Thurston Fluff

I tend to be optimistic so take this for what it's worth. Assuming the players we have play to their norm we need one offensive guy to step up a little and we are back on track. Last season we had two black holes where they brought no defense or offense. Now with the two injuries we may end up with two again on offense but still don't have any players who bring nothing. If we can fill first base with adequate production we can be about the same as last year offensively. Combine that with better defense and everything we had hoped for is still possible. Whether that comes from someone stepping up in the outfield to allow Hart to move to first or someone like Green stepping up we need someone to do it. If we do I am as comfortable with Izturas at short as I was last season with Yuni. Just for different reasons. Who knows maybe Maysonet turns into McGehee for a year or two and we upgrade there unexpectedly. We just need SOMEBODY to play above expectations and nobody to be well below them to be a playoff team. Keep in mind this was a good team coming in and still has 90% of that team intact.

My wife was mad at me because I knew what color my dogs eyes were and couldn't remember what her's where. Actually I guessed right but she knew I was guessing. I tried to explain to her it was because I spend so much time training and I have to look the dog in the eyes to do it. Then I added since she was untrainable I don't look into her's as much...speaking of the dogs I'm living with them for a while.

Not using Axford over Dillard is dumb, but the whole refusal to use a closer in a non save situation on the road definitely seems to be a league wide phenomenon and not just Roenicke. Not that it makes it any less frustrating to see a guy who arguably shouldn't even be on an MLB roster out there. What is really weird about it is Ron isn't afraid to do things most managers don't. He routinely pinch hits with the catcher, his defensive shifts and suicide squeeze fascination all show he will go agains the grain. Yet the closer non save situation on the road I can't remember him doing. Either there is something we are missing, this is one of those player relation things where each guy knows his role or something I can't figure. I'm glad Dillard is getting a shot in the majors. I always liked him but he is a fringe major league player. He really shouldn't have been in the game there. Especially after he faced a couple guys. Oh well like you said it seems to be league wide so chances are every team will end up on the short end as many times as we are from it. Someone here once said it takes third of the season to see what you have. That sort of always stuck with me. I guess unless you use them in that third you still won't know.

It's a month into the season and we have a better shot of overcoming injuries this season than last. All is not lost. Izturis isn't going to be any worse overall than Yuni was last season. At least he's a real shortstop defensively. This next month we'll find out about first base. I can't see them sticking with the current options when Hart was already getting ready somewhat to play there. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they are just playing the others at first until Hart feels ready to make the jump. Then we tap our outfield depth and just move on. We still have the pitching and a better defense than we had last season. A shuffling in the outfield may make that even better when Gomez comes back.

We really were not lucky last year, people keep saying this but it really wasn't true. It really depends on how you define luck I guess. To my way of thinking there are two types of injuries. One is predictable (to an extent) and the other not. A strained groin due to conditioning or torn cartilage due to wear and tear are something that will come in greater frequency in some players. A torn ACL on a random play where the player just twists wrong or runs into someone is just unlucky. Last season we didn't have a single pure luck injury that took out a regular player for the year. That was not due to some measurable metric based on players age or history. It was pure luck.

As a team the Brewers can absorb the injury. I feel bad for Gamel more than for the Brewers.

Last season we were remarkably lucky with injuries. I guess it was to much to ask for that again this season. There's got to be some AAAA guy that can be better than Ish and can be had for cheap on the waiver wire or for a B/C prospect. I think Ishikawa is the definition of AAAA guy.

Correlation does not equal causation. Maybe Gamel would've hit a couple of home runs if he didn't sit. And maybe he would have gone 0 for 20. We can do that kind of game both ways and nobody can be wrong. What we do know as a fact is he was banged up, wasn't swinging the bat very well coming back, sat a day then got his first base hit in a week. And somehow that is evidence that Ron did something wrong in your view. That seems to me you want to find something wrong with him because he didn't do what you thought was right. Doing so to the point that you dismissed the evidence at hand that showed maybe, just maybe you were the one who was wrong. I think if you want to say a manager mismanaged a situation you should at least find a situation in which the results show it was a bad choice. Like Kotsay in center in the playoffs. Then again he could have won us the game just as easily as lost it so using your logic you shouldn't use that as an example of bad management. To take this to extremes, if Roenicke sat a healthy Braun for a week and played Corey Patterson in his place As soon as he starts doing extreme things like playing Patterson over Braun for a week I'll be right beside you calling him a bad manager. Until then I fail to see what that has to do with giving one player who wasn't swinging the bat very well one day off. Unless you can show me how doing that relates in any way to extreme examples that nobody ever does or would do I think it best to deal with reality. In reality he sat a guy ONE day because he felt he was struggling and the next day he broke an 0 for 8 streak. And somehow that good result is evidence that Ron made a bad choice in the matter.

Surely if he's healthy no one would expect him to need need a rest after three days off/two days on. He had a young player who was coming off an 0 for 8 streak after sitting a couple days with a sore shoulder. It appeared to Ron he wasn't swinging the bat well and botched a play in the field to boot. So Ron sat him a day and Gamel came back and got his first base hit in a week. And for some odd reason you think that is bad management. I simply don't get it.

I don't think it is a big leap at all. He said that Gamel told him he was fine and he was sure that he was fine. He didn't start him because he had a couple bad days. I have little doubt Gamel told him he was fine. I also have little doubt if Ron had seen him playing fine he would have chosen some other time to do so. But that doesn't mean he say him, because he was struggling in and of itself. He was simply giving you a snapshot of how he went aobu tdeciding when to give a rookie a day off. We already knew Gamel isn't going to play 162 anyway. I seem to remember something about the 140 - 150 range mentioned though I do not remember where or if it was Ron who said that. Given he isn't going to play 162 it seems logical to pick and choose those off days. Seems to me to make more sense to sit him after a couple rough days, both offensively and defensively, than when he is really hot. Ramirez, Gonzalez, Hart, and Weeks are all not Prince, but they are all every day starters. Which one of those guys haven't got a few days off a year in their careers? Hell Braun's high water mark was 158 games in his career. Does that mean he isn't an everyday player? You act like Gamel has been on the bench for a week and is now in a platoon. Gamel has played in 19 of the 22 games so far. What about that ratio seems so out of line? If that is your idea of mismanagement I think you are looking for excuses not to like him vs objective evaluation of the situation.

So anytime Gamel has a bad couple days at the plate Ishikawa will start? That was a mighty big leap from the quote you posted. Ron has said all along he will not so that. He specifically said Gamel will be given a long leash. He also has said many times in the past that Gamel is not Prince and will not play every day no matter what. I read the comments to mean that all things considered Gamel looked like he could use a day off.

The problem with making really good roast beef sandwiches is it takes three days to prepare the roast beef. While it's well worth the wait the temptation to just eat the meat as it comes out of the smoker on day two is almost always to hard to resist. This is the second of the three days. I have yet to touch it.

As for Green's performance this season in AAA, he's clearly dejected after his demotion and is trying to get back on track. It's not an excuse, he needs to pick it up and he knows he does, he just hasn't handled the demotion back to AAA well at all. I don't want to sound like I'm bashing Green. I think he can and will get back on track. I was pointing out Casey has turned himself around to a degree as well while Green has had a setback. Seeing that just shows how hard it is to determine who would have had the better odds of being the better player last season. Both had shown they can play and both have had setbacks. To blame a manager for deciding to stick with one vs the other when both could sink or swim is like blaming him for the results of a coin flip.

I guess it should be mentioned he is doing ok in Pittsburgh now. Maybe not great but as a part time player he seems to be doing as well as can be expected. Better than Green is in AAA at this point anyway.

You have a guy with 2 straight good years for your club, gets off to a pretty normal April and then struggles for 2 months, that isn't enough to bench him. The decision one when to pull someone is always controversial mainly because there isn't a simple answer as to when. I think how the team is doing overall plays into it as much as the player's performance does. If the team is doing well and the player is an established one with a decent track record it makes sense to leave him in longer. Especially when the alternative is a AAA player who hasn't had a full season there yet.

Maybe but not sure. She tends to go after vocal dogs or dogs who are playing together even if they are half an acre away. That to me may indicate the herding instinct gone wrong but that is just a guess. Borders are known to be a dog aggressive breed to begin with. Usually you can stop that if you get them young enough. Since we are on the dog subject might as well share a pretty cool story. A dog was found on the road shot several times. The person who found him rushed him to the hospital and he was saved. He's been named Seven. Seven is a well mannered dog who is very loving and gets along with everyone at the hospital. When the person who brought Seven in comes to visit him he howls and gets really excited. When he leaves Seven mopes around. The dude was around him for maybe a few hours but 7 has bonded with him in that short of a time. Dogs really are cool.

Some of each was discussed and probably the route we take. Seems a cheat though. As far as other dogs go sadly I have a dog aggressive border collie. Amazing with humans. She especially loves kids yet dogs are another story. The danger of rescue dogs is you don't always get them young enough to prevent certain traits from materializing. Dog aggression is one of them. It took us months to get her to accept our new pup let alone strange dogs. We do have other dogs over at times to play in the yard but she has to be locked in the house when they are over. I'm putting in the turf specifically for the game I created for her so it seems like she should get to play at it's inauguration.

We thought of that but finding something tasty, artificial and green is kind of a tall task. All of this just to play with my dog. Ironic that I posted this after craigharmann posted the thing about dog monocles.

Supposed to get the new field turf for my back yard next week. Gonna have a party to celebrate. Complete with dog games to inaugurate it properly. Thing is my wife and I can't agree on the party theme. She wants a green party where we make food with green ingredients like pistachios and such. I want an artificial theme were we make food like mock chicken legs or imitation crab meat. Tough call.

Wow. I can't imagine how sensitive you could be if that is a "derisive comment," by stating the guy who's been starting and throwing almost 100 pitches per start is more stretched out right now than a guy who threw I think 5 innings the entire season thus far. You yourself said your post was a bit over the top. Then you followed it up with another one that pretty much was an I told you so post. One that I never said wasn't true. Estrada might only have 5 innings over a couple weeks. He is still only a few weeks removed from being stretched out in spring to be a starter if necessary. I didn't know where that left him at this moment. Here is the comment that had you so bent out of shape about. Apparently You took that to mean Peralta might not be that stretched out. What meant is Estrada may be nearly as stretched out. Partly because it is early in the season and even starters in the majors don't go 100+ very often early let alone young minor leaguers and Estrada was stretched out to 90 pitches a few weeks ago. So if Peralta is around the 90-100 pitch count level and Estrada is around that as well there is no argument to be made for Peralta. AS it turns out, well after my post was made mind you, we found out Estrada can go about 75 pitches. I still don't understand why you thought that was so stupid of me to bring up.

Well they are "hoping," to get 70-75 pitches out of Estrada, so he's obviously not as stretched out. I read that after I posted. Probably why I posted then I didn't know if that was a concern. He got up to 90 pitches in spring and I wondered out loud what he could go now. After reading comments from him I learned he could go 75 or so now. I'm not sure why that was such a bad point to make at the time to deserve such derision from you twice now.

Doug Melvin a couple years ago didn't have any problem having Gallardo AND Parra in the rotation to start the season IIRC Neither of them got their first taste of the majors to start the season. YoGa was called up during the season and Parra had all of 26 innings in his first taste of the majors. I don't believe either of them got called up and had to pitch right away with no warning and only one day to get used to the majors. Even if that was their first taste what does that have to do with Ron's way of handling the situation now?

I agree with Oxy in a lot of his post. I'll add that IIRC Peralta was one of the people who kind of bombed when he was being looked at to start the season last year for Marcum. I know it's a year removed but it was also a lot less stress in spring training. This seems to be a pattern for Ron so it's consistent. He seems to like to give his rookies a couple days of sitting and watching then gets them into a game. If there are alternative I don't think it hurts anything and getting a couple days to figure out the daily routine can have some advantages. Perhaps small ones but still why not take them if there are viable alternatives?

Of course Peralta is more stretched out at this point. He's been starting in AAA and IIRC threw 98 pitches in his last at start. I was referring to how far they think Estrada can go not how far Peralta can go. If you recall Estrada was being stretched out to start with when they didn't know Marcum's status.

I guess if there is a sliver lining it happened this season when there are better alternatives than last season. I don't see how they could not start Estrada after how well he did last season as a spot starter. The only argument could be how stretched out he is but I don't know if Peralta is so much more stretched out at this point.