From: djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson)
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 16:24:36 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.160102.15183@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> sinhaa@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Anand Sinha) writes:
>In article <BrrGCL.FI7@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul21.193757.8909@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> sinhaa@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Anand Sinha) writes:
>>>
>>>Are you sure that having a good time creates a better atmosphere? How do 
>>>Rance Mulliniks, Derek Bell and Rob Ducey feel about Winfield? Could they 
>>>blame him for lack of playing time? I don't know, but it's a worthwhile
>>>consideration.
>>
>>If Rance Mulliniks, Derek Bell, and Rob Ducey don't think that a .300 hitter
>>15HR and 50 RBI man so far shouldn't be playing then they shouldn't be
>>considered team players as well.  
>
>But wait, a team player *also* realises that that other players on his 
>team *need* and *Should* play too. A team player should not be selfish with
>his wants and needs.  If Bell/Ducey/Mulliniks aren't team players for letting
>Winfield play, then also, Winfield is not a team player because he 
>doesn't let the others play.  The others will be used in games, in important
>situations.  By not letting the others get some chances to keep their skills
>sharp, he is hurting the team.  

Correct, but Winfield doesn't make these decisions, the manager does.  

>>It is obvious that the team didn't think much of Cecil at that time as they
>>let him leave for Japan.
>
>Cecil asked to go to Japan.  The Jays released him.  Of course they should
>have realised Cecil's worth.  In 500 or so ABs for the Jays he hit 32 HRs. 
>It should not have been hard to see that given regular playing time, he could
>be a good DH.

Wouldn't you think that they would try and trade him and get something for
him.  I am assuming that they tried and nobody wanted him so they were forced
to let him go.  If there is something that I am missing in making this 
statement please let me know.

>>>He did. In '89 and '90, he DHed more often than 1988 when he wasn't hurt as much.
>>>I guess he wasn't helping the team then.  
>>
>>He wasn't exactly jumping for joy at the thought of DH'ing but finally decided
>>that it was a good idea.  Probably a year or two late in my opinion.
>
>Ah your opinion.  Doesn't Bell's opinion count in this matter? Or does only
>Jimy Williams' opinion count?

The managers job is to make decisions the players job is to perform and do
the job the manager tells him to.  If he has a problem with this he should
talk to the management about it not complain about it through the media.

>>Even if the Bell to DH move would be a bad one Bell should have respected the
>>manager and either agreed to play there part time or privately ask for a 
>>trade like some players.  If he had of been a little quieter about him not
>>wanting to DH but still privately discuss the issue with management then
>>the fans would have never booed him and he may still be in Toronto (Awful
>>Thought).
>
>Nah, the fans would have booed him no matter what, as soon as he stopped 
>hitting like he did in '87.  Of course, how was Bell told he was going to be
>the DH? Williams announced it in the media.  He didn't tell Bell first, just
>made an announcement.  Same with moving Garcia from the leadoff spot to ninth
>in '86, and Moseby to the leadoff spot.  How else should Bell respond?  Through
>the media.  If management feels right by announcing major roster changes to
>the media first, Bell should be able to use the same method for voicing his
>opposition.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

If Bell has a problem with the manager or how the manager operates then he
should complain about it to higher management.  Not do the same thing that
he thought was wrong when Jimy Williams did but seemed to think was ok if
he did it.

>>If you remember Dave said that he would bring his glove to spring training
>>and try and show the Jays that he can still play the outfield.  I recall him
>>saying that he thinks he still can play outfield and would like to play out
>>there a little but I don't recall him demanding to play in the field.
>
>But Dave can't play the OF all that well.  By trying to play the OF, he is 
>not being a team player.  He practically dared Gaston to not play him in the OF.
>Gaston originally said that Winfield was going to be his DH only, then was
>practically forced to play Winfield in the OF.  But man, does he look 
>horrible out there. 

Winfield played the outfield because Bell was on the DL, Carter was injured
and could not play the outfield and the manager didn't want to take Dave's
bat out of the line up.

>>     a)Right but the management critisized him for not doing this.
>>     b)If the management doesn't respect you and doesn't think you
>>       are doing a good job, why should he have to respect the management.
>
>Why is it alright for Winfield not to respect to management, but not for Bell?
>The management in Toronto did not show much respect for Bell, by maligning
>his defensive abilities, which he took pride in.  That's an important issue
>here, Bell took pride in his defensive abilities.  By suggesting that he
>was less than adequate, the management is not respecting him.  Thus
>(by your reasoning) Bell should be able to not respect the management.  

But Bells defensive abilities were less than adequite.  Bell should have 
realized this.  When Winfield had poorer second halves in NY they still weren't
that bad.

>Just because Winfield's management was George Steinbrenner and Bell's 
>management was Gillick/Williams, does not change the validity of the logic.
>
>>
>>I think that George was an asset (probably the best Blue Jay prior to Alomar
>>and Carter) but he could have been better off the field.
>
>George was the best Blue Jay prior to Alomar (Carter belongs on the "most
>over-rated" team).  But you fail to address one point of mine.  I've mentioned
>at least twice that in '88, the Jays had no one else of major league caliber
>to play the OF.  That's why George should still have been out there.  Not to
>mention that if he had DHed, that he would have taken plate time away from 
>Fielder and Mulliniks.  Maybe he was being more of a team player, by trying
>to get the best hitters into the everyday lineup.  Even a slug for an OF, who
>can hit is better than an OF wiz who can't SLG his weight.  By George 
>playing in the field, the best bats were in the lineup where they belonged. 
>Moving him to DH, takes Fielder's and Mullink's bats out of the lineup, and
>replaces them with Campusano/Ducey neither of whom has been able to prove
>themselves at the major league level.

The fact that he didn't obey the managers decisions is what makes him not
a team player.
>
>
>Anand Sinha
>Jays #1 -> all the way in '92.
>Roberto Alomar for MVP
>Juan Guzman for Cy Young
>
>
--David Johnson


Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball