Originally Posted by kittle42
That is a decent argument, but you have basically stated in other posts that a manager has *zero* (or at least next to nothing) to do with a team's performance. Hey, why even have one, then?
I do not think that is a position you can defend.
Oh, the Cubs fired Sveum today. Wow, what morons. I mean, he had a bad roster, so what was the basis for firing him?
Find me one reason Sveum should be gone and Ventura retained. At least the Cubs basically admitted they were tanking the season, so really, you would have a better argument as it related to Sveum.
I think managers way back in the day had a lot more to do with the success or failure of their teams; a generation ago players weren't baseball players only, many of them supplemented their income with odd jobs during the off-season.
Nowadays, athletes are pro athletes and pro athletes only. These guys know their jobs, it's a managers job to put them in the best position to succeed, which I don't know that Ventura has done (he's made some pretty curious pitching and pinch hitting moves).
I think the difference between Sveum and Ventura is that Robin's roster is pretty much devoid of much up and coming talent, whereas Sveum had a couple of "superstars" in training in Castro and Rizzo who have, frankly, regressed.