Yost's last stand?

[whynotthebrewers]

I took small issue with sitting Braun. Our offense is struggling and he needs to be in there. I also took issue with Gross as our DH again. He is awful right now and should not see the field for awhile. I would rather see Mench or Gwynn as the DH. Lastly, I took issue with not pinch hitting in the 9th for either Counsell or Graffy just to mix it up and try to get something going. We were only down 4 and basically just gave up. Please put Hart back at leadoff until Weeks is back and healthy.

 

 

Well Braun was hurt and probably needed a day off yesterday. As for the DH spot. Who else do we have? I know Gwynn is always the answer but he is really not as good as people would like to believe. The lineup is what it is now without Weeks in it. But alot of guys are struggling right now so this only has more people upset and the lineup is more of an issue. I don't think it really mattered who was in there last night with that nasty stuff Verlander was throwing. We just need JJ and Hall to get going here. Graffy and Counsell are what they are. But we need to get 6 hitters going at the same time.

[hauser42]

I'm a Yost fan generally....but think this team needs some new energy and I'm willing to sacrific Ned to do so. I seem to recall Buck Rogers being fired during the season the last time we went to a World Series. Wasn't that the case?

 

That was veteran team that was done dealing with Buck micro managing them. Keuhn came in and told the guys to just play ball and have fun.

 

As was discussed in earlier (or another thread) this is a different type of team as it is much younger.

 

 

Yost is from the Bobby Cox tree and I have never liked him as a manager. Cox always messes around with his lineup, he flirts with different closers in the pen, and sticks with his slumping guys too long.

[naivin]

Quote:

---

Yost is from the Bobby Cox tree and I have never liked him as a manager. Cox always messes around with his lineup, he flirts with different closers in the pen, and sticks with his slumping guys too long.

---

 

Lord knows he hasn't seen any kind of results.

[Fatter than Joey]

While that's a neat list, it doesn't say a whole lot. I certainly wouldn't use career winning percentage.

 

Well -- again -- what tells us that Yost is a "top-5 manager"? -- If your gut tells you that -- that's fine -- however all I am saying, is let's be objective about this and not just randomly declare Yost to be a "top-5/untouchable" manager.

 

After going through the managers on baseball-reference, it didnt take me long to find a bunch of managers that had better results than he has, and have taken crappy teams to the playoffs.

 

I guess my conclusion after studying the managers a bit, while I would never consider Yost to be an abomination, I think chances are pretty good a better manager could be found.

[RU Rah Rah]

Yost is from the Bobby Cox tree and I have never liked him as a manager. Cox always messes around with his lineup, he flirts with different closers in the pen, and sticks with his slumping guys too long.

 

Do we have a "how many different lineups" thread? Baseball Reference indicates that there have been 37 different ones in 64 games. The most common (9 times) is the following:

 

C. Estrada

1B. Fielder

2B. Weeks

3B. Graffanino

SS. Hardy

LF. Mench

CF. Hall

RF. Hart

 

Other teams in the NL:

Padres (31 lineups/most common 11 times)

Diamondbacks (44/4)

Cubs (41/4)

Mets (27/16)

Braves (30/10)

Cards (43/5)

Dodgers (35/9)

 

So I am not sure what that means, frankly. It also seems interesting that this is the second-most common batting order (5 games):

 

1. Weeks

2. Hardy

3. Fielder

4. Hall

5. Mench

6. Hart

7. Miller

8. Graffanino

[Klements Bratwurst]

I put this last night in the vent thread on page 44. I hope it would maybe bring some of you to laugh a little, but the major Ned Yost supporters won't like it. I am not sure what camp I am in yet, but I personally am sick of the different lineups every day that Ned throws out and especially stringing together Gross, Counsell, and Graffanino 9, 1, 2.

 

 

 

 

Dateline- Detroit, MI 5:30PM Visiting Clubhouse

 

Ned Yost is waiting around his office with an empty lineup card. He is biting his nails. Scratching his head. He is having some serious anxiety about something.

 

Yost: That darn phone better ring. It is getting close to game time. I need the lineup fairy to call me so that I can get the lineup out to the umpires. Where is he?

 

Phone rings.

 

Muffled voice: I have your 42nd new lineup today Ned.

 

Yost: You do? Does it have some gritty veteran battlers at the top of the order?

 

Muffled voice: You bet it does!

 

Yost: Oh goodie, goodie. Just want I always wanted. I love gritty veteran battlers. But wait, Mr. Lineup Fairy. That phenom Verlander is pitching tonight. Shouldn't we go with our best offensive weapons?

 

Muffled voice: No, Nedly. This lineup will allow you to rest the better players you have by giving them no more than 3 or 4 at bats by putting them at the middle or bottom of the lineup or not even have some of your better players IN the lineup.

 

Yost: What a great idea!! I like giving my better players a lot of time off to rest. Especially after having two off days in the last five days. This way, it will make them stronger for tomorrow, or the next day. Oh goodie, goodie!!

 

Yost: Can you tell me?

 

Muffled voice: Here it is

 

1. Counsell 2B

2. Graffanino 3B

3. Hardy SS

4. Fielder 1B

5. Hart RF

6. Jenkins LF

7. Estrada C

8. Hall CF

9. Gross DH

 

Yost: Wow! Two .600 OPS guys at the top of the order to rest my .900 OPS guy. Great thinking Mr. Lineup Fairy. This way, we will really be ready for Mike Maroth tomorrow, or that Durby guy for Thursday!!

 

Muffled Voice: I call you tomorrow with a new lineup Nedly.

 

Yost: Great! (Ned hangs up the phone)

 

15 minutes later after the lineups are put on the board at Comerica Park and Dale Sveum enters Ned's office.

 

Sveum: Ready to go Ned?

 

Yost: Yep, got a great lineup tonight.

 

Sveum: I saw it posted, not sure that I like the top of the order but it is your call.

 

Sveum shrugs his shoulders and walks toward the door of Ned's office and turns around.

 

Sveum: Ned, I ran into the guys that had your job before you. It was weird, I was walking between clubhouses earlier today and I saw Davey Lopes and Jerry Royster with a lineup card and a few scratchings on it. Are they scouting for some other team because Mike Maddux has also seen them before around.

 

Yost: Naw. I have never seen them around here before. What do they want? My job? Ha! Do they want to watch me to screw up like they did? Ha! Not going to happen, I have a secret weapon on my side!!!!

 

 

 

This is the undisputed true story of the events that led up to the first pitch before the Milwaukee Brewers were no hit for the third time in the history of the franchise.

[1992casey]

---

It was something Molitor once said in an interview that makes me ask these questions:

"Honestly, if we had never replaced Buck with Harvey Kuenn we would never have sniffed that world series."

---

I think the flaw is in comparing this team to 1982. I'd say that these comparisons are more apt:

• 1978? the first season the team was good
• 1980? the good team who needed tinkering before it could become 'good enough'
• 1987? Team Streak

---

Cox always ? sticks with his slumping guys too long.

---

Someone quoted Bobby once and I'd love to see the exact words. It was something to the effect of riding out slumps as long as he could, and when he finally decided a starter needed to be benched, he'd wait another two weeks.

[sbrylski]

I am not sure what camp I am in yet, but I personally am sick of the different lineups every day

 

So what? I'm sure having a few of your players moving around a little is not going to have a very big effect on their production. If anything, it could help them by putting them in positions to succeed.

 

How about this, say Yost has had the same lineup everyday:

 

Suevm: Ned, why is Jenkins hitting 6th again today, we've got a tough lefty today? And Estrada looks really tired and is slumping bad. Gross, Gwynn and Mench have just 20 AB's between them. What gives?

 

Ned: I don't want to mess with them.

[endaround]

Do players really forget how to hit if they are moved about in the lineup? Seriously, this isn't a football formation or a basketball rotation. Aside from some players not wanting to hit right after Hart or Weeks because stealing bothers them, what difference does it really make?

[Jacob008]

Quote:

---

Well -- again -- what tells us that Yost is a "top-5 manager"? -- If your gut tells you that -- that's fine -- however all I am saying, is let's be objective about this and not just randomly declare Yost to be a "top-5/untouchable" manager.

---

I see that, and I know that your list was to show that by winning percentage Yost is not considered a good manager. And my point, poorly articulated, was that no one would argue that winning percentage shows Yost is a good manager. Further, my point was, let's not be objective about it.

 

I don't care where Yost "ranks" in the league among managers. Or if there are better managers out there. As long as he's not losing more games than he's winning why rock the boat? I actually think he's won a few games this season on good managing alone. Most of the guys on this team are not playing for contracts, replace a guy they are comfortable with, with a "better manager" (which you could never be sure of) and that could very easily have negative effect on this team.

 

He's having a good year. And really, he deserves a shot with this team. I don't mean to defend any crazy "top-5 manager" comments. But just as it's hard to show he's a good manager, it's hard to show he's a bad manager, and it's probably harder to show that there are better managers out there that could come in and have a positive impact on the team.

 

Quote:

---

it didnt take me long to find a bunch of managers that had better results than he has, and have taken crappy teams to the playoffs.

---

 

really? actually crappy teams, or crappy teams that had good years? If you want to get objective about it, i think the way to do it is to find teams that based on their hitting/pitching lines, scored/prevented more runs then they should've. Then, the managers that can do that consistently over the course of a career can be called good managers. But, just like clutch hitting, you can't make that judgement until after said manager's/player's career is over.

 

It's a crapshoot. Get a guy who's good at making the trains run on time, and isn't ozzie guillen crazy and you've got a good manager.

[1992casey]

Anyone remember 2003 when Ned didn't tinker with lineups at all? He's place any substitutes in the regular's slot, even if it meant a Brady Clark hitting cleanup.

 

While that tack seemed OK in 2003, it didn't seem to work well at all in 2004, and it took him a bit to realize it.

 

Over the long run and in most situations, I'd rather see the manager be flexible with the lineup.

[qrk10000]

As has been said by a few others, I don't think Yost is a great manager or a terrible manager. I think he is pretty average. I have never liked how he has managed his starting lineup or bullpen, and sometimes I think he is loyal to certain players to a fault, but I do like his attitude, the way he manages his rotation (save a few of Dave Bush's starts), and the fact that he trained under Bobby Cox. You also have to credit him for having the respect of his players too. That is certainly very important in this day and age.

 

I don't think making a move during the season is the route to go, even if we played below .500 baseball until the all-star break. I don't think we have identified any real candidates to replace him other than Frank Kremblas or Dale Sveum and I doubt either of them would be able to do much if they were thrown into the fire midseason. I am not against reevaluating things once the season is over, though, especially if some new candidates emerge. However, we are not even halfway into the season and are currently above .500 and in 1st place. Both of those things have already exceeded my expectations for this season.

[Fatter than Joey]

As long as he's not losing more games than he's winning why rock the boat?

 

He has lost more games than he has won in his career. If Yost is .500+ this year, I certainly would not push to get him fired. If the Brewers were .500- this year would you want him gone?

 

I don't care where Yost "ranks" in the league among managers. Or if there are better managers out there.

 

I am not trying to "rank" managers -- I realize that my method is far from scientific. However if there is batter managers out there, I wouldn't hestitate to try and upgrade our manager. I don't see why we wouldn't.

 

I don't mean to defend any crazy "top-5 manager" comments.

 

http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

I am not singling you out on this -- I hear this "top-5" comment a lot, from a lot of people.

 

Now if you think Yost is the best manager -- I can't touch that. However people toss around the "top-5" if there is some sort of actual criteria or that it is undisputable fact. i.e. "Yost is a top-5 manager we would be silly to fire him."

 

For example -- you could say "Estrada is my favorite C" -- That is not debatable-- however if you say "Estrada is a top 5 catcher in MLB" -- there is a criteria that can be applied to either support or refute that statement.

 

My question remains, "What criteria allows you to claim Yost is a top 5 manager"? -- If it is your personal perferences -- that is super cool, only it should be stated as such -- however, I can tell you Yost's results certainly don't show that.

 

really? actually crappy teams, or crappy teams that had good years?

 

Sometimes I think we think that the Brewers are the only franchise that has extended times in the dumps. There are plenty of examples of managers taking bad teams and turning them around faster than Yost has (before 5 seasons). It's not like Yost has worked a real miracle here in Milw.

[FVBrewerFan]

Managers don't get fired for line-up changes and use of the bullpen. That is all ancillary to the big question. Do Mark A. and Melvin believe Yost is the guy that can take them to the finish line? Simple as that.

 

So much if this debate is whether Yost deserves to be fired. In reality, that rarely has much to do with the decision. It's difficult at best for an owner or GM to pin point that manager or head coach in any sport is doing a poor job of managing. After all, players win and lose games right? If that were the case then every manager would have a job for life.

 

So you need to look at the big picture, because that's what Melvin is doing. Every team has slumps. High and low points. But this team started 24-10 and have been in a downward spiral ever since. Again, there's a difference between a cycle and a trend.

 

Mark A spent more money this year, and in a weak division may expect a Central Division title. Great for attendance this year and next (REVENUE $$$) So either they feel Yost can right the ship or not. The reason I started this thread is that I believed a horrific road trip would really put him on the hot seat.

[naivin]

Quote:

---

There are plenty of examples of managers taking bad teams and turning them around faster than Yost has (before 5 seasons).

---

 

Such as...

[Jacob008]

Quote:

---

My question remains, "What criteria allows you to claim Yost is a top 5 manager"? -- If it is your personal perferences -- that is super cool, only it should be stated as such -- however, I can tell you Yost's results certainly don't show that.

---

Well then it's just a semantic issue. In general I assume that if someone has some evidence for an opinion the point is to share it, and when they don't i assume it doesn't exist. So a statement without evidence is always opinion. I wouldn't get hung up on how it's presented. That's that other guy's job.

 

I don't have any evidence that he's managing well enough to keep his job. I could put something together perhaps, like i suggested above, but i wouldn't trust it enough to fire the manager.

 

Clearly you think he should be replaced, right? So, what evidence do you have that the team, because Yost is manager, is under-performing. I haven't seen any. And sometimes best-available evidence is not actually evidence at all. Like career winning percentage for example. Might as well evaluate manager talent on hat size.

 

Quote:

---

There are plenty of examples of managers taking bad teams

---

This, i would definitely argue against. I would say that there are no bad teams that have gone to the playoffs because of the manager.

 

On the whole i'm with you. I think Yost is a bad manager. He had a bad '05 and a horrible '06. But he's greatly improved this year, and I just don't see enough games that he's lost to cost him his job. If he were still trying to use Aquino in closer situations, i'd have a different opinion. He just meddles too much to be a great manager.

 

But this year he's not intentionally walking hitters, he's not sacrificing as much, he's managing the OF and the IF rotations well, his bullpen management has improved since april, the team is aggressive but not overly so on the basepaths. He handled braun brilliantly, he didn't leave hall at 4 too long, he's gotten away from mench when it was clear it was time too. What else do you want?

[FVBrewerFan]

Quote:

---

What else do you want?

---

 

Wins. Very simply, "the buck stops here" concept is still alive and well. If a player is hitting .087 the entire year should he be cut? Well no, not if he's taking extra BP, listening to coaches, doing everything he can to turn it around right?

 

Same thing is true for Yost or any manager. Whether or not he is making the right moves is largely irrelevant.

[giffted1]

Quote:

---

There are plenty of examples of managers taking bad teams and turning them around faster than Yost has (before 5 seasons).

---

 

The managers are not what turned these teams around. Its either player acquisitions, young players improving, or a wave of prospects getting called up.

 

Take last year's Tigers for example. Everyone says Leyland turned them around, but he was just a small part of the puzzle. Leyland had the good fortune of coming to a bad team that had made some good signings and trades and had some good prospects coming up.

 

You can credit Leyland for the turn around, but I credit the additions of Polanco, Ordonez, Rogers, and Jones along with the promotions of Verlander, Zumaya, and Granderson and other moves.

[Jacob008]

Quote:

---

Wins.

---

And this, i would argue, is unreasonable. The manager can only put the team in position to win. He doesn't score and prevent runs. (I do think that managers can make good odds-defying moves that turn out well and should be credited for winning the game, but those are, and should be, rare events.)

 

What you are saying, to me, is the equivalent of as long as Hardy is slugging over .600 Yost can keep his job. What I assume you are saying is, as long as Yost puts the team in a position to win the game, he should keep his job. Do you think that Yost is not putting the team in the best position to win? How many more wins should the Brewers have at this point in the season? 10, 20? Do you think the cubs should fire Pinella?

[qrk10000]

rluzinski, are there any stats out there that can be used to show a manager's performance? You always seem to post some really interesting statistics to judge a player's performance (and even if I don't always agree with them I appreciate that you post them) and I was wondering if there was anything for managers? I can't even think what would be quantifiable outside of winning percentage, wins and losses, streaks, and lesser things like number of lineups used or number of pitchers used (though I think it would be very difficult to formulate a conclusion based on subjective stats that).

[Fatter than Joey]

Clearly you think he should be replaced, right?

 

Now, no. If the Brewers are less than .500 at the end of the season, I think he should get fired.

 

So, what evidence do you have that the team, because Yost is manager, is under-performing.

 

I never really want to argue this position -- My question is "what criteria do people have to say that he is a top manager?" -- If all it is, is personal opinion, then that is fine with me. I am really rallying against the concept that Yost is a sacred cow.

 

I would say that there are no bad teams that have gone to the playoffs because of the manager.

 

In one year -- of course you are correct -- but many managers before Yost have turned a team around faster -- of course the infusion of talent plays a huge role in this, and some bad teams were destined to remain bad, but for argument's sake lets assume a franchise with some committment to getting to the playoffs.

 

This is really not what I am saying -- rather there have been managers that gotten teams with no talent, to the playoffs in a quicker time span than Yost (Hargrove Cleveland e.g.) -- this is to say, Ned has gotten a free pass because of the team's lack of talent in 2003, 2004, which is fine, but if the Brewers are sub .500 after his 5th year -- I am quite certain that is a reasonable amount of time to see what Ned can do.

 

What else do you want?

 

Estrada never to bat 5th, and a .500+ team at the end of the year.

[Fatter than Joey]

Take last year's Tigers for example. Everyone says Leyland turned them around, but he was just a small part of the puzzle.

 

Sure -- I don't think anyone here thinks Casey Stengel would take the 2002 Brewers to the World Series.

 

Of course you are right the big piece of the puzzle was the talent acquisition for the Tigers. However, Leyland was a part of that puzzle nonetheless. Would Yost have been able to take that team to the WS? -- I don't think so, that is my opinion though.

 

For the record Polanco, and Ordonez were Tigers before Leyland.

[qrk10000]

And this, i would argue, is unreasonable. The manager can only put the team in position to win. He doesn't score and prevent runs. (I do think that managers can make good odds-defying moves that turn out well and should be credited for winning the game, but those are, and should be, rare events.)

 

I think when it boils down to it, wins have to be taken into consideration over a certain period of time. A manager's sole responsibility is to win. Everything else is secondary. What that period of time is, I am not sure, but if a team employees a manager for 5 or 6 years and he still has not been able to put together a winning season, then his performance does need to be evaluated. That is when you need to look at things like how that manager is doing in terms of motivation, educating/mentoring younger players, player morale, and other soft skills that are not necessarily black and white. If that manager is doing those things well, I don't see how you can fire him. In that respect, that is why I think Yost still has a job. Every manager is going to make mistakes from time-to-time because they are human and that is their nature. I think it is difficult to look at Yost, though, and find any chronic mistakes that just keep happening over and over. He does things from time-to-time in terms of the bullpen and lineup that I am sure he would differently next time, but I think that is more of an exception rather than a norm. I do think he made poor choices last year with how he handled Jenkins and Turnbow, but so far this year, he seems to have learned from those mistakes.

[Ennder]

Quote:

---

Would Yost have been able to take that team to the WS? -- I don't think so, that is my opinion though.

---

 

I'd say he'd have about the same chance. Leyland didn't do anything special, he picked his starters, played them every day and they scored a bunch of runs while not letting a lot in. His bullpen management was nothing special either. You could make the argument that he somehow just made his players play better but thats just hard to quantify so I can't really agree or disagree with it.

[Jacob008]

Quote:

---

I never really want to argue this position

---

I get that. I wouldn't either, but it's a necessary complimentary position to a fact-based opinion that Yost is a sacred cow. One couldn't exist without the other.

 

If the brewers are below .500 at the end of the season, and it's because of Yost, I'll stand with you that he should be fired. Also, I agree with you that the idea that Yost is a great manager is misguided. But I do think that he's having a good year, and any talk of removing him before the season is over is crazy talk.

 

On the other point, I don't believe that managers have any ability to "turn teams around." I don't think that has ever been done. To take a bad team and make it a good team would be an amazing feat. Outside of a manager being really crazy and getting lucky or not, i just don't see much affect a manager can have on a team.

 

Quote:

---

Estrada never to bat 5th, and a .500+ team at the end of the year.

---

Me too. Batting Estrada fifth is a huge invitation to IBB walk Fielder and get an easy double play one pitch later. It's amazing this doesn't happen more often, guess there are lots of bad managers out there.

 

Go Brewers!