White Sox Interactive Forums
What's The Score?

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > What's The Score?
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 10-02-2019, 12:49 PM
DumpJerry's Avatar
DumpJerry DumpJerry is offline
Tom Feargal Hagen
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The hearts and minds of Sox fans on 10-26-05
Posts: 28,391
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
1) His lineups are beyond stupid.

2) He bunts way too much, to the point of taking the bat out of run producersí hands.

3) He absolutely refuses to adjust when his first choice has proven to be a bad one.

I have zero use for him. He sucks.
You left out one:
4) He is working with developing players and needs to test them under different circumstances to help them develop.

Oh, I'm sorry, did I undermine your points?
__________________


2020....2020.....2020....2020....2020.....
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-02-2019, 12:51 PM
TommyJohn TommyJohn is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,924
Blog Entries: 384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitmen77 View Post
How about Kris Bryant for Eloy and Cease?
If Hahn doesn't do it, then he's stupid, jealous and doesn't want to win!! Why wouldn't he want to deal with our Cubbies to help them win???
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-02-2019, 12:53 PM
TommyJohn TommyJohn is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,924
Blog Entries: 384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
I'm not ignoring Maddon's Tampa Bay record. In his last year at Tampa Bay, he won fewer games than rookie manager Kevin Cash did the year after Maddon left for the Cubs. In Renteria's rookie season as manager, his only season with the Cubs, he won just five fewer games than Maddon did with this year's Cubs team.

Renteria did a better job managing the 2014 Cubs than Maddon did the 2018 or 2019 Cubs relative to the talent. Although the 2018 Cubs, favored by many because of its roster, won 95 games, it fell apart at the end of the season, last the division lead, lost the one-game playoff, lost the one-game wild card and came back in 2019 as an underperforming team that struggled into oblivion in September.

Renteria wasn't a manager who couldn't take the Cubs to the next level. In his rookie manager of a rebuilding team, he improved by seven games over the previous year. The difference in 2015 wasn't Maddon over Renteria, it was Bryant and Lester, Fowler leading off and such, the new players brought in after Renteria left. Maddon wasn't hired because because Renteria wasn't going going to get to the next level. Ozzie Guillen had won his championship in his second year as manager and there is no evidence that the Cubs were anything but happy with Renteria before Maddon became available. Maddon was hired because he was a star.

If Maddon had stayed with the Rays (where he wasn't particularly wanted anymore), the Cubs would have kept Renteria. The Cubs parted ways with Maddon because they don't want him anymore.

The 2014 Cubs were 73-89, not 79-83.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-02-2019, 01:18 PM
Domeshot17 Domeshot17 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Plainfield
Posts: 12,705
Default

Here is where I am on Renteria:

Some guys are improving under him

Some guys are regressing

One pitcher took a huge step forward, but attributed much of that success to working with coaches OUTSIDE our organization

One pitcher took a huge step backward

But I still won't really get over the fact that probably the best GM/decision maker in the game determined he was not the best candidate to lead an up and coming roster to a world series, and was correct in the guy he picked.

We can mock the Cubs all we want, they are our neighborly rivals and its what we do, but if our Rebuild led to 4 straight playoff appearances, 3 straight ALCS and a world series title, not only would it be the best stretch in the last what, 90-100 years of White Sox baseball, but we would claim it a major success.

I don't know that Renteria is the best guy to move us from A-B, let alone A-B-C, but I also know with the way we operate, if he isn't, then Joe McKewing will be the next man up, not someone who has proven anything, because I don't know the last time the Sox hired anyone who had actually proven anything.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-02-2019, 04:48 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 12,659
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DumpJerry View Post
You left out one:
4) He is working with developing players and needs to test them under different circumstances to help them develop.

Oh, I'm sorry, did I undermine your points?
Yeah, because Jon Jay and Yonder Alonso needed to hit cleanup for development purposes. Leury Garcia needed to hit leadoff for development purposes.

You didnít undermine anything at all.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemaster Fred
This is the major leagues so get it how you live and letís fight tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-02-2019, 04:52 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 12,659
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitmen77 View Post
How about Kris Bryant for Eloy and Cease?
Iíll gladly do Kris Bryant for the same exact package that I would pitch to the Royals for Whit Merrifield: Madrigal, one of the AA/AAA outfielders, and one of the recently drafted pitchers.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-02-2019, 05:24 PM
DumpJerry's Avatar
DumpJerry DumpJerry is offline
Tom Feargal Hagen
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The hearts and minds of Sox fans on 10-26-05
Posts: 28,391
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
Yeah, because Jon Jay and Yonder Alonso needed to hit cleanup for development purposes. Leury Garcia needed to hit leadoff for development purposes.

You didnít undermine anything at all.
You completely missed my point, but that is okay. I know you have a point to press no matter what.

Anyway, this highjack needs to end. This thread is about the team up north.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-02-2019, 05:24 PM
DumpJerry's Avatar
DumpJerry DumpJerry is offline
Tom Feargal Hagen
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The hearts and minds of Sox fans on 10-26-05
Posts: 28,391
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
Iíll gladly do Kris Bryant for the same exact package that I would pitch to the Royals for Whit Merrifield: Madrigal, one of the AA/AAA outfielders, and one of the recently drafted pitchers.
We are doing very well at Third, thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-02-2019, 10:16 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 18,664
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
You make some pretty terrible assertions. "even some business textbooks and business schools disagree on aspects of business management". - Yes, but no one is going to tell you you can't empirically evaluate your managers.

"baseball managers don't have control over personnel, not to mention salary structure and aspects of authority" - I feel like you have no idea what managing is. Managing doesn't mean you control everything. Most managers don't control those things. You're thinking of organizational leaders, like what the president and GM are. Managers are tasked with following rules and making sure others do while simultaneously reaching goals while keeping in company values.

It is fairly easy to come up with empirical methods to evaluate managers in any position, using baseline guides that are universal (like culture, production, etc.) and then there are guides that are industry specific like taking into account reasonable factors inherent in the industry. Asking the Royals to win the division would be ludicrous. But judging their manager on in game decisions, feedback from personnel, feedback from fans, on field production, on field development...the list goes on. Not every team is going to have the same method, but all teams are going to have empirical metrics to evaluate their management staff. No large organization operates without it. Or at least, not for very long.
Managers are tasked with doing what they need to do to win with what they have, from a situational standard and a personnel standard. Managers don't make trades. They don't sign players. They have some limited say in personnel matters. The more management scrutiny you impose, the less control managers will have over who they play. You may be right, though, that people who incorrectly believe they understand baseball because they went to business school and/or studied statistics may believe they can quantify managers and measure them empirically. They can't see that everything they measure is steeped in the prejudice of their standards and measurement.

The components you cited, however, would inspire early retirement from many good major league managers. (Seriously, most fans don't have the understanding of baseball to know the rules. I've heard veteran announcers with substantial major league careers who misstate rules. Sometimes I have to look rules up to see if they've changed.) In most cases, managers are looking at a pretty good pension and don't need what they would consider business-school garbage from people who know nothing about baseball. Some managers would ignore artificially imposed empirical standards and get away with it because they are good enough or carry enough weight that they don't need to care.

The best managers will ignore the sorts of evaluations you are talking about, and they will still be in demand because they are really good managers, not corporate hacks. You don't need an MBA to recognize a good manager. But what really helps is if you understand baseball.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-03-2019, 12:14 AM
blandman blandman is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,283
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
Managers are tasked with doing what they need to do to win with what they have, from a situational standard and a personnel standard. Managers don't make trades. They don't sign players. They have some limited say in personnel matters. The more management scrutiny you impose, the less control managers will have over who they play. You may be right, though, that people who incorrectly believe they understand baseball because they went to business school and/or studied statistics may believe they can quantify managers and measure them empirically. They can't see that everything they measure is steeped in the prejudice of their standards and measurement.

The components you cited, however, would inspire early retirement from many good major league managers. (Seriously, most fans don't have the understanding of baseball to know the rules. I've heard veteran announcers with substantial major league careers who misstate rules. Sometimes I have to look rules up to see if they've changed.) In most cases, managers are looking at a pretty good pension and don't need what they would consider business-school garbage from people who know nothing about baseball. Some managers would ignore artificially imposed empirical standards and get away with it because they are good enough or carry enough weight that they don't need to care.

The best managers will ignore the sorts of evaluations you are talking about, and they will still be in demand because they are really good managers, not corporate hacks. You don't need an MBA to recognize a good manager. But what really helps is if you understand baseball.



Managers in any organization in any field are tasked with managing employees with varying degrees of difficulty.

The best managers would not ignore evaluations. The best managers would use the tools at their disposal to get the best results possible with what they have to work with. Period. If they don't do that, it's because they are bad managers. Period.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-03-2019, 02:45 AM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 18,664
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
Managers in any organization in any field are tasked with managing employees with varying degrees of difficulty.

The best managers would not ignore evaluations. The best managers would use the tools at their disposal to get the best results possible with what they have to work with. Period. If they don't do that, it's because they are bad managers. Period.
The evaluations you describe are meaningless to the goals of a baseball manager. Certainly no manager, unless he is desperate for a job as a manager, is going to be limited to such evaluations. The idea that people looking over spread sheets would be evaluating Tony LaRussa or Frank Robinson is comical.

A successful baseball organization does not hire a manager because he will do what his bosses tell him to do, their way or the highway. Even when good baseball people are running the organization, especially when good baseball people are running the organization, they hire field managers to see things, to do things they would like to see done, things they can't do, things they aren't even capable of doing. TPS reports be damned.

There may well be teams who acquire enough talent to be managed successfully by mindless corporate drones (that isn't a good thing, by the way), and perhaps their successes would be enhanced by other teams copying their style without understanding their reason for success. Eventually, the next generation of moneyball, where brilliant field managers who get the most out of their less expensive players and successfully play against percentages would become more fashionable. For all the empirical data you claim to have on Joe Maddon, he has never and would never work for a team tell him how to manage.

A baseball organization, or a baseball division of a corporation, that would evaluate a field manager as Target would evaluate the manager of one of its stores would be a bad organization. Period.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-03-2019, 10:10 AM
blandman blandman is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,283
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
The evaluations you describe are meaningless to the goals of a baseball manager. Certainly no manager, unless he is desperate for a job as a manager, is going to be limited to such evaluations. The idea that people looking over spread sheets would be evaluating Tony LaRussa or Frank Robinson is comical.

A successful baseball organization does not hire a manager because he will do what his bosses tell him to do, their way or the highway. Even when good baseball people are running the organization, especially when good baseball people are running the organization, they hire field managers to see things, to do things they would like to see done, things they can't do, things they aren't even capable of doing. TPS reports be damned.

There may well be teams who acquire enough talent to be managed successfully by mindless corporate drones (that isn't a good thing, by the way), and perhaps their successes would be enhanced by other teams copying their style without understanding their reason for success. Eventually, the next generation of moneyball, where brilliant field managers who get the most out of their less expensive players and successfully play against percentages would become more fashionable. For all the empirical data you claim to have on Joe Maddon, he has never and would never work for a team tell him how to manage.

A baseball organization, or a baseball division of a corporation, that would evaluate a field manager as Target would evaluate the manager of one of its stores would be a bad organization. Period.
Yeah, you're just wrong. Managers in any position, whether baseball or not, have responsibilities to the organization. I can't have a serious discussion with someone about management when they don't accept basic fundamental concepts. Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-03-2019, 07:06 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 12,659
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DumpJerry View Post
We are doing very well at Third, thank you.
And weíre not doing nearly as well at second. We could use an upgrade there.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-03-2019, 10:40 PM
DumpJerry's Avatar
DumpJerry DumpJerry is offline
Tom Feargal Hagen
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The hearts and minds of Sox fans on 10-26-05
Posts: 28,391
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
And weíre not doing nearly as well at second. We could use an upgrade there.
Come on, this is a Cub thread.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-03-2019, 11:18 PM
blandman blandman is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,283
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DumpJerry View Post
Come on, this is a Cub thread.

It could be about all the Cubs players we want from their fire sale this offseason.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:47 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.