McLaren announces coaching staff
If you haven’t heard by now, John McLaren’s announced 80% of his coaching staff for the 2008 season – Jim Riggleman as bench coach, Eddie Rodriguez as first base coach, Mel Stottlemyre as pitching coach, Norm Charlton as bullpen coach, and Larry Bowa as the candidate-of-choice to be the third base coach.
I’m sure they’ll get offended by this, but by and large, major league coaches don’t really matter. There are a few exceptions, but for the most part, these guys real job title is John McLaren’s Drinking Buddy. They’re around to make McLaren more comfortable, and their impact on the players on-field actions is going to be minimal.
However, it’s nearly impossible to not see the obvious trend here. We rode McLaren pretty hard in the second half for his ridiculous love of veteran players, and it’s not hard to see that McLaren went back to the experience well when picking these guys. Clearly, he values track record above almost anything else in decision making, and he’s far more comfortable with someone who has experience than someone who doesn’t.
Considering he’s Lou Piniella’s understudy, that shouldn’t come as any real surprise. Piniella hated young players, especially young pitchers, during his early years in Seattle. He mellowed as the years went on, but McLaren certainly has Piniella-ish tendencies when it comes to the experience bias.
If the coaching staff he chose is any indication, I’d expect another year of Rick White type inexplicable decisions, with old guys getting the longest leash imaginable and unproven players sitting around watching.
Comments
107 Responses to “McLaren announces coaching staff”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
USSM uses and recommends
Stottlemyre – Ugh.
Agree on all counts.
It’s a catch-22. On the one hand, I wouldn’t expect a manager on a one-year deal to get away from his comfort zone, so the moves aren’t surprising. On the other, there’s no way I’d give McLaren a multi-year contract in the hopes that it would encourage him to take more “chances” in playing the kids.
The front office is setting up 2008 to be a wasted year, which is a shame.
If anything makes me optimistic, though, it’s that you’re adding Bowa and Stottlemyre from the Yankees — an organization that’s used plenty of young guys in the last couple of years in key situations. It’s often been out of necessity, but maybe they can lend a little perspective.
Or maybe I’m just wishing.
I was going to use a great Star Wars quote but I’ll save it for another time. I’m sure the 2008 Mariners will have many disappointing days ahead.
At least Larry Bowa is an experienced third base coach, so that’s an improvement.
Those are inspired hires.
We’ll be lucky to finish .500 in ‘08.
Nuss, I get what you’re trying to say, but Stottlemyre hasn’t been with the Yankees for the last couple of years, so their use of young guys recently has no relationship to him.
per Drayer:
“One change [McLaren] would like to see is more running from those who can. Five stolen bases from Betancourt is not acceptable. With his speed he should be able to swipe upward of thirty bags a year. He also mentioned wanting to see Adam Jones go for it on the base paths. He doesn’t think guys should be afraid of being thrown out.
Looks like there will be a change in camp as well. For those heading to spring training, workouts shouldn’t be as spread out as they were this year. Mac said today that he would move the majority of the practices back to the two fields closest to the complex. ”
(and Rodriguez wil be organising spring camp this year)
from Hickey’s piece: “As for Stottlemyre, the Mariners are bringing aboard a pitching coach who knows about winning.
“When I was in Tampa Bay, (fellow coach) Don Zimmer talked about him all the time,” McLaren said. “Mel utilizes the strength of each pitcher. Whatever the strength of the pitcher is, you have to work with that. Too often this season we tried to go after weakness of other hitters rather than go with our strength.”
oh, and in all of the articles this morning, Larue had the damndest line:
“And Charlton brings a presence, an attitude – he’s a man’s man.”
“And Charlton brings a presence, an attitude – he’s a man’s man.”
Is that why he keeps having to adjust Little Norm?
“When I was in Tampa Bay, (fellow coach) Don Zimmer talked about him all the time,” McLaren said. “Mel utilizes the strength of each pitcher. Whatever the strength of the pitcher is, you have to work with that. Too often this season we tried to go after weakness of other hitters rather than go with our strength.”
Is it really hard to recognize Roger Clemens’ strength, or Andy Pettite’s, and tell each to pitch to that strength?
“Roger, I think you need to work fastball and splitter. That’s a good combo for you.”
“And Andy, I’ve noticed that your cutter to right-handed hitters is really tough. Do that some more.”
Who cares (about coaches, not specifically msb’s post above)? Oh, I guess that doesn’t substantially contribute.
Coaches don’t matter. McLaren knows he’s on the hot seat. Can you blame him for taking proven commodities, even if they’re proven mediocre? Do you want to wind up with the 3rd base coach who’s the talk of the town (about how horrible he is), speeding your own exit?
On the bright side, I see two former major league managers on the staff which means they won’t have to look far for an experienced interim manager. And let’s hope that given a chance to mold the team himself, instead of “inheriting” Hargrove’s team, McLaren does some things different. You have to think he was involved in the decision to not sign Guillen to an extension (I know Dave liked the idea, but I thought it was a terrible move), so that’s some change already.
Of course if they’re “opening RF” for Jones, that doesn’t solve the second biggest gaping hole on the team.
You know, after seeing Ichiro raise the 12th man flag over at QWEST field on Sunday, and watching him grinning from ear to ear as he spun that towel around and exhorted that crowd. I was ready for the new baseball season to start then and there.
And then I go and read this, and now waiting for next year doesn’t seem like such a bad proposition at all.
brain dead (mostly) white men?
High tech city, stadium, ownership, no tech managers.
They haven’t decided to not sign Guillen. They haven’t reached an agreement to re-sign him yet. There’s a difference.
Not in and of itself, but more as an insight into the team’s decision-making.
THink we’re afraid that they consider veteran status as a primary quality, on the par with talent…that they can trade off experience for talent to get the same results.
If so, then they aren’t learning anything, they aren’t going outside their comfort zone and, most importantly, they aren’t questioning themselves enough and looking for every edge to win (a mark of 20th Century American corporate management, as opposed to 21st Century American entrepreneurialism).
More relevant…no entrepreneurial leaders.
I think the front office manages, but doesn’t lead. The orientation is that of an old-style manager instead of an entrepreneurial innovator.
The team that finally hooked me as a baseball fan was the mid-80’s Mets (I lived in NYC at the time and my best friend had been a Mets fan since we were in kindergarten. It took him 20 years, but he finally got me hooked too.) Stottlemyre was the pitching coach for that team and I guess some part of my baseball heart has thought well of him ever since.
Now that I know more about how to analyze what he does, I’ll be glad to watch and see what (if any) difference, positive or negative, he brings.
Why not save the money then and not hire anyone? Isn’t time to think outside the box, to be bold and innovate in baseball?
I think of all the coaches, the pitching coach has the chance to make the biggest impact. I remember when Bryan Price came in and made Lou look smarter than he was. Guys like Mazzone, Verne Ruhle, Dave Duncan and Rick Peterson have all had stretches where they have had a tangible positive effect on their pitching staffs.
The one area of the offense where we play the percentages intelligently, and naturally he thinks that’s the problem.
6 — I had forgotten about that. My bad.
is it a good thing or a bad thing that Mel had Doc Gooden from age 19+, through pretty much all of his ups and downs …
The quote about baserunning scares me. Just because a guy is fast does not mean that he is good at base stealing. There have been lots of players who can motor from 1st to 2nd or 1st to 3rd but are subpar basestealers. Yubet is a prime example. He doesn’t steal a meager five bases because he is lazy, but because he doesn’t read pitchers well and he gets lousy jumps. Unless Yubet makes a Herculean leap in improving those skills, there is no way he steals 30 bases. By the way, isn’t an emphasis on stealing bases and getting more out of the running game something that occurs at every other spring training?
My guess is that Mel has little if any influence over the forces that shaped Gooden’s life and career.
I’m sure they’ll get offended by this, but by and large, major league coaches don’t really matter. There are a few exceptions, but for the most part, these guys real job title is John McLaren’s Drinking Buddy.
I don’t think any one of us can say that coaches don’t matter at all. They are still out there every day reviewing and sometimes tweaking player mechanics (at least the hitting and pitching coaches), and that must create some impact on performance, even if that impact is impossible to measure.
“Don’t really matter” is not the same thing as “don’t matter at all”.
But overall, their impact on player performance is negligible.
I’ll go on record that the starting 2B on Opening Day will be Willie Hustle, and Richie Sexson will be given every opportunity to fall on his face at 1B.
and that must create some impact on performance, even if that impact is impossible to measure.
Uh, what? Isn’t the negative hypothesis (no measurable impact = no impact) more reasonable to assume than? This is like arguing for Santa Claus’s existence.
I thought Stottlemyre was widely regarded as having damaged Gooden’s release point (and, subsequently, his arm) during his stint with the Mets as he kept trying to get the Doc to learn a change-up even though his fastball and curve were the best in the business. The change altered the Doc’s release point (I believe), and it was just one factor amidst a myriad of them that led to Gooden’s demise.
Granted, but isn’t coaching a primary way to LEARN to read pitchers? It seems evident that he doesn’t have the base-stealing instincts of an Ichiro (let alone a Rickey Henderson), but good coaching should be able to improve the base stealing somewhat. (Now, whether or not the Ms can supply that good coaching is a separate question altogether…)
27. Me thinks we’ll be playing a veteran with a track record such as Mark Loretta at 2B.
i think what hurt gooden the most was cocaine…
#28– well, I’ve read (just various internet “I’ve heard” comments, mind you) that Mel supposedly messed up Doc’s mechanics by teaching him the change-up after the ‘86 season, but wasn’t he healthy & mostly successful as a pitcher until ‘89? I know he missed part of ‘87, but IIRC, that was rehab, and not arm-related.
I agree that the selection of coaches is a peek into the mind of Mac and that it’s not a terribly reassuring one. But the best coaches in the world couldn’t have done much with HoRam, et al. this season. The coaches are a part, the position players are a much bigger part, but the huge question mark that still hangs over this management team is whether they can evaluate and sign good pitching. At this point, as far as coaching goes, I’ll be happy if Mel S. just doesn’t screw up Felix.
Can’t wait for the 2010 season.
well, you know, Mac sez that he went for the best, not just for friends….
McLaren said experience wasn’t the sole criterion upon which he based his decisions. “I wanted coaches who would put the Mariners in the best position to win next year,” he said. “I passed up good names. I passed up some good friends, too.”
These coaches are proven veterans who’ve been through wars.
Meet the new coach, same as the old coach.
My wife has come to the conclusion that all levels of management, to some extent, are trying to lose on purpose, Major League style.
I’m not sure how she comes to these irrational conclusions, but it’s hard to disprove her point when we sign and use Rick White and multiple situations perfectly suited for a well-rested JJ Putz.
Who’s more insane, my wife or McLaren?
27. Impossible to measure because there is so much noise in the data.
#29 — I agree that excellent coaching would improve Yubet’s basestealing, but I doubt that he could become a 30 SB man by improving the skills that can be enhanced by coaching. From watching Yuni, he appears to be a runner that takes time to reach his maximum speed. So, while he is fast from home plate to 2nd or 3rd, he does not beat out a lot of infield hits. My worry is that the new coaches will be incapable of seeing this (if indeed I am correct) and insist that his speed should necessarily translate to more SBs. Then they will grow frustrated with him when he doesn’t steal more bases and believe that he is either lazy or stupid, which of course would be the wrong conclusion.
Ah, he’s agile, but not necessarily possessing an explosive start (which would help in base-stealing) and the coaches may not be swift enough to allow for that.
That’s a valid fear given the past coaching vis a vis base running. And the “veteran” coaches may not feel it necessary to break down his base running into those components….
Jeff Nye: When DMZ says the coaches main job is to be drinking buddies with John Mclaren, that’s pretty demeaning to the job.
EC: If Raffy Chavez and Jeff Pentland had been replaced by any other two coaches last season would our players have performed exactly the same? It would be foolish to believe so, right? But how large a swing the difference would be and in which direction for which players, we obviously have no idea. I find it hard to believe that the skills coaches have as negligible impact as is commonly espoused simply because the impact is difficult to measure/predict.
Sammy, that was Dave, not DMZ.
20 Scraps – “The one area of the offense where we play the percentages intelligently, and naturally he thinks that’s the problem.”
Exactly! The one dang area they improved on, throwing out Hargrove’s aggressive base-running lunacy… and that’s what they want to fix. Genius.
Just fire them now and save us a year, please.
25 – “I don’t think any one of us can say that coaches don’t matter at all.”
That is not at all what he said. Bad pool.
11 – “Coaches don’t matter. McLaren knows he’s on the hot seat. Can you blame him for taking proven commodities, even if they’re proven mediocre? Do you want to wind up with the 3rd base coach who’s the talk of the town (about how horrible he is), speeding your own exit? On the bright side, I see two former major league managers on the staff which means they won’t have to look far for an experienced interim manager.”
I’m not sure what to make of this.
Are you saying I can’t blame him because he chose crappy coaches so they wouldn’t threaten his job?
Or I can’t blame him for taking proven veterans because they were the safest…?
I’m not sure why I can’t blame him.
42. Whoops. Sorry.
23-year-old Yuni might have had the speed to steal 30 bases, but 26-year-old Yuni, with roughly an additional 20 pounds on his frame due to natural filling out and exposure to an American diet (thank you Cheesecake Factory), probably does not.
The common thread between his coaching selections and his love of veteran players is clear. And it tells us a lot about who John McLaren is.
In every office there’s the guy (or gal) in his 50’s who was once the hot young prospect in the office but now is stuck in a mediocre job, who never got the shot he thinks he deserved at the big promotion, and who is now marking time until retirement stewing with resentment against all the young guys who got promoted ahead of him over the years. That guy is John McLaren.
McLaren got a minor league managing job at about 28 years old, and then became an MLB third-base coach at 36. I’m sure he saw himself on track for a managing job, not realizing it would take 21 more years of toiling as an underpaid coach. Every time a managerial opening came along, he saw it go to a younger guy who hadn’t been through the wars like he did.
He identifies with those older guys, and probably is a bit resentful toward the young punk who wants to take their jobs away.
I’m not defending him, but the pattern seems clear.
This may be heresy but Charlton’s commentaries on KJR and the like did very little to impress me. He was pretty much another walking cliche spouter “keep the ball down” “establish the fastball early” etc. etc.
Glad he got the opportunity but hope he won’t get saddled with next year’s version of Rick White.
As a group McLaren’s choices are pretty much what I would have expected – a group of retreads who won’t challenge him philosophically or fill in the gaps in his knowledge, so to speak. I guess we’ll see how it plays out, but I’m not expecting great things in 08.
27 – They can’t possibly trot Richie out again, can they? Didn’t they give him enough rope last year to fully and finally hang himself? Don’t we have to just bite the bullet and pay somebody to take him off our hands now?
I like Mel, for what it’s worth. Obviously he had more material to work with in the NYY organization when he was there, but you can’t argue with the results. How can he not be an upgrade from Raffy?
hmm. from the AP report:
“The Mariners were a surprise last season, reaching 20 games over .500 and leading the AL wild-card race in late August before 15 losses in 17 games doomed them. They finished 88-74, a 10-game improvement over 2006, and in second place in the AL West following three consecutive last-place seasons.”
24: Agreed. Sadly, it was guys like Darryl Strawberry and Keith Hernandez who, at that point, did.
In regards to baserunning ability, Yuni reminds me a bit of Lou Whitaker back in the ’80’s — who was (at least early in his career) a very good baserunner despite never having stolen more than 20 bases in one season. There are a lot of guys out there who, for whatever reason, don’t steal a ton of bases…but I’m with those who’ve said that that fact does not necessarily make them “lazy”, unmotivated, lacking hustle, etc.
You’re tempting fate with that question.
I’m not too worried about hurting anyone’s feelings, myself. Even the manager really has a minimal impact on the performance of the team, and these people impact the team significantly less.
So “McLaren’s drinking buddy” is probably a pretty accurate job description.
Overall, McLaren’s coaching selections seem to fit precisely into his managerial style. If I recall correctly, Bowa was an old-style manager who made a lot of questionable strategic decisions based on “small ball” thinking.
A lot of these types of manager remind me of a retarded version of Gene Mauch, who made intelligent decisions within the questionable framework of that particular strategic universe. For example, with none out and runners on first and second, he would seldom have bunted with the ninth place hitter and Ichiro coming up next, knowing that the opposition would walk Ichiro to get to Lopez but he might if the next hitter was Beltre.
It irritates me immensely when managers and coaches who profess to espouse small ball continually demonstrate that they don’t comprehend it.
SI has reprinted their 1978 cover of can’t-miss prospect Clint Hurdle
<I.Impossible to measure because there is so much noise in the data.
So how do you know that the noise ISN’T the data- that it’s just random, and coaches don’t have a lot of effect on player performance?
If Raffy Chavez and Jeff Pentland had been replaced by any other two coaches last season would our players have performed exactly the same?
OK, but if it hadn’t snowed in Cleveland, our players wouldn’t have performed “exactly” the same… because it wouldn’t be the same. Sure, a hypothetical would change things… but if it’s just random change that doesn’t fit the model of “Coach X instructed Player Y on Skill Z, and we can see this through…”, why on earth should I care about it any more than any other sort of random happenstance?
Basically, my argument is that unless you can actually SUPPORT a hypothesis of “coaching does X to affect performance”, the negative hypothesis of “we have no evidence that coaching affects performance” is the way to go, similar to “we have no evidence that team chemistry and gritty hustling ballplayers from Port Orchard improve your team”. Coaching, to me, is like chemistry- it’s overemphasized in baseball because of cognitive biases like fundamental attribution error.
EC:
I fully acknowledge that predicting performance based on coaching factors, chemistry, snow outs, dead brothers, and unhappy veterans is completely futile.
But you – and others – seem to be arguing that since we can’t measure or predict the effects of these things, they must have no effect at all. We don’t have enough information to see if there is a correlation, and I think this is especially true as regards coaches. I can’t say “Coach X instructed Player Y on Skill Z, and we can see this through…” because no knows X, Y, or Z so we can’t solve for any of the three.
And, yes, for the purposes of us responding to these hirings with a “nay” or “yay”, the correct response is “whatever”, not because “coaches have no effect” but because “we have no idea what effect different coaches might have.” It’s a small point, but one that gets washed over a lot.
There are only differences of degree between degrees of difference and no difference.
Or is it there are only degrees of difference between differences of degree and no difference?
I forget.
Sammy:
We’ve had a similar discussion about things like “chemistry” and “grit” and so on, before.
Not to rehash, well, pretty much the entire history of this site, but the general point is that if you can’t measure something, you can’t talk about it intelligently as a factor in what happens.
So there isn’t really any point to saying “it has an effect but we don’t know how much of an effect”; if you can’t measure the effect that a factor has, you can’t for sure say that it isn’t zero.
So it’s much more intellectually honest to just take all of those “intangibles” out of the discussion entirely.
My grandfather used to say “A difference that makes no difference is no difference.”
This may be heresy but Charlton’s commentaries on KJR and the like did very little to impress me. He was pretty much another walking cliche spouter “keep the ball down” “establish the fastball early” etc. etc.
Heresy? To whom? There’s been a fair amount of hostility towards Charlton-as-advisor on this blog (I know, because I was responsible for some of it) — as opposed to Charlton-as-player. Provided you can keep those two guys (or roles) separate in your head, I don’t think you’ll be considered much of an apostate.
Glad he got the opportunity but hope he won’t get saddled with next year’s version of Rick White.
You do realize that it was Charlton who saddled the team with Rick White? He was the guy who scouted him and said “Yeah, he can still pitch at the major league level.” Sure, MacLaren gets the blame for treating White as his own personal Mateo, continuing to put him into high-leverage situation where he was destined to fail and lose the game, but MacLaren only had that particular toy to play with because Charlton made the recommendation. Thus Charlton’s track record is already tainted, at least in his post-playing career. Normally I’d give someone a few more chances, but White was so obviously a disaster from the first time he took the mound that it calls Charlton’s judgment into serious question.
How long until Charlton starts lobbying for his first relief appearance? I can’t wait to see his arm fly off and land in the tenth row.
from the M’s site:
“One day after filling most of their Major League coaching vacancies, the Mariners on Tuesday named Dave Wallace as their Minor League pitching coordinator.
He replaces Pat Rice, who had held the position for the past eight seasons.”
and Mel speaks
“He was pretty much another walking cliche spouter “keep the ball down” “establish the fastball early” etc. etc.” Ron Fairly also gets jostled around for his repeated cliches and such. I think the reality is that much of baseball is that simple. Sometimes we look for something really profound about pitching or hitting when the truth is you have to get ahead in the count, keep ball down and know who, as Ron liked to repeat, “is in trouble here”.
Ironically, though, “The Sheriff” could probably STILL pitch better than The Gas Can could.
#62– the only thing I have ever seen about Norm and Rick White (other than hearing Norm say just that he knew him, and that Rick was a veteran) was from Drayer’s blog at the time:
“The Mariners are White’s 11th team in 12 years. White, who was released by Houston after suffering a herniated disc in his neck said that Norm Charlton, a friend of his, was instrumental in bringing him to the Mariners. I don’t know much about White’s pitching, but I do know he keeps good company as he said that he is also a hunting and fishing buddy of Jay Buhners.”
me, I’ve never heard that Norm ’scouted’ him, or anything beyond that one secondhand quote — and even if your roving pitching instructor does mention Rick White’s availablitity, that doesn’t mean that as a FO you have to pick the guy up….
Jeff Nye:
I realize that; I’ve been reading here a long time and know the arguments.
if you can’t measure the effect that a factor has, you can’t for sure say that it isn’t zero.
You’re right, but I would argue that a coach providing constant instruction to a player about a mechanical skill would produce a greater than 50 percent chance likelihood that the coach affects to some measure the player’s ability to perform that skill. Maybe you’re right and the coach has zero effect, but, to me, it’s much more intellectually honest to acknowledge that some “intangibles” may actually have effects that we will never be able to account for.
66: You’re right…as cliched (and boring) as “Red” was at times, I could sit through a full season of him before I could five minutes of a pompous know-it-all like Joe Buck.
Where does that greater than 50 percent likelihood come from? How did you arrive at that number?
Do you see where I’m going with this? No one is saying that some intangible effects may not exist, but any guess at what the actual amount of the effect would be is entirely a shot in the dark.
Okay, how about a rephrase? Coaches make no relative difference. There’s certainly a difference between coach/no coach, but in almost every case, no difference between Coach A and Coach B.
Bryan Price tried to get everyone to change the position of their hands. Rafael Chaves tried to get everyone to throw a two-seam fastball. Mel Stottlemyre wants everyone to pitch inside. It’s different, but not in any meaningful way. In the end, unless you’re Rick Peterson or Leo Mazzone, you’re not going to have any real impact on your players.
71. I know that guessing “the actual amount of the effect would be entirely a shot in the dark.” I’ve gone to lengths in every one of my posts to state my agreement with this position.
No one is saying that some intangible effects may not exist
It seems, at times, that there are a whole crap load of people that believe this. And in the instance of trying to guess which “intangibles” could make a large difference, pitching instruction and batting instruction would be near the top of my list. Maybe not for the majority of our roster, but for the struggling players in particular. Look at all the mechanical tweaking we put HoRam, Weaver, and even Felix through last year. Would a different pitching coach with a different understanding of mechanics have made a difference last year? I bet he would have. What kind of difference? Who knows.
Or, hell, maybe it’s like Dave says and every pitching coach is only good at understanding one or two concepts and sucks equally at fixing mechanics.
Right, but the point I’m trying to make is that you have no way to disprove those who say that no intagible effects exist.
So, while you’re free to believe that (and this is just hyperbole to illustrate a point, don’t get upset) if Felix wears pink socks he’ll get an extra 5 mph on his fastball, until you have some evidence connecting those two things, you’re better off not even bringing his sock color into the discussion, because you can’t prove any correlation, much less causation.
Not everything can be measured, and that’s okay; but we can only talk in a concrete fashion about what can.
I can work with that, Dave.
74. The only things we have in lieu of hard information is an educated guess. Arguments for why one thing is probably true even if I cannot prove it with figures. I would deduce that pink socks would have no correlation to Felix’ velocity because there’s no logical correlation to his arm speed. If a pitching coach is changing the release points, hand positions, arm angles, and leg kick of three of our five rotation starters, I would logically guess that the coach’s instruction has some bearing on the results, even if I don’t know to what end. I would also guess that one coach might change those mechanics in one way, and another would do it another way, and the results between those two coaches would differ. Like it or not, this is a causational argument.
68 – They talked about it at length on a KOMO post-game show right when he was added to the 25-man roster. I don’t recall anything about Charlton having explicitly ’scouted’ White, but I’m pretty sure that if it wasn’t for Charlton petitioning on White’s behalf, we would have never seen him in an M’s uniform last year.
You would have a point if you were discussing an effect and what caused it. But what you are discussing is something for which there is no apparent effect. You are starting with a cause, and proposing that it has an effect whether we can detect it or not. You think that it sounds logical, but it is not in fact logical. It falls into the area of “common sense” — the things we know to be true because we know them to be true. Those are exactly the kinds of things you should question in your thinking, rather than stubbornly defending them. (No offense intended.)
The point you’re missing, though, is that my pink socks example has exactly as much evidence to support it as your theory about changing arm angles, etc.
In other words, none.
(note that I’m not saying they’re equally likely, just that there are equal amounts of evidence about their causative value)
So there is nothing to support your causational argument.
48. Ghost of Spike Owen said, in part: I like Mel, for what it’s worth. Obviously he had more material to work with in the NYY organization when he was there, but you can’t argue with the results. How can he not be an upgrade from Raffy?
Speaking of trying a pitching coach with a great resumé in hopes of improving the club’s pitching, remember, the Orioles just fired Leo Mazzone. Even a genius couldn’t create the pitching equivalent of a silk purse out of a sow’s ear…
55. Thanks, SI, you probably just made a bunch of Rox fans very unhappy.
(the infamous SI cover jinx)
80: No kidding — betcha SI’s “on the take” from the Red Sox!
There have certainly been many many instances where a pitcher or hitter has credited a coach for a dramatic improvement, whether it be shortening a swing or teaching a new pitcher or whatever. Frankly, I think it’s obvious that a particular coach could, and sometimes does, have a real impact on a particular player’s performance that another coach might not have.
However, that conclusion is just about irrelevant to the current discussion, for two reasons: 1) it’s just about impossible to predict when a particular coach and player will mesh and result in improved play; and 2) one coach isn’t going to benefit the team’s performance as a whole any more than any other coach.
When it comes to “intangibles” I think we should resolve to be like Wittgenstein:
“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darueber muss man schweigen.”
“What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence.”
Or, in the context of baseball — If we can’t at least roughly quantify the effect, we can’t intelligently debate the cause.
These things might be fun to handwave about over a beer, but ultimately nobody is going to get persuaded one way or the other. So we’re just wasting our time and USSM’s bandwidth when there are things that can be done that do make a demonstrable difference. As fans we can focus on anything we want, of course, but if we’re going to obsess over moves made by M’s management I’d prefer to spend my time on the ones we know will matter.
Here’s the bottom line: in the grand scheme of things, who the coaches are is FAR less important than the organizational plan and organizational philosophies that the organization asks them to follow. THAT is where the problem is, because the M’s don’t appear to have much of a plan, and their philosophy, to the extent they have one, often appears to be 20 years outdated.
over on the M’s site, is a new poll:
Which of these starting outfields would you most like to see?
Jones-Ichiro-Guillen
Ibanez-Ichiro-Guillen
Jones-Ichiro-Balentien
Ibanez-Ichiro-Balentien
Ibanez-Ichiro-Jones
lets all vote for the middle one!!! Maybe FO will make their decision based off the fan poll. Thatd be funny.
Which of these starting outfields (left-to-right) would you most like to see?
Jones-Ichiro-Guillen
992 votes (28%)
Ibanez-Ichiro-Guillen
1057 votes (29%)
Jones-Ichiro-Balentien
685 votes (19%)
Ibanez-Ichiro-Balentien
107 votes (3%)
Ibanez-Ichiro-Jones
753 votes (21%)
3594 people have voted so far Discuss this poll
Your vote was Jones-Ichiro-Balentien on 10/23/2007 9:51 pm
Ehh so far not so good. If FO makes their decision based on the fan poll. Ehh, naive casual fan :/
Anyone who votes Ibanez-Ichiro-Balentien should be executed.
I’m willing to bet that 78% of those voting said “Balentien? Who the hell is Balentien?” and about 51% said the same thing about Jones.
88 And yet I wouldn’t be totally shocked if that’s the starting line up next year after Jones was traded for some starting pitcher.
As to the choices for the coaching staff announced offically today aren’t prefect choices but they are good solid ones:
Mel Stottlemyre can get alot out of a rotation that lacks a TOR by getting all he can out of SPs 1 thru 4 that he can.He works with the 5th SP to get good innings from him with minimum of 5.
John Riggleman with his experience coaching and as a MLB manager are a help to McLaren as well as making easier for Mac to risk ejection should he have to argue with umps and do a “Sweet Lou” impersonation if needed.
Norm Charlton is a wise and solid choice for the bullpen coaches job. While so many here blame him for the Rick White fiasico on that one you need to remember 3 main things:
1)He may have scouted and recommended the guy
2)White was a waiver wire claim pretty much a risk free pick up if he works out you keep he doesn’t you dump him on harm no foul.
3)This is the most IMPORTANT of these 3 the final decision was and always be the GMs in this case Bonehead Bavasi.
As much as I would love to see Guillen return but he has to realize he is a stop gap player til OF prospect in Balentien is MLB ready.
So his desire for a long term deal is somewhat unrealistic so I think his decision will be to opt out of his mutual option and seek a contract elsewhere.
I would love a Jones(LF) Ichiro(CF) Balentien(RF)
but to be quite frank is very unlikely to happen.
Look for the M’s to seek another one yr wonder of a veteran FA to play regular RF.
If Balentien is lucky he’ll be the 4thOFer if not he’s either traded or back in AAA.
#88
What about Ibanez-Ichiro-Guillen again?
This means to say something you think people need to be straightforwardly apprised of, or that you think might be controversial but is nonetheless true, or to say something you think might give offense but needs to be said. It doesn’t mean to say something every single person reading knows is true and that not one person would disagree with.
I want to see a Ibanez – Vidro – Broussard outfield.
Has there been any talk here about Fukudome in Right Field? I need some educated/opinionated fan input. What are the pro’s and con’s?
Interesting that Jones – Ichiro – Ibanez isn’t even being suggested. Isn’t Jones a better fit for LF than RF, given his range and its spaciousness?
95 – I think that whoever made the poll fell prey to the usual misconception about defense: arm strength matters more than range, especially in RF.
#95
Jones is better in LF because he can cover more ground but Ibanez would be a disaster in RF. Imagine him trying to throw out a baserunner heading to third…
I didn’t realize Ibanez’s arm was so bad. He got a 42 in arm strength in last year’s fan balloting, which is, in fact, pretty bad. I’m not sure, however, that I’d take it on faith that Ibanez’s poor arm strength in RF is less of a liability than his poor range in LF.
I’m not sure, however, that I’d take it on faith that Ibanez’s poor arm strength in RF is less of a liability than his poor range in LF.
Ibanez’s arm strength is indeed less of a liability than his range — by a lot. Arm strength is far less important in run prevention than the ability to get to balls.
I think Bowa, a hard-nosed middle-infielder himself, may do some good for the sometimes-unfocused Lopez and Betancourt. He seems to have done a good job with Robinson Cano in New York. (See this NYTimes article: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/sports/baseball/12bowa.html)
And like Charlton, Mel Stottlemyre’s been living in the northwest for a while, so at least he won’t have to worry about high rent.
Man, this new Mariner coaching staff certainly seems to be missing that gritty, veteran presence that is required for any baseball successful. I insist that McLaren re-stock the positions with these obvious candidates:
Bench coach – Connie Mack
Hitting coach – Ty Cobb
Pitching coach – Christy Matthewson
First Base coach – Frank Chance
Third Base coach – John McGraw
Bullpen coach – Hoyt Wilhelm (to add some new, modern ideas into the mix)
With a brain trust like that, we can guarantee victory!!!
(I know, I know, I added an extra “t” in Mathewson)
#102
Are Honus Wagner, Branch Rickey, and Sparky Anderson not available?
oh, Sparky is waaaaaay too busy.
101 -But…but…what about Mordecai “Three Finger” Brown???
And also, Sparky is still kicking around.
I vote Satchel Paige for bullpen coach.
Lots of talk out there about Bowa joining Torre & Mattingly in Chavez Ravine. Was this the “personal matter” that was holding up Larry officially announcing with the M’s?
I like Bowa at third. I won’t say he’s got grit–but he’s sure got spit and fire. Having him as a counterpoint to “Get-Along Mac” would seem to be a good idea.
If Bowa is going to bleed Dodger blue next year…who’s next in line?
And please tell me its not the coach who held Lofton on third base…I really couldn’t take MORE poor decisions out of the 3B base coach box this coming year…