PDA

View Full Version : Why does Manuel have a job?


kermittheefrog
05-12-2002, 07:35 PM
He ordered a walk to Erstad to face Glaus.

Erstad
2002 OPS: 665 Career OPS: 790

Glaus
2002 OPS: 851 Career OPS: 869

Genius. Pure genius.

HawkDJ
05-12-2002, 07:37 PM
Glaus was 1-5 against Foukle. Erstad is 3-7.

KempersRS
05-12-2002, 07:39 PM
I think people blame Manuel way too much for some of these losses. This time however, I will have to admit it was quite a stupid move. You don't GET to Glaus if you don't have to. Bad move...oh well. No ground lost this weekend.

kermittheefrog
05-12-2002, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by HawkDJ2k2
Glaus was 1-5 against Foukle. Erstad is 3-7.

Great idea! Use a combined 12 at bats to make a decision that could cost you a game!

I honestly have never seen something this stupid before. Manuel intentionally walked Erstad to bring the best hitter in the Angels lineup to the plate. What other manager would do something so obviously stupid? How do you justify an intentional walk to force the opposing team's best hitter to the plate?

Garrison
05-12-2002, 07:48 PM
The guy is a moron. Erstad isn't the hitter Glaus is. Plus Hawk and DJ agreed with Manuel's move as Foulke walked him. What does that say right there?!?!?

Tragg
05-12-2002, 07:53 PM
Manuel is averaging close to a loss a week. It's getting aggravating. That move today is absolutely non-sensical.

Viva Magglio
05-12-2002, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by Garrison
The guy is a moron. Erstad isn't the hitter Glaus is. Plus Hawk and DJ agreed with Manuel's move as Foulke walked him. What does that say right there?!?!?

Hawk and D.J. are a pair of suckups to management.

oldcomiskey
05-12-2002, 07:58 PM
I disagree with the assumtions put forth that Manuel should be fired-----and that Hawk is a company man------

oldcomiskey
05-12-2002, 08:01 PM
besides if we had a left fielder that could throw worth a damn he nails the runner anyway

CerberusWG
05-12-2002, 08:07 PM
Originally posted by oldcomiskey
besides if we had a left fielder that could throw worth a damn he nails the runner anyway

Only person who could have got Eckstein out would have been Ichiro.

I also noticed that the Outfielders (especailly C Lee) were playing WAY too far back. Prolly Manuel's fault again.

Garrison
05-12-2002, 08:08 PM
Originally posted by oldcomiskey
if we had a left fielder that could throw worth a damn he nails the runner anyway

So true! Now two late-inning losses that were hits to short left field and maybe with a decent or good throw would have at least made a play at the plate if not gotten the runner.

kermittheefrog
05-12-2002, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by Garrison


So true! Now two late-inning losses that were hits to short left field and maybe with a decent or good throw would have at least made a play at the plate if not gotten the runner.

Oh so now it's Lee's fault that Manuel decided to pitch to the good hitter over the ***** hitter. There aren't that many leftfielders who can make that throw. Most leftfielders are out there because it's an easy position to play.

Garrison
05-12-2002, 08:19 PM
I am not trying to take the heat off of Manuel at all. He should never have IBB to get to their best hitter. I am just saying if C Lee had a decent arm he might have made a play at the plate out of it. They keep talking about forcing the action and whatnot and C Lee doesn't even make it interesting. Eckstein hits third as Carlos fields it and our hearts sink because we know it's over.

Kilroy
05-12-2002, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by KempersRS
I think people blame Manuel way too much for some of these losses. This time however, I will have to admit it was quite a stupid move. You don't GET to Glaus if you don't have to. Bad move...oh well. No ground lost this weekend.


Manuel gets the blame for the intentional pass in the 9th, but the players go scott-free for wasting chance after chance at getting runs in earlier in the game? What about Marte who comes on in relief and throws 1 pitch to give up the lead? Can't we keep inherited runners from scoring? And what the **** was that pitch from Foulke to Glaus for the game winner? Might as well have been on frickin tee.

At least Kempers is keeping in it's proper perspective. The standings are what count right now, and nothing has been lost. While we could have gained, better to lose when the teams ahead of you lose so you don't fall off the pace.

HawkDJ
05-12-2002, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by Kilroy



Manuel gets the blame for the intentional pass in the 9th, but the players go scott-free for wasting chance after chance at getting runs in earlier in the game? What about Marte who comes on in relief and throws 1 pitch to give up the lead? Can't we keep inherited runners from scoring? And what the **** was that pitch from Foulke to Glaus for the game winner? Might as well have been on frickin tee.

At least Kempers is keeping in it's proper perspective. The standings are what count right now, and nothing has been lost. While we could have gained, better to lose when the teams ahead of you lose so you don't fall off the pace.

You're right. It was a game of lost oppurtunities. A game that we should've and needed to win. Now instead of snapping our losing streak, avoiding the sweep, being in a tie for 1st, winning a close game for once we are on a 4 game losing streak,swept,and in 2nd. We shouldn't have been in that position in the 9th

Also...I'm not sticking up for Manuel but Erstad is much better in his career with RISP than Glaus. Just stats.

kermittheefrog
05-12-2002, 08:37 PM
Originally posted by Kilroy

Manuel gets the blame for the intentional pass in the 9th, but the players go scott-free for wasting chance after chance at getting runs in earlier in the game? What about Marte who comes on in relief and throws 1 pitch to give up the lead? Can't we keep inherited runners from scoring? And what the **** was that pitch from Foulke to Glaus for the game winner? Might as well have been on frickin tee.

Okay now you're just exaggerating. The pitch to Glaus was a fastball up and in on his hands it takes a very good hitter to hit a pitch like that. Exactly why you don't walk someone to get to the best hitter in the lineup because the best hitter in the lineup is the one guy who can probably handle that pitch.

Kilroy
05-12-2002, 08:47 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog


Okay now you're just exaggerating. The pitch to Glaus was a fastball up and in on his hands it takes a very good hitter to hit a pitch like that.

My ass. He took an easy swing and hit that with the fat part of the bat.

If Erstad bats and singles home the run, I wonder how many of you are asking "why have Foulke pitch to the guy who's hitting .430 off him instead of the guy who's hitting .200?"

The only way Manuel isn't a moron right now is if Foulke gets Glaus out.

GASHWOUND
05-12-2002, 08:51 PM
Hmm, I don't know if the intentional walk to Erstad was a bad move or not. Now you can say it was a bad moe after the fact, but I won't do that. For 1, Glaus was 0-4 coming int that at-bat, while Erstad just knocked in a 2-out run the previous time. Foule had more success against glause in his career, than with Erstad. It was righty against righty, instead of left aainst righty. So there are reasons that the move was a good one. On the other hand, Glause is their big hitter in he line-up, and is over-all a good hitter.
But if Foulke would've gotten him out, than none of this would have even been brought up.
Ekstein takes one for the team with Foulk's inside pitch. Who knew that would cost us the game on such a stupid thing like that.
Instead od blaming JM for everything, lets start blaming the people who really need to get blamed...the players

CerberusWG
05-12-2002, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog


Okay now you're just exaggerating. The pitch to Glaus was a fastball up and in on his hands it takes a very good hitter to hit a pitch like that.

The pitch Foulke made was out in the middle-in, around the upper part of the letters.

kevingrt
05-12-2002, 09:31 PM
I have to back up Jerry here. Now lets say he pitched to Erstad and Erstad singled to win the game. Guess what's coming, you should have IBB and get to Glaus look at the stats. BLA BLA BLA. But put yourself in Jerrry's shoes and you would be screwed too. Yes he has not made the best decisions but he hasn't made the worst. WE could be doin much worse if it wasn't for Jerry. I don't see anyone congraulating him on the Mags move or anything he does well. Is it just me or is all Chicago fans do is complain complain complain. Guys we've lost three in a row we are fine.

REMEMBER: BASEBALL IS A MARATHON NOT A SPRINT

CLR01
05-12-2002, 09:43 PM
Originally posted by kevingrt
I have to back up Jerry here. Now lets say he pitched to Erstad and Erstad singled to win the game. Guess what's coming, you should have IBB and get to Glaus look at the stats. BLA BLA BLA. But put yourself in Jerrry's shoes and you would be screwed too. Yes he has not made the best decisions but he hasn't made the worst. WE could be doin much worse if it wasn't for Jerry. I don't see anyone congraulating him on the Mags move or anything he does well. Is it just me or is all Chicago fans do is complain complain complain. Guys we've lost three in a row we are fine.

REMEMBER: BASEBALL IS A MARATHON NOT A SPRINT


No, if it would have been Erstad, the complaints would have been why the hell was Foulke in there in a tie game, we all know he falls apart in tie games. So what we got swept by the Angels who are hot right now. Probably wont be the last time we get swept or have an extended losing streak this season. We had one right about the same time in 2000 and we still won the division. Calm down people.

kermittheefrog
05-12-2002, 09:46 PM
What if Erstad won the game for them with a single? I wouldn't have anything to say. I don't even pay attention to what a guy has done agaisnt a particular pitcher because you can't tell anything from 5 or 7 at bats. Anyone knows that. That's like picking who's the MVP two games into the season. It's stupid. Why don't I blame the players? Well the players do the best they can, phsyical errors happen. Mental mistakes, pure stupidity like Manuel's can be avoided. His job is to put the team in the best position to win. If he's not getting his job done then he's hindering the players. I'm not blaming Foulke for giving up a single to one of the AL's better hitters when he could have faced a much weaker hitter in Erstad.

RedPinStripes
05-12-2002, 09:51 PM
:firenardi

:firejerry

kermittheefrog
05-12-2002, 09:58 PM
Originally posted by RedPinStripes
:firenardi

:firejerry

Damn straight.

Kilroy
05-12-2002, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
What if Erstad won the game for them with a single? I wouldn't have anything to say.

That's pretty easy to say -- now.

kermittheefrog
05-12-2002, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by Kilroy


That's pretty easy to say -- now.

Dude you don't have to believe me but if you read my posts you know I don't pay attention to stuff like pitcher versus batter histories because of small sample size. It's a stathead thing. You should also know that I'm not one to make kneejerk reactions based on one game. Howver this move is going to bother me for a long time. Simply said, Troy Glaus is by far the best hitter on that ballclub. You don't put the bat in the hands of a team's best hitter with the game on the line. It's monumentally stupid to do such a thing.

Garrison
05-12-2002, 10:23 PM
Look at our starting pitching!
:firenardi

doublem23
05-12-2002, 10:33 PM
Originally posted by Garrison
Look at our starting pitching!
:firenardi

Ah, yes, but you can also blame our sometimes absent-minded GM and our overly thrifty owner for not going out and getting help, too.

:burly
I can't do it all, y'know.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-12-2002, 10:43 PM
Personally, I chalk up the last two losses as a result of Jerry Manuel falling back into some bad habits from 2001 that he supposedly had learned from, and promised not to do anymore.

He said he wouldn't juggle line ups, yet he started fiddling with the most potent line up in the league yesterday.

He said he would trust his best players to make the big plays, and yet he played the ninth inning to lose, not trusting his ace closer to get the decisive out with first base open.

I used to be a huge supporter of Manuel's, but I've cooled off to him a lot the past 12 months. He's managed these past two games like somebody who is panicking, and I'm sure it will have a negative effect on the clubhouse. As bad as we were this weekend, the Sox didn't lose a single game in the standings, thanks to the NY Yankees finally offering some REAL opposition for the Twins.

This is no time to start second-guessing your best players, yet that's exactly what Manuel is doing. I don't understand it, and I bet many of his ballplayers don't either.

WhiteSoxWinner
05-12-2002, 10:43 PM
Originally posted by oldcomiskey
besides if we had a left fielder that could throw worth a damn he nails the runner anyway

We all know Jerry is a fan of the Lefty Specialist out of the pen. Maybe that's why he kept Julio Ramirez in the line up last year and misses him this year, as the Cannon Arm In The Outfield Specialist. Who's with me to trade to bring him back? Someone tell Cameo.

duke of dorwood
05-12-2002, 10:47 PM
The scary thing is that we do not win close games, unless they are games we have a big lead and the bullpen makes them close. I think the manager has a lot to do with losing close games. And yes, some bad habits have resurfaced.

Garrison
05-12-2002, 10:55 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
:burly I can't do it all, y'know.

So true! BurlyMon is the only consistently good starter we have. Ritchie pitches well enough but gets no run support. #3-5 in the rotation are basically a toss-up every time out. Our 23 year-old ace can't do it all himself.

Kilroy
05-12-2002, 11:03 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Dude you don't have to believe me but if you read my posts you know I don't pay attention to stuff like pitcher versus batter histories because of small sample size. It's a stathead thing. You should also know that I'm not one to make kneejerk reactions based on one game. Howver this move is going to bother me for a long time.

That's fine. Simple fact tho, Glaus makes an out, and Manuel's a genius for not letting Erstad, who hits well against Foulke, beat them.

And as far as how long that move should bother you, I'd equate "a long time" to about 10:15 p.m. central time tonight. No sense dwelling on it. The key is the fact that the standings haven't changed. The sweep got us no further from the top.

Garrison
05-12-2002, 11:16 PM
Originally posted by Kilroy
The sweep got us no further from the top.

One win from three and we are in first.

doublem23
05-12-2002, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by Garrison


One win from three and we are in first.

BLEGH!

No use in crying over spilled milk.

kermittheefrog
05-13-2002, 12:14 AM
Originally posted by Kilroy


That's fine. Simple fact tho, Glaus makes an out, and Manuel's a genius for not letting Erstad, who hits well against Foulke, beat them.

And as far as how long that move should bother you, I'd equate "a long time" to about 10:15 p.m. central time tonight. No sense dwelling on it. The key is the fact that the standings haven't changed. The sweep got us no further from the top.

Fine be happy with an incompetent manager. I can't take stupidity like that.

GASHWOUND
05-13-2002, 12:54 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Personally, I chalk up the last two losses as a result of Jerry Manuel falling back into some bad habits from 2001 that he supposedly had learned from, and promised not to do anymore.

He said he wouldn't juggle line ups, yet he started fiddling with the most potent line up in the league yesterday.

He said he would trust his best players to make the big plays, and yet he played the ninth inning to lose, not trusting his ace closer to get the decisive out with first base open.

I used to be a huge supporter of Manuel's, but I've cooled off to him a lot the past 12 months. He's managed these past two games like somebody who is panicking, and I'm sure it will have a negative effect on the clubhouse. As bad as we were this weekend, the Sox didn't lose a single game in the standings, thanks to the NY Yankees finally offering some REAL opposition for the Twins.

This is no time to start second-guessing your best players, yet that's exactly what Manuel is doing. I don't understand it, and I bet many of his ballplayers don't either.

I've heard alot of people on the radio wanting JM to juggle the line-up "a little", moving Frank down, and such. Although the line-up he put out there on Saturday wasa little wacky. And JM wouldn't have had to make any changes if this "potent" line-u would score some damn runs. Its been a struggle to get 2 runs lately. And with Durham banged up, maybe it was not a bad move moving him down in the order. What he should have done was put Pauly hitting 3rd and Maggs 4th, but he screwed that up. He panicked, we weren't scoring runs and thought by doing this maybe it would stir things up.
And when JM went up to the mound that inning maybe he asked Foulke what he wanted to do and..face Erstad, or face Glause. So it would be safe to assume that although its JM say on the intentional walk, Foulke has some pull in the say also and agreed to walk him instead of doing the intentional/unintentional walk and/or facing him all together. So maybe Foulke himself didn't trust himself in facing him. I believe with Foulke being the competitor he is if he really felt he could've gotten Erstad out he would have said "I WANT to face Erstad and know I can get him out"
So you say JM didn't trust Foulke to get Erstad out, but maybe Foulke himself didn't trust that he could've gotten him out. That's not a good thing for your closer to think that if that is the case(not saying that it is)

I'll keep saying this, the players have to have some accountability! Blaming JM for everything is unfair. This isn't little league, this is the majors and we hardly ever blame the players.

kermittheefrog
05-13-2002, 01:26 AM
It's simply a lot easier to blame Manuel and it's a lot easier for Manuel to do a better job than the players. Unless you believe a player isn't givign his best effort there isn't much to say on the player side. However if Manuel is making decisions that hurt the team, which I think he is, there is definitely more immediate accountability there.

FarWestChicago
05-13-2002, 01:29 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
It's simply a lot easier to blame Manuel and it's a lot easier for Manuel to do a better job than the players. Unless you believe a player isn't givign his best effort there isn't much to say on the player side. However if Manuel is making decisions that hurt the team, which I think he is, there is definitely more immediate accountability there. Damn, Kermit. You are just fired up tonight. :smile:

kermittheefrog
05-13-2002, 01:46 AM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Damn, Kermit. You are just fired up tonight. :smile:

Dude Manuel has me flipped out tonight. I just can't understand this decision.

FarWestChicago
05-13-2002, 01:52 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog


Dude Manuel has me flipped out tonight. I just can't understand this decision. It was a tough weekend and and a painful last inning. :(:

kermittheefrog
05-13-2002, 01:53 AM
Okay here goes a little more explaination on why I'm angry.

Erstad is a well respected player because he's had a couple good seasons and an outstanding 2000 season but really since the beginning of 2001 Erstad has hit about as "well" as the Choice.

Glaus on the other hand is pretty much on Magglio's level as a hitter. So putting this in the context of the Sox it'd be like walking Choice to get to Magglio. No team would do something that stupid. Manuel just did. I think there is no rational in the world that can justify this. It's just plain dumb.

GASHWOUND
05-13-2002, 01:59 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
It's simply a lot easier to blame Manuel and it's a lot easier for Manuel to do a better job than the players. Unless you believe a player isn't givign his best effort there isn't much to say on the player side. However if Manuel is making decisions that hurt the team, which I think he is, there is definitely more immediate accountability there.

Of course its alot easier to blame Manuel, thats the easy way out.
And whats to say the players aren't gving their best effort out there?
The reason you should put more accountability on the players than on the manager is because when the manaer makes good moves its always the players who get the props, and when the manager makes a seemingly bad move its the managers fault. Its a no win situation for the manager. Was a good move when he put in maggs to pinch hit? Or was he just lucky...

Its the players job to move runners along, drive in the runners in scoring position, make the plays on the field, and for the pitchers not to walk people. Unless you think JM is responsible for things like that.
Pointing out 1 bad move that you think he made with the intentional walk, instead of pointing out the other reason why we lost this game. Like the bases loaded and 1 out with a 3-2 score. Couldn't even get a run home with a sac fly or something to tie the game. Is that JM's fault? No, its the players fault...accountability needs to be pointed to where it truly belongs, the players not doing the little things to win games.

FarWestChicago
05-13-2002, 01:59 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Erstad is a well respected player because he's had a couple good seasons and an outstanding 2000 season but really since the beginning of 2001 Erstad has hit about as "well" as the Choice.

Glaus on the other hand is pretty much on Magglio's level as a hitter. So putting this in the context of the Sox it'd be like walking Choice to get to Magglio. No team would do something that stupid. Manuel just did. I think there is no rational in the world that can justify this. It's just plain dumb. Well, when you put it like that, it is cause for a little frustration. :o:

RedPinStripes
05-13-2002, 02:02 AM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Well, when you put it like that, it is cause for a little frustration. :o:

Time for a new message on my sig. :D:

GASHWOUND
05-13-2002, 02:07 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Okay here goes a little more explaination on why I'm angry.

Erstad is a well respected player because he's had a couple good seasons and an outstanding 2000 season but really since the beginning of 2001 Erstad has hit about as "well" as the Choice.

Glaus on the other hand is pretty much on Magglio's level as a hitter. So putting this in the context of the Sox it'd be like walking Choice to get to Magglio. No team would do something that stupid. Manuel just did. I think there is no rational in the world that can justify this. It's just plain dumb.

Huh? now you're comparing Erstad's bat with Clayton's? That's not a fair comparrison at all. Erstad is a really good hitter, and is a pretty clutch hitter. And its not like Glause was hitting .330 like Maggs or something. He was hitting .270 which is a good AVG, and is higher than Erstads but was not swinging a hot bat at the time. So you take the chance there, just didn't work

kermittheefrog
05-13-2002, 02:12 AM
Originally posted by GASHWOUND


Huh? now you're comparing Erstad's bat with Clayton's? That's not a fair comparrison at all. Erstad is a really good hitter, and is a pretty clutch hitter. And its not like Glause was hitting .330 like Maggs or something. He was hitting .270 which is a good AVG, and is higher than Erstads but was not swinging a hot bat at the time. So you take the chance there, just didn't work

I'm not really looking at average, I'm looking at a stat the Baseball Prospectus uses called EqA. It's the kind of thing I've learned most people don't want to hear about because you guys don't encounter it or read about it enough about it for it to mean anything for anyone other than me. Or any other avid BP reader on WSI like Beausox who hasn't been posting much lately.

Kilroy
05-13-2002, 06:51 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog


I'm not really looking at average, I'm looking at a stat the Baseball Prospectus uses called EqA. It's the kind of thing I've learned most people don't want to hear about because you guys don't encounter it or read about it enough about it for it to mean anything for anyone other than me. Or any other avid BP reader on WSI like Beausox who hasn't been posting much lately.

I wanna hear, really. No teal. Dazzle me.

Jerry_Manuel
05-13-2002, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Personally, I chalk up the last two losses as a result of Jerry Manuel falling back into some bad habits from 2001 that he supposedly had learned from, and promised not to do anymore.

He said he wouldn't juggle line ups, yet he started fiddling with the most potent line up in the league yesterday.

He said he would trust his best players to make the big plays, and yet he played the ninth inning to lose, not trusting his ace closer to get the decisive out with first base open.

I used to be a huge supporter of Manuel's, but I've cooled off to him a lot the past 12 months. He's managed these past two games like somebody who is panicking, and I'm sure it will have a negative effect on the clubhouse. This is no time to start second-guessing your best players, yet that's exactly what Manuel is doing. I don't understand it, and I bet many of his ballplayers don't either.

I myself turned the game off after Erstad made that great catch on Lofton. I knew right there the game was over. The Thomas move had to be made. Frank hasn't hit well since the first half of 2000. He was bad prior to getting hurt in 2001.

As for his sitting Durham, I'm not sure what to make of it. He hasn't been hitting, and his defense has slipped as well. Perhaps it's his way of sending Durham a message.

Garrison
05-13-2002, 09:42 AM
I hope JM sends the guy a message. Hitters have slumps but the defensive thing is just lack of hustle or concentration. I like Ray and want to see him back but if JM is sending a message I hope that the guy gets it. I want a good last season out of him.

Chisox353014
05-13-2002, 10:51 AM
I knew this game was lost as soon as Eckstein got "hit" by that pitch, but that's beside the point. I don't understand all the whining about walking Erstad. I can think of at least 3 good reasons why that was the right move, besides the obvious setting up a force at 2nd and 3rd:
1. Glaus strikes out 3 times as much (32-10) as Erstad. Erstad is going to put the ball in play somewhere.
2. Erstad is much better at going with the pitch and using the whole field than Glaus who's basically a pull hitter.
3. Erstad has hit Foulke hard in the past.
I don't envy the decision JM had to make, but you can't blame this loss on him. I'm not saying he hasn't screwed up before, but this game was the players' loss pure and simple. Maybe we win if Foulke doesn't serve up that cookie to Glaus, or if 14 hits produces more than 4 runs, or if Frank or CLee gets a clutch hit when we need one, or if Howry and Marte don't immediately cough it up when we tie the game. There are a lot of guys to point fingers at after a game like that, but I don't think Manuel is one of them (at least not this time). Angels just executed better than us yesterday.

ode to veeck
05-13-2002, 03:49 PM
Hawk and D.J. are a pair of suckups to management

I know this is off the thread topic, but this hits the nail on the head of why I can't stand Hawk-besides the fact that he brings no excitement to the job and compliments himself all day long...


back to your regularly scheduled JM debate ...

Garrison
05-13-2002, 04:53 PM
I agree veeck. I am becoming sick and tired of everything being compared to an event from Hawk's playing days. Ed Farmer bringings up a story now and then but with Hawk it's a contstant stream of anecdotes. He agrees with everything management does (walking Erstad was said to be the perfect move by Hawk) and makes excuses for the teams poor play.
:hawk
"Well DJ I think the smell of hot dogs from the vendors here can be very distracting and therefore he dropped that ball. A lot like this one time when I was playing in Boston....."
:DJ
"mmhmmm"