but in no way can you start comparing Yost to Leyland or Cox. When Yost has some serious success, then he might get a free pass for a season or two. But he hasn't had that success yet.

I don't think he meant it as a comparison of success, but rather just to show you can't simply take the previous 162 games to make a point about a manager.

[Roscoe Chill]

I think the point is that Ned Yost has had a pretty good team the last 162 games. Probably better talent than the other managers mentioned, except Leyland. Or we could also just look at overall career records between Cox, Leyland, and Yost if you don't think the Brewers roster over the last 162 games matters.