jazzytrav

Speaking of MS Office, will I be able to use it yet? It's not that I can't get by without it, but I have some fairly significant papers (well, fairly significant to me) that I have in Word files and they are continuing projects that I need to edit. The only other files that I have that I really don't want to lose and that I want to be able to continue editing are on Finale (music writing software). Would there be any problem accessing and/or editing things like that?

I guess that's more or less the point. Just that there are other ways to work a bullpen. I would be fine with your example as well.

Guess you don't watch the games. The Brewers won 3 of those 5 blown saves. Well that's embarrassing. I did watch the games, but I'm apparently not thinking past the surface today. Thanks for the correction.

I'll admit that most of my post was just mindless ranting because I hate the use of the term "closer" like it's some sort of position player. I just don't think that you can compare a hitter with a closer. He's a glorified relief pitcher, that's all. The part that I'm quoting here is the part that I stand by, though. I'm not saying throw him into mop-up duty, but there are other stressful situations that he can be put in that will at least get him away from this idea of being a "closer" and the added pressure that comes from us labeling it. And I think that's a key point. This was never that big of a deal until we made it a big deal. As I said, Gagne can work the 7th of a tied game and still be in a pressure situation. And I'm not just saying that because Gagne is struggling; I'm saying it because it's costing the team wins. If he doesn't blow those 5 saves, we're 21-10 right now. There were plenty of opportunities to try something new. There was an opportunity to have Shouse go out against mostly lefties in the 9th, but he was wasted in the 7th against one less-talented hitter. There were opportunities to have someone else close it so he doesn't have to go 4 games in a row. He definitely didn't need to go 5 in a row, but Ned had him warming up for it. So what does he do then? Get him up the next game, too. Bullpen management is not so set in stone as Yost seems to make it, and I'm so sick of hearing that every other manager does it this way, too. Who cares what every other manager does? Does Ned really have to do things that way just because everyone else before him said so?

So what position does everyone make their player? I have a feeling that if we all put ourselves in the Brewers farm system, the position we choose is the one we deem most replaceable on the actual Brewers http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif I took the safe route and became a catcher. I'm regretting this move because it's apparently insanely difficult to make the catcher have any sort of speed.

Maybe the bat boys have done well, but the ball boy that was in left field have biffed at least two of them that the camera showed. One of them was crazy funny because he was moving forward, then had to stop, then took a digger on his bum. Hilarity ensued. That's just great television http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

A hitter is not a closer! Where does this comparison even work? Gah, I hate this "closer" crap. Throw someone out there that can finish the game. If Gagne doesn't like that and wants to cry about it then perhaps these guys aren't as "mature" as we thought. I have no doubt that Gagne can do the job well once he comes out of this, but there's no reason to let him work through it like this. Put him in a tie game in the 7th or something just for a change of scenery. Seriously, this entire thread is about one group thinking Yost is a dink and the other group thinking the players suck. In that position, and I realize this is only my opinion, the manager takes the fall. Hell, if Ned was out there taking some of the blame right now I might even give him some credit. But he seems to be sitting there thinking he's doing everything right and the players are just ALL COLLECTIVELY STRUGGLING. Oh, I forgot, Gabe Kapler came out swinging hot. Anyone else find it curious that all the older vets are the ones hitting well and the young guys are struggling?

I understand that making the big leagues is difficult, but it's completely unrealistic to hit .400 with 30 homers for years in the minors and be the AAA backup. And since your player has A potential, there's no reason that adjusted the sliders would make it impossible to make the big leagues.

I see what you're saying now. But you also have to take into account that Gwynn's numbers are partially because of his speed. As I mentioned earlier, he seems to get a lot of infield hits and drag bunts for hits. Those kinds of things most likely won't work well when there's a force at any base and two outs. Dillon has a much better shot of driving the ball into the outfield, which, other than perhaps a walk, is what we needed.

Guess that explains Kendall's improved throw-out numbers http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

That's pretty much why I wish we could figure out who our best reliever is, pit them against the heart of the order, and get rid of this "closer" nonsense.

This is ignoring the fact the Dillon did, in fact, have those numbers. If Gwynn can handle AAA pitching pretty well when he's 30, then perhaps he would be a good PH in that given situation when he's 30. But right now, he's not and Dillon is. Touche. I'll give you this one BC http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif But I think it's important to remember just how young these guys are and stop expecting them to have the maturity of a grizzled vet. They do need inspiration, as well as direction, motivation, and role models. Prince is only 22. I can't imagine where I would be, even though I'm only 26 now, if I hadn't had all those things surrounding me from competent people when I was 21-22.

His career BA in the majors is .274, and that number has a lot to do with infield singles and drag bunts, as I stated earlier. But infield singles and drag bunts don't help with the bases loaded and 2 outs. As for Gwynn, his career OBP in the majors in .321. Gross so far this year, even though his average is .188, he has a .333 OBP. So if you're talking about extending the inning with the bases loaded and 2 outs, I'll take Gross or Dillon any day over Gwynn.

A single with the bases loaded and two outs usually requires getting the ball to the outfield.

Neither Gwynn nor Dillon have a large enough sample to make such a claim based solely on Major League statistics. Ryan Braun did really well in Nashville, and that translates into being a very good major leaguer. Obviously there is a difference between Nashville and the big club, but when players haven't been in the league for very long, it's perfectly acceptable to use minor league statistics. Also, if we use those major league statistics, I would still rather have Dillon and his SLG when the bases are loaded and two outs and we need a lot of runs. Gwynn gets his numbers from drag bunts and infield singles. Those don't work very well with the bases loaded and a force at any base.

Yeah, I caught that, too. It's definitely their right, but also definitely annoying.

This is up there right now for Line of the Year in my book http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

I have to bring this up just because I busted out laughing. This is from a ESPN chat that's going on right now with Jerry Crasnick about the 3-team race right now with the Cubs, Brewers, and Cards. Classic.

Yeah, I've pretty much given up on RTTS for now. You can absolutely dominate in all facets of the game and you'll get sent down just because your attributes aren't good enough. I remember one time where I was hitting .375 in the majors and I got bumped down twice to AA. I homered in 8 of my next 12 at-bats and finally got called back up. It really sucks because if you completely dominate, your place on the team won't reflect your performance. But if you adjust the sliders to make your placement better suited to your performance, you'll never meet any of the goals or get enough points to add attributes. They make it very difficult and unrealistic.

To me it says that they're just like any other player in the league that needs to be put in a position to succeed, but we have this unreasonable expectation out of our players to succeed in any situation at any given time. TGJ is a slap-hitter, so why put him in when there's a chance to win a game in an RBI situation. And I don't believe for a second that Yost was handcuffed to that decision because Dillon was sitting right there on the bench. That's why we have a manager...to put them in position to be successful. That's the goal of any manager, to put your employees in the position to be successful. If you want to work on things with them, there are times to do that outside of the game.

It's almost surreal how everyone is defending Yost during the day and ready to fire him at night. I'm not saying that people are changing their opinions, but just that during the day the people that post in this thread are generally supportive of Ned. Then nighttime comes and different people are generally all ripping on Ned. Strange...

I'm not getting into a burden of proof argument here. But don't say something is "absolutely meaningless and completely ineffective" if you don't have anything to back it up.

Thanks Brian. Just one question. What kind of programs would be Windows-specific?

After the hitting and/or pitching coach of course. They are almost always the first to go in an absolutely meaningless and completely ineffective way to make something happen. Prove it. Prove that it's meaningless and ineffective.

I guess what this tells me is that the team is underperforming and somehow winning games. If they actually had someone that could help them perform, perhaps they would win more games. Also, those numbers can sometimes reflect the manager. Not pulling someone at the right time affects ERA. Putting TGJ in any situation affects SLG. I guess I just don't understand sitting here saying that nothing is Ned's fault and that it's all on the players. What the hell does Ned do then? These players have performed in the past, so there's no reason to think they don't have the ability. It's the manager that needs to get the most out of his players. You can point to some string of luck that has us barely above .500 and say that Ned is somehow the reason for this, or you can watch his decisions in-game and decide for yourself.