Two baseball-related points:
1. Would someone at Fox Sports care to explain why Ozzie Guillen was picked as a guest analyst for the World Series? The list of alternatives is not only a mile long, but I assume that most of those potential alternative choices don’t have a record of self-important and deceitful behavior (at best) or racist and homophobic utterances on record (at worst).
Finally –– and though this may seem insensitive, it still remains a fact –– part of being a good television personality is a mastery of the native language. Even if he were a saint, Guillen’s enunciation and diction are not suitable for the role he is being asked to play. It’s hard for a TV audience to appreciate any insights he might share when that audience can’t fully comprehend what he’s saying. Sorry folks, it’s true.
2. It looks like the Indians are interested in hiring veteran MLB (and Japanese League) manager Bobby Valentine as the 49th field general in franchise history. But buried in the story is an odd little tidbit that the franchise considered re-hiring former manager Mike Hargrove. Really?
I’ve never understood that kind of thinking. Teams hire (and fire) managers on the faulty premise that managers actually make a difference in the win-loss column; the fact remains, however, that managers are merely window dressing and that wins and losses are determined almost exclusively by the players themselves, with luck filling in the margins of what talent does not capture.
Assuming for a moment that this is not the case –– that managers actually do matter –– then why re-hire a candidate you once deemed unfit to run your ballclub? And if the reverse is true –– that managers make almost no difference whatsoever on the fortunes of the clubs they run –– then why did you fire someone like Hargrove in the first place, if he’s now considered good enough to revisit history with?
In any event, it appears that Bobby Valentine and Don Mattingly are the leading candidates in Cleveland. Each has certain skills that make them attractive to the Indians ballclub. Valentine is known for being a master tactician and an amusing personality, although tactics are less important in the American League and his personality does tend to grate after a while. Mattingly is a well-respected ex-player who could certainly coax accountability and leadership out of what has become an increasingly rudderless and lazy ballclub. His association with Joe Torre has only furthered his reputation as a “winner” (fallacy that it is, the media has nevertheless run with that meme). His credentials notwithstanding, Mattingly is a quiet man by nature and brings no previous managerial experience to the table.
If I were the Indians, I’d hire the guy that would do the job for the least amount of money. No sense pouring resources into a titular position of no real consequence when the team itself is starved for talent and cannot afford to divert funds away from the player and scouting budgets.
1. Would someone at Fox Sports care to explain why Ozzie Guillen was picked as a guest analyst for the World Series? The list of alternatives is not only a mile long, but I assume that most of those potential alternative choices don’t have a record of self-important and deceitful behavior (at best) or racist and homophobic utterances on record (at worst).
Finally –– and though this may seem insensitive, it still remains a fact –– part of being a good television personality is a mastery of the native language. Even if he were a saint, Guillen’s enunciation and diction are not suitable for the role he is being asked to play. It’s hard for a TV audience to appreciate any insights he might share when that audience can’t fully comprehend what he’s saying. Sorry folks, it’s true.
2. It looks like the Indians are interested in hiring veteran MLB (and Japanese League) manager Bobby Valentine as the 49th field general in franchise history. But buried in the story is an odd little tidbit that the franchise considered re-hiring former manager Mike Hargrove. Really?
I’ve never understood that kind of thinking. Teams hire (and fire) managers on the faulty premise that managers actually make a difference in the win-loss column; the fact remains, however, that managers are merely window dressing and that wins and losses are determined almost exclusively by the players themselves, with luck filling in the margins of what talent does not capture.
Assuming for a moment that this is not the case –– that managers actually do matter –– then why re-hire a candidate you once deemed unfit to run your ballclub? And if the reverse is true –– that managers make almost no difference whatsoever on the fortunes of the clubs they run –– then why did you fire someone like Hargrove in the first place, if he’s now considered good enough to revisit history with?
In any event, it appears that Bobby Valentine and Don Mattingly are the leading candidates in Cleveland. Each has certain skills that make them attractive to the Indians ballclub. Valentine is known for being a master tactician and an amusing personality, although tactics are less important in the American League and his personality does tend to grate after a while. Mattingly is a well-respected ex-player who could certainly coax accountability and leadership out of what has become an increasingly rudderless and lazy ballclub. His association with Joe Torre has only furthered his reputation as a “winner” (fallacy that it is, the media has nevertheless run with that meme). His credentials notwithstanding, Mattingly is a quiet man by nature and brings no previous managerial experience to the table.
If I were the Indians, I’d hire the guy that would do the job for the least amount of money. No sense pouring resources into a titular position of no real consequence when the team itself is starved for talent and cannot afford to divert funds away from the player and scouting budgets.
No comments:
Post a Comment