Don’t Hate the Manager, Hate the Team
I was chatting with an acquaintance of mine, another Cub Fan, who is firmly in the Baker Hater camp. Unfortunately, he’s one of those guys who thinks that Baker’s foibles are more of a problem than, say, how he constructs a lineup.
At any rate, we were having the same circular conversation about why Dusty is a bad manager and a bad guy when brought up a favorite chestnut of the Baker Hater brigade: the only reason he won all those games in San Francisco is because he had Barry Bonds on his team. And now that he’s running a crappy team, he doesn’t know how to win.
Puzzled by this line of thought, I asked my acquaintance what Baker could do differently to win more games. The response: nothing, because it’s a crappy team.
That, in a nutshell, is the pretzel logic many Cub Fans are engaging in now. We’re not winning because Baker is a horrible manager. But even a great manager couldn’t win because we have a horrible team.
My advice to Cub Fans: don’t tie yourself into mental knots trying to reconcile both ideas into a logical “If A, then B” statement. Simply accept that both concept wrap neatly into a quasi-Aristotelian syllogism:
The Cubs are a team so bad that even a good manager would have trouble winning 70 games.
Dusty Baker is not a good manager.
Therefore, the opportunity for suckiosity is increased by several powers of ten.
Despite Jim Hendry’s assertions that Baker’s final fate won’t be determined until the off-season, would anyone be surprised if Baker left for other opportunities? I don’t want to say that Baker is giving up on the rest of the year, but he just has the look of a guy who knows he’s out. And it will probably be a relief for him, after the abuse he’s taken the last two years.
Whoever Hendry brings in to manage the team next year will probably be an idiot, too, if only because the team has major issues that need to be addressed before we can even think about challenging .500, let alone the Cardinals.
Pretty much everything I wrote about last time I talked about the Cubs is still open, along with the ongoing Aramis Ramirez saga. Talk that he’s going to opt out of his contract and become a free agent is getting louder, although neither Ramirez nor his agent will confirm or deny the rumor.
If Ramirez goes, then we better hope that whoever we get with the first or second overall draft pick this year (a) plays third base and (b) will be ready for the Show sometime in 2008.
On the other hand, I like what I’ve seen of Matt Murton lately. He should get a real chance next year. Maybe not in an everyday role – perhaps a platoon situation would provide the best use of his talents. And Derrek Lee and Michael Barrett will be back…
Well, that’s three lineup spots covered. Time for Hendry to start working on the other eight…
At any rate, we were having the same circular conversation about why Dusty is a bad manager and a bad guy when brought up a favorite chestnut of the Baker Hater brigade: the only reason he won all those games in San Francisco is because he had Barry Bonds on his team. And now that he’s running a crappy team, he doesn’t know how to win.
Puzzled by this line of thought, I asked my acquaintance what Baker could do differently to win more games. The response: nothing, because it’s a crappy team.
That, in a nutshell, is the pretzel logic many Cub Fans are engaging in now. We’re not winning because Baker is a horrible manager. But even a great manager couldn’t win because we have a horrible team.
My advice to Cub Fans: don’t tie yourself into mental knots trying to reconcile both ideas into a logical “If A, then B” statement. Simply accept that both concept wrap neatly into a quasi-Aristotelian syllogism:
The Cubs are a team so bad that even a good manager would have trouble winning 70 games.
Dusty Baker is not a good manager.
Therefore, the opportunity for suckiosity is increased by several powers of ten.
Despite Jim Hendry’s assertions that Baker’s final fate won’t be determined until the off-season, would anyone be surprised if Baker left for other opportunities? I don’t want to say that Baker is giving up on the rest of the year, but he just has the look of a guy who knows he’s out. And it will probably be a relief for him, after the abuse he’s taken the last two years.
Whoever Hendry brings in to manage the team next year will probably be an idiot, too, if only because the team has major issues that need to be addressed before we can even think about challenging .500, let alone the Cardinals.
Pretty much everything I wrote about last time I talked about the Cubs is still open, along with the ongoing Aramis Ramirez saga. Talk that he’s going to opt out of his contract and become a free agent is getting louder, although neither Ramirez nor his agent will confirm or deny the rumor.
If Ramirez goes, then we better hope that whoever we get with the first or second overall draft pick this year (a) plays third base and (b) will be ready for the Show sometime in 2008.
On the other hand, I like what I’ve seen of Matt Murton lately. He should get a real chance next year. Maybe not in an everyday role – perhaps a platoon situation would provide the best use of his talents. And Derrek Lee and Michael Barrett will be back…
Well, that’s three lineup spots covered. Time for Hendry to start working on the other eight…
posted by Bob at
8:55 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home