jazzytrav

I didn't really have a problem with it either way. My personal preference would have been to send the runners because Prince is more likely to make some sort of contact than strike out, but I wasn't at all upset that they didn't send them. Rock just got a little lucky with the outcome and blew it out of proportion.

I guess I never understood why it necessarily means a player sees less fastballs just because he's in front of the pitcher. It really depends on the team that they're playing against and their strategy, as well as the game situation. There are many times where there is no one on base and Hardy may see better pitches because they want to get him out and have the pitcher lead off the following inning. I tend to think it all evens out in the long run, so if Hardy is uncomfortable for some reason, it's probably in his head.

It's strange how everyone is afraid of making any kind of change. It's like a macho thing where all things being equal, we beat you. Even stranger is that this sentiment somehow made it's way through the steroid era, and even now we still play it off as if the juiced-up pitcher was throwing to the juiced-up hitter. Everyone wants everything to be equal in baseball, because apparently a small advantage like batting the pitcher 8th might win more games that would have otherwise been lost if all things had been equal. Change is incredibly slow in sports.

I don't understand how there can really be a debate about whether a guy is a 5th starter or a 6th starter. He's a 6th starter on some good-pitching teams, and a 5th starter on crappy teams. In the beginning of the year on the Brewers, he was about a 6th-7th starter. Right now, he might be the 5th. Unfortunately we can't predict a string of bad luck in the future.

AHHHHHHHH!! AHHHHHH!! TOO MUCH NED!! AAHHHHHHHH!!

That's weird. I guess that's just one more time in my life where I'm guilty of copyright infringement. I was on a team called the Brewers, Orioles, White Sox, and who knows what else. Oh wait, can I say those names on here? Nice avatar Brian http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

Was that the difference of 15-20 feet?

I'm gonna take a leap and say that I liked the late-inning management tonight, and not just because they won. The Weeks bunt was a good idea because it both moves the runner over and Weeks has a decent chance of beating it out. Sending Hall was the right call regardless of whose decision it was to send him, but I've always felt that an employees behavior is a reflection of the manager, so I'll give Ned some credit for that. I also liked the bullpen management tonight. So what the heck? Did someone tip Ned off to the site? I really hope some of this stuff keeps up (crossing fingers).

I don't know how the cutoff man not having a good grip on the ball is the difference of 15-20 feet. These are all very broad terms...good, near-perfect, well, throw is "off", 2b bobbles it (little bobble or big bobble?). I don't know how you can draw the percentages you did by using terms like that.

Unless it's changed since I was in school, which was all of a year ago, most credits will transfer to all UW schools except Madison. They have some kind of different rules for credits. The example that I gave was because the Calculus class that I took was 4 credits, and the requirement for my degree and most degrees was either 3 or 4 credits...point being that the class fulfilled that requirement. For some reason, Madison required 5 credits to fulfill that requirement, so the class left the student 1 credit short. And normally you can't find a 1 credit class so it becomes a waste in some senses. So the credits transferred, but they were less useful at Madison than other UW system schools.

I can attest to that. I got a promotion after I graduated simply because I had a degree, even though my degrees have absolutely nothing to do with my job. The business world especially is less to do with your degree and more to do with getting your foot in the door early.

I agree with Russ's post. The difference is that Russ isn't just dismissing it as a silly argument and acting like we're all ready to jump off the bandwagon. And the examples given are just examples, not proof of anything. No one was trying to prove anything. The question that was asked is if anyone knows how we compare to other teams in baserunning mistakes.

I don't see how that's the bottom line. Did you know that Cappy would need surgery and Yo would tear his ACL? And what exactly is an under-Vargas performance? Of course we could use him now, but no one was saying in March that we're definitely going to need Vargas come June.

Opening day. Is this your gut-feeling or do you have more of an explanation? And Russ provided his opinion without completely dismissing the other opinion, rather than just dismiss it as silly. I don't quite understand how you can "get it" any more than someone else without providing any kind of statistic other than some questionable percentages. I'm not trying to pick a fight or say that I'm right, but I just don't understand how you can just turn a blind-eye just because you think it's silly. I'm not sure if the Brewers are worse than any other team with baserunning skills, but it sure feels like it some times, and I can't see any stats that show otherwise. If there are, then I want to see them so that I can feel better about our baserunning.

Doesn't it look like Hudson is looking at the ball coming out of his hand, while Bush's eyes are directly towards the plate? Weird.

I agree that the biggest issues make up 98% of it, but those topics have been beaten to death. What's the harm in asking if something easy can be done to fix the other 2%? Yeah, people are looking for easy fixes. But why not look for some easy fixes to steal a game somewhere, rather than sit around and wait for the SLG% to go up? And Hall getting thrown out at 2nd had nothing to do with how big his lead was...he just wasn't paying attention. I know that's only one example, but I believe that was the one being referred to. It's not like other teams don't get picked off, get caught stealing in bad situation or get thrown out at the plate. Understood, which is again why the original poster asked how we fair in relation to other teams, and that question has yet to be answered.

I'm fairly certain Brewjihad was making a comment on the general topic of the thread, not the tangent of Fielder's single/double. Hall has made a couple by himself. I don't think it's too far of a stretch to say the Brewers have been making some baserunning blunders this year. That's why the original poster asked the question of how the Brewers fair in relation to other teams...a question that wasn't answered. I'm not sure why you question someone's objectivity when they make a clear attempt at remaining objective. What's our record when leading after 7? Or maybe 6? People have different definitions of a "late lead", so I don't think it's fair to question that statement without looking at all the statistics instead of saying that it's "about" something. How's this for an easy problem to fix: Don't steal 3rd with 2 outs. Don't send the runner home when the ball has already made it to the cutoff man. Don't get picked off at second with 2 outs. Just those simple things can change the outcome of one or two games and put us at or above .500 right now. I agree that you can't point to that as THE problem, but I think it has to be recognized that it can have a significant impact in some places.

Hot coffee and long sleeves in Arizona...

It really depends for this. If you attend a two year university, but then you decide to transfer to a private college, things can get messy. Also, Madison doesn't have the same credit requirements as other universities, so even though the credits will transfer, they may not be enough. I took a Calculus course in high school that transferred to UW-Oshkosh and covered my math requirements for my degree, but my friends going to Madison were 1 credit short, even though all the credits transferred. Also, this really depends on the program that you decide on. Many programs do all the general stuff in the first two years, followed by classes related to your degree. But there are also some programs that throw you right in. I started out in Music Education, and you're doing music from the first day, with sprinklings of general classes as you go along. But that was mostly because you can't just stop playing music for two years to take general classes. Other than that, I definitely agree with b19...start visiting schools now. Most of them have visitation days where you can set it up and walk around campus with a guide. Also, if you know anyone that goes to certain schools, start asking them about it. Most people are somewhat knowledgeable about different degrees that their campus offers and how good their school is in those programs. As for when to start doing stuff, start now. I would suggest Peterson's to give you a better idea about some schools and what they offer. You can enter in different degree programs and different areas of the country and see what results come back, then do a little more research on those schools. It's been a very valuable resource in my search for grad schools, and I imagine it would be just as valuable for undergrad. One more thing, you said you got a 27 on your ACT and you're a junior? Take it again, and again even. Get the best score you can possibly get, and try to get scholarships with it.

Yeah, that's kinda what I meant endaround. In that case, what are they doing that they can't watch the pitch and add it to the count? You had one job to do!

Really? That's a pretty bold statement to make about a bunch of young players that Ned himself called "kids". I think we're in agreement here, unless you're claiming that he doesn't throw players under the bus in a visible way. No, but if you were an umpire and you saw the way he acted in press conferences, would you really take the guy seriously on the field? At this point, I don't think he should even bother arguing anything because it would be worthless. When he has earned some respect, maybe him arguing will actually mean something, but right now it doesn't. I was merely pointing out that, imo, the reason his tantrums are useless is because he's made them useless by his own actions. When someone holds themself accountable for things, it's a natural reaction to listen when they yell at someone else. But when Ned throws everyone else in the line of fire and doesn't take any blame on himself for anything, no one is going to take him seriously. In this case, the media is actually very important. I could care less what he does behind closed doors. If Ned tells Kendall behind closed doors that Ned himself made a mistake on the signs, but then Ned goes to the media and says Kendall screwed up the signs, what does that tell Kendall and the rest of the players?

I would think it would be one person's duty to keep track of everything on the TV scoreboard. Keep track of count, outs, score, and where the runners are on base. If you can't keep up with those things, that's sad.

Then I don't understand when and where Parra and Villy are supposed to prove themselves as starters. And what is your basis for liking Vargas over Bush and Suppan?

I don't think I understand this. The way Yost has handled the media, he basically HAS taught them to blame all their woes on bad luck instead of themselves. He hasn't held one player accountable to the media, unless that player made a mistake that was actually Yost's fault (Kendall after suicide squeeze). That leads to my next point, which is the fact that he never takes the blame for anything. So what exactly is he teaching his players when he throws everyone else under the bus? All I'm saying is that if he held people accountable for what they do, including the players and coaches and HIMSELF, maybe it would actually means something when he yells at an ump.

Where are you hearing fabricated statistics? And you can't pick his first half of the year and just throw out his awful second half.