5/29/2004 - Brewers (Obermueller) vs. Padres (Tankersley)

[batman]

Brooks isn't a magician, he can't be warming up in the bullpen and batting or on base at the same time.

 

He was ready to come into the game already... it's not like he just got up. He was wearing his blue Brewers' coat and just standing there. It sure looked like he could have trotted in and hit had Nedley wanted him to.

 

~Bill

[whizkid]

Once a pitcher's warmed up, if the inning continues they soft toss every once in a while to stay loose. If the inning continues because he's on base or if he's in the dugout he doesn't have that opportunity. He's being used as a pitcher first, again in tight situations, and I don't think Ned 'botched' anything.

[bucksbeat]

Maybe Wes Helms is the darkhorse in our lineup. It seems that we have had trouble scoring runs since he has been out of the lineup. Most likely a coincidence since Ginter has played very well.

 

As far as the offense, I wouldn't worry much. Look at the Texas Rangers right now. That very potent offense has only scored in 3 of their last 36 innings. Of course their pitching staff has crashed down to earth with an ERA over 5 in that amount of time.

 

I have been impressed with the range of Mark Loretta in this series. It's how he's been all year long. Pretty impressive when Khalil Greene is dancing around right next to him.

[batman]

Once a pitcher's warmed up, if the inning continues they soft toss every once in a while to stay loose. If the inning continues because he's on base or if he's in the dugout he doesn't have that opportunity. He's being used as a pitcher first, again in tight situations, and I don't think Ned 'botched' anything.

 

He was finished warming up as Obermueller was pitching the sixth. The pitcher's spot was due up third in the seventh. After the third out was recorded, Brooks was still ready. If he trots in and bats, he's doing the same thing *every other pitcher does*... if Obermueller would have hit for himself and gone back out for the seventh, would he have become "not warm"? There's a reason pitchers' get to throw warmup pitches at the beginning of the inning.

 

It's one thing if Kieschnick hadn't gotten up in the pen yet or if he wasn't ready yet. But if he's good to go, having him hit won't change that anymore than it changes every other pitchers' readiness when they sit on the bench for their teams' half of the inning.

 

It's not that big of a deal, but if Nedley's goal was to get Brooks an AB then he made a poor decision. If he didn't care about using him to hit, then it didn't matter. It has nothing to do with whether Brooks is primarily a pitcher or whether he is pitching in high leverage situations or not. It's just a question of what the goal was and how successfully it was obtained. If the goal was to have Kieschnick bat, then it didn't work.

 

~Bill

[whizkid]

Then, when you used the term 'totally botched' you must have assumed the primary goal was to get Brooks an at bat. Considering the Brewers were ahead, I think the primary goal was and should have been to hold the Pads in the 8th and get the game to Kolb.

 

You also seem to be assuming Ned knew in advance how long the inning would last. There's a difference between a pitcher who's already pitched several innings of live ball and a relief pitcher coming in fresh as to how they handle the inactivity. There's also a reason why pitchers sometimes do have difficulty after their team has a long inning. Pitchers do 'cool down' or stiffen up and 8 warmup pitches isn't always enough. You often see pitchers who are warm and just standing around start throwing again if the inning goes longer.

 

So yeah, I do think Brooks' primary purpose this year is relevant to Ned's decisions on how he uses him.

[batman]

Then, when you used the term 'totally botched' you must have assumed the primary goal was to get Brooks an at bat.

 

Not the primary goal, but I think much of Brooks' value, especially on a team with four bench players, is that he can save a pinch-hitter. He didn't do that tonight. The game ended with only Durrington and Moeller on the bench. What if the Padres would have tied the game and we had to bat in the ninth or extra innings? Durrington would have become our only real option, because Nedley doesn't use his second catcher.

 

Considering the Brewers were ahead, I think the primary goal was and should have been to hold the Pads in the 8th and get the game to Kolb.

 

Why are those mutually exclusive? It would all be moot if Brooks had tossed a scoreless inning because then he would have still been in the game to bat. But he didn't. So instead of using Kieschnick, we used Kieschnick, Adams, and Billy Hall.

 

It's all well and good if the Brewers' are going to use Kieschnick primarily as a pitcher. But if that's the case, we really don't have 12 and a half position players... we have twelve. And that's not a good idea.

 

You also seem to be assuming Ned knew in advance how long the inning would last. There's a difference between a pitcher who's already pitched several innings of live ball and a relief pitcher coming in fresh as to how they handle the inactivity. There's also a reason why pitchers sometimes do have difficulty after their team has a long inning. Pitchers do 'cool down' or stiffen up and 8 warmup pitches isn't always enough. You often see pitchers who are warm and just standing around start throwing again if the inning goes longer.

 

Sure. But pitchers manage to deal with it all the time, no? I think you're making too big a deal of the "warm up time" factor. If Brooks can't handle warming up, sitting through a half inning in which he bats, and then going out to pitch, then he loses a lot of his value, too. Like Peavey said, then Nedley has to use him as a hitter only *after* he pitches. And that might be the case. I just think it would make the 12/13 position player/pitcher roster construction more versatile if Brooks could do the hitting/pitching thing both ways.

 

So yeah, I do think Brooks' primary purpose this year is relevant to Ned's decisions on how he uses him.

 

It's only relevant if *in this situation* Nedley would rather have had Clark and Hall get at-bats versus Clark and Kieschnick or Grieve and Kieschnick.

 

If Brooks can't handle warming up, hitting, and then pitching, so be it. But if he can, and he is the best pinch-hitter available AND/OR using him "both ways" can preserve one of our four bench players, then he should have batted and then pitched. Otherwise, he's just another reliever. And he's certainly done a good job, but that takes a lot of the luster off of having him as that "25th man".

 

That's all I'm saying.

 

~Bill

[MassBrew]

It's not that big of a deal, but if Nedley's goal was to get Brooks an AB then he made a poor decision. If he didn't care about using him to hit, then it didn't matter. It has nothing to do with whether Brooks is primarily a pitcher or whether he is pitching in high leverage situations or not. It's just a question of what the goal was and how successfully it was obtained. If the goal was to have Kieschnick bat, then it didn't work.

 

How cool is it that Brewer fans are the only ones in all of baseball who can even have this conversation?

[batman]

How cool is it that Brewer fans are the only ones in all of baseball who can even have this conversation?

 

I know!!! I had this debate with my brother last night on the way home, and we were both like "wow... this is so cool to even think about". In 20 years, we'll all be able to tell the next generation of young'uns that we saw Brooks Kieschnick, the two-way player with the Brewers. Pretty darned cool.

 

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

~Bill

[rotoherb]

Don't you think it's possible that Brooks and Ned have actually talked about this stuff and Brooks has said he feels more comfortable on the mound directly out of the bullpen instead of going to the hitting mindset and then back to the pitching mindset? Just asking because that would be my first assumption since this wasn't the first time he was used like this.