Bad Managing = Winning Teams?
I'm not sure what this WSJ article is meant to get at, but it seems to me, looking at the bottom of the rankings, that you want your manager to score as poorly as possible in their rating system in order to have success at the MLB level. Way to go, Wedgie!
8 months ago
steincat
5 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
funny. wedge just popped up with a 94/100 on my random made up stuff for rating a manager scale. ozzie guillen scored a -4/100.
by Brick. on Mar 28, 2008 4:44 PM EDT 0 recs
See it must be true. It's in the WSJ and it's got numbers and everything! Very scientific!
"the most vehement Yankee-hating guy I know" - Jay
by mauichuck on Mar 28, 2008 4:51 PM EDT 0 recs
Man ... this is really dumb.
It would almost make sense if they ranked player performance above expectation, rather than just raw player performance. It would still be poor, but at least that would make it more than totally non-sensical.
by Jay on Mar 28, 2008 7:50 PM EDT 0 recs
There's no way to salvage this bit of crap. Even Templeton wouldn't author anything as bad as this.
"the most vehement Yankee-hating guy I know" - Jay
by mauichuck on
Mar 29, 2008 5:29 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I thought the best part was their first line of the methodology section:
Assessing managers is difficult, since their win-loss records are closely tied to the team's talent level.
I thought it was more of a vague relationship between a manager's win/loss and who the players are.
by Nat on Mar 29, 2008 8:32 PM EDT 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
New FanPost
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.