200D00111607105053620 wrote: Possibly Tanner.
But, only for games that we won.
)
Tanner stunk 64 times in 1979!
Yep. What about the announcers? There HAD to be at least one who stunk all of the time.
)))
Does Chuck's Stink Quotient happen to include the Pist-Season losses? We must be precise with these things.
No, but he was really bad in some of those games.
Sports (really, life in general) is kind of funny in so many ways. A manager can'r win.
I know a guy who's way tougher than I'll ever be. When we win (as we did in 79)...he's been known to say that it wasn't by enough. He'd go on an on about guys LOB, especially in scoring position.
Or, we should've won in 6 games, not 7. Can't please everyvbody.
________
We need a scorecard to figure it out. Apparently it is OK to criticize Shelton and Polanco. But it is not OK to criticize Cherington because we have to wait and see? Hasn't Cherington and Shelton been here about the same amount of time? Why don't we have to wait and see with Shelton?
Because the criticism of Shelton and Polanco is very specific. And no one says you can't criticize Cherington. But do it intelligently. Recognize what he's doing and analyze that. But your criticism is mainly that he's not following the course you want him to follow. You tell us how bad he is because he's not building up the MLB roster even tho that is clearly not his focus this year. But you don't tell us how he conceivably could have built up the MLB roster so quickly with Nutting's financial constraints and the lack of talent in the farm system. And you tell us he's a failure because the GMs before him failed and therefore he's just kicking the can. And since he's focused on building up the minors, you make the case that he's doing it poorly by giving false information. When they got an A, an AA and a AAA (who had played for the Padres this year) player for Frazier you said it was for 3 suspect A players. Then you said it was for 3 utility players even tho one was a pitcher and one was an outfielder with power. But you wanted to make the trade look as bad as possible so you lied about the return. And when these things are pointed out to you you start crying that everyone else can complain but you're not allowed.
You're allowed. In fact many of us would love to hear some intelligent, legitimate criticisms from you since you are so adamant that Cherington is terrible. Enlighten us. But your criticisms are based on Cherington focusing on something other than what you want him to focus on. And on things you make up that aren't even true. You can't stand a rational comment like it's too soon to judge BC because his focus is on the minors so we'll have to wait and see. All that means is that he may turn out good or he may turn out bad but we don't know yet. But you need an immediate rush to judgment to deem him a failure based on the MLB team this year. And you hate that everyone won't join you in your irrational analysis. Criticism is fine. But back it up.
_______
I feel that my criticism of Cherington is very very specific, and the criticism of Shelton and Polanco is irrational.