Batter's Box Interactive Magazine - 14 May 2007: A Contest!

14 May 2007: A Contest!

People do dumb things - you, me, and major league managers.

I'm only including myself to be gracious, by the way.

In the eighth inning yesterday afternoon, the following words were heard: "John McDonald pinch hitting for Phillips." It was the general consensus in the press box that the phrase "John McDonald pinch-hitting" was a new one, a combination of words hitherto unused. John Gibbons was asked afterwards (after the entirely predictable groundout) what had brought on this fit of creativity. He said "I've got my reasons" but that no one else needed to know what they were.

OK.

But don't blame us if we speculate.

We can, by the way, eliminate injury - Phillips was fine. We can also eliminate past history - neither Phillips nor McDonald had ever faced Brian Stokes. Neither had Sal Fasano or Jason Smith. Alex Rios, also on the bench, had a single in two at bats against Stokes.

By the way, it was just two weeks ago when I wrote:

John McDonald! If he goes 1-22, he'll still be hitting .300. And face it folks - who on this team is more likely to go 1-22 than Johnny Mac?

He didn't let me down, he's gone 1-26 since then, so he's hitting .281 - and he's appeared in every game this month. His batting line for May 2007 is wonderfully symmetrical: .043/.043/.043.

Anyway... speculate away! "I've got my reasons."

What might they have been?

Posted by Magpie on Monday, May 14 2007 @ 06:12 AM EDT.

14 May 2007: A Contest! | 43 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

China fan - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 07:07 AM EDT (#168039) #

My speculation is that Gibbons was unhappy with something Rios said or did. Hence he sat, even in an obvious pinch-hitting situation, to send him a message.

I admit that I am just guessing. But we were invited to speculate, so that's mine.....

tmlfan4ever - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 07:17 AM EDT (#168040) #

Nice Post.

I too was shocked when Rios didn't pinch hit for Phillips OR Stairs (although the Matt Stairs AB obviously worked out alright)

We will certainly be seeing more Mac-Attack pinch hitting in Philly with no DH. Does anyone know what the Jays lineup will look like when we hit the NL parks? Can Big Hurt play 1B at all?

timpinder - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 07:29 AM EDT (#168041) #

I'm with China Fan. Gibbons must have been punishing Rios for something. There's no other logical explanation, unless Rios was hurt or Gibbons overdosed on crazy pills.

kinguy - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 08:08 AM EDT (#168042) #

Maybe Rios wrote something on the clubhouse chalkboard and sent Gibby into a hissy fit.

oodler - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 08:28 AM EDT (#168043) #

According to a quote I read a few days back - I believe it was in the Star - Thomas said he would not playing the field in the NL parks and will be preparing for PH duties. With the way Gibby "stretches out" his starters, he may be needed 4 times a game. Oops! That would be against the rules wouldn't it?

Gerry - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 08:50 AM EDT (#168044) #

This question is in all the Toronto papers today. Gibbons was on The Fan this morning, and having all night to think of a reply, his answer was "I was playing a hunch".

Four Seamer - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 09:04 AM EDT (#168045) #

Gibbons was on The Fan this morning, and having all night to think of a reply, his answer was "I was playing a hunch". That interview made for some very painful listening - he had no explanation to give, just endless mumbling about how "Mac" had done some good things for us, maybe could scratch out a hit or a walk, get something started. It's just as likely that he had forgotten that he had given Rios the day off, and was available for pinch-hitting duties. Apparently Litsch is getting the call for tomorrow night.

AWeb - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 09:09 AM EDT (#168046) #

Gibbons appears to believe quite strongly in the concept of "due". I mean, McDonald was bound to get a hit, having just gone 1-May, right? This also explains his devotion to all strike-out, no power Jason Smith. I prefer to think he was just halfway in the bag and screwed up. Tomorrow, he could be sober, but stupid is forever.

Maldoff - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 09:13 AM EDT (#168047) #

I just caught the last seconds of that interview (go lime green tie!), what did Gibby say about someone feeling a pop? Was that in reference to Glaus?

Ryan Day - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 09:19 AM EDT (#168048) #

Bah. Even if Rios did something so unspeakably awful that he deserved to stay on the bench even if it meant a loss, why take McDonald over Phillips? Neither is a great hitter, but at least Phillips might have gotten the ball out of the infield.

I don't blame Gibbons for taking Marcum out, though; there was no way Marcum was going to last 9 innings. Putting in Jason Frasor, however... well, it's no wonder that you run out of relievers when Gibbons insists on using three or four of them every game.

VBF - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 09:41 AM EDT (#168049) #

The coaching staff had been quite hard on McDonald lately, and wanting to reassure his shortstop that there was no hard feelings, he lets him decide the outcome of the game. Rios hadn't been working as hard as McDonald was lately, and Gibbons rewarded his hard work? That's my guess.

If Gibbons can't publicly justify his reasoning for using him in that role, that's just wrong. It's one thing to have an arguably dumb reason like playing off a small sample size but clearly Gibbons doesn't want us to know what his reasons were, as I imagine it was completely unjustified reasoning.

Ceej - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 09:57 AM EDT (#168051) #

Yup, with the 'pop' comment, he was referring to Glaus, who felt that pop in the same general region as his heel injury. I know... it doesn't make sense to me either. Then again, what's made sense coming from the Jays' management tier lately?

He went on to say that they hope to have Glaus back on the field (and by this he meant to work out, not to play) within 'the next couple of days.'

Frank Markotich - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 09:57 AM EDT (#168052) #

If Gibbons was sending a message to Rios, then that's fine and traditionally managers will protect their players in those situations and come up with some other reason for public consumption. Of course, the question remains why pinch hit McDonald for Phillips even if Rios is unavailable.

We're starting to see silly little things like this. There was a game during the losing streak where Jason Smith was sent up to hit for Fasano down a run with 2 out and nobody on (in the 8th I think, but I'm not sure). In that situation, my opinion is that you might as well leave Fasano in, since he's more likely to hit a home run than Smith is, as opposed to earlier in the inning where you consider the on-base difference and platoon advantage between the two options. Anyway, enough of these little things start to add up to questioning the basic competence of the manager to run the game.

I wonder if the team's high expectations and underperformance to date has affected Gibbons' rationality (aka Don Zimmer syndrome).

Ryan Day - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 10:09 AM EDT (#168053) #

Gibbons' decisions tend to fall into two categories:

By The Book: Left-handed pitchers can only face left-handed batters. The Closer only works the 9th inning, even if it's just a fill-in closer. They're unimaginative and often frustrating, but at least they make sense.

Gut Instinct: Bizarre pinch-hitting and lineup decisions.Occasionally bizarre bullpen usage. Makes no sense, and seldom works.

rpriske - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 10:22 AM EDT (#168055) #

I'm in the 'Gibby lost a bet' camp.

He owed Mac.

VBF - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 10:48 AM EDT (#168056) #

I wonder if the team's high expectations and underperformance to date has affected Gibbons' rationality (aka Don Zimmer syndrome).

Other notable famous people include Montgomery Burns operating his casino.

Ricciardi: "We got that big series in New York tomorrow. Better schedule the private jet."

Gibbons: "Don't do that!"

Ricciardi: "Why?"

Gibbons: "We'll take the spruce moose! Hop in!"

Ricciardi: "But I don't thi--"

Gibbons: "I said hop in."

Maybe John McDonald had the least amount of germs on him?

DanInToronto - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 11:27 AM EDT (#168057) #

I am getting fed up with Gibbons. Unless MacDonald had a "Batter vs. Pitcher" record of 10 for 21 vs the guy (or if Rios was 0 for 20 vs. the pitcher), you'd have to go with Rios. A bigger beef was taking out Marcum. The Blue Jays aren't going to win the division this year (with the injuries to Halladay, Ryan etc). Although Marcum had a long way to go (9 more outs), a no-hitter is one of the greatest achievments in sports, and I feel that he should have been given a shot. Take him out when he allowed a hit or a run... A no-hitter would have made Marcum's career (and the fans' season). Heck, I'm sure a player like Marcum would even trade a year on the DL for a no-hitter (I'm not saying he'd get injured by pitching 3 more innings, but I'm just judging how "big of a deal" it would be if he could have gotten it).

Biggest beef w/ Gibbons (this year): Since we know BJ was hurt in spring training, why did Gibbons/mgt pitch him during the 1st week of the season. All it accomplished was blowing several games, and possibly making the injury worse.

2nd biggest beef: I was at that Halladay-Tavaras game last month (the one where Halladay had thrown about 90 pitches through 8 and 1/3, and with the bullpen in shambles, Halladay rolling, Gibbons went to the bullpen after the first two red sox batters had a bunt single and a pop up. Doc was completely on his game, at a low pitch count, the bullpen was in shambles, and we know what happened after that...

Jevant - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 12:05 PM EDT (#168061) #

I have absolutely no problem with Gibby taking Marcum out. In fact, if Marcum was tired like he says, then it was the right call.

Heck, I go to the gym and if I push it and do one more rep than I should, I know instantly when I've sprained a muscle and I won't be back at the gym for a week. Major league pitching has gotta be infinitely greater strain on the arm. I can't fault Gibby for taking out Marcum when he was tired and was likely risking "pushing it too far" with every pitch.

If we want to blame anyone for yesterday, blame the offence (our powerhouse offence, allegedly) for getting 3 hits off of Jae Seo and the D-Rays. That's what lost us the game.

If your pitching staff as a whole allows 2 runs or less, you have to win the game.

Rickster - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 12:32 PM EDT (#168062) #

Managers are only visible to the fans when they make mistakes. What can Gibby do? He has zero bench and a limited pitching staff. If John Macdonald as a pinch hitter is the answer, you are asking the wrong question in the first place. The offence will come around no matter who is the manager.

Ryan Day - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 12:40 PM EDT (#168063) #

He didn't have a zero bench: He had a bench with Alex Rios on it. He also had Jason Phillips at the plate, who's no superstar but still a better hitter than McDonald.

ayjackson - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 12:44 PM EDT (#168064) #

Even if Rios did something so unspeakably awful that he deserved to stay on the bench even if it meant a loss, why take McDonald over Phillips?

I agree with this. If he had to pinch hit though, and Rios wasn't an option for whatever reason, sending Jason Smith up to bunt again was probably a better choice than asking JMac to square up a 97mph fastball.

Rickster - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 12:48 PM EDT (#168065) #

Ryan - I am not talking about yesterday specifically, but about his performance writ large. I have no idea why he didn't use Rios yesterday, but I suspect he had a good reason which he will not divulge publicly (hence the 'hunch' quote). He's a smart guy who's spent a lifetime in the game. He knows who's on the bench.

I think he's doing a decent job. There is no real room for strategy with this team other than playing your 8 best-hitting fielders and hoping that the bullpen doesn't blow it if the starters can get to the fifth inning. There is a tonne of luck and randomness in baseball and even the best in-game strategy will only have a minimum impact on the game's outcome.

Fawaz - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 02:03 PM EDT (#168067) #

McDonald had the highest batting average of anyone left on the bench...either that or Gibby decided Phillips needed to be pinch-hit for (because he ALWAYS needs to be pinch-hit for) and he forgot that he had anyone else left on his bench...either that or he just saw Johnny Mac first...either that or he's trying to see just how far he can go without getting canned for his in-game management. Gibbons has made some BAFFLING decisions this year, but after this one I wouldn't be surprised if Josh Towers started at 3rd tonight.

Geoff - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 02:14 PM EDT (#168070) #

The only explanation for holding back Rios is that he is being bargained as a trade chip, which had better be a fine, terrific deal for his sake.

J.P.'s got a noose around his neck already and multitudes of angry mobs waiting to light their torches; he better not be sabotaging his way out of town. He'll have major balls to make anything but a slam-dunk trade and stick around to see it through.

Ryan Day - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 02:27 PM EDT (#168071) #

How would keeping Rios out of the game improve his trade value? It would be one thing if Gibbons didn't start him because Ricciardi was very, very close to finalizing a deal. But not pinch-hitting him late in the game doesn't make a lot of sense.

dalimon5 - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 02:34 PM EDT (#168072) #

People who say Gibbons is not the problem: you are right. He is not THE problem. There are many problems. But when you have so many things going wrong on your team (inuries, frasor, confidence, etc)...the last thing a manager should be doing is adding to the problem's. That is what Gibbons is doing. I said it with the Towers saga, and it continues to happen.

Someone on this forum said that Jim Leyland can squeeze blood from stone...well, I would put Gibbons at the opposite end of the spectrum. If he can only win and effectively manage ball games when his team is "right," then explain to me exactly how he is MANAGING. Any succesful manager gets through slumps and what not. Gibbons, seems to get worse and worse with the increased level of managing that is required of him. That is not a good sign.

I have seen him make bold moves that have translated into several losses (Halladay vs Boston, Frasor vs Sizemore, etc etc). His players do not seem to be playing for him, his General Manager has called him out, and WORST of all...he stayed in Texas during the off day...NOT travelling with the team in the middle of a 9 game losing streak. I understand family comes first, but to sit at home while your "dying" team crawls back to Toronto...that is just not the best way to handle the situation. Especially considering Gibbons commented that same day that "you can fire me if you want," or something along those lines after being asked if he thought he would be fired. Compare this to Torre fielding questions about his brother under the knife, the depleted Yankee line up, etc etc.

By the way, I am not a Ricciardi basher. I think he is a great, great GM. I never thought he would stick with Gibbons, and remain surprised that he continues to do so.

One last thing, I remember whispers in the media that Gibbons' extension was a way for Ricciardi to give him "power" over players, who, acordingly would not feel it was Gibbons' contract year, or that he may not be around afterwards.

Jim - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 02:46 PM EDT (#168073) #

I think he is a great, great GM

You had me until here.

Nolan - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 02:55 PM EDT (#168074) #

A no-hitter would have made Marcum's career (and the fans' season). Heck, I'm sure a player like Marcum would even trade a year on the DL for a no-hitter (I'm not saying he'd get injured by pitching 3 more innings, but I'm just judging how "big of a deal" it would be if he could have gotten it).

I would bet a fair chunk of money that Marcum would much rather a healthy season without a no hitter, than a totally lost season with a no hitter. Further, if the Jays do not start winning, the fact that they had a no hitter in May would make very lkittle diffrence in perception or attendance.

dalimon5 - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 02:59 PM EDT (#168075) #

Jim, Ok ok ok...I did exaggerate. Ricciardi is adequate, above average even. Maybe not Great, Great! I just want to emphasize that he is not the WORST GM on the planet which seems to be the consensus on call-in shows and here.

Thomas - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 04:13 PM EDT (#168078) #

Ricciardi is adequate, above average even. Maybe not Great, Great! I just want to emphasize that he is not the WORST GM on the planet which seems to be the consensus on call-in shows and here.

You obviously didn't listen to WWJP last Wednesday. For a team in the midst of a 9-game losing streak, he was fed incredibly soft questions, often preceded by, "I think you're doing a great job"-type comments. The closest anyone got to criticizing his moves was to ask why Janssen wasn't in the rotation to start spring training and if he'd be in there soon.

Ryan Day - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 05:12 PM EDT (#168083) #

He does tend to get a lot of softballs on WWJP. And I still like the guy, but some of the fawning callers are just embarrassing.

The knives tend to be out every other night of the week, though. I don't know if they have tighter screening when J.P. is on, or if (as is my guess) many people are just more comfortable ranting about him when he's not there. Probably a bit of both, I guess.

dalimon5 - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 05:22 PM EDT (#168084) #

I listen to Wednesday's with JP. And I listened that time. The reason he was given soft questions is because nobody who calls for his head actually calls and literally tells him what they think when they get the chance to. They pull an Elliot. The few times someone has called in to try to make him look like a bad GM, he gives logical reasons and almost always shows them wrong. My point of emphasizing the fact that he isn't so bad refers to when he is not on the show on Wednesday's (the other six days of the week), when caller's constantly bash him.

This team, in my opinion, would be better with a better manager. Gibbons is not cutting it.

Back to Ricciardi, If you look at his pitching picks, Marcum and Janssen fall out at the lower top ten positions in terms of top ten lists. I really do not think he is a bad GM. Honestly. I expect two arms to come into the MLB and top Marcum and Jansen. I think we can see a Halladay-Burnett-Janssen-Purcey or McGowan-Romero or Litsch rotation by this time next year or before the all star break.

As well, Yates should come out as a long man (possibly this year). The point is I think Janssen will be equalled by the other pitchers mentioned here, unless they are mishandled. Enter Gibbons and company...

Mark - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 06:08 PM EDT (#168085) #

Jason Phillips, John McDonald, Jason Smith, Matt Stairs, Sal Fasano, Royce Clayton.

Yeah, that John Gibbons sure needs to learn how to manage.

Lefty - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 07:12 PM EDT (#168086) #

I just get the feeling that with each passing day both Gibbons and Ricciardi are getting closer and closer to the rail.

For the past ten days or so everytime I open my browser I wonder if I'll be reading a story about how Ricciardi, Gibbons or the both of them have been shown the door.

greenfrog - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 08:33 PM EDT (#168090) #

One question I'd like to hear someone ask JP (and Godfrey) is: how should fans measure the success or failure of your tenure as GM (or President)? Can you be considered a successful GM if the team doesn't make the playoffs while you're in charge?

My own view is that it depends. I would rather see a GM build a strong nucleus and powerhouse farm system, and depart without the team's having made the playoffs, than a one-time playoff team built on a shaky foundation that takes years to rebuild.

I guess what I'd like is some clear accountability from management, instead of the tendency to (as one caller described it) 'push back the goalposts every year'.

Frank Markotich - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 10:21 PM EDT (#168095) #

All the classic signs for a managerial firing are in place:

1. Team performs poorly

2. Manager makes a series of in-game decisions so bizarre that even the media start to notice.

3. Said decisions don't work out.

John Northey - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 10:43 PM EDT (#168099) #

Every time I hear that the Jays must make the playoffs to be a success I'm reminded of how if MLB followed the NBA and NHL the Jays would've been in every year JP has been here except 2004. For the Leafs that would be enough for sainthood.

Once MLB added the wild card and it stuck I've felt we should be moving towards the 16 team playoffs ala the other major leagues (NFL is a gambling league and a druggie league - no one will convince me that the vast majority of those guys aren't on serious drugs beyond anything McGwire or Bonds dreams of using, not a sports league imo). Fans want playoffs more than regular season so you might as well give it to them if we aren't going to have the regular season be winner takes all ala pre-1969

SNB - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 11:05 PM EDT (#168100) #

There's been some discussion of a fire sale recently, but JP says we're not there yet:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=2869512

ChicagoJaysFan - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 11:06 PM EDT (#168101) #

I don't think the Jays need to make the playoffs to be a success - I think they need to provide their fans something interesting through most of the season. For me (and I'm assuming for a lot of fans, but that's a strong assumption), that's either a team that's a playoff contender, one that is young and developing towards a playoff contender, or else a team with someone that has a shot at a significant career event.

The problem that I think JP is having is that you can only promise being a team that's developing towards a playoff contender for so long before the promise starts to ring hollow. This is also the reason I'm questioning Tampa Bay's future - they've clearly got some talented youngsters, but I'm rather confident they'll find a way to screw things up before they can take advantage of it.

oodler - Monday, May 14 2007 @ 11:24 PM EDT (#168103) #

A few things at this late hour.....

1) I have always liked the idea of a 16-team playoff (not 1-8 in each conference/league like hockey but 2 from each division plus 2 wildcards). I think it would extend interest into September in many more markets, our own included. More excitement = more attendance = more $$ = more payroll = improved teams (if you have improved GMs - Toronto teams have had some difficulty with this concept lately). Unfortunately, the baseball traditionalists (i.e., older Americans) don't like the idea - they don't like the DH either.

2) A few years back I saw a gang of hooligans with giant circa-1986 Ernie Whitt masks (sitting right benhind 1st-base, where he was coaching at the time). I think the masks should be a free giveaway to all in attendance the first game that no. 12 is the "interim" manager. The chant (ER-NIE; ER-NIE) should start tomorrow night, and continue until JP/Godfrey/Uncle Ted get the picture.

GregJP - Tuesday, May 15 2007 @ 12:11 AM EDT (#168105) #

You want more teams in the playoffs?????? Are you freaking kidding me.

The sample size of a playoff series is so small that you might as well take the 16 teams and flip coins.

There should be at the very MOST 4 teams in the playoffs (2 divisions in each league) with best of 11 or 13 to have some semblance of a sample size that means anything.

The purpose of 162 games is to even out al to determine which team is better.l of the bloops, line drives right at fielders, etc. A best of 5 playoff series is like having 2 hockey teams play a single period of hockey

GregJP - Tuesday, May 15 2007 @ 12:13 AM EDT (#168106) #

Last paragraph one more time.

The purpose of 162 games is to even out all of the bloops, line drives right at fielders, etc. A best of 5 playoff series is like having 2 hockey teams play a single period of hockey to decide which is the better team.

Thomas - Tuesday, May 15 2007 @ 12:19 AM EDT (#168107) #

A best of 5 playoff series is like having 2 hockey teams play a single period of hockey to decide which is the better team.

Yeah, it's exactly like that. An 82 game regular season reduced to 20 minutes of action. It's precisely the same.

14 May 2007: A Contest! | 43 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.