PDA

View Full Version : hal's article


fquaye149
09-07-2003, 11:55 PM
the one about manuel's alibis

i was with you until you bawled him out for not backing kimm.


i hear what you're saying but there's no way in the world manuel has any call on that play. He should have backed kimm, but that question should never have been asked in the first place. It's akin to asking him why Sandy Alomar called a certain pitch in the 5th inning of a wide open game. You give these guys rope because you trust their judgment. If manuel was managing Rickey Henderson in the 80's, he would probably give him the green light to steal at any reasonable time.....so if he's thrown out that's not Manuel's call, it's the runner's...thus to Kimm.

I think it's unreasonable to say that Manuel made a decision before the inning for Kimm to send anyone who came his way. I doubt he even said anything to the tune of "be very aggressive on the base paths."

What would you have said in that situation as manager? maybe something different...but Jerry can't answer for him... so if you don't twist it "you'd have to ask bruce about that" is a very reasonable answer. let the man speak for himself.

he didn't really criticize it, which would have been classless and poor ly thought out...he just said, if you want to know why he went ask him. if you want to know why frank's stance has changed, ask walt hriniak. if you want to know what loaiza's doing differently, ask don cooper.

i don't know...just my $.04

TornLabrum
09-08-2003, 12:05 AM
Originally posted by fquaye149
the one about manuel's alibis

i was with you until you bawled him out for not backing kimm.


i hear what you're saying but there's no way in the world manuel has any call on that play. He should have backed kimm, but that question should never have been asked in the first place. It's akin to asking him why Sandy Alomar called a certain pitch in the 5th inning of a wide open game. You give these guys rope because you trust their judgment. If manuel was managing Rickey Henderson in the 80's, he would probably give him the green light to steal at any reasonable time.....so if he's thrown out that's not Manuel's call, it's the runner's...thus to Kimm.

I think it's unreasonable to say that Manuel made a decision before the inning for Kimm to send anyone who came his way. I doubt he even said anything to the tune of "be very aggressive on the base paths."

What would you have said in that situation as manager? maybe something different...but Jerry can't answer for him... so if you don't twist it "you'd have to ask bruce about that" is a very reasonable answer. let the man speak for himself.

he didn't really criticize it, which would have been classless and poor ly thought out...he just said, if you want to know why he went ask him. if you want to know why frank's stance has changed, ask walt hriniak. if you want to know what loaiza's doing differently, ask don cooper.

i don't know...just my $.04

I know what I'd say in that situation, "Bruce made the call he thought was appropriate. It's our philosophy to run aggressively on the base paths, and Bruce thought Aaron had a chance of making it. Unfortunately it didn't work out this time."

Sound any better than, "You ll have to ask Bruce about that"?

fquaye149
09-08-2003, 10:05 AM
sure. that's a very good comment made after the fact. i just dont' think, "you'd have to ask bruce about that" is very derogatory made afer a tough loss. It's not exactly a criticism, not even saying they necessarily weren't on the same page.

Jerko
09-08-2003, 10:21 AM
I don't mind a few plays at the plate, but when the runner that gets thrown out is closer to 3rd than home when he's called out, that's pretty bad.

PaleHoseGeorge
09-08-2003, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by fquaye149
sure. that's a very good comment made after the fact. i just dont' think, "you'd have to ask bruce about that" is very derogatory made afer a tough loss. It's not exactly a criticism, not even saying they necessarily weren't on the same page.

Among many responsibilities, a manager is supposed to be a leader. He is also supposed to set an example for everyone else to follow.

Whether essentially true or not, passing off a mistake as solely belonging to one of your own staff--as Manuel most certainly did-- does not communicate leadership or set a good example for everyone else to follow. A manager is supposed to be smart enough to know why making a dumb comment like Manuel's should be avoided at all costs. For example, Joe Torre would never be stupid enough to make such a comment, especially dealing with the NY media horde that is always looking to blow everything out of proportion. Manuel is damned lucky he works in Chicago where the media is too laid back (lazy?) to pursue such obvious gaffes.

Of course we are all assuming that Manuel still gives a damn about his job--or feels he might lose his job. I think Hal's entire point is that the evidence shows Manuel doesn't give a damn anymore, perhaps because he doesn't think he will keep his job. That's why Manuel said what he said. He's talking like a man already convicted.

brewcrew/chisox
09-08-2003, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


Among many responsibilities, a manager is supposed to be a leader. He is also supposed to set an example for everyone else to follow.

Whether essentially true or not, passing off a mistake as solely belonging to one of your own staff--as Manuel most certainly did-- does not communicate leadership or set a good example for everyone else to follow. A manager is supposed to be smart enough to know why making a dumb comment like Manuel's should be avoided at all costs. For example, Joe Torre would never be stupid enough to make such a comment, especially dealing with the NY media horde that is always looking to blow everything out of proportion. Manuel is damned lucky he works in Chicago where the media is too laid back (lazy?) to pursue such obvious gaffes.

Of course we are all assuming that Manuel still gives a damn about his job--or feels he might lose his job. I think Hal's entire point is that the evidence shows Manuel doesn't give a damn anymore, perhaps because he doesn't think he will keep his job. That's why Manuel said what he said. He's talking like a man already convicted.


Ridiculous.

Do you remember why JM was sitting back BEHIND the dugout and not in it? He was thrown out of the game for giving it (in loads) to the umpire on a bad call. But I guess you would argue that he was thrown out on purpose because he just didn't want to coach anymore. Question the guys decision making on the field, but don't speculate about a man's attitude toward his job if you have no clue. Perhaps JM doesn't give a damn about answering stupid questions from the Media about decisions made by the third base coach.

This IS precisely what is wrong with HAl's article as well. If JM doesn't give a damn about his team or backs his players or staff then why is has he been thrown out a total of 9 times this year for arguing with umpires about decisions made againt the very team you say he is so apathetic about.

JM made some bad decisions that game, but to point to some off hand comment given to a reporter is not one of them. Leaving Sullivan in...mistake. Putting WH in Center for CE and then pinch running Rowand late in the game instead of the other way around, a mistake.

But to question JM's feelings about his team when they are in the middle of a Pennant race.

Another mistake
Do you all think this guy is made of wood or something?

PaleHoseGeorge
09-08-2003, 01:06 PM
Originally posted by brewcrew/chisox
Ridiculous.

Do you remember why JM was sitting back BEHIND the dugout and not in it? He was thrown out of the game for giving it (in loads) to the umpire on a bad call. But I guess you would argue that he was thrown out on purpose because he just didn't want to coach anymore. Question the guys decision making on the field, but don't speculate about a man's attitude toward his job if you have no clue. Perhaps JM doesn't give a damn about answering stupid questions from the Media about decisions made by the third base coach.

This IS precisely what is wrong with HAl's article as well. If JM doesn't give a damn about his team or backs his players or staff then why is has he been thrown out a total of 9 times this year for arguing with umpires about decisions made againt the very team you say he is so apathetic about.

JM made some bad decisions that game, but to point to some off hand comment given to a reporter is not one of them. Leaving Sullivan in...mistake. Putting WH in Center for CE and then pinch running Rowand late in the game instead of the other way around, a mistake.

But to question JM's feelings about his team when they are in the middle of a Pennant race.

Another mistake
Do you all think this guy is made of wood or something?

I strongly urge you not to measure how much a manager "gives a damn" by how often he gets thrown out of the game. I remember plenty of jokes about Manuel earlier this year when he started popping out of the dugout to argue silly things after being criticized for not arguing obvious mistakes by the umpires.

No, the man is not made of wood. He isn't made of managerial material either. This has become painfully obvious the last 3 years. None of us can put words in Jerry's mouth or force Jerry to do what he does, nor prevent him from contradicting himself between the two--and he does this repeatedly. He's accountable for these things--and they prove he is no manager.