Brewers (Hall) vs Diamondbacks (Gallen): 9/15/24, 3:10pm

[BCF]

17 minutes ago, wiguy94 said:

I agree. I can think Murphy is a good overall manager and deserving of manager of the year while simultaneously being a poor in game manager which is exactly what I think and what my #PatMurphyLogic dig was about. His in game managing. 

Edit: In game managing mostly doesn't make a big difference during the regular season. There are 162 games so the good/bad decisions even out, but in the playoffs these poor managing decisions could absolutely be the difference between a win and a loss which is scary with Murphy's bunt fascination.

Sometimes good decisions don’t work and bad decisions work out

[Recovering Chicagoan]

8 minutes ago, BCF said:

Sometimes good decisions don’t work and bad decisions work out

Indeed!

[Samurai Bucky]

14 minutes ago, BCF said:

Sometimes good decisions don’t work and bad decisions work out

This is a great take.  👍

[wiguy94]

15 minutes ago, BCF said:

Sometimes good decisions don’t work and bad decisions work out

100% true although when the bad decisions don't work out it's a lot harder to accept than if a good decision doesn't work out.

[Jim French Stepstool]

I'm going to raise a point that's unfortunately been lost in all this----the offense today. We've all seen 3-game sets where after a team wins the first two, it almost seems inevitable that the other guys salvage the 3rd game, especially if they're the home team. We were in that scenario today, facing their ace, fell behind 5-0, and scored 8 unanswered & ten total. We let Gallen off the hook early, but ran up the count, didn't chase too much, and it paid off eventually. And that was w/o Contreras. Very, very impressive.

And I'm probably out on an island here, but I have no problem with the thought behind most of the bunts. I have a problem with bad bunts, but the majority of the time I think it's people that are good enough to do it, are doing it at an appropriate time & need to do it better rather than that they shouldn't be doing it. If Frelick or Turang or whoever bunts & pops it up, I dislike it but not any more than if he swings away & pops up or Ks or whatever.

[Bulldogboy]

Murphy being talked about here like he's Earl Weaver. The guy has watched Haase and Bauers all year and still can't figure out how to play the best players. It's not hard.

[AdvantageSchneider]

The Brewers know more about pitching then I'll ever know, but color me skeptical that they have pinned down exactly how much pitches someone can throw or batters a pitcher can face before it causes damage.  

I'm all in favor of keeping the pitchers fresh for the post season but the argument that 1-2 batters and 10 pitches is ok but 3-5 baters and 25-30 pitches is a problem seems to rely on a level of injury prevention precision that no one in baseball has. 

If the brewers are so precise in just exactly how much work is too much than why have we gone through (checks figures) 174 pitchers this season mainly due to injuries?

[DuWayne Steurer]

9 minutes ago, AdvantageSchneider said:

The Brewers know more about pitching then I'll ever know, but color me skeptical that they have pinned down exactly how much pitches someone can throw or batters a pitcher can face before it causes damage.  

I'm all in favor of keeping the pitchers fresh for the post season but the argument that 1-2 batters and 10 pitches is ok but 3-5 baters and 25-30 pitches is a problem seems to rely on a level of injury prevention precision that no one in baseball has. 

If the brewers are so precise in just exactly how much work is too much than why have we gone through (checks figures) 174 pitchers this season mainly due to injuries?

Injury prevention or managing fatigue? These dudes are conditioned to work to a certain workload. We can say all we like that there's no difference between 10 pitches and 30 pitches, but there definitely is if you're conditioned to a certain workload.  

 

[treego14]

Don't be Craig Counsell anymore, Pat Murphy!

[BCF]

1 hour ago, AdvantageSchneider said:

The Brewers know more about pitching then I'll ever know, but color me skeptical that they have pinned down exactly how much pitches someone can throw or batters a pitcher can face before it causes damage.  

I'm all in favor of keeping the pitchers fresh for the post season but the argument that 1-2 batters and 10 pitches is ok but 3-5 baters and 25-30 pitches is a problem seems to rely on a level of injury prevention precision that no one in baseball has. 

If the brewers are so precise in just exactly how much work is too much than why have we gone through (checks figures) 174 pitchers this season mainly due to injuries?

Maybe they’re being protective yet because he’s coming off a pretty serious injury?

[BCF]

2 hours ago, wiguy94 said:

100% true although when the bad decisions don't work out it's a lot harder to accept than if a good decision doesn't work out.

But what’s considered a “good decision” a lot goes into a decision that we don’t necessarily know about. What if someone came to the manager and said they weren’t feeling the best? Or if a player comes down sort of sick or he’s sore that day? They aren’t going to tell us every little detail and I think we need to give them the benefit of the doubt more often than not 

[Jim French Stepstool]

1 hour ago, BCF said:

But what’s considered a “good decision” a lot goes into a decision that we don’t necessarily know about. What if someone came to the manager and said they weren’t feeling the best? Or if a player comes down sort of sick or he’s sore that day? They aren’t going to tell us every little detail and I think we need to give them the benefit of the doubt more often than not 

That's why, if something I don't understand or don't agree with occurs I like to hear the explanation later, rather than jump on someone. In this case, I'm OK with wanting to give him a day off, but the ups & downs in the BP is what got everyone scratching their heads. They vacillated, or at least seemed to. I've often seen situations where it seemed to make perfect sense to leave, say, a LHP in to start an inning if a LHH is leading off, then pull him. But most managers seem married to the "It's so-and-so's inning" philosophy. They at least claimed to look into the possibility of going against that on Sunday.

At the end of the day I think they liked the way the ball was coming out of Koenigs' hand in the 9th, with the 2-run lead felt confident about him finishing up vs the guys they had lined up to face him, and it unexpectedly blew up.

[adambr2]

9 hours ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

I'm going to raise a point that's unfortunately been lost in all this----the offense today. We've all seen 3-game sets where after a team wins the first two, it almost seems inevitable that the other guys salvage the 3rd game, especially if they're the home team. We were in that scenario today, facing their ace, fell behind 5-0, and scored 8 unanswered & ten total. We let Gallen off the hook early, but ran up the count, didn't chase too much, and it paid off eventually. And that was w/o Contreras. Very, very impressive.

And I'm probably out on an island here, but I have no problem with the thought behind most of the bunts. I have a problem with bad bunts, but the majority of the time I think it's people that are good enough to do it, are doing it at an appropriate time & need to do it better rather than that they shouldn't be doing it. If Frelick or Turang or whoever bunts & pops it up, I dislike it but not any more than if he swings away & pops up or Ks or whatever.

Can you name one single time this season where the sac bunt method in extras has produced the intended result? (I.e, leadoff man successfully sacrificed man to 3rd, next batter produced ground ball or flyball that successfully scored run from 3rd that would not have otherwise scored from 2nd).

I'm not asking to be snarky, I just cannot think of even one specific time when it has worked successfully.

 

[Underachiever]

1 hour ago, adambr2 said:

Can you name one single time this season where the sac bunt method in extras has produced the intended result? (I.e, leadoff man successfully sacrificed man to 3rd, next batter produced ground ball or flyball that successfully scored run from 3rd that would not have otherwise scored from 2nd).

I'm not asking to be snarky, I just cannot think of even one specific time when it has worked successfully.

 

August 30, game 1 of DH with the Reds. Turang bunted, ended up with a single. Brewers won.

And, to add to this:

9/4 the Brewers didn't bunt, K'd three times instead and lost

9/1 didn't bunt and lost the game

8/21 two ks and no bunt, loss.

7/20 Bauers bunted, got on base, win.

7/1 No bunt, lost

6/26 No bunt, won the game

6/4, no bunt, lost

6/1 no bunt, got a wild pitch that kind of made the bunt unnecessary, infield single won the game

5/28 gave up 5 in the top of the 10th, loss

5/20 sac bunt turned into infield single, runners on 2nd and third with one out, Adames struck out, Sanchez flied out. Loss

4/26 no bunt, Ortiz single won it

4/19 no bunt, win

6-8 in extra innings. Not sure if there is any conclusion to be drawn except that people don't like bunting, especially when it doesn't work.

[tmwiese55]

I don't know, seems an odd spot for them to have landed on for Williams. He's ok for 1-2 batters but not the possibility of 4-5.  If you want to be cautious and just mark him as out for this game, so be it, they're the experts and I wouldn't have disagreed.   But if you're cool with him getting all warmed up and throwing up to 10ish pitches you might as well be ok with 15ish and do the whole inning.  And to compensate maybe give him two full days off after, for all they know he might not even be needed in those where this one he was.   This middle ground area seemed weird though.

Another to note is probably having a Koenig limit of like 20 pitches. I could be wrong but I think he had another like this a few weeks ago where he completely lost control in this same pitch area. 

[Sixtolezcano]

14 hours ago, rickh150 said:

I 

Manager of the year….by far. To you he is underperforming?

I’ll quote dozens of BF posters, “They aren’t winning because of him but rather in spite of him.” No way are they winning because of his superior managerial decisions.

[markedman5]

3 hours ago, adambr2 said:

Can you name one single time this season where the sac bunt method in extras has produced the intended result? (I.e, leadoff man successfully sacrificed man to 3rd, next batter produced ground ball or flyball that successfully scored run from 3rd that would not have otherwise scored from 2nd).

I'm not asking to be snarky, I just cannot think of even one specific time when it has worked successfully.

 

August 30 against Cincy…..first game of doubleheader…….Murphy said post game he was playing for 1 run because Devin was available. He pinch hit Turang just to bunt……bunt was so good it ended up being a single. 

[owbc]

I'm a huge fan of bunting in the postseason. We've seen a number of infielders crack under the pressure in those scenarios and it has turned series around before. 

[adambr2]

 

1 hour ago, tmwiese55 said:

I don't know, seems an odd spot for them to have land on on for Williams. He's ok for 1-2 batters but not the possibility of 4-5.  If you want to be cautious and just mark him as out for this game, so be it, they're the experts and I wouldn't have disagreed.   But if you're cool with him getting all warmed up and throwing up to 10ish pitches you might as well be ok with 15ish and do the whole inning.  And to compensate maybe give him two full days off after, for all they know he might not even be needed in those where this one he was.   This middle ground area seemed weird though.

Another to note is probably having a Koenig limit of like 20 pitches. I could be wrong but I think he had another like this a few weeks ago where he completely lost control in this same pitch area. 

Yeah, the rationalization was on Devin was a little weak, to me. He's either available or he's not. If it's so essential to limit him to a low amount of pitches than you'd honestly have been better off just saying he wasn't available.

I also thought it was strange that he called it a "consensus" decision. You are the manager of the Milwaukee Brewers, correct? It's not run by a committee. Step up and take ownership of the decision. I don't know who was in on the consensus, but Devin definitely wasn't among them. 

None of this is to say that Murphy isn't a good manager and doesn't deserve Manager of the Year award. It doesn't mean all his decisions are beyond reproach and not subject to examination. 

 

[shanedog19]

16 hours ago, markedman5 said:

And how many pen guys won’t be available tomorrow now?

Ross, Ashby, Koenig, Megill…….?

I think you’ll see some callups today. Maybe Hudson and Mis?

[Jim French Stepstool]

4 hours ago, adambr2 said:

Can you name one single time this season where the sac bunt method in extras has produced the intended result? (I.e, leadoff man successfully sacrificed man to 3rd, next batter produced ground ball or flyball that successfully scored run from 3rd that would not have otherwise scored from 2nd).

I'm not asking to be snarky, I just cannot think of even one specific time when it has worked successfully.

 

I can't name any specifically as it's been a little while since it's happened, but they have twelve on the season. It should be more because like I said, they should be better at it. I'm also including bunt hits in my thoughts about this, so the total amount of successful bunts would be higher than twelve. If the bunt was successful & the run didn't score, that's on the next man, especially if the runner is on 3rd w/less than two out.

Understand, there have been times when it wasn't a great idea. The Perkins bunt to end the game a couple months ago is a prime example. I'm not advocating turning into a fastpitch softball team. But it's a skill many of these guys have, and it should be cultivated & sharpened. With most fans, popping up a bunt or being thrown out when trying to bunt for a hit leaves them with a real empty feeling like "he should've swung away". That's normal. To me, the feeling should be the same when someone Ks or hits a lazy fly ball when the 3rd baseman is playing 18 feet behind the bag (Rickie Weeks was notorious for this; he could run & seemingly refused to even learn how to be a marginal bunter. drove me nuts).

But like I said, it depends on the situation. This is a team that's built on run prevention & the pen. A run here or there can be huge. And most of the time this year I think the situation was correct when they tried it. Just get better at it.

[Jim French Stepstool]

2 hours ago, adambr2 said:

 

Yeah, the rationalization was on Devin was a little weak, to me. He's either available or he's not. If it's so essential to limit him to a low amount of pitches than you'd honestly have been better off just saying he wasn't available.

I also thought it was strange that he called it a "consensus" decision. You are the manager of the Milwaukee Brewers, correct? It's not run by a committee. Step up and take ownership of the decision. I don't know who was in on the consensus, but Devin definitely wasn't among them. 

None of this is to say that Murphy isn't a good manager and doesn't deserve Manager of the Year award. It doesn't mean all his decisions are beyond reproach and not subject to examination. 

 

I'll bet there are a lot of dugout decisions made, here & elsewhere, that are built on consensus. But I agree that there's no need to mention that in the postgame.

And as to your bunting comments, sorry, I didn't notice you were only asking about extras. Really doesn't change my philosophy though.

[Jim French Stepstool]

1 hour ago, shanedog19 said:

I think you’ll see some callups today. Maybe Hudson and Mis?

The thing about Misiorowski & Yoho, they've been able to script their outings, days off, # of pitches, etc. by having them in the minors. Especially Mis, having him go into a situation where the sked is more uncertain might not be something they want to do.

Just trying to think along with the braintrust. I'm not against him coming up. Hudson I think should be imminent.

[Pugger]

18 hours ago, wiguy94 said:

They have to make a move. They can't go into a game with Civale, Milner, Paredes as the only available arms. Payamps will probably have to hit the IL. I'd guess that would mean Peguero would be back up.

Peguero?  Oh no...

[wiguy94]

9 minutes ago, Pugger said:

Peguero?  Oh no...

Only fresh guys on the 40 are Peguero and Tyler Jay unfortunately. I suppose they could call up Misiorowski, but I don't think Murphy is a fan of that based on his comments in Hogg's article about Hudson and Misiorowski