IST: Cub at Reds

[brett05]

Show any proof of that besides its just a theory.

Not going thru this again.

 

[brett05]

That doesn't matter.

The game is played by scoring runs and preventing runs. It's all that matters.

How has Maddon handled Castro who is contributing to wins? How has Maddon handled the pitching staff? How has Maddon used all the players, so that they are ready to play when their opportunity comes?

You keep arguing this, but with who is the mystery. Maddon has done a great job as expected.

Those answers are clearly worth wins.

Nope, that is worth zero wins. It scored no runs nor did it prevent any runs from scoring.

Go back to watching Ventura.

Save it for the correct thread.

LOL. The answer is not only "no", it's "hell no".

And your OPINION is noted.

You have no proof that batting the pitcher 8th would have had the Cubs score more runs. What would have helped the Cubs score more runs is if they would have put the ball into play more with runners on 3B instead of striking out or swinging for the fences and hitting a lazy fly.

Again not going thru this another time.

 

[Parade_Rain]

The game is played by scoring runs and preventing runs. It's all that matters.

Strategy, personnel management matters.

You keep arguing this, but with who is the mystery. Maddon has done a great job as expected.

Nope, that is worth zero wins. It scored no runs nor did it prevent any runs from scoring.

So hiring Theo Epstein hasn't been worth any wins for the organization either...if we follow your logic which is

Save it for the correct thread.

Go watch Ventura. Enjoy sucking, Sux fan.

And your OPINION is noted.

Epstein would not have jumped at the chance to hire Maddon and fire Rick, who had done a decent job with a young club, if it wasn't a "hell no".

Again not going thru this another time.

Then perhaps you could have done us all a favor and not mentioned it in the first place.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Strategy, personnel management matters.

This is the crux of the whole thing. Everything else is just noise.

 

[FrankieLyrical]

Brett, are you insinuating that we're winning based off talent and Joe Maddon has not played a big part in our success this season? That's what it seems like, but not sure if I'm interpreting correctly.

 

[Parade_Rain]

This is the crux of the whole thing. Everything else is just noise.

Yes, but everything must be broken down into something quantifiable. This is 2015 afterall.

 

[brett05]

Strategy, personnel management matters.

Not to actually winning the game it doesn't. It scores no runs or prevents runs from scoring.

So hiring Theo Epstein hasn't been worth any wins for the organization either...if we follow your logic which is

you do know you need to score runs to win games, right? Stop confusing what wins a game and what minimizes mistakes.

Go watch Ventura. Enjoy sucking, Sux fan.

So jealous, again keep these meaningless attacks in the appropriate thread.

Epstein would not have jumped at the chance to hire Maddon and fire Rick, who had done a decent job with a young club, if it wasn't a "hell no".

And your OPINION id noted.

Then perhaps you could have done us all a favor and not mentioned it in the first place.

Actually you started it.:sigh:

 

[brett05]

Brett, are you insinuating that we're winning based off talent and Joe Maddon has not played a big part in our success this season? That's what it seems like, but not sure if I'm interpreting correctly.

Joe has minimized mistakes and has helped in getting a lot out of his team. None of that wins a single game, but does help in preventing the game being lost.

 

[Diehardfan]

No way Rentoria would have the stones to pull this off. Maddon is comfortable in his own skin and not afraid to try and do anything to win a game.

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20151001/sports/151009825/

 

[Parade_Rain]

Not to actually winning the game it doesn't. It scores no runs or prevents runs from scoring.

:lmao: There goes your big gripe about batting the pitcher 8th. Strategy just doesn't matter. :lmao:

you do know you need to score runs to win games, right? Stop confusing what wins a game and what minimizes mistakes.

Yes. I need 8 Kris Bryants and 1 Jake Arrieta. It requires no stategy whatsoever to win.

So jealous, again keep these meaningless attacks in the appropriate thread.

Managers don't matter. Go watch yours.

And your OPINION id noted.

That isn't my opinion. That's completely obvious why they hired Maddon.

Actually you started it.:sigh:

VVVVVVV

Still have not seen how many runs scored/prevented Maddon has allowed.

Could Rick have done this? We will never know. I doubt he would have changed his mind and suddenly started to bat the pitcher 8th so the Cubs likely would have scored more runs and perhaps in turn won a game or two that they lost because of that theory.

This last comment is a clear sign of Brett05 being Brett05

Trollin', trollin', trollin'
Brett05 keeps on trollin'
Rawhide

 

[brett05]

No way Rentoria would have the stones to pull this off. Maddon is comfortable in his own skin and not afraid to try and do anything to win a game.

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20151001/sports/151009825/

That said more about Jason than Joe IMO. Many questioned the move at the time from what I recall.

Joe is a vet that gets more respect than those with less experience. No doubt.

 

[brett05]

sigh...here we go....sigh

:lmao: There goes your big gripe about batting the pitcher 8th. Strategy just doesn't matter. :lmao:

it does nothing of the sort.

Managers don't matter. Go watch yours.

Ventura makes more mistakes than Joe. No one questions that but again, you make more scarecrows I guess.

That isn't my opinion. That's completely obvious why they hired Maddon.

nope, still just an OPINION. There really seems to be little for you to show otherwise.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Joe has minimized mistakes and has helped in getting a lot out of his team. None of that wins a single game, but does help in preventing the game being lost.

Brett, I've supported you on this in the past but you seem to be drawing a line that doesn't need to be drawn. Let's put this put this in a business context is the guy in charge not the one ultimately responsible for the profits and loss under his control? Do the decision he makes in terms of where to put people, how to develop talent and how to recognize obstacles to success not lead to profit? Why would it be any different in baseball? What do you think this team would look like with Matt Williams was the manager? Brad Ausmus? Robin Ventura? There is no way you can tell me any of those guys would still have this team where it is right now with still a decent shot at 97 wins almost 8 wins over their updated Pythagorean projection of 89.6. A team with a bunch of talented rookies but rookies just the same. No one has ever brought a team to the playoffs with the 4 rookies with the combined AB that the 4 rookies have. Never, not in the history of the game. Because you can't quantify how many wins that's worth all you can say is that Maddon has prevented them from losing more? Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the absence of a loss a win? You're really barking up the wrong tree just being obstinate to be obstinate. The thing is your initial point about how many wins a manager is directly responsible for and how it can't be quantified is correct. You've just surrounded that point with a bunch of noise and refusal to bring the obvious, although unquantifiable, intangibles into play.

 

[SilenceS]

Brett, I've supported you on this in the past but you seem to be drawing a line that doesn't need to be drawn. Let's put this put this in a business context is the guy in charge not the one ultimately responsible for the profits and loss under his control? Do the decision he makes in terms of where to put people, how to develop talent and how to recognize obstacles to success not lead to profit? Why would it be any different in baseball? What do you think this team would look like with Matt Williams was the manager? Brad Ausmus? Robin Ventura? There is no way you can tell me any of those guys would still have this team where it is right now with still a decent shot at 97 wins almost 8 wins over their updated Pythagorean projection of 89.6. A team with a bunch of talented rookies but rookies just the same. No one has ever brought a team to the playoffs with the 4 rookies with the combined AB that the 4 rookies have. Never, not in the history of the game. Because you can't quantify how many wins that's worth all you can say is that Maddon has prevented them from losing more? Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the absence of a loss a win? You're really barking up the wrong tree just being obstinate to be obstinate. The thing is your initial point about how many wins a manager is directly responsible for and how it can't be quantified is correct. You've just surrounded that point with a bunch of noise and refusal to bring the obvious, although unquantifiable, intangibles into play.

I can sum this up for you. There are workers, managers, and there are owners. There is a reason there is a pecking order and there is a reason some don't understand that.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

I can sum this up for you. There are workers, managers, and there are owners. There is a reason there is a pecking order and there is a reason some don't understand that.

Excellent point. I've been all three at one point or another. I see the big picture pretty well.

 

[SilenceS]

Excellent point. I've been all three at one point or another. I see the big picture pretty well.

My first boss told me that. He also said that you can always tell who is going to be what one day. That always stuck with me.

 

[brett05]

Brett, I've supported you on this in the past but you seem to be drawing a line that doesn't need to be drawn. Let's put this put this in a business context is the guy in charge not the one ultimately responsible for the profits and loss under his control? Do the decision he makes in terms of where to put people, how to develop talent and how to recognize obstacles to success not lead to profit? Why would it be any different in baseball? What do you think this team would look like with Matt Williams was the manager? Brad Ausmus? Robin Ventura? There is no way you can tell me any of those guys would still have this team where it is right now with still a decent shot at 97 wins almost 8 wins over their updated Pythagorean projection of 89.6. A team with a bunch of talented rookies but rookies just the same. No one has ever brought a team to the playoffs with the 4 rookies with the combined AB that the 4 rookies have. Never, not in the history of the game. Because you can't quantify how many wins that's worth all you can say is that Maddon has prevented them from losing more? Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the absence of a loss a win? You're really barking up the wrong tree just being obstinate to be obstinate. The thing is your initial point about how many wins a manager is directly responsible for and how it can't be quantified is correct. You've just surrounded that point with a bunch of noise and refusal to bring the obvious, although unquantifiable, intangibles into play.

The analogy fails when compared to a business. Let's keep it in the correct realm. What would happen with the three managers that you mentioned? They would make more mistakes than Joe. They would probably cost their team wins because of that. Again, as you know from the past to which you agreed with, Managers don't win, they help to mitigate losses. It's not an opposite affect. The net effect of a manager should be zero. It should all be on the field just as the game is played. However each time a manager makes a mistake the number drops from zero effect to a negative effect. Depending on the decisions made it could be a tiny bit negative to catastrophic. That's the difference. That's not noise.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Sorry, the business analogy is relevant. Almost everything in life can be compared with something else in life. Pro sports are a business first ad the game is part of that. Games are very much analogous to profit and loss in business. The fact that you can't see that is why we're at this impasse.

 

[brett05]

Sorry, the business analogy is relevant. Almost everything in life can be compared with something else in life. Pro sports are a business first ad the game is part of that. Games are very much analogous to profit and loss in business. The fact that you can't see that is why we're at this impasse.

You are confusing the business of sports vs the game itself.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

You are confusing the business of sports vs the game itself.

I thought I made it clear that I meant both. All games are analogous with business at their core. A group of people, each with their own gifts, combining their efforts to create something greater than the sum of its parts. A win in sports is analogous to profit in business.