PDA

View Full Version : Brewers about to fire Ned Yost?



Unassisted
05-10-2008, 12:08 PM
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=748877


Yost might be toast if he can't light a fire under team

Posted: May 8, 2008

Finally, someone spoke up in a Milwaukee Brewers clubhouse that is far too reticent for public consumption, lest that kind of posture be taken for complacency.

Give Ryan Braun credit for leadership Tuesday night when he candidly told our Anthony Witrado in Miami, "It's frustrating; it's beyond frustrating. I'm (bleeping) sick of saying it's early. You can only say that for so long. You can only say, 'It's early,' you can only say, 'It's going to be all right' for so long.

"It's time for us to start swinging the bats like we're capable of."
It would've been nice to hear that from the manager, but that is not Ned Yost's style. Instead, Yost continues with the Kevin Bacon refrain from "Animal House" that "all is well," when everyone knows that all is not well.

And now, with the division-leading St. Louis Cardinals in town, it's probably getting close to what everyone also knew would be the doomsday scenario for the manager: An underachieving start combined with being sufficiently behind in the NL Central before May had a proper chance to commence.

If the Brewers don't snap out of it soon, Mark Attanasio could make the move with justifiable cause. The owner has been remarkably loyal to his holdover employees, but Attanasio is a businessman first, and a pragmatic one at that. He is banking on a 3 million house at Miller Park based on what were realistic expectations for this team.

Also, Attanasio is probably aware of a poll in this newspaper indicating 75% of the respondents believe a managerial change would benefit the Brewers. No good owner would ever use a poll to make such a decision, but it's clear that Yost is unpopular with a lot of paying customers and has been for some time.

Some of that may have been because Yost is perceived as defiantly stubborn when it comes to admitting his mistakes. Mistakes happen often in a game that teeters on a fine balance between gut instinct and calculated decision, evident by the fact that managers who push the wrong buttons 40% of the time are in the Hall of Fame, but they are forgiven less when the manager is seen as intractable.

Yet personality should not be a part of this. The guy in the other dugout tonight can be testy at times and no one really cares because Tony La Russa wins. The Cardinals got better when no one expected it of them. It only matters whether the Brewers improved in a year when they should be contending.

Except for defensively, they have not so far. Braun, Prince Fielder, Rickie Weeks and the rest of the young stars must be held accountable for their performances; what Yost should be evaluated on is whether he has placed them in positions to succeed with a lineup that rarely changes.

It's not Yost's fault that Yovani Gallardo got hurt or that he wasn't given a solid preseason Plan B when Derrick Turnbow went over the edge and Eric Gagné started losing it. But it is incumbent on Yost to pull this team out of its funk.

Nostalgic fans screaming for Yost's head need to be reminded that the magic Harvey Kuenn bullet that catapulted the '82 Brewers cannot be realistically fired again. Clearly, though, if Yost cannot inspire an underachieving team to achieve again, someone else will get the chance.
Maybe this thing turns around with Yost, but it had better do so quickly for his sake. As Braun refreshingly established, the excuses have grown beyond stale.

LoganBuck
05-10-2008, 04:41 PM
See the Brewers are doing it. Join the club, Fire Dusty!

Unassisted
05-19-2008, 12:08 PM
http://blogs.jsonline.com/brewers/archive/2008/05/19/blogger-claims-yost-to-be-fired.aspx


Blogger claims Yost to be fired
By Tom Haudricourt
Monday, May 19 2008, 04:57 AM

Boston - Somebody named the "Badger Blogger," who I am told does mainly political postings (I must admit I'm not familiar with the site) posted a blog late Sunday night claiming manager Ned Yost will be relieved of his duties on the team's off day in Pittsburgh today.

The blog said it could not "independently confirm" the information but said sources close to the Brewers' organization said Yost would be fired today and replaced by bench coach Ted Simmons.

The blog said "in the midst of another horrid road trip and on the heels of a sweep by the Boston Red Sox," the decision had been made to replace Yost. It says switching to Simmons "will provide the direction and leadership this team has been so badly lacking."

Well, first off, I have no idea how much credibility this blogger would have regarding the Brewers. It's easy to say "sources close to the Brewers' organization" said it would happen, but are those sources credible?

Owner Mark Attanasio and general manager Doug Melvin were on hand for the the three-game series against Boston, during which the Brewers did not play well. It's possible that Attanasio didn't like what he saw and decided a change was necessary but he has given no indication recently he was leaning in that direction.

Whether those sources told "Badger Blogger" Yost was going to be canned after Ryan Braun spoke out about the team not expecting to win, I don't know. Braun's comments, which I posted on my blog last night and have in the JS this morning certainly were condemning of the team's approach to that series. And, by inference, it might be considered an indictment about the way Yost had the team prepared to play.

I don't know if a 20-24 record, five straight losses and a last-place standing before Memorial Day is enough to get Yost punted. I would think Braun's comments would be more damning, and possibly the straw that broke the camel's back.

What makes me a bit suspicious of that posting is saying that Simmons would replace Yost. I've never considered Simmons the primary candidate to be the team's interim manager. I've always thought Dale Sveum would be a more logical choice because he's been with the organization longer and has previous managerial experience in Pittsburgh's farm system.

Simmons has been with the club only a couple of months. Yes, he is considered a very smart baseball man, but I'm not sure he'd even want to manage. I broached the subject with him in spring training and he said he never would have taken the job as bench coach if Yost perceived him as a threat.

So, I have no idea if there's any legitimacy whatsoever to "Badger Blogger's" post about Yost. A lot of stuff gets tossed onto the Internet with no validity whatsoever.

But, I thought I'd throw the info out there for your consumption. The only thing that makes me think there could be an iota of truth to it is what Braun had to say after the game. He certainly did Yost no favors with his comments, which he obviously felt needed to be said. No other player made such comments but Braun just signed an eight-year, $45 million contract and obviously has some clubhouse power.

Falls City Beer
05-19-2008, 12:18 PM
See the Brewers are doing it. Join the club, Fire Dusty!

Apparently Dusty got out of the way enough for this juggernaut to tick off a 6-game win streak. ;)

Tommyjohn25
05-19-2008, 12:54 PM
Apparently Dusty got out of the way enough for this juggernaut to tick off a 6-game win streak. ;)

Yeah...you know the rules. They have been winning "in spite" of Dusty. It's only Dustys fault when they lose. :D

Tommyjohn25
05-19-2008, 01:09 PM
Something else interesting that probably doesn't help Yost. Apparently Ryan Braun was quoted after the Sox series as saying that the team didn't "expect" to win, they gave 100% effort, but they didn't "expect" to beat Boston. Ouch...

smith288
05-19-2008, 01:12 PM
Yeah...you know the rules. They have been winning "in spite" of Dusty. It's only Dustys fault when they lose. :D
Bunting Dunn would have given us a loss no doubt...so luckily Dunn didnt. THat's a direct effect of his stupid ways.

Tommyjohn25
05-19-2008, 01:14 PM
Bunting Dunn would have given us a loss no doubt...so luckily Dunn didnt. THat's a direct effect of his stupid ways.

There is no way to prove that whatsoever.

smith288
05-19-2008, 01:19 PM
There is no way to prove that whatsoever.
No I cant prove that. But yea...Bako has a long and storied history of winning games so lets bunt Dunn for the chance that Bako can win it.

I guess I cant say no doubt in a technical sense, but lets not fool ourselves into thinking Baker had the right idea for victory, k?

lollipopcurve
05-19-2008, 01:21 PM
I guess I cant say no doubt in a technical sense, but lets not fool ourselves into thinking Baker had the right idea for victory, k?

Not even after he took the bunt sign off on the 2-1 count?

Falls City Beer
05-19-2008, 01:23 PM
My guess is that Kobayashi doesn't lay in a flat, down-the-pipe fastball to Dunn without Dunn showing the bunt earlier in the count.

smith288
05-19-2008, 01:30 PM
Not even after he took the bunt sign off on the 2-1 count?
Makes pretty good sense in a hitter's count... but what does it matter? If Dunn got the bunt down, we would have had Bako as our hope. Dusty wanted Dunn to freaking bunt in the bottom of the ninth inning with 2 on and down by 2. We can only THANK Dunn for being such a poor executioner of the bunt.

There should be a specific rule written that say "Dunn shalt not bunt". I cant believe im having to defend my position here.

westofyou
05-19-2008, 01:32 PM
The Reds announcers were convinced the bunt was the right move, the Indians announcers laughed, they were shocked... after Dunn hit the ball the Indians announcer said... And THAT'S why Adam Dunn doesn't bunt.

Me?

I blamed the Dodgers.

Dusty Baker saced bunted more as a Dodger in two years than he did in his whole prior career.

In 1978 he sac Bunted 4 times, each time was part of the inning that won the game.

Thus I blame Tommy Lasorda.... BTW Hank Aaron had exactly 3 sac bunts in his career after 1956, the year after that he first topped 40 HR"s



Los Angeles Dodgers 3, Chicago Cubs 2

Day

Game Played on Monday, July 24, 1978 (N) at Dodger Stadium

DODGERS 9TH: Garvey doubled to left; Baker out on a sacrifice
bunt (pitcher to second) [Garvey to third]; Ferguson was hit by
a pitch; LACY BATTED FOR MARTINEZ; Lacy was walked intentionally
[Ferguson to second]; MOTA BATTED FOR FORSTER; Mota popped to
center; Lopes singled to center [Garvey scored, Ferguson to
third, Lacy to second]; 1 R, 2 H, 0 E, 3 LOB. Cubs 2, Dodgers 3.

Los Angeles Dodgers 4, New York Mets 3

Day

Game Played on Friday, September 1, 1978 (N) at Dodger Stadium

DODGERS 9TH: Cey singled to left; DAVALILLO RAN FOR CEY; Baker
out on a sacrifice bunt (catcher to second) [Davalillo to
second]; Ferguson singled to left [Davalillo scored, Ferguson to
second (error by Stearns)]; OATES RAN FOR FERGUSON; Russell was
walked intentionally; LACY BATTED FOR HOUGH; Lacy struck out;
Lopes walked [Oates to third, Russell to second]; North forced
Lopes (shortstop to second); 1 R, 2 H, 1 E, 3 LOB. Mets 3,
Dodgers 3.

Los Angeles Dodgers 5, Atlanta Braves 1

Day

Game Played on Thursday, July 6, 1978 (D) at Dodger Stadium

DODGERS 2ND: Lopes singled to left; North walked [Lopes to
second]; BORBON REPLACED NORMAN (PITCHING); Baker out on a
sacrifice bunt (pitcher to second) [Lopes to third, North to
second]; Garvey was walked intentionally; Cey hit a sacrifice
fly to left [Lopes scored]; Ferguson singled to center [North
scored, Garvey to third]; Lacy singled to center [Garvey scored,
Ferguson to second]; Russell singled to shortstop [Ferguson to
third, Lacy to second]; Rhoden struck out; 3 R, 4 H, 0 E, 3 LOB.
Reds 0, Dodgers 6.


DODGERS 11TH: Garvey singled to left; Baker out on a sacrifice
bunt (pitcher to first) [Garvey to second]; Monday was walked
intentionally; Oates reached on an error by Royster [Garvey to
third, Monday to second, Oates to first]; Hough flied out to
right; Lopes homered (unearned) [Garvey scored (unearned),
Monday scored (unearned), Oates scored (unearned)]; 4 R (0 ER),
2 H, 1 E, 0 LOB. Braves 1, Dodgers 5.

Tommyjohn25
05-19-2008, 01:36 PM
No I cant prove that. But yea...Bako has a long and storied history of winning games so lets bunt Dunn for the chance that Bako can win it.

I guess I cant say no doubt in a technical sense, but lets not fool ourselves into thinking Baker had the right idea for victory, k?


Not even after he took the bunt sign off on the 2-1 count?


My guess is that Kobayashi doesn't lay in a flat, down-the-pipe fastball to Dunn without Dunn showing the bunt earlier in the count.


Yes, and yes. The count was 2-1...a VERY good hitters count. Perfect time to take the bunt off. Also agree with FCB, that is a very real possibility. As far as the bunt sign being on in the 1st place? I do not disagree with it at all. They were at home, two men on and none out, down by one, it was a percentage play that almost all managers would choose IMO. You can argue that Bako doesn't have a "long and storied history" of winning games. But you know who does? Dusty Baker.

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 01:38 PM
I must say, I've never seen a manager so married to extremely basic tenets, completely failing to utilize them with any sophistication.

Dusty has been everything I've expected him to be -- and that makes me sad. I cannot imagine a manager who does more to misuse the talent he's been given, both in utilization and tactically. In the universe of potential managers, is this really the top of the heap? And Davey Johnson doesn't have a job?

2-1 is a great hitting count. And if Dunn had been able to get down the bunt, he never would've seen it. And yet Dusty, along with the announcers would have been lauding what a great out it was.

Dunn is a fly ball hitter who often walks or strikeouts. When he does hit the ball on the ground, he tends to pull it, not ideal for the defense to turn two. Basically, no Reds hitter is less likely to hit in to a double play than is Adam Dunn. Likewise, no Reds hitter is more likely to get an extra base hit than is Adam Dunn -- and remember, a walk is like a sacrifice without making an out in that situation. There's basically no justification for asking Dunn to do bunt in that situation.

Dusty (and others) rail on the stathead crown for being slaves to data and not understanding the game. And yet time after time, Dusty blindly follows some imagined rules even when all of the evidence, scouting and stats, suggests the rule should not apply in this case. He follows a CYA strategy to the very end. It's like he formed a few basic strategy tenents early on as part of his playing career (which he cites frequently) and now just keeps applying them over and over, with no though of greater context or subtlety.

I know he's got his strengths as a manager, but the guy just isn't an independent thinker. If you want him in the organization as a great "baseball man", I have no problem with that. I'm sure he's an asset in many ways. But he has done absolutely nothing to show that he has any particular skill at using his available talent to win baseball games. The Reds have won recently in spite of his decisions, not because of them.

westofyou
05-19-2008, 01:40 PM
I cannot imagine a manager who does more to misuse the talent he's been given, both in utilization and tactically.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/pics/don_zimmer_autograph.jpg

smith288
05-19-2008, 01:47 PM
I must say, I've never seen a manager so married to extremely basic tenets, completely failing to utilize them with any sophistication.

Dusty has been everything I've expected him to be -- and that makes me sad. I cannot imagine a manager who does more to misuse the talent he's been given, both in utilization and tactically. In the universe of potential managers, is this really the top of the heap? And Davey Johnson doesn't have a job?

2-1 is a great hitting count. And if Dunn had been able to get down the bunt, he never would've seen it. And yet Dusty, along with the announcers would have been lauding what a great out it was.

Dunn is a fly ball hitter who often walks or strikeouts. When he does hit the ball on the ground, he tends to pull it, not ideal for the defense to turn two. Basically, no Reds hitter is less likely to hit in to a double play than is Adam Dunn. Likewise, no Reds hitter is more likely to get an extra base hit than is Adam Dunn -- and remember, a walk is like a sacrifice without making an out in that situation. There's basically no justification for asking Dunn to do bunt in that situation.

Dusty (and others) rail on the stathead crown for being slaves to data and not understanding the game. And yet time after time, Dusty blindly follows some imagined rules even when all of the evidence, scouting and stats, suggests the rule should not apply in this case. He follows a CYA strategy to the very end. I know he's got his strengths as a manager, but the guy just isn't an independent thinker. If you want him in your organization, I have no problem with that. I'm sure he's an asset. But he has done absolutely nothing to show that he has any particular skill at using his available talent to win baseball games. The Reds have won recently in spite of his decisions, not because of them.
Dont think Davey wants a mgr job with the MLB. He likes to teach guys, not groom their egos.

Bravo post.

smith288
05-19-2008, 01:52 PM
This is funny

on the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dusty_Baker#Criticism) of Dusty


Criticism

Baker, an old-school baseball traditionalist, was scrutinized for the Cubs’ declining productivity. To sabermetricians, many of his methods were puzzling, such as his tendency to put players with a poor on-base percentage, such as Neifi Perez and Corey Patterson, at or near the top of his lineups. Baker rejected (and still rejects) the importance of on-base percentage, arguing that extra baserunners simply "clog up the bases" unless they can run well. [2] This flies in the face of statistically-oriented baseball strategy and has made Baker a frequent target for sabermetric critics. Additionally, many fans and commentators blamed his consistent tendency to overuse pitchers for damaging the careers of Wood and particularly Prior.[3] Baker was widely known as a "player's manager," attempting to mollify his athletes rather than focusing on team output above personal interests, and favoring his favorite players regardless of their statistical output.[citation needed]

They want a citation for the fact he plays low OBP players at the top of the lineup and favors certain players??? Try Patterson and Bako (though Bako has been productive)

Falls City Beer
05-19-2008, 01:53 PM
I must say, I've never seen a manager so married to extremely basic tenets, completely failing to utilize them with any sophistication.

Dusty has been everything I've expected him to be -- and that makes me sad. I cannot imagine a manager who does more to misuse the talent he's been given, both in utilization and tactically. In the universe of potential managers, is this really the top of the heap? And Davey Johnson doesn't have a job?

Johnson, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't want a job.

And outside of the Patterson placement at leadoff and the placement of Griffey in the 3 slot, I think Dusty's been fine. Not overused pitchers, made most of the right pitching changes, gotten guys a decent amount of playing time. I even think it's been kind of refreshing to see him show so much confidence in Votto as to bat him in the four slot fairly often (or more often of late).

bucksfan2
05-19-2008, 02:00 PM
I must say, I've never seen a manager so married to extremely basic tenets, completely failing to utilize them with any sophistication.

Dusty has been everything I've expected him to be -- and that makes me sad. I cannot imagine a manager who does more to misuse the talent he's been given, both in utilization and tactically. In the universe of potential managers, is this really the top of the heap? And Davey Johnson doesn't have a job?

2-1 is a great hitting count. And if Dunn had been able to get down the bunt, he never would've seen it. And yet Dusty, along with the announcers would have been lauding what a great out it was.

Dunn is a fly ball hitter who often walks or strikeouts. When he does hit the ball on the ground, he tends to pull it, not ideal for the defense to turn two. Basically, no Reds hitter is less likely to hit in to a double play than is Adam Dunn. Likewise, no Reds hitter is more likely to get an extra base hit than is Adam Dunn -- and remember, a walk is like a sacrifice without making an out in that situation. There's basically no justification for asking Dunn to do bunt in that situation.

Dusty (and others) rail on the stathead crown for being slaves to data and not understanding the game. And yet time after time, Dusty blindly follows some imagined rules even when all of the evidence, scouting and stats, suggests the rule should not apply in this case. He follows a CYA strategy to the very end. I know he's got his strengths as a manager, but the guy just isn't an independent thinker. If you want him in your organization, I have no problem with that. I'm sure he's an asset. But he has done absolutely nothing to show that he has any particular skill at using his available talent to win baseball games. The Reds have won recently in spite of his decisions, not because of them.

I thought the bunt call was the right call at the time. Down 1 with runners on 1st and 2nd you object is to score atleast one run to send the game into extras. I am curious as to what is a better run scoring situation. Runners on 1st and 2nd with none out, or runners on 2nd and 3rd with one out? A walk does serve as a sacrifice and the only downside of the walk would be a force our remains at any base. A pop up or strike out which are also very likely in that situation are very detrimental to the situation at hand.

As for the statement that had Dunn sacrificed the reds would have lost you can not make that arguement. We can not go back and simulate that exact situation. Does Dusty pinch hit? The infield probably have been pulled in but do the indians walk the 8 hitter to set up a force at any base? What does Bako do?

You can rail the reds announcers and laud the indians announcers all you want but the AL teams don't see a whole lot of sacrificing. My buddy was with me at the game and was confused when the indians were forced to double switch on sunday. They just don't see that kind of baseball.

westofyou
05-19-2008, 02:03 PM
You can rail the reds announcers and laud the indians announcers all you want but the AL teams don't see a whole lot of sacrificing.

Listen to it, it's funny..... I understand the difference, but it was darn funny.

FWIW I get the idea, but the man asked to execute it was not the tool... It was akin to hammering a nail with a fish.

smith288
05-19-2008, 02:13 PM
Listen to it, it's funny..... I understand the difference, but it was darn funny.

FWIW I get the idea, but the man asked to execute it was not the tool... It was akin to hammering a nail with a fish.
There's this

http://www.orangebeachfishing.com/images/030506Return/FishPhotosRicky%20155.jpg

Falls City Beer
05-19-2008, 02:23 PM
Listen to it, it's funny..... I understand the difference, but it was darn funny.

FWIW I get the idea, but the man asked to execute it was not the tool... It was akin to hammering a nail with a fish.

It wasn't the right call, I agree. But I prefer to keep my eyes on the big picture when it comes to managers, not pretend I'm choking on a grain of sand.

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 02:25 PM
Firstly, the problem is as much with the fact that Dusty was asking Dunn to bunt as it was that he called for the bunt at all.

Here's a run expectency table


RE 99-02 0 1 2
Empty 0.555 0.297 0.117
1st 0.953 0.573 0.251
2nd 1.189 0.725 0.344
3rd 1.482 0.983 0.387
1st_2nd 1.573 0.971 0.466
1st_3rd 1.904 1.243 0.538
2nd_3rd 2.052 1.467 0.634
Loaded 2.417 1.65 0.815

A successful bunt would, generically speaking, decrease the run expectancy of the inning. But that's really the wrong comparison. The bunt decision shouldn't be based on pre Dunn-AB to post Dunn-AB. Rather it should be based on the average run-expectancy values of possible outcomes if he attempts to bunt versus the average run-expectancy values of possible outcomes if he swings away.

The run expectancy of the bunt attempt is actually lower than 1.467 because there's a decent chance the bunt won't succeed and a pretty small chance of something better happening.

But what really causes trouble is the comparison point. 1.573 is more or less irrelevant. Dunn is going to do something which changes that 1.573 figure. We need to know the value of the non-bunt something. I won't pretend to go about doing that. I'd be very interested in seeing what that figure might look like. Given the possible outcomes of Dunn swinging away, what is the weighted mean run expectancy of those, based on their likelihood of occurring?

A few other notes:
- We're not interested in the average number of runs scored. We're interested in either the chances of scoring 1+ (tie or better) and/or scoring 2+ runs (win). The Reds didn't need a monster inning. That possible run values greater than 2 are irrelevant in this case might swing the logic in favor of the sacrifice.
- Run expectancy tables don't account for the quality of the batters coming up next, nor the specific abilities of the player at the plate.
- A bunt is not a guarantee of 2nd & 3rd, 1 out scenario.
- Aside from the hit or walk (a 35-40% of drastically increasing your chances of winning), there are non-bunt outs which accomplish the same as the bunt. I think these are often discounted as possible outcomes.

Generally speaking, that situation was not a bad situation for a bunt. Bottom line, you really do want to maximize your chances of scoring at least 1 run in that inning. But where I think the logic goes wrong is that managers compare the wrong things. I think the tendency is for managers to inflate the chances of a successful bunt and inflate the chances of a less desirable outcome if the player were to swing away. Because the manager is most scared of that 0 run outcome, the idea of supposedly guaranteeing a positive outcome becomes very attractive. (and while I would hope this doesn't have influence, it also lets the manager off the hook as it comes down to players executing "basic skills" such as bunting and directional hitting to get that run in)

A bunt, generically speaking, might not be a bad idea in that situation. But by my judgment, and honestly I should do the math, Dusty failed to adjust the probable outcomes based on the skill of the guy at the plate.

Falls City Beer
05-19-2008, 02:32 PM
My guess is that Dusty feared a K by Dunn, plain and simple. And it's not exactly outlandish to expect Adam to whiff.

bucksfan2
05-19-2008, 02:45 PM
A bunt, generically speaking, might not be a bad idea in that situation. But by my judgment, and honestly I should do the math, Dusty failed to adjust the probable outcomes based on the skill of the guy at the plate.

Actually Dunn claims to be a pretty good bunter.

blumj
05-19-2008, 02:48 PM
You can rail the reds announcers and laud the indians announcers all you want but the AL teams don't see a whole lot of sacrificing. My buddy was with me at the game and was confused when the indians were forced to double switch on sunday. They just don't see that kind of baseball.
If you take pitchers out of the mix, the Indians have sac bunted more than the Reds have this season.

smith288
05-19-2008, 02:50 PM
Actually Dunn claims to be a pretty good bunter.
He might be a good bunter, but Dunn can hit 400 ft bunts. Which as we know, would win the game.

If he whiffs (which is more common than a dbl play at least for him), then let Bako have his try. Which is what Dusty seemed content in doing anyways.

Im not debating the bunt in this part of the game and situation. Im contesting the idiocy of having your mammoth hitter bunt.

dabvu2498
05-19-2008, 02:53 PM
Actually Dunn claims to be a pretty good bunter.

FWIW, Dusty said in the pregame show yesterday that Dunn had come to him promoting his bunting ability recently.

And, http://winexp.walkoffbalk.com/expectancy/search says a successful bunt there increases win expectancy in that situation from 51.4% to 55.1%. Of course, a 3 run homerun increases it to 100%. A strikeout would have taken it to 36.4%.

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 02:56 PM
My guess is that Dusty feared a K by Dunn, plain and simple. And it's not exactly outlandish to expect Adam to whiff.

So if Dunn doesn't get to swing the bat in what has to be considered a great spot for an "RBI guy" then what does Dusty want Dunn to do? He's not allowed to set the table for anybody else and when put in a position to drive runs in and when the game, Dusty wanted Dunn to take an action which would have deferred that responsibility to somebody else less capable.

I don't see how you can put a reasonable spin on that. Dusty clearly has no intention of taking advantage of Dunn's OBP (based on his batting order) and now he only wants Dunn to use his power potential when the benefit is small (read: nobody on base). It's a horrible misuse of talent and there's no way around it.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-19-2008, 03:09 PM
Yesterday, when Volquez pitched to Casey Blake with two outs, a runner on second, first base open, and Cliff Lee on deck I almost popped a blood vessel in my head. I had to pound a beer, exit the house, and mow the lawn. And I mowed it angrily. I owned that yard.

Here we are in a game that features the two major league leaders in ERA in Volquez and Lee. A game that is currently 1-0, Reds. A game where small-ball, micro-managing, and playing for that one run is certainly justifiable. A game in which the same situation occurred in the second inning and they intentionally walked Blake, (after Volquez had pitched around him to ball three).

So here is a chance for Dusty to do what he does best and cover his butt (again) by going by the book (and this situation calls for it), but he doesn't. Maybe he let Volquez pitch around Blake to see if Blake would go fishing, but he shouldn't have messed around with it, especially when Volquez was wild as all get out.

So let's have your bopper that has averaged 42 HR, 100 RBI, and a .920 OPS over his last four years lay down a bunt so "Falling back to earth at super-sonic speed" Paul Bako can attempt to save the day, but yet have Edinson Volquez pitch to the current RBI leader of the Tribe in a 1-0 game when Cliff Lee is on deck. This isn't by the book managing. It's inconsistent Jerry Narron-esque by-the-gut managing.

Luckily for the Reds, Lee wasn't himself (or at least wasn't the freak that sold his soul for 7 starts) and although I missed a great finish at least my yard was mowed and mowed well.

mbgrayson
05-19-2008, 03:13 PM
In the TV pregame yesterday with Chris Welch, Dusty said that he wanted the bunt to move the runners up and to avoid a double-play. Welch sort of questioned whether Dunn could put down a bunt, and Dusty bristled.

Problem with this plan is that Dunn is about 4 times more likely to homer than hit into a double play. He only has two DPs this year so far......and now has 10 HRs.

As RMR noted above, there are many more possibilities. Certainly a strikeout is a real possibility.

But given that Dunn was hot, and is even hotter now, I can't imagine bunting him in that situation. Dunn has always been a streaky hitter, and once he gets going, he is GOOD. Dusty should know this, and adjust his strategy accordingly.

Falls City Beer
05-19-2008, 03:16 PM
It's a horrible misuse of talent and there's no way around it.

Dunn will rise in the order when he starts OPSing more in line with his career, but I have no problem batting a .750 OPS hitter in the 7 spot. Though that certainly doesn't account for Dusty's near-psychotic tic of putting Griffey in the 3 spot.

I can't defend every move Dusty makes, but I don't think a manager could possibly misuse talent to the degree that's being claimed on this board and still win 100+ games as he did in 2003. If you believe the cant on this site, most would have a difficult time seeing the man tie his shoes.

Falls City Beer
05-19-2008, 03:24 PM
I do think it's weird that Francona bats guys like Pedroia (.750 OPS) and Ellsbury (.750 OPS) first and second (or second and first), while the king of OB (.400 +) with decent speed Youkilis "rots" in the 6 or 7 slot most nights.

Fire Terry!!!

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 03:29 PM
Dunn will rise in the order when he starts OPSing more in line with his career, but I have no problem batting a .750 OPS hitter in the 7 spot. Though that certainly doesn't account for Dusty's near-psychotic tic of putting Griffey in the 3 spot.

I can't defend every move Dusty makes, but I don't think a manager could possibly misuse talent to the degree that's being claimed on this board and still win 100+ games as he did in 2003. If you believe the cant on this site, most would have a difficult time seeing the man tie his shoes.

Guys' skill simply doesn't change that much. Yes, Dunn's OPS has lagged so far this season, but the underlying skill is the same. Practically speaking, that means Dunn is more likely to OPS .900 moving forward than he is .750. Waiting for him to "heat up" before moving him is simply a way to waste a few great games.

Patterson, Hairston/Janish, Griffey, and Phillips' place in the lineup shows me that Dusty is much more concerned about a lineup that fits his aesthetic of what a lineup should look like than about maximize the production he gets from it. Dunn doesn't look like a productive player by Dusty's definition. High power, low batting average = buried at the bottom of the order.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-19-2008, 03:30 PM
Dunn will rise in the order when he starts OPSing more in line with his career, but I have no problem batting a .750 OPS hitter in the 7 spot.

Dunn has an OPS of .920 over the last four full seasons and it's currently at.845. Hardly the disaster season many have claimed. I've watched many of his AB's this year and he has hit the ball hard right at people a bunch of times. His walk rate is where it always is and his K rate is down.

On a sidenote, his defense has gotten better. Although I have always said that if his future is not at 1B, he needs to be in the AL (DH), he has done pretty decent for himself as a leftfielder, where traditionally the worst outfielder is placed.

WMR
05-19-2008, 03:32 PM
Yesterday, when Volquez pitched to Casey Blake with two outs, a runner on second, first base open, and Cliff Lee on deck I almost popped a blood vessel in my head. I had to pound a beer, exit the house, and mow the lawn. And I mowed it angrily. I owned that yard.

Here we are in a game that features the two major league leaders in ERA in Volquez and Lee. A game that is currently 1-0, Reds. A game where small-ball, micro-managing, and playing for that one run is certainly justifiable. A game in which the same situation occurred in the second inning and they intentionally walked Blake, (after Volquez had pitched around him to ball three).

So here is a chance for Dusty to do what he does best and cover his butt (again) by going by the book (and this situation calls for it), but he doesn't. Maybe he let Volquez pitch around Blake to see if Blake would go fishing, but he shouldn't have messed around with it, especially when Volquez was wild as all get out.

So let's have your bopper that has averaged 42 HR, 100 RBI, and a .920 OPS over his last four years lay down a bunt so "Falling back to earth at super-sonic speed" Paul Bako can attempt to save the day, but yet have Edinson Volquez pitch to the current RBI leader of the Tribe in a 1-0 game when Cliff Lee is on deck. This isn't by the book managing. It's inconsistent Jerry Narron-esque by-the-gut managing.

Luckily for the Reds, Lee wasn't himself (or at least wasn't the freak that sold his soul for 7 starts) and although I missed a great finish at least my yard was mowed and mowed well.

Hahahahahaha.

It was simply dreadful managing.

WMR
05-19-2008, 03:34 PM
Dunn will rise in the order when he starts OPSing more in line with his career, but I have no problem batting a .750 OPS hitter in the 7 spot. Though that certainly doesn't account for Dusty's near-psychotic tic of putting Griffey in the 3 spot.

I can't defend every move Dusty makes, but I don't think a manager could possibly misuse talent to the degree that's being claimed on this board and still win 100+ games as he did in 2003. If you believe the cant on this site, most would have a difficult time seeing the man tie his shoes.

Dunn should bat 2nd. Period. And he should stay there, no matter what his small sample size OPS might suggest. OBP never sleeps.

bucksfan2
05-19-2008, 03:45 PM
Dunn should bat 2nd. Period. And he should stay there, no matter what his small sample size OPS might suggest. OBP never sleeps.

Actually it seems as if Dunn has picked up his hitting after he was dropped to the 7 hole.

blumj
05-19-2008, 03:45 PM
I do think it's weird that Francona bats guys like Pedroia (.750 OPS) and Ellsbury (.750 OPS) first and second (or second and first), while the king of OB (.400 +) with decent speed Youkilis "rots" in the 6 or 7 slot most nights.

Fire Terry!!!

Youkilis never, ever bats 7th. That's JD Drew's spot(.389 OBP). :confused:

BuckeyeRedleg
05-19-2008, 03:47 PM
Actually it seems as if Dunn has picked up his hitting after he was dropped to the 7 hole.

I'm sure that is nothing but a coincidence.

He didn't need to be placed in the 7 hole to hit 166 HR's and OPS .920 over the past 4 years.

fearofpopvol1
05-19-2008, 03:50 PM
The one thing I will give Dusty some credit for is he has by far and away managed the bullpen better than any Reds manager in recent memory. The personnel is slightly better this year than it has been in the past, but he runs a way better ship there. I think he has handled the starting pitchers well (for the most part) too.

Chip R
05-19-2008, 03:50 PM
So, nothing yet on Yost being fired.

osuceltic
05-19-2008, 03:58 PM
Guys' skill simply doesn't change that much. Yes, Dunn's OPS has lagged so far this season, but the underlying skill is the same. Practically speaking, that means Dunn is more likely to OPS .900 moving forward than he is .750. Waiting for him to "heat up" before moving him is simply a way to waste a few great games.
Like these last few? Imagine what our record might be if Dunn had been hitting in the two hole these last six games ...

blumj
05-19-2008, 03:58 PM
So, nothing yet on Yost being fired.
I just watched every inning of that team for 3 games without seeing a single above average pitcher or more than maybe 1 or 2 average or better defensive players take the field for them. If they think the manager is their biggest problem, they're not thinking.

osuceltic
05-19-2008, 04:04 PM
Actually it seems as if Dunn has picked up his hitting after he was dropped to the 7 hole.

Nah, that would mean someone would have to give Dusty credit for getting Dunn jump-started. It will never happen.

It's reminiscent of the exclamations of "I TOLD YOU HE NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN SENT TO AAA" after Encarnacion came back up and improved his play. As if the time in AAA didn't have an impact.

There is more than one way to skin a cat, although you'd never know it to read a few posters. Managing personalities, knowing when to take pressure off of a guy, knowing when he has had some bad batting practice sessions, knowing when his kids are sick or his wife has kicked him to the couch ... it would be so much more simple if you could just look at a guy's career OPS and not have to think about all that other stuff.

Chip R
05-19-2008, 04:06 PM
I just watched every inning of that team for 3 games without seeing a single above average pitcher or more than maybe 1 or 2 average or better defensive players take the field for them. If they think the manager is their biggest problem, they're not thinking.


I haven't watched them too much - except when they played the Reds - and I think Yost is a convenient scapegoat. Their bullpen is lousy - especially on the back end. They lost Cordero and Turnbow was released and Gagne has been the gas can he was last year in BOS. Doesn't help them that Gallardo was and is out. Yost was supposed to be a genius last year and now he's a bum? MIL has to be a little more patient.

lollipopcurve
05-19-2008, 04:13 PM
Nah, that would mean someone would have to give Dusty credit for getting Dunn jump-started. It will never happen.

It's reminiscent of the exclamations of "I TOLD YOU HE NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN SENT TO AAA" after Encarnacion came back up and improved his play. As if the time in AAA didn't have an impact.

There is more than one way to skin a cat, although you'd never know it to read a few posters. Managing personalities, knowing when to take pressure off of a guy, knowing when he has had some bad batting practice sessions, knowing when his kids are sick or his wife has kicked him to the couch ... it would be so much more simple if you could just look at a guy's career OPS and not have to think about all that other stuff.

Amen to that.

MWM
05-19-2008, 04:19 PM
Come on! Are people really suggesting it was the drop to the 7th hole that got him hitting? That's silly. It has nothing to do with Dusty either way.

Chip R
05-19-2008, 04:21 PM
Come on! Are people really suggesting it was the drop to the 7th hole that got him hitting? That's silly. It has nothing to do with Dusty either way.


Of course it's silly. It was the return of the game threads that did it.

bucksfan2
05-19-2008, 04:23 PM
Nah, that would mean someone would have to give Dusty credit for getting Dunn jump-started. It will never happen.

It's reminiscent of the exclamations of "I TOLD YOU HE NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN SENT TO AAA" after Encarnacion came back up and improved his play. As if the time in AAA didn't have an impact.

There is more than one way to skin a cat, although you'd never know it to read a few posters. Managing personalities, knowing when to take pressure off of a guy, knowing when he has had some bad batting practice sessions, knowing when his kids are sick or his wife has kicked him to the couch ... it would be so much more simple if you could just look at a guy's career OPS and not have to think about all that other stuff.

Nonsense! You mean those players on the field are human?

I think too often the human nature of the game is disregarded and stats are looked at instead. Too often we get caught up in obp, ops, etc but fail to look at the basic facts that can lead to a particular player struggling or a particular player being hot. Look at Votto from the beginning of the season to know. Brantley said a few weeks ago that Votto looks very "hitterish" right now. There is a world of difference in just the way he approaches each pitch from the beginning of the season to now. Adam Dunn is the same way. He looks more comfortable in the box right now. He is seing dead red right now. Who knows why that happens but to disregard a move down in the lineup and purley coincidental disregards the human aspect of the game.

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 04:26 PM
Nah, that would mean someone would have to give Dusty credit for getting Dunn jump-started. It will never happen.

"Cold" guys heat up. "Hot" guys cool down. It's called regression to the mean. Dunn was going to start hitting whether he batted 7th, 2nd, or 9th. Applying a specific cause to it is grasping at straws.

The question is how well were the Reds able to take advantage of his recovery to the more-or-less expected level of total production?

By dropping Dunn in the order, Dusty made sure that when Dunn did regress to his mean, he did it over more games (fewer PA) while providing less value (by virtue of wasted OBP).

Barring a specific mandate to change the way in which they player plays the game (say, forcing batters to take the first pitch, making relievers throw in 4 straight games, or asking your best slugger to lay down a bunt), managers shouldn't be credited with either the success or failure of the players. Dusty doesn't deserve any credit for Dunn's hot streak any more than he deserves credit for his struggles to start the year. Dunn is going to perform roughly how he's going to perform. It's up to the manager to utilize his players to maximize his return.

That Dunn got dropped to 7th but Griffey continues to bat 3rd and Patterson continues to lead off (when playing) says to me that it isn't and wasn't about matching utilization to observed performance and it wasn't about jump starting Dunn (what's the logic there anyways?) It's about Dusty's philosophy on how to maximize the value of certain skill sets. When and if Dunn starts batting somewhere 2-4 on a regular basis I'll believe otherwise. Dunn is hitting .313/.450/1.063 over his last 20 PA. If you believe in the predictive value of streaks, one would have to imagine Dunn should be batting higher than 6th or 7th tonight. We'll see...

I appreciate that players go through periods when they really are playing better or worse -- where their temporary skills are different for any number of reasons including baseball and non-baseball reasons. But outside of an identified issue which can and should be managed/addressed/fixed, we can't predict these sorts of fluctuations. The smart approach is the guy is going to do what he's done a lot of in the past, both for better and worse. Absent that observed problem (the thing itself, not a symptom of it which might just be a random variation), it takes a lot more than a bad few weeks to convince me in a real change of skill. You wouldn't bat Paul Bako 3rd or 4th based on his work this year, why bat Dunn 7th?

To that point, I'd love to have a better understand of what Ned Yost actually is or is not doing that is leading to the Brewer's problems. What will they have another manager do differently which will result in JJ Hardy, Rickie Weeks, and Bill Hall start hitting, help Fielder find his power, make Gallarado healthy, etc? What is Yost doing wrong? The idea that it's a motivation problem strikes me as incredibly laughable. Of course, just watch, a new manager will come in, guys will revert to doing what they're supposed to do (more or less) and the new manager will get credited for turning the ship around -- with all kinds of explanations by both organization and players about feeling "revitalized" and whatnot. The capacity for people to ascribe meaning and specific explanation where they really have no idea knows no bounds.

MWM
05-19-2008, 04:29 PM
I think too often the human nature of the game is disregarded and stats are looked at instead.

My goodness, must we go down this path on every thread? No one is disregardging the human element, and no one thinks it's all about the stats. I wish we could put that one to rest once and for all.

Highlifeman21
05-19-2008, 04:29 PM
I guess the Brewers brass might think that replacing Ned Yost might return a better yield on that lineup?

Mistake on their part if it happens, IMO.

I'd be much happier with Yost than The Dusty.

top6
05-19-2008, 04:33 PM
There is more than one way to skin a cat, although you'd never know it to read a few posters. Managing personalities, knowing when to take pressure off of a guy, knowing when he has had some bad batting practice sessions, knowing when his kids are sick or his wife has kicked him to the couch ... it would be so much more simple if you could just look at a guy's career OPS and not have to think about all that other stuff.

So your argument is that genius Dusty dropped Dunn to 7th in the order and took the pressure off of him, thus causing Dunn to get hot?

This doesn't really explain why Dunn performed well in high-pressure situations over the weekend - particularly in the bottom of the 9th on Saturday (where there was even more pressure on him since he lost a strike when same genius manager told him to bunt).

WMR
05-19-2008, 04:34 PM
I'd be much happier with Yost than The Dusty.

kaldaniels
05-19-2008, 04:38 PM
Come on! Are people really suggesting it was the drop to the 7th hole that got him hitting? That's silly. It has nothing to do with Dusty either way.

Not saying it happened in Dunn's case, but it would be naive to think that a slight such as being dropped in the batting order can't possibly make a difference. In some cases I'm sure that has gotten a player turned around.

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 04:47 PM
Not saying it happened in Dunn's case, but it would be naive to think that a slight such as being dropped in the batting order can't possibly make a difference. In some cases I'm sure that has gotten a player turned around.

These two statements are very different:

1. Being dropped to 7th had no effect on Dunn's rebound.
2. Dunn's rebound is not due to being dropped to 7th.

The former suggests a known 0% effect contribution to his turn around. The latter suggests that there is a different primary cause.

Being dropped to 7th probably had some unknowable affect on Dunn's approach. However, his rebound was entirely predictable based on the fact that as guys accumulate plate appearances, their performances tend to regress towards their career norms.

Unless there is some causal chain being suggested and it's effect proven, we're best off assuming that it's the known reality of regression. Dunn's performance improved not because being moved to 7th fixed anything, but that Dunn was extremely likely to improve his performance regardless of where he was in the lineup.

That doesn't mean that being moved to 7th played no role whatsoever. But suggestion that it is the primary cause, or even a significant one, simply lacks evidence. What did being dropped to 7th cause Dunn to do differently? Do we have evidence he actually changed something in his approach? Do we have evidence that said change was due to being dropped to 7th?

Assuming causation when observing correlation is usually a bad idea. It leads us to reach conclusions based on what we choose to observe rather than what the evidence at hand suggests.

bucksfan2
05-19-2008, 04:56 PM
These two statements are very different:

1. Being dropped to 7th had no effect on Dunn's rebound.
2. Dunn's rebound is not due to being dropped to 7th.

The former suggests a known 0% effect contribution to his turn around. The latter suggests that there is a different primary cause.

Being dropped to 7th probably had some unknowable affect on Dunn's approach. However, his rebound was entirely predictable based on the fact that as guys accumulate plate appearances, their performances tend to regress towards their career norms.

Unless there is some causal chain being suggested and it's effect proven, we're best off assuming that it's the known reality of regression. Dunn's performance improved not because being moved to 7th fixed anything, but that Dunn was extremely likely to improve his performance regardless of where he was in the lineup.

That doesn't mean that being moved to 7th played no role whatsoever. But suggestion that it is the primary cause, or even a significant one, simply lacks evidence. What did being dropped to 7th cause Dunn to do differently? Do we have evidence he actually changed something in his approach? Do we have evidence that said change was due to being dropped to 7th?

Assuming causation when observing correlation is usually a bad idea. It leads us to reach conclusions based on what we choose to observe rather than what the evidence at hand suggests.

RMR I just can't believe that Dunn's hot streak coincides with a regression to a career norm. It could be an adjustment he made. It could be he is picking up the ball better. Heck it could be he is just more confident at the plate. Sure over the course of a season the peaks and valleys will result in numbers that may mimick career norms or may deviate from the career averages.

I get the feeling with a guy like Dunn he could go on a month long hot streak and us fans half way through the streak would be waiting for him to struggle again.

lollipopcurve
05-19-2008, 05:00 PM
To that point, I'd love to have a better understand of what Ned Yost actually is or is not doing that is leading to the Brewer's problems. What will they have another manager do differently which will result in JJ Hardy, Rickie Weeks, and Bill Hall start hitting, help Fielder find his power, make Gallarado healthy, etc? What is Yost doing wrong? The idea that it's a motivation problem strikes me as incredibly laughable. Of course, just watch, a new manager will come in, guys will revert to doing what they're supposed to do (more or less) and the new manager will get credited for turning the ship around -- with all kinds of explanations by both organization and players about feeling "revitalized" and whatnot. The capacity for people to ascribe meaning and specific explanation where they really have no idea knows no bounds.

Sometimes people need change.

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 05:04 PM
RMR I just can't believe that Dunn's hot streak coincides with a regression to a career norm. It could be an adjustment he made. It could be he is picking up the ball better. Heck it could be he is just more confident at the plate. Sure over the course of a season the peaks and valleys will result in numbers that may mimick career norms or may deviate from the career averages.

I get the feeling with a guy like Dunn he could go on a month long hot streak and us fans half way through the streak would be waiting for him to struggle again.

Again, absent proof, I think we're better off saying "we don't know" than ascribing it to the most convenient explanation. I realize that variance doesn't equal randomness. Dunn's struggles likely had some real explanation in addition to mere random variance of balls not falling in. But to jump to the conclusion that being dropped in the order was the cause is more a reaffirmation of an illusion of control than any conclusion founded in fact.

Let's get an actual understand of what he changed and at least a few plausible explanations before jumping to a conclusion. I fear that by jumping to conclusions, we don't actually learn anything. Next time he slumps, we'll just be encouraged to drop him to 7th again.

It's that sort of shallow thinking that leads to things to the kind of overly simplistic approach Dusty espouses. It makes you think that CF and SS should bat 1-2 and the lefties should only bat back to back in an absolute emergency. Those are simplistic conclusions borne out of complex circumstances which don't always apply. But absent a deeper understanding of the mechanics of what's going on, all one has is that conclusion he jumped to last time.

kaldaniels
05-19-2008, 05:08 PM
"Cold" guys heat up. "Hot" guys cool down. It's called regression to the mean. Dunn was going to start hitting whether he batted 7th, 2nd, or 9th. Applying a specific cause to it is grasping at straws.

The question is how well were the Reds able to take advantage of his recovery to the more-or-less expected level of total production?

By dropping Dunn in the order, Dusty made sure that when Dunn did regress to his mean, he did it over more games (fewer PA) while providing less value (by virtue of wasted OBP).

Barring a specific mandate to change the way in which they player plays the game (say, forcing batters to take the first pitch, making relievers throw in 4 straight games, or asking your best slugger to lay down a bunt), managers shouldn't be credited with either the success or failure of the players. Dusty doesn't deserve any credit for Dunn's hot streak any more than he deserves credit for his struggles to start the year. Dunn is going to perform roughly how he's going to perform. It's up to the manager to utilize his players to maximize his return.

That Dunn got dropped to 7th but Griffey continues to bat 3rd and Patterson continues to lead off (when playing) says to me that it isn't and wasn't about matching utilization to observed performance and it wasn't about jump starting Dunn (what's the logic there anyways?) It's about Dusty's philosophy on how to maximize the value of certain skill sets. When and if Dunn starts batting somewhere 2-4 on a regular basis I'll believe otherwise. Dunn is hitting .313/.450/1.063 over his last 20 PA. If you believe in the predictive value of streaks, one would have to imagine Dunn should be batting higher than 6th or 7th tonight. We'll see...

I appreciate that players go through periods when they really are playing better or worse -- where their temporary skills are different for any number of reasons including baseball and non-baseball reasons. But outside of an identified issue which can and should be managed/addressed/fixed, we can't predict these sorts of fluctuations. The smart approach is the guy is going to do what he's done a lot of in the past, both for better and worse. Absent that observed problem (the thing itself, not a symptom of it which might just be a random variation), it takes a lot more than a bad few weeks to convince me in a real change of skill. You wouldn't bat Paul Bako 3rd or 4th based on his work this year, why bat Dunn 7th?

To that point, I'd love to have a better understand of what Ned Yost actually is or is not doing that is leading to the Brewer's problems. What will they have another manager do differently which will result in JJ Hardy, Rickie Weeks, and Bill Hall start hitting, help Fielder find his power, make Gallarado healthy, etc? What is Yost doing wrong? The idea that it's a motivation problem strikes me as incredibly laughable. Of course, just watch, a new manager will come in, guys will revert to doing what they're supposed to do (more or less) and the new manager will get credited for turning the ship around -- with all kinds of explanations by both organization and players about feeling "revitalized" and whatnot. The capacity for people to ascribe meaning and specific explanation where they really have no idea knows no bounds.

I can't believe Dusty is being knocked for dropping Dunn in the order during a slump due to that reason. Based on that logic all slumpers should move up in the order so they get more AB's when they will regress, and all hot hitters should be dropped so when they regress they will get less AB's.

I know that is taking it to the extreme but c'mon people. Dunn was slumping and got dropped in the order. Thats baseball. I fully expect him to be moved back up very soon.

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 05:10 PM
Sometimes people need change.

Sometimes people need change because they've decided to need it. Sometimes people think they need change when what they really need is time. But if you don't have a good way for telling the difference, I imagine you'd be encouraged to make the change -- that way you ensure you get both.

I guess asking to justify a person's firing based on his actual actions is just too much to ask.

Hoosier Red
05-19-2008, 05:10 PM
I echo Lollipop's comment.

I think the change for the sake of change can be ascribed. If Adam Dunn believes its because he batted 7th, bat him 7th until the streak ends.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-19-2008, 05:13 PM
I guess only Adam Dunn can be dropped in the order while slumping, while Griffey continually hits 3rd.

Further proof that the manager is inconsistent in his philosophy.

kaldaniels
05-19-2008, 05:16 PM
I guess only Adam Dunn can be dropped in the order while slumping, while Griffey continually hits 3rd.

Further proof that the manager is inconsistent in his philosophy.

I don't agree with it. But I would accept the fact that the politics of baseball don't allow you to drop a HOF in the order or bench him as easy as you would an All-Star even. I wish Dusty would do it now, but sadly Jr. does pull a little more weight when it comes to being moved in the lineup.

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 05:27 PM
I can't believe Dusty is being knocked for dropping Dunn in the order during a slump due to that reason. Based on that logic all slumpers should move up in the order so they get more AB's when they will regress, and all hot hitters should be dropped so when they regress they will get less AB's.

I know that is taking it to the extreme but c'mon people. Dunn was slumping and got dropped in the order. Thats baseball. I fully expect him to be moved back up very soon.

Not at all. The point is that you can't predict when the guy is going to start (or stop) hitting. What you do know is that over the long haul, hitters hit.

Plate appearances are essentially independent events. People want to make them dependent, but they simply aren't to any degree meriting a big lineup reorder. It's been studied in depth; A slumping guy's likely performance over his next few games is something like 10 or 20 points of OPS lower than his career norms. Does Dunn going from a likely .900 OPS bat to a likely .880 OPS bat justify dropping him to 7th?

(Check out chapter 2 of the "The Book" by Tom Tango)

You've decided that the lineup should be based on recent performance, that's the problem. Batting orders should be crafted based on a player's likely performance moving forward, not recent performance. The problem is the assumption that a player is likely to perform how he's performed in the recent past. Unfortunately, hot and cold streaks simply aren't predictive of future performance. Adam Dunn should bat somewhere 2-4 because Adam Dunn is a very productive offensive player. His last 20, 40, or 100 plate appearances simply don't change that.

Adam Dunn in the midst of a cold steak is likely to perform better moving forward than is Jerry Hairston in the midst of a hot streak. Independent events like plate appearances simply don't have the momentum some people want to give them.

It's frustrating to admit that we don't have as much control/influence as we'd like to think we do. Unfortunately, there's so much time to think in the game of baseball that we often lack the patience to things play out -- especially a manager whose prime medium for showing his effort and desire to win is in his manipulation of the team. It takes a great manager to set up his team for success and then get the heck out of the way.

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 05:29 PM
I echo Lollipop's comment.

I think the change for the sake of change can be ascribed. If Adam Dunn believes its because he batted 7th, bat him 7th until the streak ends.

So his belief that batting 7th is the cause of his success actually is the cause of his success?

Management by placebo. Interesting concept.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-19-2008, 05:31 PM
Let me get this straight.

Dunn is all of a sudden hitting better because he's mad he got moved down in the order?

Is that the thinking behind the support of Baker here? I think that's a pretty large reach.

Chip R
05-19-2008, 05:56 PM
Dunn was moved up to 6th on Sunday. Does that mean that tonight he should hit 5th since he did so well on Sunday?

Highlifeman21
05-19-2008, 05:59 PM
Dunn was moved up to 6th on Sunday. Does that mean that tonight he should hit 5th since he did so well on Sunday?

5th is the highest The Dusty will bat Dunn.

Ned Yost, however, would bat Dunn rightly anywhere between 2nd and 4th. I'm convinced of it.

dabvu2498
05-19-2008, 06:02 PM
5th is the highest The Dusty will bat Dunn.

Ned Yost, however, would bat Dunn rightly anywhere between 2nd and 4th. I'm convinced of it.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN200804070.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN200804170.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN200804200.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN200804210.shtml

Highlifeman21
05-19-2008, 06:08 PM
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN200804070.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN200804170.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN200804200.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN200804210.shtml

I meant 5th in the lineup consistently.

4 instances where Dunn batted cleanup are statistical outliers, nothing more. If we see Dunn bat cleanup in 41 or more games in 2008, then that'll be something else completely.

5th in the lineup consistently is the highest The Dusty will ever bat Dunn, IMO. That's just The Dusty being The Dusty.

WMR
05-19-2008, 06:12 PM
I meant 5th in the lineup consistently.

4 instances where Dunn batted cleanup are statistical outliers, nothing more. If we see Dunn bat cleanup in 41 or more games in 2008, then that'll be something else completely.

5th in the lineup consistently is the highest The Dusty will ever bat Dunn, IMO. That's just The Dusty being The Dusty.

How else is he going to knock in all those RBIs? :rolleyes:

Chip R
05-19-2008, 06:28 PM
I echo Lollipop's comment.

I think the change for the sake of change can be ascribed. If Adam Dunn believes its because he batted 7th, bat him 7th until the streak ends.


I just happened to tape the game on Saturday and afterwards Thom Brennaman and Rick Manning interviewed him. On the topic of batting 7th, here's what was said

TB: "Adam, we were talking during the game about you being dropped down to the 7th hole for the first time in 3 years. For those of us who see you play regularly, it's looked like you're right on the border of getting started. Is that the way you felt?"

AD: "Well, I've felt, I think we've talked before, I've felt really good all spring long and I'm seeing the ball well and my contact point's not there. I'm either out front or late. Hopefully we get that corrected and get out of that 7 hole."

dabvu2498
05-19-2008, 06:33 PM
AD: "Well, I've felt, I think we've talked before, I've felt really good all spring long and I'm seeing the ball well and my contact point's not there. I'm either out front or late. Hopefully we get that corrected and get out of that 7 hole."

In other words, it may not have clicked that he needed to make a mechanical adjustment until he found himself hitting in the 7 hole?

Psychology does matter?

Stunning.

;)

Falls City Beer
05-19-2008, 06:39 PM
In other words, it may not have clicked that he needed to make a mechanical adjustment until he found himself hitting in the 7 hole?

Psychology does matter?

Stunning.

;)

I'm fairly certain that Davey Johnson could have taken the Giants' 2003 team to 108 wins instead of 103--and probably could have gotten the remaining 5 outs for the Cubs to send them to their first WS since the Wilson administration (or whatever).

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 06:56 PM
In other words, it may not have clicked that he needed to make a mechanical adjustment until he found himself hitting in the 7 hole?

Psychology does matter?

Stunning.

;)

AD: "Well, I've felt, I think we've talked before, I've felt really good all spring long and I'm seeing the ball well and my contact point's not there. I'm either out front or late. Hopefully we get that corrected and get out of that 7 hole."

Or maybe he just meant that he's been working on trying to fix it for a while and he hopes he comes out of his slump soon because he doesn't like batting 7th.

But no, you're probably right. Until Dusty dropped him in the order, I'm sure he didn't care, wasn't paying attention, and wasn't working on improving. Yeah, that makes sense. He is a big, dumb, lazy oaf. Luckily our clubhouse genius is getting his butt in gear. Ah... fits my stereotypes so nicely...

Adam Dunn is struggling and working to get out of his slump. Before he was able to do so, Dusty dropped him in the order -- either to minimize the impact of his struggles (based on a belief they would continue) or to shock him in to improvement. Then, at some point, Dunn breaks out of it.

So there are 3 scenarios with a struggling Dunn.

1. Dunn breaks out from his slump before being dropped in the order. Conclusion: No issue, slumps happen.
2. Dunn breaks out from his slump after being dropped in the order. Conclusion: Dusty was smart in dropping him as it clearly caused the rebound and Dunn must've been lazy.
3. Dunn never breaks out from his slump. Dunn is horrible, nothing Dusty could do about it. At least he minimized the damage.

This is the paradigm that gets created. There's no way for the logic of dropping him to be wrong when you use that reflexive logic. Anything Dunn says at this point is like a Rorschach test -- people will read in to it what they want to see.

kaldaniels
05-19-2008, 07:06 PM
Everyone in here is arguing whether Dusty dropped Dunn so Dunn would improve. What about the point that Dunn had a poor OPS when he was moved Dunn....I'd say the move wasn't at all really to help Dunn...just to help the lineup. Dunn's production for one and a half months was hurting the lineup, while Votto had an OPS of over 100 points higher at the time of the lineup move.

Not blaming Dunn for the lack of the Reds sucess...he did contribute to it though till this past week.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-19-2008, 07:11 PM
But it's okay to have more harmful bats (to the lineup) hit 1st and 3rd?

Seems like Dunn is being held to a different standard.

WMR
05-19-2008, 07:13 PM
Don't analyze it too long, Buck, you'll hafta go mow your lawn again.

Highlifeman21
05-19-2008, 07:15 PM
Don't analyze it too long, Buck, you'll hafta go mow your lawn again.

That will end up being one hell of a lawn.

The kinda lawn that ties a neighborhood together, will it not?

WMR
05-19-2008, 07:18 PM
Dude.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-19-2008, 07:50 PM
Like a fairway. I cut it both directions yesterday.

vaticanplum
05-19-2008, 08:05 PM
I say this in complete seriousness: if the Reds do trade Adam Dunn, what on earth will we have to talk about?

The man and the analysis that surrounds him stretch my brain. Some really great points on this thread all around.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-19-2008, 08:13 PM
I say this in complete seriousness: if the Reds do trade Adam Dunn, what on earth will we have to talk about?

The man and the analysis that surrounds him stretch my brain. Some really great points on this thread all around.

Don't worry. If they make the mistake of not bringing him back there will be many of us that remind the board every day (myself included) of his progress and of what a mistake it was. ;)

kaldaniels
05-19-2008, 08:24 PM
Don't worry. If they make the mistake of not bringing him back there will be many of us that remind the board every day (myself included) of his progress and of what a mistake it was. ;)

Does anyone have the domain rights to exredszone.com??? That could bring in some serious ad revenue.

coachw513
05-19-2008, 08:33 PM
I'm sure that is nothing but a coincidence.

He didn't need to be placed in the 7 hole to hit 166 HR's and OPS .920 over the past 4 years.

Not that I disagree, but I will say there have been a number of instances where Dusty's inherent "feel" works...maybe a sense that Dunn was pressing to the point that he needed to move down in the lineup...

Even as I write that I have trouble buying it :rolleyes:...

Outside of Bruce not manning CF from day 1 (and I'm not certain financial motives ensured that, regardless of protestations to the contrary from management) and Griffey's perpetual insertion in the 3-hole, I've been relatively cool with Dusty...he's been very positive and supportive with Votto and EE, even-handed and solid with the pitching staff and has made some positive personnel adjustments (Valentin and Hopper were/are essentially banished, Freel earns his way into the CF job, etc)...

He's an easy target because there are clearly roster issues which manifest themselves into lineup deficiencies (and I hoot at some of the insanity myself), but I will continue to stand on 1 primary judgement: as long as the man doesn't destroy Cueto, Volquez, Bailey, Thompson, et al's arms, then he'll be fine with me...

He was a heck of a manager last week though ;)

kaldaniels
05-19-2008, 09:30 PM
AD batting #5 tonight...the universe is correcting itself.

WMR
05-19-2008, 09:33 PM
Dusty is reverting back to his nominally stupid self rather than completely retarded.

MWM
05-19-2008, 09:59 PM
I say this in complete seriousness: if the Reds do trade Adam Dunn, what on earth will we have to talk about?


That Jay Bruce strikes out too much. :evil:

KronoRed
05-19-2008, 10:38 PM
That Jay Bruce strikes out too much. :evil:

Also he doesn't hit well enough with runners on, and don't get me started on his never running full speed out to right field.:cool:

cincyinco
05-20-2008, 05:30 AM
So.... Did the brewers fire Yost or what?

smith288
05-20-2008, 08:57 AM
So.... Did the brewers fire Yost or what?
Did Dunn come out of his slump by hitting lower in the lineup? Both answers seem unattainable.

Unassisted
05-21-2008, 10:38 AM
http://milwaukee.brewers.mlb.com/content/printer_friendly/mil/y2008/m05/d20/c2736361.jsp


Yost furious over false report
05/20/2008 4:55 PM ET
By Adam McCalvy / MLB.com

PITTSBURGH -- A furious Ned Yost admonished media outlets for feeding what he called "a frenzy" on Monday over an erroneous blog report that he was to be dismissed.

"That's bull," the Brewers' manager told beat reporters before the start of his daily afternoon availability. "That's a joke. That's totally irresponsible. It's a joke to print [stuff] off a blog. You kidding me?"

The Brewers were off on Monday after being swept in an ugly Interleague series in Boston. Sunday's 11-7 setback marked the fifth straight loss overall and the ninth straight road loss for a team that took sole possession of last place in the National League Central for the first time since the end of the 2004 season.

At 20-24, the Brewers entered Tuesday's series opener against the Pirates 7 1/2 games behind the division-leading Cubs.

The Internet post purporting Yost's demise appeared on Sunday night and was a major topic of radio and Internet discussions all day Monday. Brewers general manager Doug Melvin, who did not travel with the team to Pittsburgh, shot down the rumor and himself chided reporters who perpetuated the report.

Catcher Jason Kendall, who has been through two managerial changes with the Pirates and another with Oakland, said that he knew nothing of Monday's whirlwind.

"I think it's ridiculous, but what can you do?" Kendall said. "Something like that is ridiculous ... but there is always going to be somebody [to blame], and the manager is usually the person. That's the way baseball has been forever. Ned has this team doing the right thing, we're just scuffling. We play the game right, and it's not from a lack of effort, we're just in one of those funks. We have to turn it around."

Does Yost fear that questions about his status will distract his team?

"They do a pretty good job [of ignoring it]," he said. "They still are somewhat affected by it a little bit, but not to a great degree. They're pretty smart about it and understand where it comes from.

"The blogs and the radio talk-show guys, it's fun, but they don't have all the information. To sit back and criticize or talk about certain situations when they don't have all the information, that's why it gets hard to sit back and listen or give it much credibility. That somebody doing a blog can start a frenzy over nothing is a joke. I expected more out of those people [who responded to the blog] than what I got. I'll know better next time. ...

"There's no legitimacy there at all, but we put it on the Internet for everybody to see and raise havoc over. It's not fair and it's not right, and you [beat reporters] want to have a working relationship? You start pulling cheap [stuff] like that?"

Adding to Monday's brouhaha were comments made by left fielder Ryan Braun on Sunday afternoon after the Red Sox finished their sweep. According to Braun, the Brewers "didn't expect to win" against the World Series champions.

"I felt like we were competing, and I know everybody tried hard, but it's not about trying hard," Braun said. "You have to go out there and expect to win, and I almost feel like we didn't expect to win any of these games."

There were no arguments from Yost.

"I have no problem with what Ryan said," Yost said on Tuesday. "Everybody has the right to say what they want to say, all right? This is stuff that we preach all the time, about believing in yourself, feeling good about yourself, confident in yourself. These things happen when you go through a tough stretch; you tend to lose a little confidence. One win, two wins puts you right back to where your confidence needs to be.

"They're fighting," he added. "They're trying hard. It's not that they don't expect to win, but they're pedaling as hard as they can and they don't get anywhere. Sometimes you just have to slow down a little but and kick it into a little bit higher gear to get where you need to go."

princeton
05-21-2008, 11:36 AM
Yust Yoking

gonelong
05-21-2008, 01:28 PM
Yust Yoking

Ok, first the "thumbs" thread and now this. You might want to ask Mrs. princeton about the ingredients ithose brownies she bakes. :D

If you ever figure out how those smilies work you are going to be dangerous. :p:

GL

Chip R
05-21-2008, 02:07 PM
I guess I would feel different if I were Yost but I really wouldn't put much stock into what some guy put in his blog. It's got about as much credibility as some guy on the street spouting rumors.

princeton
05-21-2008, 02:22 PM
think of me as a public servant. No sooner do I suggest an alternative career for Thumbs Mesoraco, but he hits a HR and a triple.

(here we go: Bbusst Stubbs needs to hang 'em up.)

Blitz Dorsey
05-21-2008, 03:46 PM
Yed Nost (it sounds better that way) and the Brewers missed their golden opportunity last year. They should have been in the Rockies' shoes as NL champs. However, they didn't even make the playoffs. Losing Cordero has killed their bullpen and there have been ripple effects.