Einsteinhood:

Not only are you clueless, you're a friggin jackass too.

Try reading peoples posts before you insult them, jerkoff. 

Einsteinhood:

Analogkid:

Why Einey,

 

No, because you add no value to this board.

Again, moderator please take care of this poster.

modmod:

Einsteinhood:

Analogkid:

Why Einey,

 

No, because you add no value to this board.

Again, moderator please take care of this poster.

Huh...two posts, both asking a moderator to censor Einstein.

How brave.

uwmfan:

brewguru:

I'm not a Ned Yost fan, but I don't believe he's ever beat his chest and said, "Did you see that move I made there? That won us the game!"

 

I'm not a Yost hater. I pointed out that he used "we" when defending the Mota move. I said I wondered if he used "I" when a move worked out. Then I found this. After Gagne's last save Yost said:"I think that he just needed a day to get away from closing...You have to understand that he's our closer. I've never been one to protect myself. Sure, I could not pitch him so that nobody thinks that I am stupid for pitching him, but I've never done that. I believe and I trust my guys. Eric Gagne is my closer and I wanted him back out there." (MJS, May 13, 2008)

Notice how there is no "we decided to pitch him" etc. This doesn't "prove" anything of course. But it is interesting.

 Just to get back to the discussion at hand. It is curious in this example that Yost used "we" when discussing a move that didn't work and "I" when discussing one that did. Of course, the writer selects the quotes so excluded  other comments. But we'll see if this pattern holds.

Einsteinhood:

Analogkid:

Why Einey,

Because I do not bow down to your every word.  I know you have been neutral on Ned, after 5+ years of the jackass, trends have been developed.

No, because you add no value to this board. All you have ever done is whine and complain about stuff. I have never once seen you bring up a novel idea,  try to think through something or bring in interesting outside information. You just let your crazy little id. run wild on here and it makes you just like the other people who do that.

But where you pissed me off here was that you insulted me for doing something I wasn't doing and acted like a friggin *** doing it. So now I'm going to tell you off, because you (and the others like you) piss me off and you make it difficult to come here and try to TALK ABOUT THE TEAM, because you have to wade through all your entitled, whiny crapulence to do it. I know it's my choice to come here and that I obviously don't have to do it, but there are many times when I can just ignore and pass over your inane crap. But you people are really too freaking much to stand sometimes. Right now is one of those times.

Einey, usually whenever anybody does suggest something novel or tries to come up with a different idea, you respond in your snarky tone and remind them how stupid they are and how much better you are than them.

ghostdog_on_the_beach:

wisblue:

Yost's explanation establishes why I have a fundamental difference of opinion about how he does things. For a manager to make a move based on an arbitrary statistic (the definition of a save) and unyielding adherence to "roles" makes no sense to me. To me, that's an excuse to avoid making more difficult decisions based on the overall situation. I never liked the "defined roles" approach because, even when it works, you tend to use up more pitchers than may be necessary to finish a game, and you put yourself in a bind if the game goes into extra innings. It makes even less sense when the pitchers involved do not have established track records of being effective in their roles. (I know Mota has been reasonably effective this year, but his career history does not inspire that much confidence.)

Yost says that he would have sent Villanueva back if the Brewers had led by 4 instead of 3 runs. In other words, he had no concerns about Villanueva being too tired or overused. Hindsight or not, I (and almost everyone else) would have kept CV in after a quick and effective 7th inning. Doing that not only leaves an effective pitcher in the game, it gives you more flexibility for the rest of the game. Yost could have had Mota and Shouse on alert to begin loosening up in case they were needed and gone to them if the situation dictated it (such as, if Villanueva put two men on). A relief pitcher who is loosening up should be able to get warmed up in the amount of time it takes a manager to stroll to the mound, stall a little, and then signal for the change. I can assure you that if Villanueva had given up two singles to lead off the 8th, Shouse had given up a double to Helton, and the Brewers had gone on to lose, I wouldn't be blaming Yost for the result.

Yost is also not getting criticized enough for not putting Cameron in for defense after Kapler batted in the seventh. In another article, Yost says that a defender like Cameron is valuable in the large outfield at Coors Park. So, even though he realizes that, and has the perfect situation to take advantage of it, he either forgets to make the move or decides not to.

Many posters here clearly bash Yost whetyher he deserves it or not. But in this case he clearly deserves it.

A manager is not a genius when he makes dumb moves that happen to work out (like benching 4 regular starters on the same day) or an idiot when he makes proper moves that don't work out. But, in this game, he made a couple of moves that did not maximize the team's chances of winning, and he deserves to be criticized for that. So do the players who failed to perform, like Mota and Shouse, and Dillon and Weeks who couldn't deliver a runner from third with less than 2 out, and weeks who couldn't make a play in the field that should have been made.

The bottom line, is that this game highlighted a number of those weaknesses that make the Brewers a team that will struggle to play .500 ball.

I amtrying to understand your points here... (1) This doesn't say anything about Yost. This is the book now in BB, if it is a save situation you run the set up guy out there followed by the closer if they are rested. Joe Torre, Tony LaRussa and a bevy of other managers would have done the exact thing. (2) This team is much better then you have been ranting about since day one. At the end of the year and they are well above 0.500 I hope we here from you. You have been missed during the winning streak (except your constant reminders of how wonderful the Cubs are...).

First, please direct me to any posts I have made about how wonderful the Cubs are.

Second, if other managers would do the same stupid things Yost does, that's beside the point. My point is that I disagree with the blind adherence to defined roles and gave my reasons why. When that adherence is based on the arbitrary definition of a "save" I really have problems with it.

Third, I was here as much during the winning streak as I usually am. I just don't camp out here as much as some others do. You will definitely be hearing from me in the unlikely eevent that the Brewers finish "well above .500", which I would consider to be about 86-76. I started the season expecting the Brewers to finish about .500 and lowered that expectation to about 75 wins after Gallardo's injury. I will admit that I was overly pessimistic if the Brewers prove to be "much better" than that.