That's some pretty tough criticism, albeit fair. I have to admit, when YES relaunched PB, I wondered if Goldman would still be so critical. It's good to see they still have that latitude. I guess blogging is almost like SciFi in the 1950s. You can get away with things that other outlets can't. I can't imagine Bob Lorenz delivering such a blunt commentary.
Ironically, as Girardi frustration seems to be going mainstream, I think I've finally come to approach him in the same way I do a bad player (don't blame him...blame the man who plays him). In this case, if Hal and Cash think Girardi is the man to lead the team, any problems with Joe are really problems with them.
[1] Good point...no one is McGraw and, quite frankly, I'd rather have a stable manager like Girardi than a tactician like Martin (over the long run). Still, I think Girardi is very much deserving of the criticism.
If Austin Kearns could get a hit we are not having this conversation.
If the home plate umpire didn't miss two pitches after the 0-1 count on Johnson we are discussing lunch.
If the Yanks don't make the playoffs or advance beyond the first round it's because they are not good enough. Manager talk is silly.
[4] It's worth noting that Joe Girardi has already won as many WS as a manager as Earl Weaver did.
That's not to say that Girardi is anywhere near the manager Weaver was, merely to offer some perspective. I'm as tough on Joe G as anyone (well, maybe not as tough as William is), but ultimately the players have to produce.
My frustration lies not with Girardi, but with an offense that has been getting virtually NO clutch hits. If people think there's a manager out there who is SO friggin smart he will win games that a hitless team would otherwise lose, name him. And for the record, I'm (grudgingly) on board with the plan of getting the team healthy and not burning out the pen (our only real strength of late), even if that means going on the road come October. I know that view puts me at odds with the great Lupica, but I'll risk that stigma.
Joe has what, 4 years managing, so are we comparing him to the 4 years of managing John or the 30+ years of managing John?
Players make mistakes. Managers make mistakes. GMs make mistakes. Owners make mistakes. It's called "being human"
Last I looked, the Yankees are defending WS winners, tied for the most wins this season, with only 1/5 of the rotation pitching well at the moment.
And I think there are a whole bunch of former A's pitchers still angry with Billy.
That's some pretty tough criticism, albeit fair. I have to admit, when YES relaunched PB, I wondered if Goldman would still be so critical. It's good to see they still have that latitude. I guess blogging is almost like SciFi in the 1950s. You can get away with things that other outlets can't. I can't imagine Bob Lorenz delivering such a blunt commentary.
Ironically, as Girardi frustration seems to be going mainstream, I think I've finally come to approach him in the same way I do a bad player (don't blame him...blame the man who plays him). In this case, if Hal and Cash think Girardi is the man to lead the team, any problems with Joe are really problems with them.
[1] Good point...no one is McGraw and, quite frankly, I'd rather have a stable manager like Girardi than a tactician like Martin (over the long run). Still, I think Girardi is very much deserving of the criticism.
[3] How bout we split the difference and take a stable tactician like Earl Weaver?
If Austin Kearns could get a hit we are not having this conversation.
If the home plate umpire didn't miss two pitches after the 0-1 count on Johnson we are discussing lunch.
If the Yanks don't make the playoffs or advance beyond the first round it's because they are not good enough. Manager talk is silly.
[4] It's worth noting that Joe Girardi has already won as many WS as a manager as Earl Weaver did.
That's not to say that Girardi is anywhere near the manager Weaver was, merely to offer some perspective. I'm as tough on Joe G as anyone (well, maybe not as tough as William is), but ultimately the players have to produce.
My frustration lies not with Girardi, but with an offense that has been getting virtually NO clutch hits. If people think there's a manager out there who is SO friggin smart he will win games that a hitless team would otherwise lose, name him. And for the record, I'm (grudgingly) on board with the plan of getting the team healthy and not burning out the pen (our only real strength of late), even if that means going on the road come October. I know that view puts me at odds with the great Lupica, but I'll risk that stigma.