Thurston Fluff

I guess it all depends on how one defines rebuilding. To me rebuilding is the same as starting over from scratch. Doing things like trading established veterans for prospects because the team is failing with that core of established veteran players. A firesale for salary purposes also falls into that category. I don't think replacing potential free agents with in house options, trades or free agents is rebuilding. I don't think filling a couple roster spots constitutes rebuilding either. I could see the Brewers trading players who have worn out their welcome or became expendable because younger more talented players are ready. But that falls more into building a better team than it does starting over. I'm all for signing Sheets to a long term contract. The injuries Sheets has had are not ones that have any long term effect. I'd be way more wary of guys who have had elbow or shoulder problems in the past then had one or two good years after that. Carpenter comes to mind off the top of my head that would be to risky for my taste. Sheets will command a lot more than 5 years $60 Million but the team will be paying for something differant from Sheets than they did for Soup. They paid Soup for stability and health. They'll pay Sheets to be Sheets. If someone wants Cappy I'd be ok with trading him but only if he nets something of value at a lesser price tag in return. That might help clear up some money for Sheets. I certainly don't think they should just give him away to clear space and money but if he can be traded for something useful and cheap fine. I also think the money Jenkins would make next year could be better spent. Gross has shown enough potential to be worth taking a chance and use the extra money elsewhere. I don't know if he can produce like Jenkins but if the saved money translates into solidifiying the pitching staff he won't have to be as good.

Not to mention Melvin didn't get where he is today by selling low and buying high.

I think there's nothing wrong with that if the player deserves it and needs a wakeup call.There is if they haven't been talked to privately first. Especially with young developing players. They are young, impressionable and aren't finished products so it would be very easy for bad public comments to effect them poorly. The most you can do is say that they failed to improve the players drastically beyond expectations. That's saying a lot if the person's job was to do exactly that.

Success at the minor league level has little to do with success at the major league level since the criteria for success is differant. If the manager wins the AAA title every year but doesn't prepare the players properly to be solid major league players he's failed to do his job properly. While some of the players have contributed at the major league level they also came in to the majors incomplete. If they are failing here there is plenty of blame to go around and he is part of that. Especially when defense is taken into consideration. We've had plenty of players come through here that didn't play major league defense recently. If the major league team has to get them up to speed there it has to have an effect on what else they can work on. After all there is only so much time in a day. A lot of that should have been doen at lower levels. It isn't so much the dislike of Yost I'm talking about as to why a person would feel Kremblas is an improvement. What qualities has he shown to make one feel he's more qualified?

I've read sevaral people who seem to want Kremblas as our next manager. Before I go too far let me make it clear. It's not that I don't think he absolutly isn't good enough or that I think he'll never be a manager but what exactly has he done to make anyone think he'd do a better job than Yost? (Please come up with something better than anyone can do a better job than Yost) Yost I might point out had far more experience going into his first job than Kremblas does. I'm sure there are other canidates with no major league managerial experience who has put in more time as a coach or minor league manager than he has. Looking back Yost learned from one of the best managers in the game. It could be argued that he learned from one of the all time best. Yet somehow someone with less time learning his craft some feel Kremblas could take over and do what Yost couldn't. Some of the reasons that I can think of are... 1- Because he's home grown and has yet to fail. I love home grown players and root for our minor league instructors to get a shot as much as anyone. That's not a reason to give someone with zero experience one of the most talented young groups of players in baseball at a time when the organization absolutely needs them to succeed. In fact it would probably be the worst time for it. 2-He knows the young players. How well could he know them? Most of them have had very little time playing for him. Most of our players have had 1 year or less with him. Some have had almost no time with him at all. Some vets may never have really met or talked to him. Fact is very few players have had more time with Kremblas as they have with Yost. 3-It's time for a fresh face. If it's for a fresh face why not go outside of the organization for a complete change? If the players have not fulfilled expectations at the big league level then it follows some of those failings fall to those who have helped develope them. 4-He's put in his time and he deserves a shot. If it's because he's next in line that simply isn't good enough a reason. I'd rather have someone with actual experince to guide a team coming off of a 15 year rebuilding project. From what I've read he does some odd things strategically. For instance having a catcher try to steal home. That's all we need is another guy whose strategic decisions could be seocnd guessed from the word go.http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/frown.gif Honestly I don't know enough about Kremblas to think he's any better or worse than what we already have. Fact is nobody does. Which is the point. At this time, with this particular Brewer team, if we do fire Yost it darn well better be for someone who is as close to a lock to be an improvement as one can get. Kremblas would be anything but. Quite frankly I think I'd rather give Garner a shot than someone with zero experience. At least Garner has proved he can lead a team through tough times and has actually lead a team to the world series as a manager. Again this is not to slam Kremblas just wondering why someone with his limited creditials would be considered an inprovement.

I couldn't agree more. Enough with the projects, let get some talent in here that is proven. You mean like Suppan, Linbrink, Mench, Estrada and Cordero?

I am also a devout member of the Brewer religion. I will never abandon reverand Bernie Brewer or his teachings of the joy of Brewer Blue.

Here's a link that not only has some info on innings limits but also links other stories on the subject. http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/the-year-after-effect/ One is pro one is con so it's balanced.

This was in theJS online this morning Even if Melvin did want him I don't think Zack Jackson would be a wise move. He's young, left handed and cheap for the next three years which is a bit much to give up for a months worth of old, average and expensive.

If you have to go back to 1971 for an example that should be reason enough to accept the statistical studies on this subject. The innings limit isn't some sort of pop wisdom that sort of caught on. It's based on a series of studies done on the subject. Of course injuries can come up any time but to use that as a reason not to take prudent measures to safeguard agianst predictable injuries is not a wise way to run an organization. Especially if one would like to continue running the organization.

Early 80's also meant unemployment and long lines at any place hiring. I got laid off in 82 and went back hat in hand to Kentucky Fried Chicken because I worked there as a kid and knew they liked me and got turned down. I was told by the owner to go to college or join the military because there just were no jobs anywhere. All in all I loved the 80's but it wasn't all peaches and cream. Anyone younger than 40 probably never had to go through a time when jobs were actually not available for anyone. Hopefully they never will.

End are you talking about Weeks range? I never really thought his range was below average. Is that something quantifiable or just your observation? Most defensive metrics seem to be flawed but I'm sure they have some validity in measuring range so if there is something objective it's worth posting so we could dissect it in the usual way.http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/wink.gif Weeks seems to be good around the bag when turning double plays and such. He has decent speed so he should be able to get to bloopers and grounders as well if not better than average. The only reason I could think of for his range to be below average is his reaction time.

Wasn't he a thirdbaseman in the minors? Not a bad career choice. Learn a knuckleball and go from jorneyman minor league lifer to solid major league pitcher for what, about 10 years, so far?

Toolive my point is it's easy to do things like waste games if the season is regarded as wasted to begin with. If Yost would have done that earlier in the year and it was percieved to have cost the Brewers some games he wouldn't get the same slack Melvin was given in AZ. He would have been roasted alive and probably fired instead of hailed as an innovative thinker. It's a no pressure situation when the expectations aren't there to begin with. It's entirely differant than the expectations of our pitching staff. Our staff was supposed to be good and help this team win a pennant are not, completly differant senario. I don't know the number of these supposed blowouts getting mopped up by one pitcher but if that number is anywhere league average I doubt that would explain how good the team has played. There just aren't that many games where one team stands no chance. Unless of course by no chance they mean down 4 runs in the sixth type of game. If that's the case I'd have to think Melvin has actually cost them a few games. Either that or he simply hasn't got very many viable relievers and he's forced to use crap pitchers. If that's the case then luck has as much to do with it as anything.

Bob Melvin uses the scrubs when they're in a game down several runs late, which has led to a lot of blowout losses (the main reason their run differential is so bad). From Melvin's perspective, if he brings in a reliever to pitch in a situation where it's teetering on the brink of a blowout, and he gives up runs, that pitcher's going to stay out there to at least eat up some innings to save his better relievers for another day, no matter how bad they are pitching. The Dbacks scrub relievers probably have zero confidence because of it, but at least they know that they have a role, and will continue to get opportunities to pitch, and pitch well. It obviously has worked for them but I'm not sure that's an option for teams who are supposed to be competetive. Melvin was working with house money in AZ because they weren't supposed to be good. If they miss the playoffs by one game some of those sacrificed games may come into question.

totally agree with you BSR. Villy has been overused. I wonder if this is out of the ordinary for one guy to take on a heavy workload early then get domoted later in the season when he gets tired. Every staff ends up rotating a few relievers. Some because they were never good enough but some probably became a sacrificial lamb because the team needed someone to eat up innings without costing to many games in the process. Villy seems to be that person this year. If he ends up not contributing any more this year but the Brewers still make the playoffs his contributions will be no less valuable having come earlier in the year.

I was in my late teens-early 20's then. Parachute pants, big hair, Brewers being relevant, man perms, heavy metal explosion due to independant labels, MTV played music, Micheal Jackson was known for his music, and free tv still ruled the ratings and I was still able to wrestle without spraining an ankle or increasing the nerve damage to my shoulder. Wow got tears in my eye.

Good point 20fry. If there is one manager in the league right now that should understand better than any other how to deal with warming up relievers it's probably Ned. That doesn't mean he can always do something about it though. The circumstances of the game dictates to a large degree how the bullpen gets used.

In october last year I read and posted an article here predicting Florida and Detroit would have problems with pitcher injury this season based on the amount of innings they had their young pitchers throw vs the previous year. This season Detroit lost one and Florida lost two or three (not sure if the third was in the same category) to arm injuries. Anytime someone can use data to predict something and it turns out to be true it should be a good indicator that there is a strong relationship.

For the stretch run the record agianst the 9 teams the Cubs face is 32-34. The Cards is 40-35 against the 10 teams they face but are three games out and still below .500. The Brewers record against the 9 teams they have left are 37-35.

According to Castro they do. Which is another reason why I don't think Ned is doing anything out of the ordinary. He's been around the game long enough to know the impact of dry runs. He also has one of the most experienced bullpen coachs in the game to help him with that. I just think to much has been made of Ned getting up relievers more than necessary when in all reality he probably does it about the same as every other manager in the league.

I've read for a while now that Ned has his relievers warming up in the pen to much. It's something that seems to have become conventional wisdom on this site. So I started to pay attention to other teams relievers warming up for roughly a month. I should have logged them but unfortunatly didn't so this isn't scinetific by any stretch of the imagination. I think it was something more than just repeating conventional wisdom on the subject though since I specifically paid attention to other managers and teams on this point. What I did was to count the times our opponents (or both teams in non brewer games) bullpen warmed up paid attention to the habits of other managers with regard to warming up relievers. It came as very little surprise to me to find that all teams get their relievers up quite regularly and don't use them. Most teams got a reliever up earlier than the sixth when the starter gave up several runs in an inning if they struggled in other innings. Most teams get relievers up in close games after the fifth inning unless the starter was dominant or the team was up by a significant amount and the starter wasn't struggling. I did notice several teams warming up more than one pitcher more than Ned does (this is one is very unscientific since it is not a fairly small sample size). The few AL games I've seen appears to have less dry runs than the NL but that has been to few to really count. I'd guess the AL would have less warm ups due to the DH. There is never a need to get a reliever ready in the event of pinch hitting the pitchers spot. Overall I think this has become something akin to stategic decisions. Easy to second guess, nothing concrete to counter it and a great way to disparage a manager that is disliked without having to prove he was wrong. I didn't look for stats on dry runs because I doubt there is anything detailed enough to validate it. If someone knows of a place to find such numbers I'd love to see it. Especially if my very unscientific approach was way off. Being proven wrong only means I learned something new.http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/smile.gif

Tough situation I feel for you. It might be prudent to get her some help to start with. It sounds a like she has some phobia's that are controlling her life. If she gets to the point where she understands the way she's living isn't normal or healthy it will help the kid as well.

Don1481 Why would one senario be all that much more taxing on a bullpen than the other over an entire season? Either way the bullpen is expected to cover the same amount of innings. In one example the bullpen may go more innings in one week then rest an entire week. My point was simple. Regardless of how it got to this point we have a staff that is about league average which is reflected in an average record to this point. That shouldn't be surprising.

I don't see why Hall, Fielder, Braun and Weeks couldn't improve. In fact I'd be very disappointed if they didn't improve. Braun has not played third all that long and I would expect improvement. Same with Hall. Weeks has made steady improvement at second. There is no reason to believe he won't as well. Especially when you take into account how relativly few pro games he's actually played. The stats do explain why the team has been so brutal pitching wise considering the starters all have a solid history. Hardy has disappointed me some with his defense. He was supposed to be a great defender but really looks average to me.