Committee wins! Cubs losing 4-2 in the 6th.

JJ!

Nice throw....I am glad Hall did not tip that ball....JJ would not have been able to get him. But nice play by JJ and a throwing motion that reminds me of Boston Red Sox SS Rick Burleson...and Mark Belanger of the Orioles and Fred Patek.

Nice hands and footwork and throw by JJ! Nice defense today...good game by the Brew Crew!

Well managed and well coached on the bases!

Happy Mommy's Day everyone...have a blessed AND SAFE afternoon...

I see you later....

BREWERS WIN!      :}               BREWERS WIN!    :}                   BREWERS WIN!    :}

wisblue:

brewhawk:

wisblue:

brewhawk:

wisblue:

brewhawk:

Potential for Yosty today, including the inexplicable failure to use Suppan to bunt with a man on second and nobody out.  Isn't that the exact situation you want your pitcher to be in at the plate for that very reason?

I don't think this one is that clear cut. With the infielders coming in on top of the hitter (as they were) and a slow runner on second (Hardy), a successful bunt is going to be tough to pull off. Suppan is not the worst with the bat, so you almost have as much of a chance of moving the runner by having him try to ground one to the right side and if you're really lucky he slips it through the moving infield. As it is, Suppan got his bat on the ball but looped out to right.

Bullcrap.  The sacrifice bunt is BY FAR the more successful means of moving a runner over with a pitcher who bats .000 at the plate (which by definition makes him the worst, since you can't possibly bat any lower), but who bunts well enough to be called upon in a pinch-hit situation to do it.

I would bet you $1000 that if you were able to interview the other 15 NL managers, that at least 12 (80%) would bunt in that situation.

I do love how you cling to your Yost defenses even though the actual result is also so obviously not in your favor.  That's real dedication to your cause.

It is a lot easier to discuss what SHOULD HAVE been done after one of the other options is unsuccessful. That is the definition of second guessing.

I AM NOT DEFENDING YOST (shouting intended)! I am just trying to be fair and to point out that not all of these things are as obvious as you make them out to be. If Suppan bunts right to one of the charging infielders and Hardy is thrown out at third (a real possibility), you have significantly lowered your chances of scoring.

 

So does a popup, groundout, or strikeout, which doesn't move the runner over.  So, you tell me which one is the better play?

If you honestly believe that swinging away with a zero hitter is the better play, you don't know very much about baseball.

By calling Suppan a "zero hitter" you are showing that you aren't willing to even be rational when you are trying to make a point. Yes, he has not had a hit this year in 13 AB's coming into this game, but I think his .175 career average in 325 AB's over 14 seasons is an indication that he can get his bat on the ball. His career strikeout/AB ratio isn't a whole lot worse than several of the "hitters" in the Brewers everyday lineup.

If I don't know anything about baseball don't bother responding to me anymore. I think some people here would agree that I do know some things about baseball, and that I am a lot more objective than you are.

0 for 13 = .000.  .000 is, be definition "zero".  Therefore there is nothing irrational about it.  In fact, it is completely rational and objective when using that piece of factual information to judge the decision whether to bunt or swing away in that situation.

It was, in fact, the "low percentage move" that wee see as a recurring theme of these discussions.

Mil2BrewCrewRWFan23:

JJ!

Nice throw....I am glad Hall did not tip that ball....JJ would not have been able to get him. But nice play by JJ and a throwing motion that reminds me of Boston Red Sox SS Rick Burleson...and Mark Belanger of the Orioles and Fred Patek.

Nice hands and footwork and throw by JJ! Nice defense today...good game by the Brew Crew!

Well managed and well coached on the bases!

Happy Mommy's Day everyone...have a blessed afternoon...

I see you later....

BREWERS WIN!                     BREWERS WIN!                       BREWERS WIN!  

He reminds me of Belanger as well, minus the beak:)

crichar3:

robertj44:

Gotta side with Brewhawk on this one. Just plain stupid not to attempt a bunt on that AB with Suppan.

 

 

I expected a bunt there, too.  But the reason I didn't think it was "stupid" not to was because of the way the defense was playing and because Suppan is pitcher who at least knows which end of the bat to hold--it wasn't beyond possibility that he could have punched one through an infield expecting a bunt.

So I can't say it was "stupid"; the move wasn't outrageously without foundation.  It was a legitimate alternative, and the fact I wouldn't have gone that way doesn't make it wrong. 

That's exactly the point. If you had Sheets at the plate (a legitimately horrible hitter even though he has a hit this year) and a fast runner like Weeks or Hart at second, your decision making is significantly different.

I wonder if some of the people who are saying it was "stupid" are watching on TV and could see how close Pujols was to the plate on those pitches.

Nice Win!!!

I might point out that the two boys from the San Fernando Valley stepped up today to win this game (Braun and Suppan).

Today's game adds more support to the "committee" approach with this collection of pitchers. Unfortunately, for it to be successful, you have to get 7 innings out of the starters pretty consistently so you still have options when you get to the 9th.

Markpackman:

Good thing that sure run Yost passed up earlier didn't come back to haunt us today. Good win!

Just accept the win and leave Yost knocking out of it! LOL... It was a well managed game. You fans are never satisfied. Just take the win and rejoice...

Yost nothing....Yost should not even be a topic issue today!

wisblue:

crichar3:

robertj44:

Gotta side with Brewhawk on this one. Just plain stupid not to attempt a bunt on that AB with Suppan.

 

 

I expected a bunt there, too.  But the reason I didn't think it was "stupid" not to was because of the way the defense was playing and because Suppan is pitcher who at least knows which end of the bat to hold--it wasn't beyond possibility that he could have punched one through an infield expecting a bunt.

So I can't say it was "stupid"; the move wasn't outrageously without foundation.  It was a legitimate alternative, and the fact I wouldn't have gone that way doesn't make it wrong. 

That's exactly the point. If you had Sheets at the plate (a legitimately horrible hitter even though he has a hit this year) and a fast runner like Weeks or Hart at second, your decision making is significantly different.

I wonder if some of the people who are saying it was "stupid" are watching on TV and could see how close Pujols was to the plate on those pitches.

I watched the game and most of the posters during the live action did not like the move, me included. Stupid is always a wrong way to go with word usage. My bad!

 Yost not having Suppan bunt was a problem. I also was not very happy about Hart getting caught stealing when the pitcher was clearly not giving anything but balls to Billy Hall and walked him. It ended up costing us a run. I wouldn't be averse to giving a "Yosty" for this one even if it was a win.

brewhawk:

wisblue:

brewhawk:

wisblue:

brewhawk:

wisblue:

brewhawk:

Potential for Yosty today, including the inexplicable failure to use Suppan to bunt with a man on second and nobody out.  Isn't that the exact situation you want your pitcher to be in at the plate for that very reason?

I don't think this one is that clear cut. With the infielders coming in on top of the hitter (as they were) and a slow runner on second (Hardy), a successful bunt is going to be tough to pull off. Suppan is not the worst with the bat, so you almost have as much of a chance of moving the runner by having him try to ground one to the right side and if you're really lucky he slips it through the moving infield. As it is, Suppan got his bat on the ball but looped out to right.

Bullcrap.  The sacrifice bunt is BY FAR the more successful means of moving a runner over with a pitcher who bats .000 at the plate (which by definition makes him the worst, since you can't possibly bat any lower), but who bunts well enough to be called upon in a pinch-hit situation to do it.

I would bet you $1000 that if you were able to interview the other 15 NL managers, that at least 12 (80%) would bunt in that situation.

I do love how you cling to your Yost defenses even though the actual result is also so obviously not in your favor.  That's real dedication to your cause.

It is a lot easier to discuss what SHOULD HAVE been done after one of the other options is unsuccessful. That is the definition of second guessing.

I AM NOT DEFENDING YOST (shouting intended)! I am just trying to be fair and to point out that not all of these things are as obvious as you make them out to be. If Suppan bunts right to one of the charging infielders and Hardy is thrown out at third (a real possibility), you have significantly lowered your chances of scoring.

 

So does a popup, groundout, or strikeout, which doesn't move the runner over.  So, you tell me which one is the better play?

If you honestly believe that swinging away with a zero hitter is the better play, you don't know very much about baseball.

By calling Suppan a "zero hitter" you are showing that you aren't willing to even be rational when you are trying to make a point. Yes, he has not had a hit this year in 13 AB's coming into this game, but I think his .175 career average in 325 AB's over 14 seasons is an indication that he can get his bat on the ball. His career strikeout/AB ratio isn't a whole lot worse than several of the "hitters" in the Brewers everyday lineup.

If I don't know anything about baseball don't bother responding to me anymore. I think some people here would agree that I do know some things about baseball, and that I am a lot more objective than you are.

0 for 13 = .000.  .000 is, be definition "zero".  Therefore there is nothing irrational about it.  In fact, it is completely rational and objective when using that piece of factual information to judge the decision whether to bunt or swing away in that situation.

It was, in fact, the "low percentage move" that wee see as a recurring theme of these discussions.

You are just digging your hole deeper. The relevant factor in making a decision is the probability of what will happen in this at bat, not what he has done in his last 13 AB's. Nobody can predict the future (or maybe you can), but what someone has done in 375 career AB's is a better predictor than what he has done in the last 13. I don't need statistics to tell me that Jeff Suppan is a lot better at handling a bat than Ben Sheets, even though Sheets has a hit this year and Suppan doesn't.

In those circumsatnces, with the infield in the position it was in and a slow runner on second, getting the runner to third was "low percentage" no matter what you tried. A lot of managers in that situation would have the pitcher/hitter show bunt and then have him slap at the ball with the infield charging. It may not be the most conventional move or the highest percentage move. But it is a reasonable choice.

robertj44:

wisblue:

crichar3:

robertj44:

Gotta side with Brewhawk on this one. Just plain stupid not to attempt a bunt on that AB with Suppan.

 

 

I expected a bunt there, too.  But the reason I didn't think it was "stupid" not to was because of the way the defense was playing and because Suppan is pitcher who at least knows which end of the bat to hold--it wasn't beyond possibility that he could have punched one through an infield expecting a bunt.

So I can't say it was "stupid"; the move wasn't outrageously without foundation.  It was a legitimate alternative, and the fact I wouldn't have gone that way doesn't make it wrong. 

That's exactly the point. If you had Sheets at the plate (a legitimately horrible hitter even though he has a hit this year) and a fast runner like Weeks or Hart at second, your decision making is significantly different.

I wonder if some of the people who are saying it was "stupid" are watching on TV and could see how close Pujols was to the plate on those pitches.

I watched the game and most of the posters during the live action did not like the move, me included. Stupid is always a wrong way to go with word usage. My bad!

Part of the problem is that the posters during the live action are weighing in after the move has failed. If Suppan had chopped a ball over Pujols head, everyone would have thought it was brilliant. Just like Hall scoring in the 8th was good aggressive baserunning because he scored and it would have taken a perfect throw to get him. Do you have any doubt that if the throw had been perfect, and Hall would have been thrown out, people here would have roasted Yost, Sveum, and Hall for that?

Its hard to put in the comment before the at-bat is finished. You are limited to a minute or less at times to get it in there. If Suppan had chopped it over Puljos' head, most of us would have said "whew, that was lucky", not "Ned is a genius". I suppose we needed someone saying "Suppan isn't squared for a bunt. This is stupid."  Of course, sometimes they don't square up until the last second, so how in the heck are we expected to get our post in at that exact time?

I doubt that many would have roasted Yost if Hall were out at the plate. They were at the bottom of the lineup, and the play was lucky to get a hit anyway. The Hart blunder steal already told us they were being aggressive regardless.

Too much focus is being put on whether Yost is getting a fair shake. But overall, most of us bend over backwards to give him the "benefit of the doubt". Do we all have to put our criticisms and predictions in beforehand in order to be valid?