06-01-2010, 09:26 AM
<!--quoteo(post=99292:date=May 31 2010, 10:57 PM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ May 31 2010, 10:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=99281:date=May 31 2010, 08:08 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ May 31 2010, 08:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=99223:date=May 30 2010, 11:23 PM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ May 30 2010, 11:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Whether you are satisfied with Lou's in-game management or not over the past 2 seasons, even his long-time supporters would have to acknowledge that he seems disinterested and overwhelmed by just about every obstacle he's encountered for quite some time. What kind of confidence could that possibly inspire in a team? If anything, his general demeanor and the impression that he has been "out to lunch" since the 2008 playoffs should cost him his job, but it won't. If it hasn't by now, it never will.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My problem with this is the idea that a fan's perception that Pinella is "out to lunch" is almost completely meaningless. Usually (and I have no idea if this is actually what you are getting at Rok) when fans say the manager "doesn't care", it's code for "he isn't screaming at the umps enough". 95 percent of what a manager does to show a team that he cares happens completely out of our sight. It happens in the clubhouse, in meetings with Hendry, in practice, in the dugout. More importantly, when he says "what do you want me to do?", he's RIGHT. He can't make ARam hit. He can't make Dlee hit. He can't make Grabow not suck (and if you are going to argue he could stop pitching him, fine, but pretty much no one has given him another option in that bullpen).
I'd also argue that you can't complain about Lou going through the motions on one hand, and on the other hand rip him for trying something unconventional like putting Z in the pen. A manager who doesn't give a shit simply doesn't make that move. Period.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That isn't what I meant by "out to lunch." I do think Lou cares, but he seems exasperated and paralyzed by events around him. That's what I meant. And giving in to certain impulses to rock the boat (like trying high risk, low reward experiments such as moving Z to the pen) are not the types of calculated gambles that a manager who actually understands his own roster would take. Being caught off guard by your leadoff hitter only walking once in the past 30 days is another sign of a manager who has overstayed his welcome. Re-read Bruce Miles' articles over the past few weeks and then tell me if Lou still sounds like a manager who is on the ball or not. I'm not saying that firing Lou would automatically turn this team into a champion, but I also don't believe for a second that Lou played no part in constructing the roster over the past 2 seasons or that he is filling out the lineup card in the best possible way recently. What sort of value is he adding in your opinion?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm sorry Rok, I love you but I need to call you out. This seems like back peddling. Out to lunch = exasperated and paralyzed? That's not what I think of the expression. When I hear out to lunch I think happy, carefree, and unthinking. I can only assume that's what you meant originally by your statement. Now maybe you reconcidered your originall position, and that's cool. But I find it extremely hard to believe that when you posted the statement originally, you meant exasperated and paralyzed.
Also, in terms of the Zambrano move, I think BTs point was that he gets slammed for not doing anything and also slammed for doing too much. I'm not saying that's not possible, but the polarizing comments are ridiculous. To placate Piniella as the biggest problem is foolish and acusing him of not caring is finding a reason to dislike him.
I personally think that it's getting to the point that this team is just not going to perform well enough to make a push for the playoffs and having Lou here doesn't do anything for the Cubs. Unless they go on a serious tear in the next month, I think they need to talk to him about stepping down. Not because he's an idiot. Not because he's crazy. Not because he doesn't care. Only because having a veteran manager that doesn't have long term plans for managing this team does not fit the bill for the current situation. That's all the reason needed.
My problem with this is the idea that a fan's perception that Pinella is "out to lunch" is almost completely meaningless. Usually (and I have no idea if this is actually what you are getting at Rok) when fans say the manager "doesn't care", it's code for "he isn't screaming at the umps enough". 95 percent of what a manager does to show a team that he cares happens completely out of our sight. It happens in the clubhouse, in meetings with Hendry, in practice, in the dugout. More importantly, when he says "what do you want me to do?", he's RIGHT. He can't make ARam hit. He can't make Dlee hit. He can't make Grabow not suck (and if you are going to argue he could stop pitching him, fine, but pretty much no one has given him another option in that bullpen).
I'd also argue that you can't complain about Lou going through the motions on one hand, and on the other hand rip him for trying something unconventional like putting Z in the pen. A manager who doesn't give a shit simply doesn't make that move. Period.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That isn't what I meant by "out to lunch." I do think Lou cares, but he seems exasperated and paralyzed by events around him. That's what I meant. And giving in to certain impulses to rock the boat (like trying high risk, low reward experiments such as moving Z to the pen) are not the types of calculated gambles that a manager who actually understands his own roster would take. Being caught off guard by your leadoff hitter only walking once in the past 30 days is another sign of a manager who has overstayed his welcome. Re-read Bruce Miles' articles over the past few weeks and then tell me if Lou still sounds like a manager who is on the ball or not. I'm not saying that firing Lou would automatically turn this team into a champion, but I also don't believe for a second that Lou played no part in constructing the roster over the past 2 seasons or that he is filling out the lineup card in the best possible way recently. What sort of value is he adding in your opinion?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm sorry Rok, I love you but I need to call you out. This seems like back peddling. Out to lunch = exasperated and paralyzed? That's not what I think of the expression. When I hear out to lunch I think happy, carefree, and unthinking. I can only assume that's what you meant originally by your statement. Now maybe you reconcidered your originall position, and that's cool. But I find it extremely hard to believe that when you posted the statement originally, you meant exasperated and paralyzed.
Also, in terms of the Zambrano move, I think BTs point was that he gets slammed for not doing anything and also slammed for doing too much. I'm not saying that's not possible, but the polarizing comments are ridiculous. To placate Piniella as the biggest problem is foolish and acusing him of not caring is finding a reason to dislike him.
I personally think that it's getting to the point that this team is just not going to perform well enough to make a push for the playoffs and having Lou here doesn't do anything for the Cubs. Unless they go on a serious tear in the next month, I think they need to talk to him about stepping down. Not because he's an idiot. Not because he's crazy. Not because he doesn't care. Only because having a veteran manager that doesn't have long term plans for managing this team does not fit the bill for the current situation. That's all the reason needed.