Is Counsell the Right Manager for the Brewers?

[Thurston Fluff]

Some pitchers do better in strict roles while others are more versatile. The trick is finding enough if that type of pitcher to fit the way the pen is going to be used. If you have the wrong players each way will fail. Kimbrel might be an example of a 9th inning only guy.

 

There is almost no proof of this other than an old baseball adage that is suddenly disappearing as analytics continue to infiltrate baseball.

 

Kimbrel only has 22 innings in the 8th inning over his career, but he certainly isn't a bad pitcher in that inning.

 

I understand the idea that a certain guy wants to warm up at a certain time or his adrenaline is higher in the 9th, but it's not as if they're pitching on mars when they come in for a different inning. It's still a major league baseball game.

 

In fact, we need to look no further than Wade Davis, who was an absolute stud in 2014 for the Royals in the 8th inning when they made it all the way to the World Series and lost in game 7...and he did fine in the 9th inning the following year.

 

I don't agree wholly with xisxisxis 100% on the #2 vs. #3 hitter thing (even if he is right, it is a very small matter IMO) but at least he has presented some data. Almost every other complaint on here is, "I think Counsell is a bad manager because [insert pre-2010 baseball adage here]."

 

Is there any proof the other way is better? I know using the strict role method worked for Yost when he had good pitchers to use. Not so well when he didn't. But can't the same be said of Counsell's more modern use of the pen?

 

What I know there is ample evidence of is every fan base complains about how the manager manages it's bullpen. What there is absolute proof of is bullpens with a lot of good pitchers in it do better than bullpens with few good pitchers in it regardless of who is the manager. Beyond that the difference of how they are used is minimal IMHO.

[Thurston Fluff]

Some pitchers do better in strict roles while others are more versatile. The trick is finding enough if that type of pitcher to fit the way the pen is going to be used. If you have the wrong players each way will fail. Kimbrel might be an example of a 9th inning only guy.

 

There is almost no proof of this other than an old baseball adage that is suddenly disappearing as analytics continue to infiltrate baseball.

 

Kimbrel only has 22 innings in the 8th inning over his career, but he certainly isn't a bad pitcher in that inning.

 

I understand the idea that a certain guy wants to warm up at a certain time or his adrenaline is higher in the 9th, but it's not as if they're pitching on mars when they come in for a different inning. It's still a major league baseball game.

 

In fact, we need to look no further than Wade Davis, who was an absolute stud in 2014 for the Royals in the 8th inning when they made it all the way to the World Series and lost in game 7...and he did fine in the 9th inning the following year.

 

I don't agree wholly with xisxisxis 100% on the #2 vs. #3 hitter thing (even if he is right, it is a very small matter IMO) but at least he has presented some data. Almost every other complaint on here is, "I think Counsell is a bad manager because [insert pre-2010 baseball adage here]."

 

Is there any proof the other way is better? I know using the strict role method worked for Yost when he had good pitchers to use. Not so well when he didn't. But can't the same be said of Counsell's more modern use of the pen?

 

What I know there is ample evidence of is every fan base complains about how the manager manages it's bullpen. What there is absolute proof of is bullpens with a lot of good pitchers in it do better than bullpens with few good pitchers in it regardless of who is the manager. Beyond that the difference of how they are used is minimal IMHO.

[Thurston Fluff]

Some pitchers do better in strict roles while others are more versatile. The trick is finding enough if that type of pitcher to fit the way the pen is going to be used. If you have the wrong players each way will fail. Kimbrel might be an example of a 9th inning only guy.

 

There is almost no proof of this other than an old baseball adage that is suddenly disappearing as analytics continue to infiltrate baseball.

 

Kimbrel only has 22 innings in the 8th inning over his career, but he certainly isn't a bad pitcher in that inning.

 

I understand the idea that a certain guy wants to warm up at a certain time or his adrenaline is higher in the 9th, but it's not as if they're pitching on mars when they come in for a different inning. It's still a major league baseball game.

 

In fact, we need to look no further than Wade Davis, who was an absolute stud in 2014 for the Royals in the 8th inning when they made it all the way to the World Series and lost in game 7...and he did fine in the 9th inning the following year.

 

I don't agree wholly with xisxisxis 100% on the #2 vs. #3 hitter thing (even if he is right, it is a very small matter IMO) but at least he has presented some data. Almost every other complaint on here is, "I think Counsell is a bad manager because [insert pre-2010 baseball adage here]."

 

Is there any proof the other way is better? I know using the strict role method worked for Yost when he had good pitchers to use. Not so well when he didn't. But can't the same be said of Counsell's more modern use of the pen?

 

What I know there is ample evidence of is every fan base complains about how the manager manages it's bullpen. What there is absolute proof of is bullpens with a lot of good pitchers in it do better than bullpens with few good pitchers in it regardless of who is the manager. Beyond that the difference of how they are used is minimal IMHO.

[sveumrules]

Really, Anyone with an open mind can see the Brewers don't have a good pitching stuff and they should not be still in the Playoff race and that It's Counsell Outstanding management of what he has as the only reason they are still are in it.

 

Generally agree with this.

 

At various points different posters have bemoaned our underachieving offense, our terrible pitching, the substandard work of the coaches in charge of each of those areas, Counsell's management, Stearns moves or lack thereof, our cheap owner, our negative run differential, etc, etc.

 

Yet here we are at 66-62, just a couple two tree games out of the postseason.

 

Someone somewhere along the line must have done something right.

[sveumrules]

Really, Anyone with an open mind can see the Brewers don't have a good pitching stuff and they should not be still in the Playoff race and that It's Counsell Outstanding management of what he has as the only reason they are still are in it.

 

Generally agree with this.

 

At various points different posters have bemoaned our underachieving offense, our terrible pitching, the substandard work of the coaches in charge of each of those areas, Counsell's management, Stearns moves or lack thereof, our cheap owner, our negative run differential, etc, etc.

 

Yet here we are at 66-62, just a couple two tree games out of the postseason.

 

Someone somewhere along the line must have done something right.

[sveumrules]

Really, Anyone with an open mind can see the Brewers don't have a good pitching stuff and they should not be still in the Playoff race and that It's Counsell Outstanding management of what he has as the only reason they are still are in it.

 

Generally agree with this.

 

At various points different posters have bemoaned our underachieving offense, our terrible pitching, the substandard work of the coaches in charge of each of those areas, Counsell's management, Stearns moves or lack thereof, our cheap owner, our negative run differential, etc, etc.

 

Yet here we are at 66-62, just a couple two tree games out of the postseason.

 

Someone somewhere along the line must have done something right.

[DHonks]

Counsell does a nice job. I really liked Ned. Insiders told me that he made few pitching decisions, but rather most were Maddux. When people would say “why didn’t we use X pitcher?”, we nearly always heard in the post game presser than the guy was unavailable. Ned and Maddux were the first coaches we had that tracked every ball a pitcher threw. If a guy warmed up twice in a game, they counted those as pitches that would require rest another day. Now that thinking is mainstream.

 

As I said, I like Counsell. I’ve heard he’s not committed to Milwaukee like we think, and is prepared to leave if there are disputes between the front office or if he’s not paid like he thinks he deserves

[DHonks]

Counsell does a nice job. I really liked Ned. Insiders told me that he made few pitching decisions, but rather most were Maddux. When people would say “why didn’t we use X pitcher?”, we nearly always heard in the post game presser than the guy was unavailable. Ned and Maddux were the first coaches we had that tracked every ball a pitcher threw. If a guy warmed up twice in a game, they counted those as pitches that would require rest another day. Now that thinking is mainstream.

 

As I said, I like Counsell. I’ve heard he’s not committed to Milwaukee like we think, and is prepared to leave if there are disputes between the front office or if he’s not paid like he thinks he deserves

[DHonks]

Counsell does a nice job. I really liked Ned. Insiders told me that he made few pitching decisions, but rather most were Maddux. When people would say “why didn’t we use X pitcher?”, we nearly always heard in the post game presser than the guy was unavailable. Ned and Maddux were the first coaches we had that tracked every ball a pitcher threw. If a guy warmed up twice in a game, they counted those as pitches that would require rest another day. Now that thinking is mainstream.

 

As I said, I like Counsell. I’ve heard he’s not committed to Milwaukee like we think, and is prepared to leave if there are disputes between the front office or if he’s not paid like he thinks he deserves

[nate82]

As I said, I like Counsell. I’ve heard he’s not committed to Milwaukee like we think, and is prepared to leave if there are disputes between the front office or if he’s not paid like he thinks he deserves

 

Which is basically how a manager should be looking at things as the managerial job market is rather volatile. If Counsell were to be fired at the end of this season he would have a job with basically any team he wanted to work for. The Reds, White Sox, Tigers, Giants, Padres, Angels, Rangers, Pirates, and the Mariners would all be lining up to hire Counsell as their manager. I think you could even put the Cubs, Cardinals, and the Phillies as possible destinations for Counsell. Nearly half of the teams in MLB would be interested in hiring Counsell as their manager so it makes sense for Counsell to not be as committed.

 

I believe Counsell stays and will stay for a rather long time or as long as Stearns stays in Milwaukee that is.

[nate82]

As I said, I like Counsell. I’ve heard he’s not committed to Milwaukee like we think, and is prepared to leave if there are disputes between the front office or if he’s not paid like he thinks he deserves

 

Which is basically how a manager should be looking at things as the managerial job market is rather volatile. If Counsell were to be fired at the end of this season he would have a job with basically any team he wanted to work for. The Reds, White Sox, Tigers, Giants, Padres, Angels, Rangers, Pirates, and the Mariners would all be lining up to hire Counsell as their manager. I think you could even put the Cubs, Cardinals, and the Phillies as possible destinations for Counsell. Nearly half of the teams in MLB would be interested in hiring Counsell as their manager so it makes sense for Counsell to not be as committed.

 

I believe Counsell stays and will stay for a rather long time or as long as Stearns stays in Milwaukee that is.

[nate82]

As I said, I like Counsell. I’ve heard he’s not committed to Milwaukee like we think, and is prepared to leave if there are disputes between the front office or if he’s not paid like he thinks he deserves

 

Which is basically how a manager should be looking at things as the managerial job market is rather volatile. If Counsell were to be fired at the end of this season he would have a job with basically any team he wanted to work for. The Reds, White Sox, Tigers, Giants, Padres, Angels, Rangers, Pirates, and the Mariners would all be lining up to hire Counsell as their manager. I think you could even put the Cubs, Cardinals, and the Phillies as possible destinations for Counsell. Nearly half of the teams in MLB would be interested in hiring Counsell as their manager so it makes sense for Counsell to not be as committed.

 

I believe Counsell stays and will stay for a rather long time or as long as Stearns stays in Milwaukee that is.

[Boomer5]

After seeing what a Stearns has done to this roster and especially the farm, how is CC even a consideration for replacement at this point? He is easily one of the top 5 managers in baseball and should be receiving an extension.

[Boomer5]

After seeing what a Stearns has done to this roster and especially the farm, how is CC even a consideration for replacement at this point? He is easily one of the top 5 managers in baseball and should be receiving an extension.

[Boomer5]

After seeing what a Stearns has done to this roster and especially the farm, how is CC even a consideration for replacement at this point? He is easily one of the top 5 managers in baseball and should be receiving an extension.

[Ennder]

After seeing what a Stearns has done to this roster and especially the farm, how is CC even a consideration for replacement at this point? He is easily one of the top 5 managers in baseball and should be receiving an extension.

 

I don't understand this statement. Stearns took over a team with a mediocre farm system that lost 94 games and that looked like it was going into a 5 or 6 year tank job and got them above .500 in 2 seasons and 1 hit away from the World Series in 3 years. Hard to complain about Stearns' results so far. I figured the team would look like the 2017 White Sox at this point, instead we almost went to the World Series last year.

[Pugger]

4. Stop Undervaluing Your Own: Yasmani Grandal is an amazing offensive catcher. However, his defense (despite what the advanced stats may say) does not equate to $18m worth of value. We saw this firsthand in the NLCS. Pina, while no world beater, is a great defensive catcher and really didn't need replacing. Grandal's $18m could be spent elsewhere to shore up deficiencies in the roster.

 

What is Grandal so bad at defensively? He had a bad NLCS but scouts and stats say he is a good defensive catcher. His bat is definitely worth replacing Pina. Pina is a good back up catcher, but if we was our starter at the trade deadline next year we would asking for an upgrade.

 

I too have no problem with Grandal and I wouldn't be opposed to keeping him around unless he asks for the moon. I hope we can keep Moose too. Veterans like this in your clubhouse have value.

[Boomer5]

After seeing what a Stearns has done to this roster and especially the farm, how is CC even a consideration for replacement at this point? He is easily one of the top 5 managers in baseball and should be receiving an extension.

 

I don't understand this statement. Stearns took over a team with a mediocre farm system that lost 94 games and that looked like it was going into a 5 or 6 year tank job and got them above .500 in 2 seasons and 1 hit away from the World Series in 3 years. Hard to complain about Stearns' results so far. I figured the team would look like the 2017 White Sox at this point, instead we almost went to the World Series last year.

 

Do you feel that Stearns has set us up for success in 2020 and beyond? Because that’s the premise of this thread, whether Counsel is the guy to manage this team going forward.

[PeaveyFury]

Do you feel that Stearns has set us up for success in 2020 and beyond?

 

Absolutely. They clearly need to acquire a quality arm and address the bullpen, but they'll be contenders in 2020.

[Ennder]

 

Do you feel that Stearns has set us up for success in 2020 and beyond? Because that’s the premise of this thread, whether Counsel is the guy to manage this team going forward.

 

Definitely for 2020-2021. When Yelich leaves in 2023 things get a bit dicier. That is the price we paid for getting him though. It would have been nice if one of Peralta and Burnes had actually worked out so we had 2 young starters to build around obviously. Hiura, Grisham, Yelich looks like a good offensive core to build around and Stearns has proven he has been able to get the fringe support guys to flesh out a lineup. We did not go for the tear it down and stink for 5+ years type rebuild so it is going to need creativity more than those teams do to stay good.

 

Very few impact players fall off of the team in 2020. Moose and probably Grandall. Those departures take a lot of cash with them so they can find replacements.

 

As for the complaints about lineup tinkering, every team in baseball does that. It is not a counsell thing. Watch some other teams and you'll realize this isn't a Brewer specific thing, it is just how baseball works in 2019.

[sveumrules]

After seeing what a Stearns has done to this roster and especially the farm, how is CC even a consideration for replacement at this point? He is easily one of the top 5 managers in baseball and should be receiving an extension.

 

Yeah, that whole "trading four prospects who have amounted to diddly squat so far for the best player in the NL on a team friendly deal" was a real head scratcher from Stearns.

[timpep]

After seeing what a Stearns has done to this roster and especially the farm, how is CC even a consideration for replacement at this point? He is easily one of the top 5 managers in baseball and should be receiving an extension.

 

Yeah, that whole "trading four prospects who have amounted to diddly squat so far for the best player in the NL on a team friendly deal" was a real head scratcher from Stearns.

 

I totally forgot that was the only trade he's made so far....

[PeaveyFury]

After seeing what a Stearns has done to this roster and especially the farm, how is CC even a consideration for replacement at this point? He is easily one of the top 5 managers in baseball and should be receiving an extension.

 

Yeah, that whole "trading four prospects who have amounted to diddly squat so far for the best player in the NL on a team friendly deal" was a real head scratcher from Stearns.

 

I totally forgot that was the only trade he's made so far....

 

Good thing his batting average on trades is like .800....

[Thurston Fluff]

The jury is still out for me on Stearns. The promise was to build a team that could remain competitive over a long period of time with in budget. He hasn't been around long enough to know if he can do all that. What he has done so far is impressive. But that was the easy part.

He wasn't left with a bare cupboard like the Cubs or Astros were. He also wasn't walking into a place run incompetently with substandard coaching and player development systems like Dean Taylor had when he got here. Melvin was competent and did a decent job setting him up. Including trades for some key minor league players. I think that helped make the rebuild shorter Stearns showed he was more than up to the task.

Now comes the hard part. Keeping it going. He's got a good core that will be around for a few years but he did so at the cost of the farm. How he replenishes the farm while remaining a contender is key to fulfilling the whole promise.

[timpep]

 

Good thing his batting average on trades is like .800....

 

I would absolutely disagree that 4 out of every 5 trades he made was a "win" or whatever metric you use for his batting average. I'm not condemning him or anything, but he's made a lot of poor moves to go along with a lot of good moves. Yelich isn't his only trade, and it's ridiculous to counter any criticism of the current team/farm with "BUT YELI!!"