TooLiveBrew

Dale Sveum's chaw is chawier than your chaw.

All we were told is that the real director is working on NBA -- if it's not the Bucks, his team might still be playing or his assignments might run into/through the playoffs. Jason Kendall's fast is faster than Johnny Estrada's fast.

It's not the cameramen -- they're doing their jobs just fine. I thought Trenni fixed this!! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/mad.gif [/blue]

WOW. Now I see what people have had to put up with in terms of camera production. Holy crap is this horrid. Everytime he strikes a batter out you can use it. He strikes enough out that people might start catching on and saying it with you but he doesn't strike out enough for it to become annoying and repetitive. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif I like it... especially about it not getting 'played out' -- we'll see. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

Tonight is my first game since adding Extra Innings that I get to hear BA & Rock! Lovin' it. Also, Jeff Suppan is an amazing person. I don't know how yet, but I know I can find a use for 'Suppwned'

I've noticed him striking out a few times on borderline strike threes too (great point Darnell & TLB) There we go... fixed to reflect accuracy. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

Ditka, & inverse-Ditka.

The last 2 or 3 games I think he's struck out looking at ball 4 at least 3 times, and has been stinging the ball right at guys all year, but people take a peak at his BA and K's and just assume that he's going to be hitting like this all year. Well-said... living up to your screenname! I'm hoping to avoid the "we need to wait through this season" answer. How about what you would do if he is successful, or if he is average, or if he gets hurt? If Weeks puts up a line similar to what DJr. postualted, I personally would offer him a 4-yr. deal for $35-40 mil., w/club option for 5th yr. @ $15 mil.

"I want [Joba Chamberlain] as a starter and so does everyone else, including him, and that is what we are working toward and we need him there now," Steinbrenner told The New York Times. ... That was done last year, so now we have to catch up. It has to be done on a schedule so we don't rush him." At least he's thinking things through...http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/eyes.gif

Why even bother answering garbage like that? Because Haudricourt has a very limited understanding of the sport he covers.

Jazzytrav, I found the constructive point! ... You love the kid (by all accounts)

After TLB said "conspiracy" he added that it was in jest You actually read entire posts? What a waste of time. Point being that it's a good thing that Gagne wanted to be out there. It's not a bad thing or some proclaimed conspiracy. Yes, it's a great thing that Gagne wanted to be out there. However, there's more than 'the win' at play (meaning, a shot at a save), and when a player wants to be on the field, he's not going to tell the coach anything but, "I'm ready to go!" Many SPs give their coaches the death glare when it comes time to make the move to the pen. The SP clearly wants to still be out there, and will tell the coach, 'No -- I'm fine, let me finish the inning/game/batter.' This has nothing to do with how effective or ineffective he's going to be; it's just the pitcher lobbying to stay in. The judgment of likelihood of effectiveness falls at the feet of the manager.

I do agree with that but the problem was that we didn't have a "non-tired" Gagne. I still think a tired Gagne throwing it 91 mph was a better option than a non-tired Riske throwing it 87 mph and Ned Yost seemed to agree with me. Self-congratulating for being wrong? I don't get your inclusion of velocity -- means next to nothing. There were at least two superior choices to throwing Gagne a 4th day in a row. He had information from Gagne himself and his staff including Maddux and Castro. We already covered this. This part about having the info straight from Gagne... pretty much my whole 'conspiracy/save opps.' point (please note I'm using the word "conspiracy" in jest). If you're leaving it up to the player, the player is going to tell you, 'yes, I can go'. He feels fine physically (which is totally different from being ready to be his best), so he wants a shot at the valuable save, or he doesn't feel fine, but still wants to rack up another save. It's the manager's job to use common sense and realize that, no matter what a player is saying, RPs do not do well when used 4 days in a row. The great part about this is that Yost probably won't trot Gagne out there 4 straight days anymore. That's what makes him a good manager. He learns from his mistakes One of my biggest problems with Yost is his stubbornness. I don't agree all that, in general, he "learns from his mistakes." I think he's learned from certain mistakes, but on the whole he doesn't.

What would Gagne rather have? option A) A World Series option B) One less save that Riske picked up because he had pitched the 3 previous days Gagne wants to win and so does Yost in their opinion, Gagne going out there in the 10th gave their team the best chance to win. (which turned out to be wrong in hindsight and here we sit) BTW, I think Gagne would take option A. No one's debating when Gagne should have been in that game, the talk has been about how he shouldn't have been used in the first place. A non-tired Gagne gives the Brewers the best chance to win, not one being used the 4th day in a row. I'm not sure what your point is with the A) & B) (in B), did you mean "one more save"?), but Gagne wants to win, obviously. However, saves are incredibly valuable to relief pitchers, and I would be surprised if Eric isn't watching his total number of chances very closely. He's been used 9 times so far in 18 games. I know it's more the result of a small sample & mis-management, but you obviously don't want to use your closer 82 times in a season in today's game -- especially since one of the most important aspects of the 'closer' role is that you have to pitch consecutive days when it's needed, not desired.

I don't think we can really make any kind of sound decision on that last question, zman, until after this season. I think Weeks will prove that he's a guy you want to keep around (not meaning long-term deal necessarily), but if he has more wrist problems (unlikely imo) this summer, then obviously you have to re-evaluate.

That is how Yost managed last year though and everyone exploded at him over it That's a vast over-generalization. There were many instances last season like the Suppan example here, where Yost went away from a guy & people were frustrated. I can't get too upset, as Shouse clearly was a superior matchup on Votto. However, Yost doesn't seem to do a good job of balancing when his starters are 'on' & pitching well, or 'off' and getting by on some good luck/fielding. I wasn't able to watch this game, but all accounts I saw on Suppan's performance were noting not only his pitch count, but the fact that he looked very impressive. That's a whole lot different from scraping your way through 6 innnings on 100+ pitches.

This sounds harsh You're darn right -- very harsh. Throwing out stuff like "you screwed up", "pathetic", "ridiculous", and 'you should have worked it out like an adult' aren't really helpful as much as they can be hurtful.

What I don't understand is why this wasn't addressed in the offseason. It was completely foreseeable. This regime's reluctance to admit mistakes and move on baffles me. It was a mistake buying out two of Turnbow's arby years after one big year, especially considering his rather checkered career up to that point. It was addressed, as Melvin added Riske, Torres, & Gagne. TBow can pitch the Spurling/Wise/Aquino innings this season & still provide good value for the team (not to mention that he's an upgrade over the aforementioned pitchers). Clearly there wasn't anything worth moving Derrick for this past offseason, which isn't too surprising. While it sucks to have to pay $3.2 mil. for this season, the contract is off the books after 2008. I don't see any way in which TBow's contract has prevented or will prevent anything the Brewers have planned.

His interests are to win games which coincides with Ned Yost's interests. No, his interests are to pile up as many saves as possible (obv. yes, this means the team wins), which means getting as many save opportunites as possible... even when the appearances aren't necessary, or lead to ineffectiveness in a later save chance, hurting the team. I don't think it's some huge conspiracy, but I also don't think it's out of the realm of plausibility that Yost is there working to get Gagne as many save appearances as possible, regardless whether or not that's in the team's best interests.

I didn't have a problem with it. And still don't. But definitely can see your side of it now. Thanks for bringing that to my attention!! Glad you looked into that (thanks!), as I didn't have time to do so (otherwise I would've). It's roughly what I'd figured, though -- using any reliever 4 days in a row tends to work out poorly, and most managers are fully aware of this.

Quite frankly I'm kind of surpirsed anyone would critisize him for not superceding his staffs opinions since most people seem to think he doesn't have a clue himself of how to do it. You seem to be suggesting that he take his own opinion, which you yourself feel is poor in that area over that of his staff and players. I'm not saying Yost is smart enough to make a better decision, but was answering the question "why wouldn't you [obv. a hypothetical, not me or you, etc.] go with that information?" So to clarify, I was answering the hypothetical, not saying Yost should strive to listen less to his players. Another reason I agree with Yost on this decision is it shows he trusts his players. Gagne now knows he has the full confidence of Yost and he can be trusted by his manager. Gagne knew this already. Now what Gagne 'knows' is that Yost will pitch him in any situation that dictates picking up a "Save" stat... which is what leads to more money for Gagne after this season's one-yr. deal. Wouldn't you put yourself out there every single time the manager would let you if it meant chances at more money? I know I would. Imho, it's up to the manager to have the best interests of the team on his mind, not the player(s). It's troubling to me that it appears (not that 'I know') Yost is using Gagne in a manner by which Eric will have a chance at as many save opportunities as possible, as opposed to utilizing our best/2nd best RP in a manner that most helps the team to wins. I have this crazy Oliver Stone theory that what makes Gagne happiest is the most chances at a fat payday after this season, and Yost is happy to comply. I have nothing to back this up, but it has become something over which I'm genuinely concerned. The appearance that sparked this thought to me was when Gagne was brought in to pitch for Riske @ CIN on 4/18... the game where Riske remarked something to the effect of "You've got to be -hmmhmm- kidding me" as he walked off the mound. Riske had retired the first two batters he faced (first was 3d out of the 8th), and then Griffey had a fluky little 'bunt' base-hit. After Phillips & Dunn singled behind Griffey (KGJ scored on Dunn's hit), Yost went to Gagne, who proceeded to give up a single & run to the next batter, Encarnacion. Yes, Gagne ended up getting the save, but I felt Riske would have as well, and it was an uneccesary use/waste of Gagne.

I don't blame Yost for bringing in his closer with a 3-1 lead. Yes it was the 4th day in a row, but closers pitch 4, 5, even 6 days in a row ALL THE TIME. Can you back this up without citing Ned Yost's closer usage? Honest question. You yelled this, and then proceeded to produce two examples showing that Yost misused his closers consistently.

If the pitching coach, bullpen coach, and the player himself, all tell a manager a certain player can pitch on that particular day, why wouldn't you go with that information? Because the manager is paid to have the superceding opinion. If you look at RP usage, common sense should tell you that using a guy on the 4th consecutive day, in a HR park no less, is not a wise idea. Yes, Yost gets advice from others, but it's ultimately his call. This is the guy that reminded us "I'm the manager, I'm very smart" after all, and the same skipper that needed Prince's 'permission' to not manage like a buffoon late in the season against StL.

This is an honest general question: Has the moderating been scaled back a bit thus far in the season? It seems there's a noticeably higher amount of name-calling (non-cuss-words) & consecutive posting that's been going on so far. I might just be the old man/Andy Rooney on this, but one thing I love about BF's forums is how they're vastly different from 95+% of sports team message boards. I guess I'm spoiled, as this is clearly still true. However, it seems to have become more & more commonplace lately for what I previously understood to be frowned upon & moderated here to just get posted & overlooked. I want to stress that I think the moderation here has been stellar for as long as I've been frequenting the forums, and am curious to perhaps get some help in understanding if there is some credence to what I think seems like it's true lately, or if I've just randomly happened to encounter some stuff that's been missed or deemed 'just fine' by those in positions to determine things like this. Thanks in advance.

I want no part of Kendall batting 2. I'd love to see Braun/Hart 2 (with the other at #5), & Cameron 3. However, I'm sure that since anyone that 'knows' baseball like Yost 'knows' that your #3 hitter 'has' to be a guy that's worthy of batting in the shiny #3 slot. That said, I'm not going to lose much sleep over Cameron hitting 2.