|
Post by Don Caballero on Apr 2, 2013 9:06:28 GMT -5
Funny thing is that this "Bobblehead" thing began with this post, where Lucchino pretty clearly states that it was John Farrell who decided JBJ was going to be the LF. You know, the manager. Not himself. So... Yeah, what's going on here? No, no, no. The funny thing is that the post everyone is arguing over is a blatant April Fools joke. The funny thing is that the person who originally posted it added an edit less than ten minutes later stating that it is an April Fools joke. And yet several posters continue to argue about it as if it were a real quote. That is the funny thing. Wow, missed that too. Fantastic stuff right there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2013 9:30:17 GMT -5
I'd question that statement. Jobs was famous for filtering products through his vision of its marketability, including the appearance of a particular device. The point is that a good company utilises its resources, all of them. The view some espouse is only one part of the organisation should have any say, and I disagree the efficacy of such an approach. Decision makers need facts. Decision makers weigh facts and choose the outcome they feel is best. Whether our particular decision maker(s) is/are as skilled as those in other organisations, time will tell, but I don't think the JBJ placement was as inane a decision or absent any baseball ops support as some suggest. (Edited for clarity of point.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2013 10:56:41 GMT -5
When I first read Luccino's comments I interpreted them to mean that Jackie Bradley Junior's spring training performance had led to more ticket sales which enabled the Sox to have a Jackie Bradley Junior bobblehead day event to promote fan excitement around this performance. Ergo my conclusion.
However, upon rereading the paragraph I can see how I might have misinterpreted the article.
My overall point still stands.
Creating excitement, read(selling a few extra tickets/raising short-term ratings), should never factor into a baseball decision. When it does, it leads to bad baseball decisions which have long-term consequences.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Apr 2, 2013 11:35:57 GMT -5
OK, so ... lock the thread and start fresh, or just start talking about Jackie Bradley, Jr as an actual baseball player?
|
|
|
Post by honkbal on Apr 2, 2013 11:45:26 GMT -5
OK, so ... lock the thread and start fresh, or just start talking about Jackie Bradley, Jr as an actual baseball player? We just had a poster claim bring out the classic, "Sure, the evidence upon which I based my argument turns out to be a lie, but I don't see how that changes the truth of my point!" We've delved into Birther/Truther/"Vaccines cause autism" territory here. I'd like to think everyone involved is better than that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2013 13:57:48 GMT -5
I'm sorry but when someone unfairly compares me to a birther I must respond.
I misinterpreted a small portion of the Lucchino quote. However it was not the only evidence that I presented or has been presented for the ideas presented. I really don't see how this small detail disproves my entire argument.
In those cases there is plenty of evidence to suggest one side of the argument and no evidence to suggest the other. In this case, I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest that Lucchino has attempted to hold sway over baseball decisions since he's been here. There is also evidence that Lucchino overrode his baseball operations department to hire Bobby Valentine to placate a fan base who wanted blood after 2011. It's not a huge logical leap to assume that the decision to put Bradley in the big leagues also falls into that category. Just as the decision to hire Valentine was, the decision to put Bradley in the big leagues based upon spring training performance obviously placates the desires of the fanbase. Yet it is also possibly not in the best long-term interests of the club and has a faulty basis.
Comparing the points made to the arguments of Birthers and 9/11 truthers is nothing more than ad-hominim and appeal to ridicule and I think/hope you are better than that.
|
|
|
Post by awall on Apr 2, 2013 13:59:35 GMT -5
fans wanted bobby V? not this one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2013 14:31:14 GMT -5
fans wanted bobby V? not this one. The fans, wanted a hardass manager after chicken and beer gate and Lucchino placated them with a famous hardass. Yes I am aware that not every fan thought chicken and beer gate was the second apocalypse...but we are getting off track here. I had hoped that the thread would evolve into a discussion regarding where making decisions for the purposes of placating the fan base gets you but it appears that's not going to happen. It's clearly devolved so maybe it is time to close the thread.
|
|
|
Post by jclmontana on Apr 2, 2013 15:46:23 GMT -5
"Build a great baseball team and the revenue/marketing side will take care of itself."
Well, of course this is true, just look at Tampa......
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Apr 2, 2013 15:48:59 GMT -5
I had hoped that the thread would evolve into a discussion regarding where making decisions for the purposes of placating the fan base gets you but it appears that's not going to happen. It's clearly devolved so maybe it is time to close the thread. I think that was the point at which it devolved. The second rule of message board posting: if it can't be said in two posts, stop saying it.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 2, 2013 15:52:39 GMT -5
Yeah, gonna close this thread. Feel free to start another thread focused on Bradley. Any discussions of Lucchino/the rest of the FO should go in the throwdown forum or not at all.
|
|