Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Our Errors are Mistakes: The Media Forum' started by MyDaughterLovesTomGordon, Jan 19, 2009.
Cora will be #11; Cafardo will complain about the team's use of analytics.
I think they’ll all be equal 30th for employing shifts.
I assume Bochy will be the new darling of the old-school writers since he "knows how to win" but is going to be forced to do things like employ an opener and not leave his starters in too long by the new GM.
That reminds me--I need to go back at the last few RTM columns to see which managers got fired during the respective seasons.
In no particular order:
Maddon, Bochy, Showalter are top 3 Bottom three are Dave Roberts (28), Scott Servais, Andy Green
Hinch, Francona, Bochy, Maddon are Top 4. Buck is 6, Roberts up to 9. Cora is 26, followed by Boone, Kapler, Dave Martinez and Mickey Callaway
Francona, Maddon, Bochy, Terry Collins, Show at the top, Farrell 8th followed by Roberts. 28 is Snitker, then Andy Green, and Torey Lovullo on the bottom
Bochy. Showalter, Maddon, Leyland, Francona on top. Sveum, Porter, Mike Redmond, and Weiss at the bottom
2009: http://archive.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2009/05/31/the_managerial_ranks/ (done in season)
LaRussa, Francona, Leyland, Bobby Cox and Torre on top. Cecil Cooper, Manny Acta, Wakamatsu, HINCH, and Jim Tracy last
He won’t be too flattering of Boone but he will make plenty of excuses. Cora’s will be full of hedges, caveats and backhanded compliments because he’s only done it one year.
Boone's grandfather was a scout for the Red Sox, Aaron Boone is going to get a GREAT ranking.
Baseball has taken a turn for the worse in casting aside scouts
I don’t even know where to begin. Getting angry about a 64-year-old guy losing a job? I mean, he was in baseball for 41 years. Yes, it sucks to be fired but at the same time, he’s 64.
I know what Cafardo is doing, us old timers have to stick together, but god, he’s so ham handed. One of his reasons for scouts not getting fired is because they tell good stories. Seriously? That was the best you could come up with?
And one of his examples, Aaron Sele, didn’t get fired; he quit. I wish that there was away to know whether all scouts are getting shitcanned or just the old ones.
Because I have a suspicion that it’s the latter and Cafardo is trying to raise awareness for his buddies.
Agreed, it's really a pathetic article.
So, first, Nick's "point" might be that people who don't evolve might lose their jobs? Thanks for that insight, Nick, can't believe Harvard Business School hasn't brought you aboard yet.
Second, as JMOH notes, you don't even have evidence that there is a trend here. 30-40 scouts get laid off each year (you think---that's not a real number either)? How does that compare to the past, is it more, less or the same? Who knows?
Third, some scouts are getting re-hired. What makes these scouts different than those who are not? How does, say, the number of scout hirings compare to the number of analytics hirings each year? Who knows?
Fourth, the job of the GM is to win games. Do we have some way to assess whether GMs shifting resources to analytics (if that is happening---which you don't analyze or have data to assess) is it working and a good strategy or failing? Who knows?
So to summarize: we don't know that anything has changed, and if it has we don't know whether the change is benefitting teams or not. And regardless of the answer, it must be the fault of teams that individual scouts don't adapt.
If the segment were titled "here's some friends of mine who should have jobs" it would at least be more honest about the objectives.
The STORIES! That’s why we pay these guys!
He has a point though. Without these scouts, who will tell these great baseball stories? Do you expect there to be some sort of professional writing guy who works for like a newspaper or something to tell great, interesting baseball stories?
How would that even work? Would this writing guy have to do research and talk to people and do a bunch of work just to tell these stories? Sounds crazy. Only baseball scouts have the time to do that.
If these "sportswriters" did exist, they would surely spend their time using their column to punish people they don't like and promote people they do like. They'd also have to devote time to ranking the managers and inventing possible trades. No time for telling great baseball stories.
It’s mind blowing that his headline today was “Scouts with plenty to offer being cast aside.” Does anyone edit his stuff and check if he’s writing the same exact thing every week? There are thousands of writers who would kill for Carfardo’s position and he’s the laziest, most ineffective writer they could have for that position.
Did the teams cut the scouts' tongue out when they fired them? Are they no longer allowed to tell stories?
I like the symmetry of the writing:
And then, about 6 or 7 paragraphs later:
Tough but fair policy.
And the two he brings up both resigned (not re-signed), so I'm not sure of the whole concept of them being cast off here
He's the James Shields of his era!
To play out Nick's argument which is stupid to begin with, at least James Shields had to pitch against both the Yankees and Red Sox his whole career. Mussina being on the Yankees himself the last 9 years of his career probably faced a composite divisional schedule under .500, so the out-of-division schedule season by season were more difficult for him on balance.
Nicky sure loves the New York Yankees.
They've won the Off Season! They drip with classy! Yay!!
In truth, the MFYs have done well. I'm still shaking my head over the Sox not signing Ottavino. But let's hold off on sending Cashman to Canton over this. (I know, wrong sport, but Parcells authored that line so there.)
If re-signing JA Happ counts as "solidifying" the rotation and re-signing Britton counts as "improving" their bullpen, then sure the Yankees have won the offseason. Of course, the biggest names on the free agent market remain available so declaring a winner of the off-season now is like declaring a World Series winner in August.
Weren't both those guys Yankees last season? Staying the same is improving?
Solidifying is the new improving
Fixed that for you, Nick.
Who and/or what is Nick referring to as the game's "general hierarchy"?:
I hate the Yankees and Cafardo as much as anyone, but he does mention Paxton and Ottavino as well
Yes, it was especially enjoyable when Don Denkinger's blown call changed the probable result of a World Series, when Jim Joyce's blown call took a perfect game away from Armando Galarraga, when Jeffrey Maier helped the Yankees to stay alive in the playoffs, etc. The 2018 ALDS would have been much better had Angel Hernandez' blown calls actually been allowed to stand. Those times were much better than using instant replay to get calls right. Let's go back to letting umpires actually make mistakes which they just aren't allowed to do any more.
And if he'd just listed those two, his point would have held and been better writing. Any other writer and I'd think he was padding his word count, but he truly thought he was bolstering his case by including those guys.
I for one know that I watched the nfccg a week ago and came out of it thinking that I would enjoy other sports more if they too had season killing blown calls with no way to fix them.
Don't forget his finger wagging at the Yanks for allowing someone to wear #0. How exactly is 0 less classy than 91 or 99 (Alfredo Aceves and, of course, Aaron Judge), numbers hardly worn by anyone else in baseball?
How do you leave off Jim Bowden, Nick's "a National League General Manager" for years?
A couple years ago my wife and I were watching baseball, something she nearly never does. I mentioned "oh cool, this guy is wearing number zero." She asked why that was cool, and I started in on how when I was younger, sportscasters/ writers would occasionally tsk, tsk it as being somehow unserious or disrespectful. She was incredulous and genuinely confused, and I very quickly thought "wait, am I remembering this right?" I thought, ok, that can't be true, I must have misunderstood something and had it concretize as reality in my youth. Then I forgot about it.
So I was right. The "Total Ninny from 30 Years Ago" routine continues, unabated.
Jersey numbers as a measure of class. Unreal.
Sure but you can’t say “The Yankees have improved their bullpen by signing a guy and resigning a guy they had last year.” Shocking I know, but it’s bad writing from Nick with the added bonus of being offseason Yankee genuflecting.
Last Sunday's column begins:
And that's it. Not one word more. ... He mentions the possibility (roughly two weeks from now) of every major league player refusing to report to spring training -- but believes, apparently, that typing the words is enough "thinking" about that issue.
Credit where credit is due, Cafardo’s piece about why steroids matter in MLB but not the NFL was decent. Though he should have corrected Costas when he said Manny was suspended three times for PEDs, I believe it was only two.
He quotes Costas as saying Manny failed three drug tests, not that he was suspended three times. I assume he's counting the 2003 test that was supposed to be anonymous as the third failure, in addition to the two that resulted in suspensions.
That piece of Cafardo's column was good, like you say. It's sort of in his wheelhouse as the discussion is more subjective and opinion-driven and it touches on the two sports he's covered the most so he should have some perspective on it.
Nick? Change? Change is for toll booths, pay phones and laundromats:
That reads like he's in favor of the change.
He would be in favor of sending infants without batting helmets up to hit against blindfolded pitchers as long as it "forced teams to junk their analytic models." The latter is what hasn't changed.
...and his DH advocacy put in another shameless plug for Joey Batts, who no National League GM in their right mind would hire as their DH should the rule change go through.
Aren't the days of picking up old professional hitters and slotting them into the DH slot, kind of over? The Angels do it with Pujols, but he has a jillion dollar contract and they have to put him somewhere. I guess that the Blue Jays employed Morales, the Indians had Encarnacion and the Tigers had Victor Martinez, but going through Baseball-Reference and seeing which DHs got the most ABs per team, the vast majority were players under 32-years-old.
This idea that the DHs are Orlando Cepeda, Don Baylor or Dave Parker types in the twilight of their careers is not realistic.
If only the Sox had junked their analytic model that prevents them from signing good hitters over 30 they might have signed someone last off-season like, say JD Martinez, who turned 30 during 2017. Instead, Martinez was limited to teams whose scouts sent him mimeograph copies of their teams' ability to execute sacrifice bunts, and the Red Sox struggled offensively all year.
THE NEW MANAGER RANKINGS ARE HERE!
THE NEW MANAGER RANKINGS ARE HERE!
THE NEW MANAGER RANKINGS ARE HERE!
He read your post and punk'd you
From the manager rankings:
I agree pretty solidly with 1-7, including the rationales. Gets pretty murky after that.
Paraphrasing Nick, "I give a lot of weight to managers that win the World Series because it's a really hard thing to do."
2. Bob Melvin. Number of World Series? Zero. BUT he has three manager of the year awards and is 20 games over .500. So that's what he gives a lot of weight to.
Edit: I can't go through this entire thing because it's the ramblings of an insane man. But I have to admit I think that him putting Boone as 11 is probably a troll on this thread. Hi Wilbur! Hope things are going well!
Obviously I have no idea if Nick reads this thread, but why would he? Would you read something that 98% of the time is critical of you? Who needs the aggravation?
This was generally one of his less egregious manager rankings. Cora at one is a little edgy but a smart pick. Lovullo probably should have been higher based on his early performance, the job he did filling in in Boston and the fact that his roster in AZ has been picked apart since.
Boone is ridiculous tho – his ranking should have been below 16 (ie, bottom half) and rationale should have been “His team performed well and he is generally well liked – however his in game decisions are suspect.” And if Nick wanted to do his “feeling” shit he could’ve said something like, “There’s a feeling that perhaps Boone is a bit over his head but time will tell.”
If Nick wanted to do this seriously he’d include pros and cons for each manager. Instead it’s all gut reactions and hagiography. But science isn’t really his thing I guess.
Answers to your questions:
The rankings themselves are utterly meaningless. It is an impossible thing to quantify anyway, and he has never stated any criteria or guidelines to measure against. That's the point of the mockery--it is an inane and meaningless "list" with contradictory, idiotic, and confusing commentary accompanying it.