Hoynes & Pluto
I bash Hoynes all the time, the least I can do is give him some credit when he does well. He doesn't do as good a job as Castrovince with the same opportunity, but Shapiro provides some more insight into the recent moves and other AL and AL Central teams.
Meanwhile, Pluto takes on Wedge:
"The fact is the Indians were supposed to contend, and collapsed when it counted. The fact is the Indians had their fifth losing April in seven years under Wedge. Or that this is the third time in five years they were under .500 at the All-Star break."
almost 3 years ago
APV
122 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I don’t know if Wedge can be fully blamed for poor bullpen construction, poor drafting and injuries.
2007 was the anomaly because he was actually able to dip into the minors and come out with viable replacements by mid-season.
You can definitely slam Wedge on over-reliance on veterans and misuse of some young talent, but those aren’t the reasons why we started off so far in the hole.
I still feel he should be allowed to finish out his contract, but I feel like Dolan will let him go to appease the fanbase.
The key is if you believe the statement that “we were supposed to contend” meaning, even with poor drafting, bullpen, etc. we should still have been in the hunt. I tend to agree that we were supposed to cotend.
I think that goes back to the optimism that most of us had going into last season and, to a lesser extent, this season. That optimism created by looking at a team that we felt “were supposed to contend” fell precipitously to the point that by mid-June, the team was out of the playoff hunt both years, causing the trades of the last two years.
If “we were supposed to contend” with the team that we saw on paper to start both years and didn’t, whose shoulders does that fall on?
by The DiaTriber on Aug 12, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
It’d be different if Pecota didn’t have us in the hunt either year or if the consensus amongst the experts was that the Indians weren’t supposed to be in it. Neither was the case, the talent they saw on paper was similar to the expectations that we as Indians fans had as well.
Precisely, so the team under performing both of the years has to be chalked up to something.
If Wedge is that “something” (and Dolan’s comments certainly make it sound that way), I’m not having a problem with it.
by The DiaTriber on Aug 12, 2009 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions
If you look at the history of “contenders” (ones that actually did, not the ones who were picked in preseason polls) you will see teams that had strong bullpens, few major injuries and minor leaguers coming up and filling holes during the course of the season.
Everyone might think the 2008 Rays team was bound to win their division because of all their young talent they accumulated over the decade. But if they didn’t get outstanding seasons from journeymen bullpen guys like Wheeler, Balfour and Percival .. they would not have made the playoffs.
- -
Like I said in another thread, “being a contender” is overrated. While watching meaningful September baseball is a thrill, if it ultimately ends in missing the playoffs, does it actually do more harm than good?
I would gladly take the 2008/2009 Cleveland Indians seasons (and their end results in a massive influx in young talent) versus what the Mets fans saw in 2007/2008.
Can’t say I agree. Being out of it by June is horrible. Even if we miss the playoffs the last week, at least they had a shot and the heartbreak is there to leave a memory. I have put 2008 far out of my mind and 2009 will be similar
shapiro pretty much said carrasco will be in cleveland this september… i’m kind of excited to see how that works out
by gorilla_baller on Aug 12, 2009 12:27 PM EDT reply actions
Like I said before, as the Indians performance gets worse, Hoynes’ reporting gets better.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
In 2007, he did a season in review top 10 Tribe moments (I can’t find a link just yet.) Seven of the 10 were negatives. Off the top of my head, the June 1st comeback against the Tigers didn’t make the list. Dude is clearly glass-half-empty.
No, not you. Your helmet!
by PatBordersHelmet on Aug 12, 2009 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I heard on the radio this morning some sound bites from a recent sit-down with Paul Dolan, I think it was by Mike Snyder. Anyway he was asked about Shapiro’s job security and the paraphrased response was:
“Mark is one of the best men at his job in baseball, and I know if we were to for some reason let him go there would be 25 or more clubs that would fire their GM for a chance to interview him.”
When asked about Wedge’s job security (again, paraphrased):
“Eric, uh, has done a great job for us, and we’re very appreciative of that, and there’s no doubt he’s a great manager. Whether or not he’s the manager for our needs is something we will evaluate at this end of the season.”
While not the exact words, you get the idea.
Steel Nick
In other words, ""Eric is one of the men at his job in baseball, and I know if we were to for some reason let him go there would be 25 or more clubs that would have done the exact same thing much earlier."
I know that doesn’t mean that our club should do it, but it shifts a little to burden to the “Why not?” side of the equation. But who am I even arguing with at this point? Shapiro and Mariah, and that’s about it.
by dgcambridge on Aug 12, 2009 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It is sort of amazing that Wedge has survived this season. I expect him to be gone in the winter. Managers that have been around this long with only one playoff appearance to show for itand have two disappointing years in a row, probably shouldn’t be kept around.
And yes, I understand it’s not all his fault, OK?
I agree that Wedge should be fired, but there is a part of me that thinks it’s cool when an organization sticks with a coach for so long. I really hate when someone gets fired before you can ever really safely say if he could have done better if not for such a sucky team. Of course eventually that wears out.
Steel Nick
I agree with this sentiment, and up until the “fire sale” I would agree that keeping Wedge wouldn’t make that much of a difference and wouldn’t really hurt the team. But now that we are retooling for 2011+ I think a change of manager would fit with that nicely. There are some things Wedge can genuinely be faulted for and since we are trying a new approach a new manager should fit into that equation as well.
I keep wondering whether there isn’t an organizational opening that they might move Wedge into this winter. I have no idea what that would be and, given the revenue issues, I don’t think they’ll just create a position. But it just doesn’t seem that Shapiro wants to simply fire him.
You are right about paying him – but just for next year. I believe they would want to find something that they want to keep him in longer term (at a reduced salary) where he would be expected to add value.
by CaptainPenny on Aug 12, 2009 6:36 PM EDT up reply actions
It just ain’t like that. With a manager, you have to fire him, and even if you did reassign him, everyone would know damned well he’d been fired. He’s got a full year at around $1.2 million salary to lick his wounds.
He can get a job as a coach elsewhere, or he can sit around waiting for another shot. Assuming he doesn’t think he’s done managing at the age of 41, what’s best for him is to move on, not to stick around for the sake of “not being fired.”
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Who knows…Eric Wedge could be the next Joe Torre
"sometimes the internet is hard for me." - ClemsonGirl
by world dictator on Aug 12, 2009 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes … he could be part of the team of geniuses that takes a 130-win payroll and routinely turns it into 95-odd wins.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Aug 12, 2009 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I keep wondering whether there isn’t an organizational opening that they might move Wedge into this winter.
GM
"sometimes the internet is hard for me." - ClemsonGirl
by world dictator on Aug 12, 2009 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions
At least we would never pull our hair out over certain guys being underutilized. They just won’t be on the team.
Steel Nick
Hey, that reminds me. Andy Marte should play every day.
by NickFantana on Aug 13, 2009 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Wedge could come coach in Japan. They will love that he appreciates grinders…look at Trey Hillman. I turned on a late night game recently to see Masny throw a meatball, in hi-definition. That was special. Now I know why have a 60 inch plasma. Wow, that was amazingly clear! Straight into a crowd of flagwaving fans.
BTW, don’t fall for an LCD. Plasma is the way to go. I have that on good authority from folks who analyze this stuff for a living.
I have no animus to Wedge really. I just think he got a long, long chance, more than most of us get in this world, and he just couldn’t shake his bad habits when the chips were down. Maybe it’s loyalty to his players, admirable, but methinks it maybe less than that. He may just have what all of us see at our jobs…hard working, seemingly smart bosses who get by, but who are revealed to have limited ability to show good judgment, in the end.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 7:44 AM EDT reply actions
What’s so bad about LCD, other than the fact that you bought a plasma?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
It used to be true that plasma was very superior when it came to fast motion (i.e. sports), but the new LCDs have narrowed that gap considerably. Plasmas still are better at producing true black, thanks to natural leakage of light between pixels of backlit LCDs, but the new LED backlighting has narrowed that gap, too. Plasmas have superior viewing angles. LCD, on the other hand, has higher native resolution, is usually your only choice if you want something smaller than 42 inches, performs better in well-lit rooms, and is more likely to be available in 1080p at a reasonable price (if you actually watch 1080p inputs, which means Blu-ray in most cases today).
Yes, I am looking for 1080p, > 42 inch. Have a PS3 for Blu Ray purposes, haven’t decided what my price limit is yet
Serious question — and I am generally rather savvy about this stuff — but why shouldn’t I or anyone else buy this TV?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I wonder if there are a lot of people who like to watch a lot of extreme closeups of sunflowers. Seems to be a fairly common demonstration screen.
by Logodaedalus on Aug 13, 2009 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I was flummoxed for a long time myself, then I focused on the three things I mentioned; skin tones, contrast, and cinema-feeling motion. Watch them side by side (literally, have them put the Tribe game on HD for you) and see for yourself. It’s like buying a pair of shoes or a great mattress, if you use them a lot, it’s not really that much more money per hour of enjoyable time. Think of it like getting ESPN Insider. At the end of the day, it’s a good value. Depends on your TV habits and on what you place value. Anyway, watch a great BluRay movie like Casino Royale on a big Panasonic (Pioneer) plasma, lots of action. For me, it’s worth it.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 11:18 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t know, I find that you get used to whatever TV you watch all the time. I have a non-widescreen 43-inch that I bought in 1999, a hybrid rear-projection. When I first bought it, I could see the significant deficiency in that type of screen, but I no longer notice it at all.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Spoken like a true Indians fan circa 1980…get used to whatever they put on the field!
So you are not even watching in HD nor widescreen? I had a 50 inch rear projection for a long time, and switched to the flat screen plasma about 2 years ago. Never looked back. Get the big 60 inch one if you can swing it…sports and movies will never be the same. It really is a leap forward. Even soccer looks interesting on it, and that’s saying something.
Sounds a like a good question for an LGT pool. On what kind of screen do you watch the Tribe. I happen to watch them on my iPhone, which can be done even in Japan over the 3G phone network.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 14, 2009 4:18 AM EDT up reply actions
In Philly, I would only get a handful of games a year in HD. When that changes, I won’t be able to resist upgrading anymore.
Incidentally, I’m confident that most folks can’t tell the difference between 720 and 1080.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
The only way you don’t notice is if you are watching 720 and think it is the finest quality, because it is very good in its own right. I cannot tell the difference between 1080i and 720p. 1080p though is striking how good the quality is
But surely on smaller screens, and at an appropriate distance, you can’t tell.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I have only seen 1080p on a TV large enough to notice the difference. Most of the smaller TVs dont support it
You actually can answer this question with math. The normal human eye can discern an angular subtense of 1/60 of an arc. Assuming a 42 inch screen and a viewing distance of 7 feet, the angle subtended by each full pixel at 720p is 1.09 arcminutes, fairly close to the limits of human vision. The angle subtended by each full pixel at 1080p is 0.78 arcminutes, beyond the limits of normal visual acuity. For 1080p, you’d need to be 5.5 feet or closer. For a 50 inch TV, it’s 6.5 feet.
Assuming your math is correct, I believe this proves my point, if only narrowly. Nobody should be sitting 5.5 feet from a 40-inch or 6.5 feet from a 50-inch, although of course in show rooms you’re always closer than that. At proper viewing distances, the difference between the resolutions for those sizes would appear to be at the very limits of and generally beyond the limits of human vision.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
It’s absurd that a 40-50-inch TV is considered small now.
by Logodaedalus on Aug 14, 2009 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s not what I meant. He mentioned smaller TVs, and he didn’t say what that meant. I was interested specifically in 40-50 inchers. Nobody said that’s considered small.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
That’s a relief.
I was trying to get a sense of how big 40-50" was, and stumbled upon this tidbit:
Half of British men would be celibate for six months in exchange for a 50" plasma TV
Not me.
by Logodaedalus on Aug 14, 2009 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Are we talking about only sex with other people here, or master of your domain?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
The default assumption would be “with other people” since they said “sex”, though it would be interesting to see how much time people would agree to for the other thing.
Well, okay, not that interesting.
by Logodaedalus on Aug 14, 2009 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions
(“celibate” was my term — which may have been the source of confusion)
by Logodaedalus on Aug 14, 2009 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I wouldn’t go LCD if you consider picture your top priority. Plasmas have more natural skin-tones, deeper blacks, and motion doesn’t look so video-gamish. Got my dad the 50 inch Panasonic with a matte screen. Get a matte screen plasma (although they used to be hard to find for some reason). As the screen gets bigger, glare will overwhelm you. You’ll be craning your neck to avoid it…unless you have a nice dark man-cave for yourself :) The Pioneer Kuro Plasmas used to be smoking great, but they have been bought out by Panasonic. The cost structure of LCDs is easier to drive down because of the manufacturing process involved (making the sheets more efficiently), and the powers thought be thought it would accompany picture improvements, so LCDs will be cheaper generally. Only downside to plasma is energy consumption, heat generation, and weight. Don’t leave it on all the time, and since it’s unlikely you’ll be carrying it around the house, weight is just a one-time issue.
Get the biggest screen you can afford, especially for sports and movies. Never have I heard the words uttered “boy, my screen seem too big.” I’ve got a 60 inch plasma, and wish it could be 100.
Diffusion isn’t a big issue anymore. It will be 10 years before you notice anything, and by that time you’ll have an OLED screen.
Facial skin tones, color contrast (too sharp, not natural looking in LCD), and more cinema-like motion. Keep those in mind when you watch LCD and Plasma side-by-side. Don’t be taken in by brightness. All stores turn up the brightness of their in-store TVs.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions
thanks for the input. I need to buy a new TV for the family room in the next 6 months or so. I love the DLP I currently have, but the replacement of the motor/lamp is just a royal pain.
Sometimes it was painful to have such a large screen. The gaping hole Hafner had in his swing when he was thrown a slider down and in was more apparent. He seems to be getting around on that pitch better this season, at least seemed to.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions
See, and I thought it was the low and outside stuff that was killing him – you know cuz it looked like he was trying to pull everything. Mighta been both.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
It probably was both, but after the insider slider I’d throw up my hands in exasperation and go get a beer from the fridge.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Get the biggest screen you can afford, especially for sports and movies. Never have I heard the words uttered "boy, my screen seem too big."
In my experience, this is only true if you do not watch standard-definition programming. Much as I’d like to do so, we end up watching some standard def – FiOS has good, but not universal, HD availability. If you sit too close to the screen or have a screen too big for the room, it looks horrid.
People who love plasmas really love them – in my case, they were just out of my price range.
How could a Travel Channel not be in HD? There’s a wonder. Didn’t Anthony Bourdain do a Cleveland Eats a couple years ago?
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s too bad — I have Comedy Central HD, and let me tell you, you haven’t lived until you’ve seen South Park in High Definition. The picture quality is amazing!
by Buckeye Brad on Aug 14, 2009 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I can’t anymore. Tried. But it looked so bad I found myself just watching the HD channels.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions
If you are watching any programming in standard definition, LCD will make it even worse. Isn’t everything digital now? No reason to hold back on quality because the older stuff won’t look as good. Prices are coming down. If you haven’t watched sports in HD, we should stop right now and take you to a store and get you settled in. It’s a new world.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe I need an avatar. Any suggestions from the peanut gallery?
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 7:48 AM EDT reply actions
Ha! I shoulda’ known. Hi literalism in Cleveland!
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions
That is great. How did Charlie get it to levitate over his head like that? He wasn’t packin’ an Oscar Gamble under there, was he?
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I think it hides the point. BTW, read your piece on current media. I agree. Just wondering: is this a new(er) phenomenon or does it go back to Bob August, Chuck Heaton, Frank Gibbons and Gib Shanley. My opinion – of course – is no. With the exception of Hal Lebovitz. I especially loved Shanley.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Honestly don’t know until I sit down and read some of the older stuff on the page. But I do think computer editing was a game-changer. Premium used to be on clear, mistake-free copy that had a fairly logical flow. Hard to find people so disciplined, and it knocked out people who like to move things around and don’t write so logically from square one. Couldn’t get fancy with logic patterns unless you were an amazing typist. A lot of local writers had probably hit their ceilings, computer editing wasn’t going to fill their columns with better thoughts…but before they could even get there, the local newspaper barons saw they could squeeze more output from their minions with technology. I don’t want to diss current writers by saying the old guys like Heaton or Bob August did it best. I’d have to go back and read them, and not in my mind’s eye.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Can’t find any Frank Gibbons stuff – but here’s a little snippet about the Press way back when.
Turns out that Bob August – my all time favorite Cleveland sports reporter – is still around. Here’s a letter to the editor from 2008. As you can see, the boy can still write.
Couldn’t find any Chuck Heaton stuff, but he was a lesser light in my eyes. Plus I can’t stand his daugher’s politics. And you either like Gib or you hate him. But the one thing everyone agrees on, there’ll never be another one like him.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Bob August, still has his fastball! Younger newspapers writers, take notice. Wish I could write so elegantly.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I mean, if you replace that hat with cranium, he’s Max Headroom. It’s got to be hair.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s all made up Brick – like the moon landing. There was no baseball back then, the Topps people
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Capricorn One was on the tube the other day. If Hollywood made a movie about it, it must be true, right?
by Bogalusa Bomber on Aug 13, 2009 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Agree completely. It’s a travesty I haven’t had the balls to buy one yet.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Aug 14, 2009 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Jamie Moyer legs out infield single, drives in two runs
- The Citi Field All-Star game has finally been made official for 2013
- Brett Lawrie receives four-game suspension, fined for ‘aggressive actions’ toward umpire
- PNC Park security guard loses finger in struggle with fan during Pirates game
- Create-a-Caption: Partying like it’s 1988
