What is the owner doing right about now?

[TooLiveBrew]

Thank you for the reply. I think it is much better than your original post. I hadn't read your comments in other threads, sorry. I hope you didn't take my reply personally but I just get tired of people just throwing stuff out there because they want to say something. your original post seemed like one of those. Obviously it wasn't. I apologize.

 

In defense of Ned if your starters aren't eating innings your pen is gonna tire out and that is exactly what has happened. That is why, IMO, the rotation is more to blame for this teams collapse than Ned is. They completely fell apart. Not much you can do about that. I'm not sure if John McGraw could have come back from the dead and prevented what has happened given the way the starters have pitched. That is why he stayed with his starters too long in some games because either he does that or he risks further exhausting the pen. It was a choose your poison type of thing, IMO.

 

Naw, didn't take it personally, just felt I could clarify. I'm with you all the way on people blaming the manager for random stuff over which he has no control. But that's what tends to happen when the team skids - the manager is the lightning rod, and receives undo credit oftentimes when his team is playing well, too.

My beef with Yost is that he does in fact have several solid choices out in the bullpen - perhaps none are lights out as we'd desire, but my beef (as stated) comes when those bullpen choices, when well-rested, are most likely going to be much more effective than a starter who is really showing signs of tiring (losing location, leaving pitches down the middle, losing snap on breaking pitches). I know our 'pen has been getting exhausted, as you point out, but I saw this troublesome 'Let's see what happens...' approach again in the final game in SF - when we actually did have Linebrink & Shouse available, and a stinkin' game to win.

 

[GenoSeligPrieb]

"The most useful sample of games you can get is the largest one, we are .500 and thats all that really matters. Trying to break the season down and judge the team by part of the season is just not very useful. "

 

Here's the thing, Ennder:

 

Ned was supposedly hired because a) he's yet another surviving link to that 1982 team, b) because he was supposed to be a great motivator and "players like playing for him", and especially c) because he was such an integral part of Bobby Cox's management team which guided those ballclubs through the various up's and down's toward division title after division title after division title....

 

No personal track record of managerial success got him the job here. No unique style or philosophy. This is not the early-80's A's when Billy Martin came in with a different approach and they started winning.

 

Just intangibles....motivational stuff...he was supposed to be the fountain of positivity which would help steer an underfunded franchise with young, cheap, often inexperienced talent through the bad psychological turns a season can take. "He was part of winners in Atlanta!!" we were told. "Ned, along with Leo were Bobby Cox's braintrust." "Let's absorb some of that playoff experience, that winning attitude, that LEADERSHIP..."

 

That's why, as Dave points out, it's critical that we DO therefore assess Ned in his SECOND in-season losing meltdown. And that means analyzing streaks, not our current .500 record overall.

 

Ned was supposed to be a steadying influence, our skipper through the stormy seas. With Ned leading us, all that Tomahawk Chop attitude, all that playoff experience, will guide us.

 

But he's apparently failing....AGAIN. When this team loses a bad one, they STAY down. And that's on Ned, I'm afraid, since he's Mr. Positive.

 

And if he bring no winning personal managerial record, and the team keeps falling apart whenever adversity strikes, then if they keep losing and fail to make the playoffs, much less maintain a .500 record, with a higher payroll and a solid influx of younf talent, then Ned should be gone, and we should try someone else.

 

Maybe, godforbid, someone with a good track record as a manager, maybe someone who won't downplay all this stupid, appalling baseball. I'm afraid this team may need a disciplinarian, one who won't tolerate Estrada's ridiculously-bad caught-stealing rate, who won't accept Jenkins letting popups fall in, in front of him, one who won't let Capuano to "pitch his way out of it" all this time, one who won't allow that play by Hart, one who won't stand by as formerly useful players like Weeks, Bush, Capuano, Wise, and Hall to fall into huge slumps and just sag.... dragging the team down with them. We need a manager who'll strike some sense of URGENCY into this bunch of meandering clowns.

 

Ned's failing because of the streaks....AGAIN. Fool me once...

[MoneyballMan]

I know people dont believe in that kind of stuff but I bet I can find quite a few situations where a manager was fired midseason only to see the team make an improvement.

 

I bet about half the teams made an improvement and half the teams did worse, just like every other team. That's not proof of anything.

 

When the ship is sinking, if you dont try to do something to fix it, you are really just waiting for the inevitable.

 

And making changes for the sake of making changes is not how you should run a sports team, IMO.

 

I agree with both points. It's just like "make a trade for the sake of making a change" rationale. I believe Mark A is bright enough to be very rational and objective with personnel decisions since he's obviously had to make them in the business world (and probably with mucho dinero involved). Start at the top of the organization and work you way down and then back up the other side. Do we have people in place that are capable of performing well? Are there factors other than each of those people individually that has caused the season to go south?

 

In my mind (pretending to be Mark A, which would be fun for a day, wouldn't it?), there are a couple of real issues to weigh.

 

First, the relative youth of the team. There are quite a few players that we have depended on this year who haven't been anywhere near this situation (and in some cases may not have even played this many games in a season, let alone been in a MLB pennant race).

 

Second, did DM overvalue the starting rotation? I have said from the beginning of the year that we were expecting a lot from a group of pitchers that really don't have any consistent history of 12-15 wins/year or more. Whether it be Sheets (injuries), Suppan (only reason he's over .500 for career is vs the Crew), Vargas (12-10 best year, but career 4.96 ERA), Capuano (one good season, but soft-tosser), or Bush (12-11, 10-9 last two years, but career 4.45 ERA), it seemed like an awful lot to ask from this group to take them all the way. But in defense of DM in this case, most publications (experts?) didn't speak up to defuse this thinking/expectations.

 

Third, does Yost still have the team's respect? Has anyone quit? Is he still firmly "managing" the team? It seems as though he's ok, but there was that one public flare-up in the dugout. But it's really difficult for an outsider to know the answer to this question.

 

Fourth, does Yost have the baseball intelligence to match wits with the best baseball managers? This is going to be a gut feel by MA and DM. Just peruse BF.net whenever he makes a pitching change and for every move, you'll see diverging opinions. This is very subjective.

 

Fifth, is there a better GM or better manager available to hire? Like with any job, a manager/owner always has to watch for better performers. Again, pretty subjective and up to MA (regarding DM primarily) and DM (regarding Yost primarily).

 

Overall, I believe (and this is just my opinion) that MA is going to give DM and NY at least through the all-star break next year to see if the team can get things going in the right direction. If you think back, expectations were for continued improvement. A run to the playoffs would be a bonus this year. I think in most people's minds, 2008 was really the target year where we should expect them to really challenge legitimately. Now that I've written all of this, I would imagine they'll both be fired after the Cubs series if things go poorly! http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/roll.gif

[TooLiveBrew]

Second, did DM overvalue the starting rotation? I have said from the beginning of the year that we were expecting a lot from a group of pitchers that really don't have any consistent history of 12-15 wins/year or more. Whether it be Sheets (injuries), Suppan (only reason he's over .500 for career is vs the Crew), Vargas (12-10 best year, but career 4.96 ERA), Capuano (one good season, but soft-tosser), or Bush (12-11, 10-9 last two years, but career 4.45 ERA), it seemed like an awful lot to ask from this group to take them all the way. But in defense of DM in this case, most publications (experts?) didn't speak up to defuse this thinking/expectations.

Aarrrgh! Why do we still have to hear the 'Pitchers are evaluated by W-L record' argument? How many times does this need to be objectively refuted before people soak it in?

[MoneyballMan]

Second, did DM overvalue the starting rotation? I have said from the beginning of the year that we were expecting a lot from a group of pitchers that really don't have any consistent history of 12-15 wins/year or more. Whether it be Sheets (injuries), Suppan (only reason he's over .500 for career is vs the Crew), Vargas (12-10 best year, but career 4.96 ERA), Capuano (one good season, but soft-tosser), or Bush (12-11, 10-9 last two years, but career 4.45 ERA), it seemed like an awful lot to ask from this group to take them all the way. But in defense of DM in this case, most publications (experts?) didn't speak up to defuse this thinking/expectations.

Aarrrgh! Why do we still have to hear the 'Pitchers are evaluated by W-L record' argument? How many times does this need to be objectively refuted before people soak it in?

 

Ok, take another stat and run with it. Are you arguing that everyone was correct in that we had a solid rotation or that everyone overvalued it? I have not seen anything (stats or otherwise) to back up why people thought we were going to have such a solid rotation. But I ask that not defensively but honestly - I just haven't seen anything to back up everyone's early season optimism.

 

And this still doesn't diminish the issue of this thread - one question MA needs to ask is whether or not DM accurately assesses talent levels. I wasn't arguing that he's good at it or bad at it - just that as an example, the rotation certainly hasn't lived up to expectations and valuing talent is certainly part of the criteria MA should use to judge DM's ability. Sorry I used W-L records as the primary stat in my example above.

[1992casey]

Ned was supposedly hired because a) he's yet another surviving link to that 1982 team

I'd say that from an ownership perspective, it'd be a heck of a lot easier to fire a Ned Yost than it would be to fire a Robin Yount or Paul Molitor. The Packers had to go through firing a head coach who had been a star player (Bart Starr). That sucked.

 

[TooLiveBrew]

Sorry I used W-L records as the primary stat in my example above.

Not gonna respond to the other stuff, since this was my only beef. http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/smile.gif It just overlooks so much involved that is wwaaaayy out of the control of the pitcher

 

[MoneyballMan]

Ned was supposedly hired because a) he's yet another surviving link to that 1982 team

I'd say that from an ownership perspective, it'd be a heck of a lot easier to fire a Ned Yost than it would be to fire a Robin Yount or Paul Molitor. The Packers had to go through firing a head coach who had been a star player (Bart Starr). That sucked.

 

 

Great point. But I question whether that was a strong reason for hiring him originally. It certainly didn't hurt from a PR perspective, but I think there was a fair amount of agreement around MLB that he was a logical up-and-coming manager.

 

Along those lines, I know Molitor and Yount are occasionally mentioned (I'm assuming as sentimental favorites). Does anyone know how they're viewed around baseball? Are they really future managerial material? Yount doesn't seem to have the commitment and I've actually seen Molitor mentioned more on a future GM/President/Commissioner path.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Ned was supposedly hired because a) he's yet another surviving link to that 1982 team

I'd say that from an ownership perspective, it'd be a heck of a lot easier to fire a Ned Yost than it would be to fire a Robin Yount or Paul Molitor. The Packers had to go through firing a head coach who had been a star player (Bart Starr). That sucked.

 

Great point. But I question whether that was a strong reason for hiring him originally. It certainly didn't hurt from a PR perspective, but I think there was a fair amount of agreement around MLB that he was a logical up-and-coming manager.

 

Along those lines, I know Molitor and Yount are occasionally mentioned (I'm assuming as sentimental favorites). Does anyone know how they're viewed around baseball? Are they really future managerial material? Yount doesn't seem to have the commitment and I've actually seen Molitor mentioned more on a future GM/President/Commissioner path.

I know this is going off on a tangent, but I hope neither of those guys ever gets seriously considered. Yount clearly didn't have his heart in Milwaukee for the season he was here, and Molitor seems like he'd be just another "link to '82". I lived it, loved it, but after this season, we really need to let that go.

IF Melvin thinks the team needs to go in a different direction, I really hope at this point he brings in a guy with some managerial experience. I know everyone has to start somewhere, but I think this team could benefit from playing for a guy who's been around the block awhile. The talk was that Ned, being Bobby Cox's bench coach, would know a thing or two, but I don't think there's any substitution for being "the guy".

[Invader3K]

I think if either of those guys, Yount or Molitor, had any real interest in managing (especially in Milwaukee), they'd already have been here. Supposedly Wendy Selig-Prieb offered Molitor basically any job he wanted, and he declined.

[TooLiveBrew]

Anyone know anything about Joe Girardi (as a manager) other than that his 2006 Marlins exceeded expectations? He even turned down the Cubs job, iirc. He may be holding out for the NYY job, but that seems an odd gamble to play.

[bklynbrewcrew]

Girardi completely mishandled a young Marlins pitching staff. If I recall correctly he brought Josh Johnson back to pitch after a long rain delay and he let his pitchers throw way too many pitches per start. With guys like Gallardo, Parra, and Villanueva to look after I would think that Girardi is not the guy to manage the Brewers. With young stars like Braun and Fielder on the team I do think that this would be a very attractive job for many qualified candidates.

[moofnelson]

Right now, Mark A. is printing off form NLFM-400. That is the official NL form that has to faxed into the league office for firing a manager.

Here's a little heads-up Mark A.: Don't forget to check the box on line 8e. That's the one that reads: Are you firing this manager because he sucks?

[AJAY]

Any chance that Tom Kelly might want to come out of retirement?

[1992casey]

Besides the Ned Yost Yay or Nay thread, we also have this thread available:

 

If Yost were to be fired after the season, whom would you choose as a replacement?

[don1481]

Right now, I would guess that Mark A. is starting to consider whether or not to let Doug Melvin go after this season. While it seems like Melvin did try to acquire someone like, say, Gagne (who's been stinking up the joint in Boston, but that's not the point), the fact is that outside of a "worn-out" (according to scouts) reliever in Linebrink that cost the team their most advanced remaining pitching prospect plus two other young-ish arms, DM did not acquire any necessary help for the pitching staff. He needs to be held accountable, whether that's through him being removed this offseason or MA telling him that he needs to pursue some additional help for the staff during the offseason (and accordingly opening up the checkbook to allow him to do so).

 

I'm sure that Ned is as good as gone either after the Cubs series or after the season... the only real question is whether Melvin will be gone as well.

[Nader Raider Tim]

If Melvin is fired, I will no longer be a Brewers fan. Melvin is the best thing to happen to this organization in years. And years. The problem to adding someone to the Brewers is who would it be and where would they go?

[SeriesFinale]

Melvin will be here for at least another year...he'd essentially be getting fired for the Linebrink trade, and while it really stinks right now (and could get much worse), it just doesn't strike me as a fireable offense right now. Who knows what options he had on the table otherwise?

 

Yost is as good as gone if the Brewers aren't playing in October, though.

[bigbrewkahuna]

Why is Melvin considered "the best thing to happen to this organization in years"?.Looks like different faces in the FO over the years, different short and long term plans possibly,but the same old results regarding W-L records.Just curious .And please,no more carrot on the stick mentalites of be patient on here please.That got old 15 years ago.

[foamboy1]

This is not just a one time thing. Every year, they have one of the worst records in baseball in the second half. This year is the same. Someone has to be accountable for this.

 

Ned infuriates me at times, but I like him. Yet, it's just time for a change of scenery, with some new fire and focus. Ned can go on to win 10 World Series with someone else, but I think it is appropriate to see if someone else can connect with this team, and do so now.

[Brian the Automator]

A GM can only do so much without payroll support. If you look at Melvin's move, there have been far more positive ones than negatives one. If the balance tipped, then I would think about letting him go.

[Invader3K]

I wouldn't see the point in firing Melvin right now. He's been a fantastic GM. I can concede that the Linebrink trade hasn't worked all that well so far, and you can argue the Suppan signing either way, but Attanasio was behind that one with Melvin, apparently.

 

The only real reason to fire Melvin would be if Attanasio decides that the current plan isn't working, and it's time for a change in direction. Unfortunately for him, that would probably also mean he needs to open the wallet even further, and I just don't know if that can realistically happen. Let's face it though, Attanasio has been a great owner for the Brewers so far, and you can't fault him for not spending money, given how much payroll has increased.

[don1481]

A GM can only do so much without payroll support. If you look at Melvin's move, there have been far more positive ones than negatives one. If the balance tipped, then I would think about letting him go.

Brian... I would say that DM did have payroll support this year.

You can almost make some of the same arguments for firing Melvin as you can for firing Ned, namely that while he was the right person to bring respectability to the organization, he might not be the right person to help push the team "over the top" in his role.

 

I would argue that the last two major trades by DM have not exactly worked out in the Brewers' favor:

 

1. Linebrink for Inman et al has been beaten to death here, both for what the Brewers gave up and for the pitcher (complete with "worn-out" arm) that was acquired.

2. Estrada/Vargas/Aquino for Davis/Eveland/Krynzel may have looked good on paper when the deal was first made but... I'd be willing to argue that Estrada has hurt the team more than he's helped it. Vargas could have been swapped with Villanueva (maybe having Vargas working out of MR from the get-go and Villy in the rotation would have allowed both of them to flourish, but I digress) and the #5 spot in the rotation would have been better. And Aquino....http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/sick.gif

 

Melvin needs to be held accountable for acquiring the player that are presently on the team. We can go around and say "DM fleeced such and such 2 or 3 years ago," but as the Astros' shakeup shows, this needs to be very much a "what have you done for me lately" deal around here if the Brewers really want to move above mediocrity. Unfortunately, the answer to the question "What have you done for me lately" for DM is... not much.

[sheethead]

Mark A. is jamming daggers in his Ned Yost voodoo doll. Wait that's what i'm doing, sorry.

[logan82]

A GM can only do so much without payroll support. If you look at Melvin's move, there have been far more positive ones than negatives one. If the balance tipped, then I would think about letting him go.

Brian... I would say that DM did have payroll support this year.

You can almost make some of the same arguments for firing Melvin as you can for firing Ned, namely that while he was the right person to bring respectability to the organization, he might not be the right person to help push the team "over the top" in his role.

 

I would argue that the last two major trades by DM have not exactly worked out in the Brewers' favor:

 

1. Linebrink for Inman et al has been beaten to death here, both for what the Brewers gave up and for the pitcher (complete with "worn-out" arm) that was acquired.

2. Estrada/Vargas/Aquino for Davis/Eveland/Krynzel may have looked good on paper when the deal was first made but... I'd be willing to argue that Estrada has hurt the team more than he's helped it. Vargas could have been swapped with Villanueva (maybe having Vargas working out of MR from the get-go and Villy in the rotation would have allowed both of them to flourish, but I digress) and the #5 spot in the rotation would have been better. And Aquino....http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/sick.gif

 

Melvin needs to be held accountable for acquiring the player that are presently on the team. We can go around and say "DM fleeced such and such 2 or 3 years ago," but as the Astros' shakeup shows, this needs to be very much a "what have you done for me lately" deal around here if the Brewers really want to move above mediocrity. Unfortunately, the answer to the question "What have you done for me lately" for DM is... not much.

 

I don't like Estrada, but I don't see how anybody else we have right now would be a better alternative. How was that trade bad? Davis was asking for a 3 year contract or threatening to go to arbitration. Ther is no way we would want him for the next 3 years. He looked last year very much like Vargas has this year so that is a wash. Aquino didn't turn out, but Krynzel was going nowhere with us so we at least gained onother arm. So the trade boils down to Eveland vs Estrada. Eveland didn't exactly make the most of his chances last year and I doubt wold have been much better this year. As for the Linebrink trade, we will have to wait and see how good Inman really is. Linebrink has been hit and miss so far, but if he turns it up for the rest of the year the trade will look good. Every team that has gotten rid of Melvin has gotten worse after his departure.