Re: Tito Bashers, Talk About How he Massaged the Game Tonight
posted at 6/9/2011 5:43 PM EDT
In Response to Re: Tito Bashers, Talk About How he Massaged the Game Tonight
In Response to Re: Tito Bashers, Talk About How he Massaged the Game Tonight : I agree. I'm open to listen to logic which suggests Tito is a poor manager, if the opposition would consider listening to the counter arguement without the "coma" type stuff. I don't agree with every tactic Tito pulls, and some of my philosphies would include tactics he never would consider, but I appreciate his results and history as a Sox manager, and I've witnessed some things he's done that are deserving of recognition. I think, going into this debate, we have to be acutely cognizant of the fact that Tito is privvy to much more information than you and I. Tito has vision, and doesn't sacrifice short term successes for long term failures. There are many parameters to managing, and it's tough to be perfect at all of them/definitely a tradeoff. I respect Tito alot, even if I do like the sacrifice squeeze, and he's never heard of one.
Posted by piersall
OK, good, let's give it a shot. And I include Mr. Davis in the conversation, since he expressed interest as well.
For starters, would you be willing to listen to anecdotal evidence that has nothing to do with his performance? I agree that Tito has access to much more information than do I, but I do not find him to be a visionary at all. In fact, my biggest problem with him is that he does not seem to think very far in ahead (except for maybe how much he wants to protect his BP, as so many supporters keep citing). Good managers, like good chess players, are always thinking ahead. And here is the anecdotal evidence that I would ask you to consider. I have a friend who knows him and has interacted with him on a number of occasions (outside baseball), and he says exactly the same thing about Tito as I just did. My observation has been that Tito does not do much tactical maneuvering (bunting, hit and run, etc.), precisely because he is not thinking ahead enough. Incidentally, as I mentioned in my earlier post, I think he has MUCH better this year on that score, so who knows, maybe he is learning.
Additionally, though he appears to run a smooth, mostly conflict free clubhouse, I am not convinced that he demands enough of his players, who are, after all, better paid than you and I ever dreamed of. I think he is kind of soft actually, on that count, and it certainly seemed to me he had not demanded enough of them in Spring Training, hence the awful start. I have played for great coaches and lousy coaches, and the former universally demanded more of his players than the latter.
I don't think he has a good "feel" for when to take starters or relievers out, but admittedly that is mostly art not science and not all managers have that talent. Again, I find that he has seemed better at it this year. And perhaps it is asking too much, but I wish he would not go by the standard book all the time of bringing in the closer for the 9th, even though the guy who just pitched a perfect 8th is unhittable and has not been overused in the last week. (Again, there don't seem to be many such situations, but I wish he would have the guts to do it occasionally.)
I have read many responses on this subject demanding that detractors name better managers who would be available. I think that is a cop out. If you think you could get a better manager/CEO/whatever, you would simply not renew the contract and institute a search for someone better. You don't have to know who that is when you let the first guy go. I think the Sox could do better, but I also think that Tito is doing sufficiently better himself this year that he deserves to prove that he has evolved and is now a good manager. With the squad he has, if he is a good manager, he ought to get to the WS. The proof of the pudding, especially in sports, is in the eating.