Re: Just curious
posted at 9/7/2011 4:11 PM EDT
In Response to Re: Just curious
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Just curious : I'ts a lot harder finding someone who will talk about Tito in a balanced way than to see the countless corncob jobs people give him here. That is precisely the point. I have given up hoping that Tito will learn how to be a good tactical manager, because it is hard to teach an old dog new tricks, and all I am doing is asking a legitimate question, in a balanced way, for anyone who might want to address it, in a balanced way. (And BTW, anyone who thinks that is trolling is also an old dog who can't be taught new tricks.)
Posted by pschuller[/QUOTE]
OK, first you say he isn't a good tactical manager then complain that you can't get an answer in a balanced way. Hmmm ... wonder why. It seems like your mind is already made up that anyone who isn't agreeing with you and your premise isn't addressing the question in a balanced way. And I wonder, did you type "ask a legitimate question in a balanced way" with a straight face?
The problem right off the bat is your statement that Francona "isn't a good tactical manager." Why? Because he makes moves or non-moves that you don't agree with. A bit full of yourself, don't you think?
Francona does play small ball on occasion. Because he doesn't play it more -- that makes him a bad tactical manager? Was Earl Weaver a bad tactical manager? He abhored small ball. Stats show small ball is a low percentage way of playing so it's an organizational philosophy. Why is that so hard to understand?
How many times has a team played small ball against the Red Sox and it didn't work? How about most of the times, although critics will only remember the couple of times it worked.
What about tactical moves we don't see, like defensive placement? Just because there isn't a dramatic shift, doesn't mean he he isn't positioning the defense based on scouting reports.
And the critics who whine about changing pitchers truly have their heads up in the sand (or elsewhere)? All managers will try to stretch out the starters who get hit early so they don't burn out the bullpen, yet critics seem to think only Francona does it. Ask yourself this -- how many times have you yelled at the TV or radio wanting him t change pitchers and he doesn't, only to see the pitcher go another few innings effectively.
Lineups? I get the biggest laugh out of this. Of his critics, half rip him for changing the lineup and not sticking with the same nine, while the other half rip him when he sticks with guys in slumps or not moving players to different spots when they're cold.
I don't know how many times I've seen him ripped before the game for not playing a guy who is hot, only to see the replacement have a good game and then when you look deeper, you see that the hot player who sat was horrible against the starting pitcher.
Critics rip him for the lefty-right-lefty-etc batting orders, so that makes him a bad tactical manager.
I'll repeat what I said at the beginning. It's pretty arrogant to call him a bad tactical manager simply because you'd do something different. Critics come on this board after every loss ripping him as if had Francona done something different, the Sox would have won. How pathetics is that?
I don't always agree with every move and I'm sure he'd admit there are moves or non-moves he'd like to change. But over the course of a 162-game season, what manager can't that be said for?