Jump to content

Ramirez precident, and that pesky chemistry thing


Moose Milligan

Recommended Posts

Interesting article by Jayson Stark: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&page=rumblings&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab2pos1

Some highlights:

"He wouldn't play for me," the exec said. "I'll tell you that. I might cost my team a chance to go to the World Series. But we work too hard to put a team together to take on a guy like that. As soon as you open the vaults for him, you'll wind up with the same problems Boston had."
It's a wonderful little portrait of how much fun it can be to have this guy around when he feels like going with the program. He can be lovable. He can be a good teammate. He's one of the half-dozen greatest right-handed hitters who ever lived. He can even run to first base on days when the constellations line up correctly.
You watch him mash in Chavez Ravine these days, and he looks like a guy who has decided to hit about .700 the rest of the season. But if he really thinks that pushing his "on" button for two months will make teams more interested in handing him $100 million this winter, he might just have it backward.

"It makes me less interested," one NL executive said. "Not that I'd have been interested in the first place. He's going to turn it on to get a contract. But once you give him that contract, he's going to turn it off. And then all you've got is a headache every other week."

So will teams line up this winter to volunteer for that headache, knowing what they know -- and knowing the kind of behavior they might be encouraging? It will be fascinating to watch, all right. Will there really be a team dumb enough to give this man his four years and $100 million, just months before his 37th birthday?

Looks like some GM's wouldn't want the um...bad chemistry...that Manny could bring to the table. Worth the headache? Dunno.

Anyway, do you guys think that he's really set a bad precedent like Stark outlines in the article? Do you think players are going to start tanking to get their way because Manny did?

I dunno, part of me thinks Stark is stretching it a bit. The quotes from the GM's can't be denied, but I don't think anyones going to start tanking to work their way out of situations like Manny did. Seems a bit extreme.

What say you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno, part of me thinks Stark is stretching it a bit. The quotes from the GM's can't be denied, but I don't think anyones going to start tanking to work their way out of situations like Manny did. Seems a bit extreme.

I tend to agree with this. It's a bit extreme. I think most players won't go to these lengths to get what they want. I don't claim to know anything about contracts, but surely something about "not fulfilling your contractual obligations" or something to that extent would come into play.

This whole situation furthers my dislike of Manny. All I see now is an extremely talented player who acts like a little kid, pouting to get what he wants. And he gets it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the same problems Boston had. Two World Series, making the playoffs four times in seven years with the Sox. He killed that team for sure.

When it was good, it was great. When it was bad, it was bad enough for them to send him packing.

Manny reminds me of that little kid who'll keep annoying all the other kids until someone smacks him. And then he's on his best behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the same problems Boston had. Two World Series, making the playoffs four times in seven years with the Sox. He killed that team for sure.

I was going to say the same thing. I value team chemistry a lot more than a lot of people around here, but this is pretty ridiculous.

If Manny keeps hitting the way he has been hitting, someone is going to take the chance on him. I seriously doubt every GM shares the opinion of the ones interviewed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it has anything to do with chemistry. It's his production. They are worried he'll slack off once he gets his contract, not that he'll be a distraction or bad teammate. Unless you consider a slacker a bad teammate which isn't a bad argument but not quite my definition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it has anything to do with chemistry. It's his production. They are worried he'll slack off once he gets his contract, not that he'll be a distraction or bad teammate. Unless you consider a slacker a bad teammate which isn't a bad argument but not quite my definition.

While Manny gets deserved flak for not hustling and at least feigning effort during the end of his Boston run, he still put up a frickin' .936 OPS for them. That kind of offensive production doesn't grow on trees.

Besides, does any GM out there really think that Manny is going to end up with a >1.300 OPS for the remainder of the season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing it isn't Bowden. He's the same guy who has taken on Pena, Milledge, Dukes, et al. He's not someone who would be afraid to take on Manny.

You are right about one thing - Bowden the GM is an idiot.

Manny Ramirez is without a doubt my single least favorite player ever (with Sheffield as a close second). I don't care how good he is (and he truly is one of the best righthanded hitters of all times) - I wouldn't want him on my team either. I personally can't stand even to look at him.

You see, I love Manny and Sheffield, and Bonds, and a bunch of other players that everyone hates for some stupid reason or another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...