TooLiveBrew

From the Wikipedia page you linked: "However, Johnson rankled Mets management with his easygoing style. When the Mets struggled early in the 1990 season, he was fired." -- Easygoing style not appreciated at that time in NY, but is purportedly just what the doctor ordered for this current mix of Brewers "However, he was controversially fired at the end of the season. Johnson had never gotten along with Reds owner Marge Schott, who had reportedly decided to fire Johnson at the end of the 1995 season even before it started. By most accounts, the final straw came because Schott didn't approve of Johnson living with his then-fiancée, Susan, before they were married" -- Wacko nut-job boss, 100% "Almost immediately, Johnson returned to Baltimore as the Orioles' manager. Again, he breathed new life into a struggling franchise as the Orioles earned a wild-card playoff berth in 1996 and the American League East title in 1997. However, Johnson and Orioles owner Peter Angelos never got along; the two men almost never spoke to each other. The final straw reportedly came when Johnson fined Roberto Alomar for skipping a team banquet in April 1997 and an exhibition game against the Rochester Red Wings (the Orioles' top farm team at the time) during the 1997 All-Star Break. Johnson ordered Alomar to pay the fine by making out a check for a fine to a charity run by Johnson's wife, Susan. However, Alomar donated the money to another charity after players' union lawyers advised him of the possible conflict of interest. In negotiations after the season, Johnson was prepared to admit he'd made an error in judgement regarding the fine, but Angelos demanded that Johnson admit that he'd acted recklessly in not leaving the decision to him. Johnson refused to do so, and offered his resignation--which was accepted by Angelos on the same day that Johnson was named American League Manager of the Year" -- Wacko, nut-job boss 100% I don't have any better 'evidence' than what is presented on his Wikipedia page, but it seems that Johnson hasn't been the problem in (at worst) two of the three examples.

Price is really, really good. It is almost frightening how similar he is to CC in just about every way. That's funny you posted that... after watching Price deliver a fastball last night, I commented aloud to me, myself & I (the three buddies I was watching the game with), 'Man, his build & delivery look exactly like CC's'. Except that Price is like skinny Subway Jared to CC's 3-pizzas-per-day Jared.

I think Turnbow's explosion onto the scene, paired with the successes of Capuano & maybe Bush are where the legend of Mike Maddux came from. I agree with Toby that it's become a sort of 'foregone conclusion' statement that Maddux is a good pitching coach, but a pitching coach is probably of comparable impact to a hitting coach.

Writers are trained to write confidently. It makes for a more definitive reading. I know... but this seemed out of character for Neault. I've read his blog frequently & can't recall ever coming across something like what I boldfaced. Sheets even said something about knowing he's not wanted, or can't invite yourself back, or something to that effect. I'm guessing the author used information like that to come up with the definitive statement. That makes sense. I missed those comments from Sheeter; thanks kramnoj & Robin

I gotcha bj, but my question is the matter-of-fact way that Neault stated "The Brewers are not going to bring him back, so he will land in a new home in '09." Just seemed like he'd heard something that we haven't

I thought I'd revive this thread since I came across something kind of interesting via The Disabled List Informer blog. The author, Chris Neault, does some work for The Hardball Times. In his most recent piece (10/16/08), he wrote a bit on Ben Sheets: Ben Sheets, SP, free agentThe "sore elbow" of Sheets became a huge issue for the Brewers down the stretch, and clearly the injury affected Sheets to a large degree. An MRI taken late in September showed that he had a tear in a muscle near his right elbow joint. The imaging did not indicate ligament involvement, but in any event, this is a concern going forward. Any time you are dealing with soreness, pain, tightness, etc. around the medial (inner) elbow, you're dealing with smoke. And where there's smoke… All indications at this time seem to point toward this injury responding well to plenty of rest, followed by conservative treatment. The Brewers are not going to bring him back, so he will land in a new home in '09. Plenty of teams are starving for quality starting pitching and may be willing to enter the negotiations for Sheets. From a fantasy perspective, I would draft Sheets only as a No. 3 or No. 4 starting pitcher. If you want to reach and make him your No. 2, I would suggest backing up that pick with another SP selection within the next one or two rounds. Elbow problems have a way of reoccurring, so don't be shocked to see him hit the DL next year with some form of elbow malady. Perhaps I've just missed some recent news on Sheets, but I hadn't heard anything definitively yet on whether or not the Brewers would offer arbitration. Seems odd to me that Neault would make that remark so assuredly -- he's not the type to just blindly and/or uninformed-ly speculate on player transactions from what I've read of his stuff. He will speculate about injuries (kind of the point of his blog), but this really stuck out to me.

I like to hear that Davey Johnson is a logical suspect for the gig. I agree with those that have already stated their preference for him, and hope that the 1-in-5 (or so) shot pays off. I'm not a big supporter of Sveum returning, definitely don't want Brenly, no to Randolph, and I'm totally neutral on Hargrove (though from what little I've heard I think he's just 'MLB Manager Retread'). "C'mon Davey" indeed!

I agree that NFL Head Coach was lame. Good concept, but lame. This game certainly sounds like its MLB counterpart, but I'd at least give it a chance, since EA did the NFL game & this is a 2K Sports release. I really like the 2K College Hoops game on 360, and largely because its 'administrative duties' aspect is quite well-done (recruiting, etc.). I'll echo sbrylski & agree with him a million times over: OOTP is the way to go if this is what interests you in terms of gaming. I never would have guessed that I'd enjoy OOTP so much -- I played tons of console baseball (The Show is my hands-down favorite), and just never realized there was something better (imo) out there.

I didn't see the Stairs home run or the Jenkins reaction at all (still haven't) but I'm sure it was "kid-in-a-candy-store"-ish. You nailed it, pitchleague. It was a fun moment to watch -- in fact, Jenkins has often been the first guy on the steps to congratulate his teammates this postseason (not just the Stairs HR). The first thing I thought of with Jenkins when the Phils won the East was, 'He didn't even have to pee his pants...'

He's worlds better overall than Weeks will ever be. He's too good and will be too sought after this off season to get him at a reasonable cost. And he'll be 31 next year, so I'd be uncomfortable signing him to a long term deal. He'll get, what, 4 years, $10+ mil per, easy? I think that part is the biggest reason that sticking with Weeks is ok. If we get 2008 production from him next year, at least we know he won't kill the team. And there's a good reason to expect him to improve at least a little. FA is just a poor way overall for the Brewers to fill their team, but specifically this season it appears the highest bidders get Hudson & Ellis. Bringing Durham back wouldn't be a terrible idea to me. I think that Weeks overall is probably at best a slightly below average 2b. I think that in the 2008 season, this is true. I don't agree with it as a general statement about where I think his talent is. I also understand that many people think along the lines of, 'Well talent is great, but what have you produced?'... which I think is necessary. I would be surprised if Weeks repeated his 2008 numbers next season. I thought Rickie would hit better in '08, but if he posted a .360+/.450+ line in 2009 it wouldn't floor me. Geoff Blum, HOU Can we sign this guy just so he can stop making me pull my hair out?

You said that market size was responsible for the Yankees success, not Steinbrenner. If that was true, the Mets would have won more, the LA teams would have won more, the Chicago teams would have won more. I don't think the 5 teams in those markets combined equal the WS that the Yankees have won under Steinbrenner since he bought the Yankees. Between the NY Giants, Brooklyn Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, White Sox & Cubs, there have been plenty of championships to go around. And the large financial advantages played a significant role. Prior to FA the big market teams could afford to sign the best young players & stock their farm systems. The less-wealthy clubs just couldn't afford the quality depth that the deep pockets could. The large markets always have & always will have a competitive advantage. [by my count...] Of the 103 World Series that have been played since 1903, a team from New York, Boston, Los Angeles, or Chicago has won 47 times (Yankees alone account for 26). Only 26 of those 103 World Series have been played without at least one team from those 4 markets, and a huge chunk of those 26 have come after expansion. When the talent pool was smaller, it was almost unheard of for at least one of those 4 cities to not have a team in the World Series, and often, both participating teams were from that quartet of cities. I don't know what percentage of credit Steinbrenner should get for the success under him, but someone should actually provide some level of detail to prove that he didn't have anything to do with it, if that is their claim. I don't believe he's had absolutely nothing to do with it, just that market size plays a larger role. He's done some good things & some bad things (like I already mentioned). I just think it's inaccurate to view him as the primary reason that the WS titles were won. The Yankees current payroll advantage is obscene, but it wasn't always to the same degree. In the 90's the Yankees were always near the top, but they didn't always hold the top position, the Orioles were usually somewhat comparable in payroll to the Yankees and had a higher payroll in 98. And of course the Yankees recent obscene payroll advantage hasn't led them to the postseason success they wanted. And in the 90s, the franchise's most successful stretch with Steinbrenner as owner (at least in terms of championships), Big Stein was actually relatively hands-off. He'd been kicked out of baseball, and in the time he was away, then-GM Gene Michael (hired in 1990) took the approach of building the team through the farm, as opposed to the FA spending binges for which Steinbrenner is notorious. Stein eventually removed Michael from the GM post over a disagreement on OF Bernie Williams's future with the club -- Stein wanted him traded away, & Michael knew Williams could play... so Michael misled Steinbrenner (iirc) about a low interest level on Williams amongst other teams. Once Michael was out as GM, the FA spending resumed. The reason the payroll was low in the early/mid-90s was that Michael's skill in identifying young talent stocked the team with its stars (Jeter, Pettite, Posada, Rivera, etc.). The FA signings of that era were able to be kept at a more reasonable volume. Interestingly enough, the tide has cycled back to being more similar to the Michaels GM tenure. Brian Cashman was finally allowed to be his own man at GM, and his strategy includes a farm system turning out young talent moreso than trading young talent away to get 'established' veteran players (just like the Yankees had done under Steinbrenner's meddlesome direction in the '80s). Prior to relatively recently, Cashman was not allowed this strategic approach, so I wouldn't be totally shocked if the Yankees' payroll gradually returns to 'atop the league'/'near the top of the league', as opposed to 'astronomically higher than almost any other team'.

One example isn't really a discussion point. All people make bad decisions. But the blank check ability to make a bad decision lowers the risk involved. I'm sure there are about as many good signings as bad, but when you're playing with revenue that is all but guaranteed to come back to you & then some, Pavano-type deals don't stop your ability to continue to sign high-priced players. I wish the Brewers could work that way. I don't disagree that Steinbrenner has had some positive impact there, but I think assigning championships to an owner is assigning false praise. Like wins for a QB or P imo.

Is there an owner that has won more than the 6 World Series that the Yankees have under Steinbrenner? I would love it if Attanasio became meddlesome and produced that kind of success. That's market size & payroll sustainability, not Steinbrenner's baseball genius. Thanks to Big Stein the Yankees signed Gary Sheffield when Cashman had a deal in place with Vlad Guerrero (just one of many examples one could point to).

People are very down on Rickie because his faults (errors and strikeouts) are very visible And interestingly enough, his strikeout rate was down from 2007's. I really think the signs continue to point to Weeks breaking out, though I'm not sure what his lowered BB rate means in that context -- it can't be good. Wouldn't a lowered K rate paired with no improvement in AVG indicate a lot of outs on balls in play? Rickie certainly seemed to lead the team in 'screamers hit right at fielders'. His BABIP was .277, which is certainly below average/normal... and below 2007's .287 & his career .299 He could reasonably hit .260/.380/.450 with 20+ homers. This is about what I'd expected heading into 2008 from Rickie. For whatever reason, he just doesn't mesh with being a leadoff hitter. I'd love to see him as a #5 hitter next season behind Prince & ahead of Corey.

I definitely am not giving up on Weeks. He was fine at the plate (for a 2B) for the majority of the season, and as Ennder points out, his defense on the whole just isn't nearly as bad as some folks would have you believe (not saying he's good on D). Below are Rickie's month-by-month OPS tally: .682 .696 .684 .769 .739 .944 I really believe that Weeks is just now starting to reach his offensive potential, and that dealing him this offseason would be selling on him at the wrong time. To me if you're one that wants to deal him, wait for the season where he flashes that .900-area OPS for the first two months or so & flip him for a salary-controlled SP. I personally think that Rickie will reach or at least get very close to his offensive ceiling, so I obviously don't want him gone yet. Offensively, and admittedly just from looking at their stats, Brandon Phillips really had some similarities with Rickie at this point in their respective careers (around age 25). If Weeks grows into his power/bat the way Phillips has, he'll be someone the Brewers will deeply regret letting go. Imagine Phillips with a .360-ish OBP to go with his power -- that's great production at 2B, and I think it's reasonable to expect Weeks to continue some marginal improvements with the glove. EDIT: Orlando Hudson is another 2B that took a while to 'click'. Hudson didn't start OPSing at an above-avg. level for a 2B until appx. his age-26 season. 2009 will be Rickie's age-26 season. In fact, in comparison with the offense of both Hudson & Phillips, Weeks turned in the best overall production of the 3 through their age-25 seasons. Heck, Mark Ellis didn't start really hitting until his age-28 season.

The 'short lines/deep CF' model wasn't terribly uncommon amongst older ballparks, if my memory serves me. I know Shibe Park in Philadelphia was shaped in that manner, for another example.

It didn't really hit my son until we were waiting in the crowd to go down the escalators. I looked down at my son as the tears streamed from his eyes. It tore my heart out, but at a same time it put a bit of a smile on my face as I realized that he was beginning to really understand the highs and lows of being a loyal follower of a sports team. That's a great mental image, Patrick. I know the Brewers brought tears to my eyes this season, so I can only imagine how overwhelming games both 4 & 5 must have been for your son. I'm sure he's going to have the same fond memories of 'growing up Brewers' that many/most of us do.

I always thought Braun was scruffy looking. http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_THR3SZhbQ_E/R8WFAfrcKVI/AAAAAAAAAjE/Rp8vaWepnCQ/s1600/05%2BHan.jpg Who's scruffy looking?

A lot of that could easily be explained by today's bandbox style stadia. I don't think there's really an appreciable difference in stadiums that can justify the difference in power. If I had to, I'd guess that on balance the park effects are probably not too different today from what they were in Spahn's time. There were hitters' parks & pitchers' parks then just like now.

and Bill Hall in the # 2 spot in the lineup against LHP (or ever). Given Hall's propensity to mash LHP ('08: .893 OPS; Career: .847), I thought it was nice to see Sveum attempting to utilize Hall's skills as best he could. I actually felt that Hall was a solid choice at #2 against lefties.

If I said "that long running catch that Cameron made near the RC wall at Coors Field," would anyone else know the play? That was one of the best catches I think I've ever seen. I remember it was a night game, but it probably was just scored F8.

I think it should be rluz's new BF.net title

I can't stand it when people gripe about the crowd on its feet. Oh man, me neither. Such a buzzkill. As for the thundersticks, one plus they have is that they're both an audible & visible sort of stimulant. I think they're annoying as heck, but they look good on TV.

The manager situation to me is the most interesting change the Brewers will be making this offseason. I really have no clue who any realistic candidates are -- I have my dream candidates & nightmare candidates, but it will be great to see this process unfold. I just hope the end result is an improvement, but Melvin seemed convinced that Yost was the man for the job, so I'm not sure that we should expect a whole lot of difference in the next guy Doug would hire. Now, if Melvin is canned too, things could get a bit crazy (I can't see that happening though).

And in regards to the small ball, he came out in the past week saying he was abandoning that idea. I didn't see anything from Sveum on that. The only person I remember talking about that was Melvin, but I'm certainly not claiming that Sveum didn't necessarily say anything, either. Whether he gets a chance to manage next season will be debated for many weeks to come, but Sveum's actions have improved my impression of him from the time he was first awarded the position. I agree with that. It was relieving in a strange way to learn that, yes, this team can do better at manager. Though I do think Sveum managed differently given the circumstances (40-man roster, 'do or die' games, etc.). Starting Suppan over Gallardo is a blunder for the ages, though -- regardless of whose decision it was.