Jay Zahn

Yost got in trouble because he thought CC could get a clean inning pitching to the bottom of the order. Then you had an error and a couple of infield hits, and Tejada and Berkman come up and a tiring CC seems like a better idea than a fresh Guillermo. Can't say that I blame Yost for that. In retrospect Mota should have started the inning. Yost got caught up in it a bit, which shouldn't happen, but at least I can understand it in this case. If you're wondering when the last time a major league pitcher threw 130 pitches in a start, actually 9 days ago Halladay did it. He didn't make it out of the 7th either, and Toronto's going nowhere. CC will have the extra day off given that they aren't going to bump any of the starters, so maybe that will help some. Sabathia's 120+ pitch count games by year: 2001 - 3 2002 - 2 2003 - 3 2004 - 2 2005 - 0 2006 - 2 2007 - 0 2008 - 5 (2 Cle, 3 Mil) There were complaints about Sabathia being tired and not performing well in the postseason last year because of a high number of pitches thrown. Obviously it wasn't because of high numbers in any one game, more that he'd pitched better than ever before and so was getting left in games longer. Sabathia, not counting tonight's stats, has a 140 pitch lead in total pitches thrown, 2950 to 2810 for Verlander. Pretty impressive actually, and obviously it's not all due to Yost. Sheets is 32nd in MLB. Ryan Dempster is 13th; you'd think that would catch up to him but we'll find out.

Once the decision was made to go to Villanueva (Torres may not have been available), he wanted the chance to get multiple innings out of him. Pitcher's spot was up 5th, which easily could have come up in the 10th and would in the 11th. If Braun's spot comes up in the 10th, you've already scored at least 2 runs. If it comes up in the 11th, you've already shut down the Dodgers in the 9th and 10th (which didn't happen anyway making it a moot point.) Kapler is a respectable hitter anyway; the difference between him and Braun for 1 AB is not catastrophic. Villanueva not making the pitches is what mattered, which shows you how much impact most moves have on a game anyway...

But can't everyone else do this stuff too? Then we're back at square one. We do it, the Cubs do it, the Yankees do it and they still have more revenue. If some teams are doing it we can't NOT do it, but it's not really a competitive advantage.

Because before this season nobody on here would even ask that question. As Hall has said, look at his splits vs. righthanders prior to this season (.262/.310/.461). It's not that big of a stretch to consider his lack of success this year as a statistical anomoly and even though his numbers don't look good, he still has 8 HR and 26 RBI in 213 AB's compared to Counsell's 1 HR and 11 RBI in 176 ABs. Fortunately it hasn't cost them and I think to some extent putting Counsell between Hart and Cameron does give the pitcher a different look and that mitigates some of Counsell's weakness as a run producer. Still in all, I think it behooves them to have Hall at least have the opportunity to get hot, because a hot Hall is far, far superior to a hot Counsell. Hall hasn't been hot since 2006. That's 750 at-bats ago. Since then he's had moderate (.420 SLG) power with a below average OBP (about .305) who has been a below average fielder (in my opinion.) That's not counting the mental mistakes that will always be there for Hall. When Hall and Branyan were splitting time at third, teams bunted for hits on the Brewers quite a bit. That's likely to not be an issue with Counsell in there. Counsell is no long term answer at third, but he's the best short-term answer.

Given that Branyan had already hit for McClung in the 6th, batting again in the 10th would have been really dumb by Yost... (edit: nested quote --1992)

Presumably one of the benefits of the Durham trade is that Counsell won't be the only lefty on the bench and could be used to replace either of them. (edit: nested quote --1992)

From the Reds' perspective yesterday they gave up a home run to a pitcher and made two errors in the last two innings. They probably think they gave the game away.

Nobody's mentioned the De Le Rosa start this past Thursday. Over the course of his career De La Rosa's worse than Fogg, worse the Rusch, likely worse than Homer Bailey will turn out to be. And we got him, 7 runs in 3 and two thirds. The problem is that peope's expectations are too high. They think the Brewers should do that to De La Rosa as an average or hit those guys that way most of the time. That's unrealistic. Thursday was De La Rosa's second worst start of his 11 this year, so really the Brewers had an excellent day against him even given how bad he is. De La Rosa does have some good starts this year too - a one hitter through 5 innings against the White Sox, followed by a 10 strikeout day against the Indians.

Because Gagne could get hurt or fall apart before Suppan gets back? After Suppan gets back they should probably look at using Bush or McClung in short relief. Or Villanueva. Even if they aren't ideally suited to it their ill fit would still be better than Mota or Gagne.

That was a bad play, but they still wouldn't have scored in that inning had Weeks held 2nd.

I believe the stats. I'm a little skeptical the one run deficit is going to be usable as a high leverage situation functionally. The stats above are only good for when you're at home; on the road 2 run lead and 1 run deficit are about equally high leverage. The problem is having enough options in your pen to be able to have guys you want to complete the innings and an appropriate backup plan. So the Brewers right now might be looking at Villanueva to take the 6th and 7th when the starter can't go long. If the starter can go six but not seven maybe Riske's the primary 7th guy. Gagne has the 8th right now and Torres the ninth. Shouse does the LOOGY and sometimes might have the seventh and sometimes the 8th. So suppose we have this three run lead. If I'm putting a reliever in other than a LOOGY or ROOGY situation I would try to give him at least two batters - don't want to pull him after just one batter. If I'm bringing in the closer I'd also like to give him a mulligan - in with the tying run on deck, not at the plate. So with a 3 run lead in the ninth I'd just as soon bring in the closer anyway, save stat or no, since if I bring in another guy I'd want to pull him after one hit so what's the point anyway. With a 4 run lead you can use a lesser guy because I can give him a couple of batters. With that 5 run lead against Arizona they could give Mota or whoever 3 runners which is what they did. Then they came in with Shouse, which given the batter was the right move but it didn't work out. Then Torres. Unless you have a guy you're willing to sink or swim with (Torres is our only one, some teams might have a setup that good) you need a backup plan anyway. Gagne can have the eighth, but you need a backup plan like Shouse or maybe even Shouse for an out and Torres for an out or two in the eighth under the right circumstances. It's hard to do all that and save your best guys for the one run deficit situation. One run deficit is kind of sink or swim in itself because if the other team gets anything going it's almost too late before you can do anything. As in last night's game, where the most damaging run was the first homer and not the three that followed. That's maybe what keeps managers from throwing major resources at those situations, because you're still close but things can go south in a hurry. I think medium resources are about the best you can do. Mota is less than a medium resource at this point. Really he needs to be off the team, since at some point you're going to have to throw your #5 or #6 guy in a close deficit situation. Just get a better guy on the team.

I just picked criteria that seemed meaningful. 30 starts is about a season's worth of games. I went a little higher on relievers since it's easier to pick up 60-70 games and not really put in a full season for anybody. Eventually barring injury Villanueva, Gallardo, and Parra are going to be included in the counts as will Eveland given my criteria. So the picture will improve. My main point (and the reason I looked at it) is that even with those additions the depth still isn't that great because of the black holes before and after Sheets.

I actually studied this and sadly it's true. The way I did my study is starting in 1998, I looked at all pitchers produced by the system for each team. To be produced by the system the pitcher needs to first pitch in the majors for them. So the Brewers would get credit for Dana Eveland, but not Will Inman. They get credit for Zach Jackson, even though they traded for him, but not Turnbow since he pitched for the Angels first. Just the easiest way to do things. Then I counted "significant" pitchers. My criteria for significance was either relieving in 100 games or starting in 30 - over the course of a major league career. So this is counting players who maybe just played for a couple of seasons. Starting in 1998, the Brewers thus far have produced three pitchers of significance - Ben Sheets, Jorge De La Rosa, and Valerio de los Santos. Two starters, and one reliever. Here are the counts for all National League teams (players were double counted if they qualified for both starting and relieving:http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif Brewers 2 starters, 1 reliever Cardinals 7, 8 Reds 5, 7 Astros 11, 6 Cubs 10, 8 Pirates 7, 6 Braves 7, 6 Expos/Nationals 9, 8 Mets 4, 7 Phillies 9, 4 Marlins 12, 10 Giants 9, 10 Rockies 4, 7 Dodgers 5, 5 Padres 9, 3 Diamondbacks 8, 13 Now by any measure the Brewers are miles behind the top teams on this list. Sheets has been very good, but I wouldn't say that he's been the best pitcher produced in the National League over the last 10 years. I'd probably take Oswalt, Zambrano, Peavey, Webb, and maybe Beckett all over Sheets. But he is a high quality guy, and maybe he gets the Brewers closer to some of the lesser teams on this list. The Dodgers had just one really good starter in Ishii, but they produced Gagne so I don't think I'd put them under the Brewers. The Mets' best product would be Octavio Dotel, so maybe. Still, they had 11 guys who at least filled spots for them, and they have a bigger payroll. The Pirates best product was Bronson Arroyo, but they produced a whole rotation a few years back in Snell, Gorzelanny, Maholm, Duke, and a closer in Capps, so they've beaten us. The Reds' best would be Scott Williamson and B.J. Ryan from 1999, and no really good starters, and I think that shows us why the Reds haven't had a winning record in a while. So at best we're second or third worst. The new guys in Villanueva, Parra, Gallardo, etc. are only going to get us to where we should be if we want to win over a period of years.

But our bullpens have been below average Melvin's whole tenure. That could just be dumb luck but it looks like it's a terrible job of putting together a good bullpen by Melvin. You would think one of these years we would luck out and have at least a top 10 bullpen. Hell, back in 2001 I believe our bullpen ERA was 10th in the majors. Main reason the bullpen hasn't been up to snuff is the Brewers' sorry history of producing pitchers. I mean just guys who last in the majors for 100 games. The Brewers have been the worst in the National League in producing pitchers over the last 10 years. Probably worst in the majors. Who's come out of the system? Sheets is great, and we had De Los Santos (in 1998!), and De Le Rosa, who stinks but has at least hung around for a while. That's about it. Now Villanueva and Parra and Gallardo have come along, and presumably they'll have some good years, but we're still catching up. Most of any pitching staff needs to be built through the farm system. You can have some trades and free agents and reclamation projects, but you can't build a whole staff that way unless you're the Yankees. The Brewers haven't produced anyone who has even been tried as a closer in the last 10 years! Turnbow doesn't count because he was just another organization's reject. It is possible, ya know, to have a pitcher come up through your system and be a closer - for years even. We did it with Plesac. But now we have no candidates so we have to go through this Turnbow-Cordero-Gagne-Torres cycle. And the future still doesn't look good. Villanueva seems like he'll stick, I guess. Stetter hasn't established himself. That's it for homegrown Brewers in the pen. Gagne doesn't have a lot left, and who knows how many years Torres, Shouse, or Mota have left. It's an old pen, and not very good to boot. Your system just has to keep churning guys out. Some will be good starters, some will be #5 starters, some will be failed starters and move to the pen, some will be in the pen from the get go, some will fill a roster spot for a season or a part of a season. Some will be traded and do their best work for another team. But you need to keep churning guys out. The Brewers haven't even caught up to where they need to be yet in pitching development.

Some of the bonus babies in the 1950s would qualify, though I think you could say those were similar to Rule 5 cases. Years back there were a couple of third string catchers who were on the roster the entire season but never played. Ralph Houk of the 1950s Yankees had some years where he was on the team but didn't play very much. For the Brewers the lowest I remember would be Roy Fosse in 1979 and Rob Picciolo in 1982-83.

Bobby Higginson was a guy like Hall who got a big contract, then really fell off badly for a couple of years. About the same age as Hall when he did that. He did then bounce back for some better years, so it's possible Hall could too. Maybe Hall really does need the Lasik, I don't know.

Yeah, it was all Yost again, wasn't it? Look at what happened. I personally thought Suppan was losing it in the 7th and should have been pulled. I was wrong. Suppan still had stuff to get out of the inning. The Brewers staff was right - I was wrong. Then Villanueva pitches the 8th, which some people no doubt would like to see, since he's been impressive lately. No problem with me either. Except Villanueva doesn't have it tonight - nothing you can do. Yost gives him a bit of a chance but then goes to our LOOGY Shouse. Shouse gives up the tying run anyway - nothing you can do. Yost then makes a double switch, bringing his closer in for the eighth inning - this is an aggresive move. Torres prevents further scoring. He wouldn't have given up any runs except for Hart's Little League error in the 9th. In fact, Torres pitches 2.1 innings, which he's certainly capable of doing and which was the right move given the closeness of the game. Yost also double switched to get those innings out of Torres. Meanwhile look at what the opposing manager, Gardenhire did. Got 6 innings out of the starter and 2 out of the setup man, Crain. When Nathan (the Twins' best reliever, which isn't always the case for a closer) gives up the lead, it's one run. He could have been given another inning - he wasn't hit for. Gardenhire just pulled him because "it wasn't a save situation anymore." This is the classic cookie-cutter managing people should be complaining about. The guy who came in for Nathan, Guerrier, isn't nearly as good. But since Nathan hasn't pitched more than an inning all year, Gardenhire just can't ever pitch him for more than one. So after Guerrier exits because of a pinch hitter, the Twins bring in Brian Bass, who's got a 5.48 ERA and worse stats. Now if the Brewers can actually get a run off these hittable guys, they win the game. But except for Branyan and Fielder, the Brewers have a difficult time even approaching 1st, so it doesn't happen. To me Gardenhire's "save situation only" methodology was a far worse move than anything Yost did. They won anyway because the Brewers couldn't mount any sort of late inning rally.

Okay, you've got two on and two out - the two men reaching on an infield hit and an error. So you IW Lamb (who isn't doing much this year, but you have to do it) to get to the pitcher. Dillard hasn't pitched recently, and he's pitched well when he's been in there, and you're down 4-0 already, so why not see how Dillard can handle the pressure, and he's pitching to the pitcher - should be able to get him out, okay? I'm not really worried about any of our pitcher's confidence levels WHEN THEY'RE PITCHING TO A FREAKING PITCHER, okay? So Dillard gives up the two run single to the pitcher. So now I pull him? That'll give him confidence right, pulling him after giving up a hit to the pitcher. The next batter gets a swinging bunt infield single, and the bases are loaded again. Hard hit ball, right? Yank Dillard already! Yes, it's 6-0 with the bases loaded, but we have one hard hit ball, a single by the freaking pitcher. Then yes you have the three run double. Hindsight's 20/20, isn't it? LaRussa should be executed after tonight's game by the Cardinals (in case you can't tell, I'm being sarcastic.)

Here's Mota's record when he pitched the day after pitching 2 or more innings: 6/24/2002 1 IP, 2 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 0 BB, 2 SO 7/23/2002 0.2 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 0 SO 9/18/2002 1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 1 SO 4/7/2003 0.2 IP, 2 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 0 BB, 0 SO 4/19/2003 1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 1 BB, 2 SO 4/27/2003 0.1 IP, 1 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 1 BB, 0 SO 5/2/2003 1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 3 SO 8/13/2003 1.1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 3 SO 8/28/2003 0.2 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 0 SO 9/17/2003 0.2 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 1 BB, 1 SO 9/20/2003 1 IP, 2 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 1 BB, 1 SO 5/8/2004 1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 2 SO 5/26/2004 1.2 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 2 BB, 1 SO 7/4/2004 1 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 2 SO (Mota also pitched 2 scoreless innings the next day) 7/17/2004 1 IP, 2 H, 2 R, 2 ER, 1 BB, 0 SO 9/20/2004 2 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 2 SO 6/30/2005 0.2 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 1 SO 6/20/2007 1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 0 SO 5/25/2008 1.1 IP, 1 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 1 BB, 1 SO 6/12/2008 1 IP, 2 H, 2 R, 2 ER, 0 BB, 0 SO Total 20 IP, 16 H, 9 R, 9 ER, 8 BB, 22 SO, 4.10 ERA. Mota's career ERA is 3.93. Even with the outing today, where the runs should have been unearned, does this seem significant? Mota also has a lower ERA pitching on no rest than not.

Because Berkman is a switch-hitter and long term (2005-2007) Tavarez has a .260 average versus rightys while Shouse is .314?

A one run deficit on the road is not the highest leverage situation. Look at the Brewers' bullpen right now. DeFelice is mop-up, and the game's too close. Let's say for the sake of argument that Torres will cover the 9th and 10th if you tie or get ahead. That leaves 5 guys. You have two innings to cover. You could try to get a two inning stint out of someone, but realisticly down one in the 7th there's a fair chance you're not going to come back and win (which they wouldn't have.) So I'd probably try to use two guys so I'm not blowing someone out in a game I'm not going to win anyway. Villanueva's only been used in games where the Brewers are tied or in the lead. Higher leverage games. Use him in games when you're trailing and you risk too many innings, which happened with him last year. You could use Shouse (Shouse did pitch the eighth), but that still leaves the seventh anyway. You're down to Tavarez, Mota, and Dillard. Dillard hasn't pitched much in key situations yet; he's pitched well so far. I guess it's a judgment call when you elevate him to tougher situations, or let him build a little more confidence. Taking a slower route with some guys like McClung seems to have paid off this year. I don't see much of a difference between Mota and Tavarez if those are your choices. Tavarez didn't pitch well for Boston but he's been better for the Crew, only gave up one earned run tonight anyway, and made some pretty nasty pitches anyway. Look up the stats of Tavarez and Mota - they've had similar careers. I'd probably say Tavarez has been more impressive. Simply put, if you're down even one run and need a couple of innings pitched you're probably going to see the fourth through sixth best relievers on any team.

Yost is known to be a positive type of guy with his players and not give up on them, so maybe he just said Mota was the eighth inning guy to try to give him a confidence boost. Today he used Shouse in the 8th. Sparky Anderson used to say a lot of stupid things too.

Why exactly was the use of Mota so dumb? Yes he pitched two innings the game before, but look at the pitch count. 2 innings, only 26 pitches on Saturday. On the other hand, Mota has 4 outings this year where he used more than 26 pitches and pitched an inning or less. Plus the fact that Mota was given the day off in an extra inning game today. Yost can't win. This year he has taken pains to use pitchers for multiple innings to lessen the back to back. He's tried to get as many innings out of the starters as he can. He's held back on pitching the unproven guys in more high leverage spots until they show some good results. And yet people find something else to complain about...

You must have missed Sheets' last start. If Sheets can give up 5 runs in less than 10 pitches, think what Gagne can do.

Given that they're at 13 pitchers and Rivera will rarely pinch-hit, I don't see blowing two of your three pinch-hitters in the seventh inning as a good move. Given Gwynn vs. Kapler in the first place, I'd take Gwynn because Kapler doesn't hit righties any better than Gwynn hits lefties and it forces Piniella to burn a pitcher. Plus that still leaves you the choice of a righty and a lefty later on. So Yost made the correct move in my opinion, and it worked out for him.