|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 22, 2013 11:10:10 GMT -5
Thanks for continuing this dialog, I've found your responses insightful. I'm not 100% with you, but I'm not against it either... I'm purposely taking one instance at a time so as not to confuse or jumble anything. Obviously, if you do not care to respond, no need to.
I disagree that a player "pressing at the plate" falls into the mechanical area vs mental area, but I don't necessarily think that "pressing at the plate" is caused by the environment. I think it can be, but it's not in each case.
My next question is about a manager and his affect on a club house and how it affects team or player performance. It seems to me that you'd fall into an argument that the manager doesn't much matter when it comes to a players performance, thus the only way they affect a teams outcome is by the decision the make from the dugout (i.e. lineup card, pinch hitters, stolen bases, pitching changes, etc) and that the culture they help create doesn't affect winning.
This same premise could be extended to players keeping each other accountable, right?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 22, 2013 11:42:10 GMT -5
Oh, I think a manager has tons of positive impact beyond the tactical moves. It's just that those decisions (a) are by far the clearest visible elements of a manager's performance and (b) come in high-leverage situations, and so are weighed more heavily. A manager has tons of other positive (or negative) influences on his team as well-- from managing the media pressure to coaching up the players and so forth. It's just that those effects are nebulous and impossible to separate from underlying player performance, so we concentrate on the factors that we can analyze with any real precision.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 22, 2013 13:38:21 GMT -5
So it's almost as if you do feel that the environment and mentality does play an affect into a players performance, however from an outside perspective, especially for purposes of conversation it's pointless to discuss as there is no way for it to be proven or backed in any sort of real way. Basically, we aren't really there so it's just pure speculation or conjecture based off of minimal evidence (i.e. a couple quotes or a few minutes of camera time) that talking about it doesn't make sense in your opinion...
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 22, 2013 13:48:20 GMT -5
Pretty much, yeah.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 22, 2013 14:01:25 GMT -5
Awesome thanks for walking through this with me. It was good insight for my own perspective. I completely agree with your premise as well; just simply disagree it's not worth discussing. Only because I feel it's enjoyable to talk about these sorts of things. I think anyone who draws any concrete conclusions about these things is off base, but I think it's worth discussing, because I think these are things the manager needs to think about when making decisions. However, when posting it's important to make sure things are kept in proper perspective and going down a road like that can be dangerous and more difficult to articulate than if people were talking. Again... good talk - thanks for the clarification. I was honestly starting to get the feeling that some people feel as though they could just have a computer manage a team and the results would either not change or improve as if there were no human element to things.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 22, 2013 21:38:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 23, 2013 9:46:38 GMT -5
Will do when not on an apple device
|
|