CIN, HOU, MIL, PIT, CHC all pisspoor in 2009.

[MAD]

If Sandberg joining the coaching staff means more commercials like this, I'm opposed.

As IAN explained, there are many aspects to the job. In-game strategy is one of them. Managing and motivating players and their attitudes is another one of them. Teaching younger players is another one of them. Working well with the GM is addressing team needs is another. Putting on a good public face to the media and community organizations is another. Complementing the team's brand (i.e., Ozzie Guillen has become in many ways emblematic of the White Sox; Tommy Lasorda the Dodgers; Earl Weaver the Orioles, etc.) is probably another. Delegating well to staff is another.

In-game strategy can be taught. It can be dictated throughout the organization. That's one of the things Moneyball addressed. Billy Beane had very little tact with Art Howe, but one thing is correct: the manager works for the general manager. It doesn't mean the GM has to micromanage the manager, but a good GM would question philosophy and demand the manager mold his in game strategy to the organization's philosophy.

Can Sandberg manage and motivate, or teach, or become a good face of the Cubs? I'm not sure. But in-game strategy is probably the easiest to teach.

Anybody whose wife was porking one of his teammates will never get respect in a major league clubhouse. Pass.

Well there goes Dennis Eckerlsey's chances at ever managing...

[Quality Start Machine]

If Sandberg joining the coaching staff means more commercials like this, I'm opposed.

As IAN explained, there are many aspects to the job. In-game strategy is one of them. Managing and motivating players and their attitudes is another one of them. Teaching younger players is another one of them. Working well with the GM is addressing team needs is another. Putting on a good public face to the media and community organizations is another. Complementing the team's brand (i.e., Ozzie Guillen has become in many ways emblematic of the White Sox; Tommy Lasorda the Dodgers; Earl Weaver the Orioles, etc.) is probably another. Delegating well to staff is another.

In-game strategy can be taught. It can be dictated throughout the organization. That's one of the things Moneyball addressed. Billy Beane had very little tact with Art Howe, but one thing is correct: the manager works for the general manager. It doesn't mean the GM has to micromanage the manager, but a good GM would question philosophy and demand the manager mold his in game strategy to the organization's philosophy.

Can Sandberg manage and motivate, or teach, or become a good face of the Cubs? I'm not sure. But in-game strategy is probably the easiest to teach.

Anybody whose wife was porking one of his teammates will never get respect in a major league clubhouse. Pass.

Well there goes Dennis Eckerlsey's chances at ever managing...

I'm thinking Eck started hitting the bottle at the exact time Manning started hitting Eck's wife.

[Chuck to Chuck]

but one thing is correct: the manager works for the general manager. It doesn't mean the GM has to micromanage the manager, but a good GM would question philosophy and demand the manager mold his in game strategy to the organization's philosophy.

'Cept on the Cubs.  The reason a lot of Jim Hendry picks are no longer with the team is due to Lou Piniella telling Jim that the guys weren't going to play anymore.

Michael Barrett, Matt Murton, Jacque Jones, Cesar Izturis, Scott Eyre and Milton Bradley come to mind as players Jim wanted and Lou siad, "Fuck no."

[Brownie]

but one thing is correct: the manager works for the general manager. It doesn't mean the GM has to micromanage the manager, but a good GM would question philosophy and demand the manager mold his in game strategy to the organization's philosophy.

'Cept on the Cubs.  The reason a lot of Jim Hendry picks are no longer with the team is due to Lou Piniella telling Jim that the guys weren't going to play anymore.

Michael Barrett, Matt Murton, Jacque Jones, Cesar Izturis, Scott Eyre and Milton Bradley come to mind as players Jim wanted and Lou siad, "Fuck no."

But that maybe speaks to your point that the general manager is the problem.

[Slaky]

but one thing is correct: the manager works for the general manager. It doesn't mean the GM has to micromanage the manager, but a good GM would question philosophy and demand the manager mold his in game strategy to the organization's philosophy.

'Cept on the Cubs.  The reason a lot of Jim Hendry picks are no longer with the team is due to Lou Piniella telling Jim that the guys weren't going to play anymore.

Michael Barrett, Matt Murton, Jacque Jones, Cesar Izturis, Scott Eyre and Milton Bradley come to mind as players Jim wanted and Lou siad, "Fuck no."

But that maybe speaks to your point that the general manager is the problem.

Lou's done his fair share of questionable things since he's been here and especially this year. Nobody is blameless.

Except me. I'm pretty cool.

[Kermit, B.]

If Sandberg joining the coaching staff means more commercials like this, I'm opposed.

As IAN explained, there are many aspects to the job. In-game strategy is one of them. Managing and motivating players and their attitudes is another one of them. Teaching younger players is another one of them. Working well with the GM is addressing team needs is another. Putting on a good public face to the media and community organizations is another. Complementing the team's brand (i.e., Ozzie Guillen has become in many ways emblematic of the White Sox; Tommy Lasorda the Dodgers; Earl Weaver the Orioles, etc.) is probably another. Delegating well to staff is another.

In-game strategy can be taught. It can be dictated throughout the organization. That's one of the things Moneyball addressed. Billy Beane had very little tact with Art Howe, but one thing is correct: the manager works for the general manager. It doesn't mean the GM has to micromanage the manager, but a good GM would question philosophy and demand the manager mold his in game strategy to the organization's philosophy.

Can Sandberg manage and motivate, or teach, or become a good face of the Cubs? I'm not sure. But in-game strategy is probably the easiest to teach.

5 dollars a month for high-speed internet is a great deal.

That's true, Gil, but is talking on the phone while sitting on the ledge of a full bathtub ever a good idea?

Eh.  It was a cordless phone, operating on a battery.  I'm guessing if he falls in with the phone, he gets a mild zap, at best.  Now, replace phone with plugged in toaster, and we've got a whole new ballgame.

Yeah, a whole new ballgame that Sandberg would probably mismanage.  HEY-O!

Eli, I trust your anecdotal stuff.  I was just curious, because I had heard some of the same things, but from vague sources.

[Lance Dicksons Arm]

I'm fine with the minor league manager asking guys to put a bunt down....even more than Bill James says he should.   Because clearly it's being ignored by most people instructing the game.

I generally don't like sacrificing unless it's to get the tying or winning run to 3b with one out.  There are times I might sac to 2B if the guy at the plate is worthless.  But whether or not we like sac bunts...those situations do occur.  When they occur, too often the case is made that "The bunt isn't in the player's arsenal". 

I'll assume that Eli's assertion is well-based.  Still, the fact that he is teaching GRIT based small-ball at the minor league level just isn't particularly alarming to me.

[MAD]

I generally don't like sacrificing unless it's to get the tying or winning run to 3b with one out after the seventh inning. 

With that caveat, I agree'd.

[Chuck to Chuck]

but one thing is correct: the manager works for the general manager. It doesn't mean the GM has to micromanage the manager, but a good GM would question philosophy and demand the manager mold his in game strategy to the organization's philosophy.

'Cept on the Cubs.  The reason a lot of Jim Hendry picks are no longer with the team is due to Lou Piniella telling Jim that the guys weren't going to play anymore.

Michael Barrett, Matt Murton, Jacque Jones, Cesar Izturis, Scott Eyre and Milton Bradley come to mind as players Jim wanted and Lou siad, "Fuck no."

But that maybe speaks to your point that the general manager is the problem.

I think it screams it.

[Dave B]

One of Rozner's better columns (some good observations about what Sandberg has done in the minors and his willingness to learn the ropes):


http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=326630

[Saul Goodman]

It makes as much sense to me as any of the other bullshit they write on that site.  Which is none.

The Cub Reportar blows.

This is like that episode of South Park when favorite band Radiohead told Scott Tenorman that he sucks.  Except the whole eating-parents-in-chili part, that is.

When they do take over, Ricketts and Hendry will get to have this conversation (the following brilliance is from Andy Dolan at Desipio):

[ChuckD]

One of Rozner's better columns (some good observations about what Sandberg has done in the minors and his willingness to learn the ropes):


http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=326630

I think you linked the wrong column.

[Philberto]

I generally don't like sacrificing unless it's to get the tying or winning run to 3b with one out after the seventh inning. 

With that caveat, I agree'd.

I meant to address this... With one out at the time of the bunt or one out after the bunt?

[Lance Dicksons Arm]

I generally don't like sacrificing unless it's to get the tying or winning run to 3b with one out after the seventh inning. 

With that caveat, I agree'd.

I meant to address this... With one out at the time of the bunt or one out after the bunt?

One out after the bunt, of course.

And yes, late in the game.  I might even say eighth inning or later.

[Saul Goodman]

DeRosa with more stellar defense in the playoffs.  BRING BACK DERO!!!

EDIT: Faced.

DOUBLE EDIT: At least I have the consolation prize of FACE-ing BC.