...unresponsive to the question of whether we choose to judge it as acceptable behavior.

Acceptable to whom? Apparently acceptable to the Red Sox organization, which took no punitive action against Ramirez.

Am I in a particularly cynical mood when it comes to what we regard as acceptable human behavior? A woman I work with was on probation for calling in sick too much and was due to come off at the end of this week. Monday she was feeling ill and asked permission to go home, but not at the consequence of losing her job. The manager said not to worry about it, sent her home, called HR, and HR fired her.

To me, that's more unacceptably violent than shoving someone to the floor, even if she was partly responsible regarding her own behavior. It was an abuse of power against an individual who didn't serve management's immediate interests. We won't even talk about the folks terminated through no fault of their own other than cutting into the profits of those at the top of the pyramid.

#99-No I'm not. I'm only trying to guess maybe how, and why they happend. I'm actually quite far from justifing them.
As "battery" goes, it is reasonable to point out that both are very minor cases, morally and legally speaking.

But whatever.

Geez, if my boss were to shove me to the ground and humiliate me, I doubt my response would be to shrug my shoulders and say, Ah well, this is just the way the world works. What can you do? I doubt many of you would either. I suppose when it happens to someone else, though, it's easy to rationalize it and drool over Manny's 20 million dollar swing. Poor Manny can't help it. He's from Washington Heights. He's basically a barbarian!

Anybody else notice this neat trick by KM:

We have no idea what really happened in the traveling secretary incident.... The incident has been blown WAY out of proportion by Manny-haters in the media,

Sneaky.

Acceptable to whom? Apparently acceptable to the Red Sox organization, which took no punitive action against Ramirez.

Actually, word is that they fined him. And when it became part of a larger pattern of behavior, they got him off the team.


I also don't agree with the "where he comes from" argument. I certainly agree that Manny probably had many disadvantages growing up due to where he was raised. But it had not made him a violent person, as far as we know, before this year. And not everyone from that area is affected by their surroundings in the same way.

I kind of take the Carl Everett position on this.

George Patton caught hell for slapping two soldiers. The higher up you are the more unseemly it is.

word is that they fined him.

They denied that they had fined him, though. But that was before Manny turned into Trotsky (or Emmanuel Goldstein...).

I hadn't seen the denials, Swedish. Do you have a link? Not that it really matters, of course. Those things can be kept in-house and I wouldn't blame them for going public once they decided they couldn't live with Manny anymore.

Actually, word is that they fined him.

Probably no more than you'd find in his laundry.

And when it became part of a larger pattern of behavior, they got him off the team.

Check out this story of the "assault", with Francona publicly dismissing it as "something that happened between friends" and Benjamin referring to eight years of drama and a remarkably placid 2008 for Manny.

All in the family until Manny sat out on Friday against the Yankees.

Manny's a jackass, but RSN were hypocritical enablers until it no longer served their self-interest.

Do you Red Sox fans not notice how the PR campaign has done its job on you, sold you the argument that management only did what it had to do in light of Manny's poor behavior, made you forget how many times in the past its done the same thing to other players it sent packing?

I hadn't seen the denials, Swedish. Do you have a link?

Think the rumour came from that thread about a tanked AB.

Manny's a jackass, but RSN were hypocritical enablers until it no longer served their self-interest.

Or, until the incident didn't prove to be a single blip in an otherwise placid season, but the starting point for a rather ugly month.

The responses of Red Sox fans here (which is all I care about, since I don't spend time at any other baseball site) run the gamut. Some, like Darren, have wanted Manny gone for years, primarily because of his assessment of Manny's on-field worth but also, I think, because he grew tired of these types of brushfires.

Another, karl, will defend Manny to the end.

Others (I'm in this camp) were genuinely fans of Manny but think the last month made their continued relationship unworkable, and generally fault Manny for the deterioration. And others, perhaps MCoA would fall in this category, think both the FO and Manny share the blame, but still think a divorce was probably necessary.

Still others have thought it could have been salvagable, based on Manny's history of being able to put these things behind him and resume raking rather quickly.

Red Sox fans, like fans of all ####### teams, are not some monolithic entity. Efforts to pigeonhole fans, whether they be fans of the Red Sox, Yankee, Cubs, Mets etc., into some single stereotype is one of the most frustrating aspects of this place.

Do you Red Sox fans not notice how the PR campaign has done its job on you, sold you the argument that management only did what it had to do in light of Manny's poor behavior, made you forget how many times in the past its done the same thing to other players it sent packing?

I'm the main person you've been arguing with about Manny, and I never said any one of the things you attribute to "Red Sox fans." You also engaged Chip, who also didn't say any of those things.

Ah. here it is...
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/did_manny_tank_an_abat/P0/

Looks like they fined him, but less than thought:
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2008/07/mannys_fine_wil.html

Swedish - you gotta use the square brackets and the "url" code for hyperlinks - edit before it's too late!

EDIT: thanks!

What's the hypocrisy? RSN liked Manny until he became violent, started publicly trashing the team, and (as you note) appeared to jaking it.* Why is it hypocritical to let a change in behavior affect your opinion of someone.

Even if Manny's behavior hasn't changed at all, and he's always been this much of a jackass, how does it make the fans hypocritical to want to get rid of him now? It's not like the timing was convenient for Sox fans--they are in the middle of a pennant race. And it's not as if Manny sucks now. and they're getting a player who is viewed as better than Manny, and are therefore just trashing Manny to make themselves feel better about ditching him. The general public opinion is that the Red Sox gave up a super-clutch Yankee killer, and one of the most feared hitters of all time + prospects for an inferior player. The logical conclusion is that the Red Sox fans are generally fed up with Manny, either that they've reached a breaking point after years of his shennanigans or they believe he has changed for the worse in the past few months. I don't see the hypocrisy.

(*Yes, I realize that some of this change may only be a perception that is being pushed by the FO. But is pretty irrelevant when determining whether RSN is being fair to Manny, it only speaks to whether they are gullible.)

Looks like me and HTML aint friends anymore...

Soshially,

I never really cared about Manny's antics. I never really questioned the legitimacy of his injuries--I always thought that was a black box to us. I was worried about Manny's defense which I thought was historically bad and now realize is only pretty awfully bad.

Also, it should be noted that there were plenty of signs in the stands at Fenway last night thanking Manny while welcoming Jason Bay.

I never really cared about Manny's antics. I never really questioned the legitimacy of his injuries--I always thought that was a black box to us. I was worried about Manny's defense which I thought was historically bad and now realize is only pretty awfully bad.

I wasn't certain, though I knew that of all the Sox primates, you were the most skeptical about his on-field value.

Also, it should be noted that there were plenty of signs in the stands at Fenway last night thanking Manny while welcoming Jason Bay.

Yes, I think the idea that the fanbase now hates Manny is incredibly overstated. Many of us appreciate what he's done in Boston, and generally wish him well, even if we agree it was time to move on.

I put this in the other thread, but it fits just as well here.



One thing about the Ramirez stuff that I find interesting is that the guy never says much to the press, even through surrogates or interpreters. I don't recall, for example, the obligatory ghost-written "I deeply regret..." press release after he pushed the traveling sec'y, although I may have missed it. He may be a cancer, but he is in some ways a quiet one. Also, no one in the FO says much directly; neither does Francona. So, what we mostly get is whatever Gammons parrots from his sources, and hatchet jobs from Shaughnessy et al. with an occasional bizarre quote attributed to Ramirez.

As far as "what really happened", my take is that Ramirez felt he was being dissed by the Red Sox when they didn't pick up the option and/or extend him and started pouting. This happened because of the type of guy Ramirez is and due to cultural issues. I have not worked with many Dominicans in the classroom/school setting, but I have worked with many guys from Mexico, of Mexican descent, guys from other Spanish-speaking countries, as well as with Brazilians. MOST of them are very much into getting treated with "respect" and how they interpret what respect means is often at variance with the way it is interpreted here, and they respond accordingly if "dissed." In enforcing rules and/or conducting business, you have to be aware of these issues, and handle yourself accordingly. This doesn't mean you "let them get away with stuff" it just means that shows of temper, etc, may be seen as more personal breaches than one might assume. Consult Ed Wade for further details.

Also, Ramirez likely has the gargantuan sense of entitlement that so many wealthy and/or famous folks seem to, and even his biggest supporters have never sold him as being emotionally mature. Add that all up and you get the MRI, the reports about Francona's health, the loafing etc.

As to the role of the FO and where the reporters got their "info", I would assume that some players said stuff and that some of it came through Lucchino and Lucchino surrogates with Henry's approval. LL is very skilled at media manipulation, as long as he HIMSELF avoids much face time, since he is an abrasive dude to say the least (I was on the periphery of conversations with him a couple of times, but was not introduced and know/knew people who dealt with him quite a bit in SD). He also has a very deep need for public approval, so the "kudos" the Red Sox are getting for "pulling it off" and standing up to a "spoiled brat" are music to LL's ears. I don't know if this was a fully orchestrated spin campiagn, but if it were, it would be a task LL would have taken on with both skill and vigor.

As to Epstein, I doubt he got emotional about it either way. I think his view is that Ramirez's salary could be better spent elsewhere, and so he welcomed the chance to trade him. I don't agree with the idea that the Red Sox were in a huge bind due to Ramirez's behavior; I think the potential buyers figured that the key would be whether it was worth giving Ramirez what he wanted and I don't think his "cancerousness" scared anybody. The Dodgers, as long as the Red Sox put up the money, met those needs.

On the field, both Ramirez and Bay are adjusting to new leagues and new pitchers and will have to do so quickly. But, I don't think it changes the calculus that much. I still think the DBacks will nose out the Dodgers in the NL West, and I think the Red Sox will make post-season, and would have if they had kept Ramirez. The Rays, I think, will have one more downturn, but with Wang, Posada, and Matsui MIA, I think Tampa gets the other spot ahead of NYY, and ahead of whomever loses Min/Chi.

In terms of Ramirez the player, I am basically with DiPerna. I respect Dial's defensive metrics, and I know what they show, but I still see Ramirez as a winning type of player and a guy I want at the plate with the game on the line. Ramirez may not sprint to first like Gammons wants him to, but he does stay on the field most of the time and remains a hell of a hitter. One side note: given Ramirez's age and apparent lack of interest in all aspects of the game other than hitting, it seems he would be the ideal DH, but of course he has been playing on a team that has a truly great hitter who also needs to DH. And, some of the #### Ramirez gets comes from his antics in the field, which of coures would go away if he could DH.

I have predicted several times that Ramirez's next stop will be Cleveland. I think it is by far the most logical place for him. Given that Garko has played poorly this year, and the silly, massive investment in Hafner, I wonder if the Indians would consider putting Hafner back at 1b and letting him sort of stand out there like Gimabi does, and signing Ramirez to DH and hit cleanup.

Also, it should be noted that there were plenty of signs in the stands at Fenway last night thanking Manny while welcoming Jason Bay.

Yup. The highlight reels kept cutting to a favorite anti-Manny sign, but it appeared to be a clear minority - the 'EEI mouthbreathers are a pretty small proportion of Sox fans. Just about all of my friends and family who I chatted with were really sad about Manny leaving.

What's the hypocrisy? RSN liked Manny until he became violent, started publicly trashing the team, and (as you note) appeared to jaking it.* Why is it hypocritical to let a change in behavior affect your opinion of someone.

The alleged hypocrisy isn't among the fans (that's what RSN means, right?). It's among the media, who are just now creating the narrative of the violent malingering Manny. If the fans trust the media it's right for them to alter their opinion of Manny in the face of this new information. But it's far more likely that the media narrative changing so fast does not correspond to a change in the reality of who Manny is.

I don't think one person here publicly stated the Red Sox should get rid of Manny for shoving the traveling secretary. Perhaps a few have at one time or another called for a trade due to Shemannygans, but these were isolated showers.

The breaking point? Back in the middle of July, shoewizard called it on the John Henry thread:

15. shoewizard Posted: July 17, 2008 at 02:18 PM (#2862358)
When you personally offend really really rich people, you are a goner.

He is done in Boston. The only question is whether they trade him, or just let him walk at the end of the year.

Perhaps it's a coincidence that RSN suddenly became fed up with Manny in concert with him pissing off management and an intense media campaign yelling "Dump Ramirez!", perhaps they calmly reached the opinion that the trade was now inevitable -- as someone stated above, RSN is made up of a diverse population within that collective entity.

Matt, your comments have been respectfully given, I'd just respectfully suggest that your opinion has been influenced by the media campaign. If you've posted about the need to get rid of Ramirez prior to last week, my apologies.

Darren, the hypocrisy was the tolerance for eight years of variously bad behavior, apparent public tolerance for shoving the traveling secretary, including here, no reports of Manny dissing cancer kids until now, tolerance for jaking and trotting to first and all types of clowning during play.

His behavior didn't change opinion, the PR campaign did it. Again, shoewizard accurately pinpointed the final straw, and it wasn't an act of physical violence, but the pinprick of a rich man's huge ego.

t's among the media, who are just now creating the narrative of the violent malingering Manny.

That's the really hard part to swallow, this retroactive thrashing for years when he was a big part of the championship teams.

Most of you are obviously torn to some extent, liked Manny the hitter, even Manny the player, sometimes Manny the clown, appreciate the fact he helped bring two long-awaited WS titles to Boston, have not become Manny-haters due to the media campaign.

But most have accepted that it's Manny's behavior that drove the trade (even if it was tacitly condoned until last Friday) and that Boston management had little choice in how it handled the matter, at the least making the best of a bad situation. That's all the media campaign has been designed to do. It worked with previous guys they've sent packing, and it's apparently worked now.

It certainly didn't hurt them that they got Jason Bay as adequate replacement.

I don't think one person here publicly stated the Red Sox should get rid of Manny for shoving the traveling secretary. Perhaps a few have at one time or another called for a trade due to Shemannygans, but these were isolated showers.

The breaking point? Back in the middle of July, shoewizard called it on the John Henry thread:

Perhaps it's a coincidence that RSN suddenly became fed up with Manny in concert with him pissing off management and an intense media campaign yelling "Dump Ramirez!", perhaps they calmly reached the opinion that the trade was now inevitable -- as someone stated above, RSN is made up of a diverse population within that collective entity.

Did anyone here express the desire to see Manny shipped because he insulted Henry?

It wasn't the shove of the traveling secretary, which most of us hoped was a one-time bad act. It wasn't calling Henry a liar, though I would agree with shoe's assessment that picking up his option was probably off the table after that. It wasn't sitting out the first game of the Yankee series? It wasn't taking 5-plus seconds to go to first while being no-hit. It wasn't the claim that the Red Sox don't deserve him. It wasn't the possibilty that his teammates had tired of him. And it wasn't the fact that the team was playing like crap throughout this stretch.

It was all of them, coupled with the FO's clearly agitated responses to these actions that furthered the discord.

Picking the first instance and calling us hypocrites because we didn't demand he get shipped out immediately is more than a little disingenuous.

But most have accepted that it's Manny's behavior that drove the trade (even if it was tacitly condoned until last Friday) and that Boston management had little choice in how it handled the matter, at the least making the best of a bad situation. That's all the media campaign has been designed to do. It worked with previous guys they've sent packing, and it's apparently worked now.

Oh please.

You're in love with your stereotypes and won't let them go, even when there's plenty of evidence in these threads that shreds them.

Matt, your comments have been respectfully given, I'd just respectfully suggest that your opinion has been influenced by the media campaign. If you've posted about the need to get rid of Ramirez prior to last week, my apologies.

The entire fricking point of everything I've said is that there wasn't a need to get rid of Ramirez prior to last week. This is a brand new thing.

This is not, I have said, due to any particular incident, certainly not due to a violent incident that happened well prior to last week. The need to trade Manny arises from the fact that the relationship between Manny and the front office has been destroyed through a media campaign in which Manny and the front office were prime offenders, and in which the media played their classic role as stenographic enablers.

EDIT: SoSH says it well. It was the accumulation of incidents, some of which are typical Manny, some of which are very atypical Manny, and the accumulation of media leaks from the front office (and maybe Manny's people, though I didn't see those) and combative on-the-record statements from Manny that created a situation in which Manny had to be moved.

EDIT2: My second paragraph is incomplete, but now it's been sitting too long to fix. I should be clear, as SoSH was, that the media campaign, on both sides, clearly followed from (though it was not determined by or inevitable after) that accumulation of incidents over the last month.

EDIT3: Blerg. Also, the media campaign did not merely cause the destruction of the relationship, but it also reflected what had already happened insulated from the media - that the front office had gotten sick of Manny and Manny sick of the front office, and their anger had permeated and wounded the relationship.

Running hard to first to avoid a double play isn't some cost/benefit game theory on proper energy management, it's part of the job description for "major league ball player".

No, it isn't. A ballplayer is hired to win games. (Or sell tickets, if you prefer, but that's a different fettle of kish). A player can walk to first base all he wants so long as he hits the ball hard enough often enough to make it to first base (or beyond) more often than other players. Despite occasionally loafing, Manny Ramirez still did more hitting-wise than 99% (at least) of all players to ever play the game. That he loafed may have cost him value (or not, depending on whether or not the X% of the time he might have beaten out a hit is worth the Y% of the time he might have gotten injured doing so, forcing him to miss games). That he could have had MORE value is irrelevant; the value he had was significantly better than the vast majority of players who ever played the game. In hitting as well as he did, Manny Ramirez did his job a damn sight better than dozens of players who never jogged.

I would encourage those who haven't yet to read the Edes article from today's Globe.

Apparently, John Henry didn't want to trade Manny, but was overruled by Theo & co. And Ortiz sounds nearly crestfallen in the one quote from him near the end. I also got a message from someone that Ortiz was wearing no. 24 armbands at the game last night. Did anyone else notice that?

As for how Sox fans are reacting, check out the nine-page "Images of Manny" thread over on SoSH. A lot of Sox fans miss him already.

Anybody else notice this neat trick by KM:

We have no idea what really happened in the traveling secretary incident.... The incident has been blown WAY out of proportion by Manny-haters in the media,

I had it all queued up and was ready to comment on it, but waited until I read the rest of the thread to see if anyone picked up on it. If we have no way of knowing what really happened,Karl, how do YOU know that "The incident has been blown WAY out of proportion by Manny-haters in the media"? Hm? How? Hm? How do you know?

Let's reverse that "...We have no idea what really happened in the traveling secretary incident...The incident has been covered up by Manny-lovers in the media..."

It's just as silly a statement.

You're very entertaining, Karl. Keep it up.

I defended Manny for his perceived lack of hustle. I never had a problem with him not running out fly balls or ground balls or whatever. His defense never bothered me. My concern over the past few months is that he's swinging late on fastballs, and that's not good for a power hitter. He's on the decline, and if he's got to go rather than committing to for another multi year deal, then he's got to go.

Loved ya, Manny. Good luck in LA. Go Red Sox.

Apparently, John Henry didn't want to trade Manny, but was overruled by Theo & co. And Ortiz sounds nearly crestfallen in the one quote from him near the end. I also got a message from someone that Ortiz was wearing no. 24 armbands at the game last night. Did anyone else notice that?

Yeah, Ortiz's reaction seems professional but unhappy.

And thus the groundwork is laid for Ortiz to eventually depart ("I saw the way they treated Garciaparra, Ramirez, and Varitek...") possibly right around when his bat is slowing down.

EDIT: Ortiz's reaction [in the Edes article] seems... etc. Also the parenthetical quotation in my second paragraph is fictional -- I made it up to make a point -- and not from the article. In case that was unclear.

All I know as a Yankee fan is that I'm glad Manny Ramirez is safely in the National League. He'll be giving me nightmares for years to come. I only wish that the Dodgers were located in Honolulu, or better yet, Siberia.

And say, didn't I hear from my good friend Matt Drudge that Big Papi refused to sign autographs at a Jimmy Fund event? Sounds to me like they oughta ship him off to Diego or Houston. BBC could use a replacement for her recently retired main squeeze.

I also got a message from someone that Ortiz was wearing no. 24 armbands at the game last night. Did anyone else notice that?

Yeah, Andy's post about YES flacks saying EVERY ONE of the veterans the FO talked to wanted Ramirez gone sounded like a bit much to me. I find it hard to believe Ortiz wanted him gone, even if Varitek, Lowell, et al did.

It seems like from what I've seen that nobody in Boston, other than the media, despises Manny. the fans still love him. I think most fans seem to agree that it's time, but everybody still loves him.

So, Julio Lugo is the last of Ortiz's countrymen on the Sox, right? And is he traveling with the team right now?

Besides those two, the only Spanish-speakers are Cora, probably Lopez, and maybe Lowell, right? And Lopez grew up mostly in Virginia, I think, while Lowell grew up in Florida?

Is this the least-Spanish team in MLB right now?

dunno if lugo is traveling with the team, but he was in the dugout last night.

So, Julio Lugo is the last of Ortiz's countrymen on the Sox, right? And is he traveling with the team right now?

Besides those two, the only Spanish-speakers are Cora, probably Lopez, and maybe Lowell, right? And Lopez grew up mostly in Virginia, I think, while Lowell grew up in Florida?

Is this the least-Spanish team in MLB right now?

Lowell is definitely bilingual. South Florida Cubano.

Colon is the other Dominican currently under contract, although not around the clubhouse much lately and not travelling with the team since he's on the DL.

And thus the groundwork is laid for Ortiz to eventually depart ("I saw the way they treated Garciaparra, Ramirez, and Varitek...") possibly right around when his bat is slowing down.

Groundwork? That looks like "groundwork" for a player's rationalization for not being re-signed. Let the Yankees show "loyalty" to their aging stars like Posada, giving them 4 year deals that take them to age 40. Loyalty is bullsh1t. Players rightfully opt for free agency to get the most money they can get. Teams should be able to say "thanks for your service and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out" when aging stars demand unreasonable long term deals.

Also, Delcarmen is of Dominican descent: his father was born there. Don't know if he grew up speaking Spanish.

It seems like from what I've seen that nobody in Boston, other than the media, despises Manny. the fans still love him. I think most fans seem to agree that it's time, but everybody still loves him.

In spite of what I wrote above, I'm going to miss Manny, too. Manny raised the bar in the Yankees-Red Sox rivalry, and anyone who does that is great by me. Keeps both the Yanks and the rest of the American League on their toes, and when you can beat a team with Manny on it, you know you've accomplished a lot.

I would guess Delcarmen is somewhat bilingual. He grew up in Jamaica Plain and moved to West Roxbury. He speaks English as well as most people from those sections of Boston. ;-)

I should also add that I think we can overrate the countrymen factor in deciphering the tone of Ortiz's comments, at least as described by Edes in today's article: we're talking about a man who married a white girl named Tiffany from Waukesha, Wisconsin, so I don't think he necessarily needs Spanish-speakers or Dominicans around him all the time to feel comfortable.

A bigger factor might be the loss of the lockerroom entertainment Manny provided for Ortiz, who has always enjoyed the company of the biggest goofball elements in the clubhouse, whether it's Pedro, or Millar, or Damon, or Julian Tavarez, or Manny. And a lot of that goofiness has been removed in recent years. Pedroia and Papelbon appear to be the two most outgoing clubhouse personalities remaining, after Ortiz himself, so I guess they're going to have to take up the slack in providing entertainment value.

A bigger factor might be the loss of the lockerroom entertainment Manny provided for Ortiz, who has always enjoyed the company of the biggest goofball elements in the clubhouse, whether it's Pedro, or Millar, or Damon, or Julian Tavarez, or Manny. And a lot of that goofiness has been removed in recent years. Pedroia and Papelbon appear to be the two most outgoing clubhouse personalities remaining, after Ortiz himself, so I guess they're going to have to take up the slack in providing entertainment value.

Mostly, I just miss my friend.

So, Julio Lugo is the last of Ortiz's countrymen on the Sox, right? And is he traveling with the team right now?

Besides those two, the only Spanish-speakers are Cora, probably Lopez, and maybe Lowell, right? And Lopez grew up mostly in Virginia, I think, while Lowell grew up in Florida?

Is this the least-Spanish team in MLB right now?

That's probably the Blue Jays. They have a guy from Venezuela who is actually Italian, and two (part-?)Latinos born in the US. (Rod Barajas, Alex Rios) Aside from that, nothing but white guys.

The Padres had no Latinos at all except Adrian Gonzalez (born in California) for a while this season. Now they also have Luis Rodriguez, Edgar Gonzalez (Adrian's brother), and Wil Ledezma.

The A's had only Santiago Casilla at one point, though now they also have Gregorio Petit and CarGo.

All this makes the "Los Mets" phenomenon even more noticeable to the troglodytes who think it is somehow a problem.

Good calls, 143 & 144.

BTW speaking of Edes, I believe yesterday was his last day with the Globe. Took a buyout and is moving to Yahoo Sports.

Hard to believe a guy with a bum knee wouldn't run all out.

Then that's the argument Ray should have made, rather than comparing that instance to a routine grounder to second.

I did make that argument, the other day.

As for the "routine grounder to second," look, it's either a bad thing to jog to first or it's not a bad thing. If it's a bad thing, it should be a bad thing for every player; it can't just be a bad thing when Ramirez does it, but not when Vlad Guerrero does it.

The YES announcers didn't even make note of the fact that Guerrero did it, and there were no replays accompanied by commentary about how Vlad Guerrero was disrespecting the game and quitting on his teammates.

Hard to believe a guy with a bum knee wouldn't run all out.

To be honest, if it's taking him that long to get to first because of a bad knee, he should probably be on the DL rather than in the lineup.

Umm, he told the team he was hurt. They didn't believe him. It's not his decision to go on the DL; his job is to tell the team that he's hurt, and then it's the team's decision whether to put him there.

This entire "5.7 seconds to first base, OMIGOD!" criticism of him flows from the assumption that he wasn't really hurt. If one assumes, instead, that he was hurt, then the 5.7 seconds isn't remarkable at all.

I like Remy, I really do, but I wish he would have said that the team deserves some of the responsibility in how the relations between Manny and the club soured.

Well, when one considers that the Red Sox own 80% of NESN, it's not exactly shocking that the best Remy could find to say about Ramirez was "I liked the guy, I really did, but I didn't have to be his teammate."

"Have to be" his teammate. Like it was so horrible for his teammates that they all got World Series rings in part because Ramirez hit for a 1.290 OPS against Cleveland in the 2007 ALCS, a series the Red Sox won in 7 games.

Like it was so horrible for Terry Francona, who is a cult hero and a badly overrated manager, in part because of Ramirez.

Like it was so horrible for Terry Francona (see Gammons's "Francona has lost weight and lost sleep because of Evil Manny") to actually have to earn his millions of dollars by dealing with the different personalities on the team.

As for the "routine grounder to second," look, it's either a bad thing to jog to first or it's not a bad thing. If it's a bad thing, it should be a bad thing for every player; it can't just be a bad thing when Ramirez does it, but not when Vlad Guerrero does it.

That's asinine. Manny does it routinely. Most often, it's greeted the same way as it is when Vlad does it, because we recognize there's only a tiny chance that running balls-out would make any bit of difference. Some may grumble and wish these guys would go all Petey down the line every play, but most often it's greeted with a shrug.

But on a ball that has a decent chance to be a base hit, and a groundball down the third base line that is fielded near the outfield grass is always that kind of ball, then loafing to first is simply bad baseball. *

And honestly, this argument shouldn't be difficult to grasp for someone who is as results-oriented as yourself.

* This is independent of whether Manny's bum knee was the cause of him not running hard, which none of us but he really knows.

SoSH: We hear about Ramirez's jogging to first incessantly. I don't really see how one can deny that. It's brought up over and over and over again, when writers cut-and-paste their standard "Manny is Evil" column. It's not brought up for most other players who do it, despite the fact that many players do it.

Thus, the specifics of the "5.7 seconds play" is irrelevant, since people criticize Ramirez generally for not running out balls; the criticism didn't magically start with that one play.

As for being "results-oriented," I have long argued that jogging to first and such not only is harmless 99% of the time, but probably erases that 1% and then some because it can avoid injury. I have never criticized any player for not hustling.

If one looks at the big picture, there is a very serious argument that not hustling all the time (A) saves injury, and (B) can help keep a player fresh. Obsessing over this stuff, as many people do, is beyond silly.

SoSH: We hear about Ramirez's jogging to first incessantly. I don't really see how one can deny that. It's brought up over and over and over again, when writers cut-and-paste their standard "Manny is Evil" column. It's not brought up for most other players who do it, despite the fact that many players do it.

Thus, the specifics of the "5.7 seconds play" is irrelevant, since people criticize Ramirez generally for not running out balls; the criticism didn't magically start with that one play.

And if Manny didn't turn doubles into singles, as he did in the ALCS by watching his non-homer, you probably wouldn't hear anything at all. Manny's loafing problem is brought up because he doesn't exercise it judiciously, as some others have.

If one looks at the big picture, there is a very serious argument that not hustling all the time (A) saves injury, and (B) can help keep a player fresh.

Well, considering Rose is No. 1 on the all-time games played list, I think your estimation of the chance of injury is somewhat overstated. Obviously it depends on the player, and for guys like Griffey of the past 8 years, latter-day Bonds and other older sluggers with injury histories, it's the wiser choice on most routine ground balls.

But I think if you put Bonds, Griffey et al in that same sitution, where they actually have a good chance to get a base hit, you won't find them loafing. And while you're free to prefer the casual jog even in that situation, by no means is that attitude universal. It just isn't comparable to a routine grounder to second, regardless if it doesn't make a difference to you.

And if Manny didn't turn doubles into singles, as he did in the ALCS by watching his non-homer, you probably wouldn't hear anything at all.

If he's turning doubles into singles, that'll show up in his stats. It doesn't change his value at all.

As for the specific ALCS play, jogging because he thought he hit a home run is not exactly not hustling. Show me a player who lights out for first base on balls he thinks are homers. (That's a serious challenge. Name one player.) Ramirez thought he hit a homer; he was wrong, but it was no different from any other player who thinks he hit a homer and so breaks into a home run trot.

Regardless, I think Ramirez would point to his 1.290 OPS in that ALCS (or if he wouldn't, I will) and tell you what you can do with your criticism of him in that series.

Manny's loafing problem is brought up because he doesn't exercise it judiciously, as some others have.

It's brought up because it's a bad thing for some players, like Ramirez, but not for others -- for whom it's ignored.

If he's turning doubles into singles, that'll show up in his stats. It doesn't change his value at all.

A player's on-field value is the sum of his statistics, isn't it? So if a player chooses not to take extra bases when available because he can't be bothred, or not to run out plays when there is a high probability of turning an out into a single or a single into a double, he's reducing his statistics and thereby reducing his on-field value.

As for the specific ALCS play, jogging because he thought he hit a home run is not exactly not hustling. Show me a player who lights out for first base on balls he thinks are homers. (That's a serious challenge. Name one player.) Ramirez thought he hit a homer; he was wrong, but it was no different from any other player who thinks he hit a homer and so breaks into a home run trot.

The criticism of Manny not running on potential homers is not a new one. For years, he's been criticized for posing after he thinks he's hit one out. Granted, much of that criticism seems to be from NY fans, but it is not like this accusation is completely out of the blue.

If he's turning doubles into singles, that'll show up in his stats. It doesn't change his value at all.

If he's turning doubles into singles, he's less valuable than he could be.

As for the specific ALCS play, jogging because he thought he hit a home run is not exactly not hustling. Show me a player who lights out for first base on balls he thinks are homers. (That's a serious challenge. Name one player.) Ramirez thought he hit a homer; he was wrong, but it was no different from any other player who thinks he hit a homer and so breaks into a home run trot.

So we should criticize him for shitty judgment, not for loafing. Fine.

Manny is not the first guy who turned a double or triple into a single or double by loafing out of the box when he thought he hit a homer. And I want you to find someone who did that and was not criticized for it, either by the announcers, the beat guys or the average fan. And yes, that's a serious challenge.

Regardless, I think Ramirez would point to his 1.290 OPS in that ALCS (or if he wouldn't, I will) and tell you what you can do with your criticism of him.

Manny was great in that series. But to some folks, greatness does not immunize a person from criticism. Obviously, you don't share that belief. To each his own.

It's brought up because it's a bad thing for some players, like Ramirez, but not for others -- for whom it's ignored.

Or you're just ignoring when others are criticized for doing the same thing. And a routine grounder to second and a possible base hit down the third base line are not the same thing, no matter how much you want to ignore that distinction.

A player's on-field value is the sum of his statistics, isn't it? So if a player chooses not to take extra bases when available because he can't be bothred, or not to run out plays when there is a high probability of turning an out into a single or a single into a double, he's reducing his statistics and thereby reducing his on-field value.

1. That will show up in his statistics, as I said.

2. He's not necessarily reducing his on-field value, as I also said: if he doesn't pull a hamstring because he's not going all-out on a routine grounder to short, that has real value.

The criticism of Manny not running on potential homers is not a new one. For years, he's been criticized for posing after he thinks he's hit one out. Granted, much of that criticism seems to be from NY fans, but it is not like this accusation is completely out of the blue.

I didn't say the criticism was a new one; I said the criticism is silly, because no player races to first on a ball he thinks is over the wall.

If he's turning doubles into singles, he's less valuable than he could be.

Not at all. Again, if not hustling avoids injury, that has more value than beating out one more grounder in 100.

Does giving David Ortiz a day off make Ortiz "less valuable than he could be"? No; the thinking is that giving him a day off here and there helps keep him fresh throughout the season. It's a short-term sacrifice for a long-term gain. Same argument in favor of not hustling.

Not at all. Again, if not hustling avoids injury, that has more value than beating out one more grounder in 100.

Then why does Manny ever hustle? He doesn't jog all the time. He's made some nice running catches, taken the occasional extra base and hustled to beat out a potential DP. Isn't he putting himself in harm's way each and every time he turns on the jets? Or is it just the times that he doesn't hustle where he's making this intelligent analysis.

You know that it wasn't some on-the-spot injury cost-benefit calculation that had him jogging out of the box against Cleveland, but misjudging what he thought was a homer. And he got rightfully criticized for it, just as every ballplayer who does the same thing gets criticized when they do it and cost themselves a base. And if he got more criticism for it than Alfonso Soriano does when he turns a wall ball into a single during a Tuesday afternoon game in June, it's because it happened in the ALCS and there were more people paying close enough attention to criticize it, not because it's Manny and everybody's so mean to him.

As for being "results-oriented," I have long argued that jogging to first and such not only is harmless 99% of the time, but probably erases that 1% and then some because it can avoid injury. I have never criticized any player for not hustling.

If one looks at the big picture, there is a very serious argument that not hustling all the time (A) saves injury, and (B) can help keep a player fresh. Obsessing over this stuff, as many people do, is beyond silly.

Good lord, Hank, stay away from my kids. This isn't an office softball game. We're talking about professional athletes being asked to haul it 90 feet about seven times every two days or so.

You're also ignoring the fact that running the bases hard more frequently creates routine in doing so that will prevent injury when the players need to do it. I would argue that not only should players bust it on every play, but they should do a little of it on the side, too, to ensure they have the pacing and paths down, and to make sure they hit the bases every time in the quickest and least injury-prone way possible.

The number of major league players who are winded going from first to home on a double or who lunge with their last step to first base or take terribly round routes around the bases is embarrassing. If these guys don't want to run, the PGA Tour is always looking for Tiger's next big challenger.

If you want to talk about pulling back on grounders to nurse an existing injury, I'll buy that (although, as mentioned above, if you can't run to first you shouldn't really be in the game to begin with). But to excuse players from making these short sprints in the interest of preventing injury or keeping a professional athlete "fresh" is completely ridiculous, I don't care who is running.

Same argument in favor of not hustling.

I can't believe that you're actually arguing that it's to the team's benefit if players don't try to avoid outs, or don't run out plays, based on some incredibly hypothetical situation that not trying may prevent enough injuries to justify the outs or extra bases given up.

You're in love with your stereotypes and won't let them go, even when there's plenty of evidence in these threads that shreds them.

I probably deserve that for my use of "RSN" and the quote you pulled, and I admit to being somewhat selective in reaching my opinion regarding the media campaign. As I admitted upthread, there's a lot of nuance here and in RSN as a whole. (It didn't help that I was agitated by off-computer events this afternoon.)

Does the above meet your approval for letting go, Chip? Or do you want to argue some more about superior/subordinate relationships and their egalitarian nature? ;>

Does the above meet your approval for letting go, Chip? Or do you want to argue some more about superior/subordinate relationships and their egalitarian nature? ;>

If that's what I were doing, I'd grant you the approval. But since I wasn't actually making any arguments about egalitarianism in the workplace ...

Ah, forget it. You've obviously let go.

But most have accepted that it's Manny's behavior that drove the trade (even if it was tacitly condoned until last Friday) and that Boston management had little choice in how it handled the matter, at the least making the best of a bad situation. That's all the media campaign has been designed to do. It worked with previous guys they've sent packing, and it's apparently worked now.

I can't take it anymore.

Loose Nuts, your handle is apt. I tolerated Manny before because his behavior was goofy rather than malignant. But this year has been different. First, he has had two separate physical confrontations with co-workers. That was worrisome enough but he was disciplined and it was hoped it would blow over. But what irrevocably poisoned the well for me was he was obviously dogging plays on the field and malingering. That is an absolute no-no. I saw that with my own eyes. I didn't have to read anything at all to see that.

Manny is being payed a ridiculous amount of money to play a game. He is ABSOLUTELY AND WITHOUT QUESTION REQUIRED TO DO HIS BEST. He wasn't doing that, and he was dragging an otherwise championship caliber team down with him. That is unforgivable. Manny has irrevocably lost me now. I will never root for him again.

Another thing. I think Darren has pegged Manny pretty accurately with his talent evaluation. While Manny is a still a very good hitter, he isn't a great hitter anymore. A worrisome number of his homers are going to right and rihtcenter this year and it's just a matter of time before those late contact swings will become missed swings and I was basically fine with the Red Sox not picking him up, because he sucks if he isn't hitting. His fielding is bad and his baserunning is historically awful. Bay might be a better player right now.

In sum, your analysis, that Red Sox fans swallowed a bunch of propaganda, is full of ####. We understand perfectly what went down, and are all fine with it. Manny caused this.

In sum, your analysis, that Red Sox fans swallowed a bunch of propaganda, is full of ####.

If I argued this, I agree.


We understand perfectly what went down, and are all fine with it. Manny caused this.

He played his part, no doubt.

How 'bout this -- the FO overkill affected me.

An interesting point of discussion raised above is what is required in the workplace -- to get the job done or to give 100 percent at all times when the surplus value you produce is sucked up by REMF.

Gotta go -- Cool Hand Luke is on.

Manny has irrevocably lost me now. I will never root for him again.

shocked i tell ya. Shocked!

I'm not upset about Manny leaving at all, I was happy to see him hit a dinger today however. At least I have an excuse to watch the Dodgers now besides Vin Scully.

Can we permanaitly retire the "if you pushed a co-worker at work..."-type comparisions forever?

every job is different...
Throwing a ball at a coworker's back for admiring his work would get you fired, but it's common place in baseball.
A bench-clearing brawl at an office would probably result in many dismissal, and police action, but ballplayers get into it without consequence.
I'd get fired for jerking off a co-worker at work, but pornstars do it all the time.

Also, these aren't normal people, the more talented you are, and the more sought after your talent is, the more you ghet away with, in any field (but esp. entertainment and athletics)>

You know that it wasn't some on-the-spot injury cost-benefit calculation that had him jogging out of the box against Cleveland, but misjudging what he thought was a homer. And he got rightfully criticized for it, just as every ballplayer who does the same thing gets criticized when they do it and cost themselves a base. And if he got more criticism for it than Alfonso Soriano does when he turns a wall ball into a single during a Tuesday afternoon game in June, it's because it happened in the ALCS and there were more people paying close enough attention to criticize it, not because it's Manny and everybody's so mean to him.

The problem is that every player who thinks he has hit a home run does this, whether it's March, April, August, September, or October.

If you want to talk about pulling back on grounders to nurse an existing injury, I'll buy that (although, as mentioned above, if you can't run to first you shouldn't really be in the game to begin with). But to excuse players from making these short sprints in the interest of preventing injury or keeping a professional athlete "fresh" is completely ridiculous, I don't care who is running.

And I flat disagree.

I couldn't care less that Ramirez doesn't hustle all the time, and I think it can be beneficial in avoiding injury. I'm sorry if that notion shocks you. But I'd rather have Manny Ramirez than an inferior player -- call him Eric Byrnes -- who races to first on every routine grounder to second.

By the way, Ramirez is getting cheered like crazy in LA and is being asked for curtain calls. The fans certainly don't seem to mind him being on the team, even though he's been "disgracing the game." His new teammates -- who swarmed him in the dugout after he hit a home run today -- don't seem to mind, even though he "quit on his team." His new manager doesn't seem to mind, even though the last manager "lost sleep and lost weight."

Those of you who have the baseball package should take a peak.

I'd get fired for jerking off a co-worker at work

Fascists.

I couldn't care less that Ramirez doesn't hustle all the time, and I think it can be beneficial in avoiding injury.

It's not about whether Ramirez is a better ballplayer than Eric Byrnes, it's whether Manny Ramirez is the best ballplayer that he can be with his physical tools.

I'll give it to Manny, he's really trying to show that he can go all out and hustle in these past two games, but it's obvious that he just doesn't know how to do it. Tonight he went first to third on a single like a good ballplayer would, but then he was winded and stopped paying attention to the rest of the play around him. The runner at first was caught in a rundown and Manny had every opportunity to go home - in fact, Larry Bowa wanted him to go home, but Manny just camped out at third base catching his breath. Maybe if he ran hard to first a little more often he wouldn't get winded trying to run 180 ft.

And no, that's not something that shows up in the stats.

To me, that's more unacceptably violent than shoving someone to the floor, even if she was partly responsible regarding her own behavior. It was an abuse of power against an individual who didn't serve management's immediate interests.

She deserved to get fired for abusing the sick leave policy. She has a responsibility to do her best. She wasn't doing that. She was malingering. If she is not fulfilling her end of the bargain, management has every right to let her go. Management gave her fair warning that she disregarded. She did it to herself.

If I argued this, I agree.

Read what you wrote:

Do you Red Sox fans not notice how the PR campaign has done its job on you, sold you the argument that management only did what it had to do in light of Manny's poor behavior, made you forget how many times in the past its done the same thing to other players it sent packing?

Do you not notice how batshit your wild hypotheses are? Management didn't need a PR campaign. Manny was openly dogging, insulting the fans, the game and himself. He was dragging the team down and had to go. All the press did was report what was happening. What, you expect the presse to remain totally silent while the Red Sox are inexplicably trying to trade Manny? Of course the fans wnat to uinderstand the underlying reasons for what is going on. They wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't report why Manny was being traded.

You're worse than Matt with your batshit conspiracy theories.

And thus the groundwork is laid for Ortiz to eventually depart ("I saw the way they treated Garciaparra, Ramirez, and Varitek...") possibly right around when his bat is slowing down.

Groundwork? That looks like "groundwork" for a player's rationalization for not being re-signed. Let the Yankees show "loyalty" to their aging stars like Posada, giving them 4 year deals that take them to age 40. Loyalty is bullsh1t. Players rightfully opt for free agency to get the most money they can get. Teams should be able to say "thanks for your service and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out" when aging stars demand unreasonable long term deals.

Oh, agreed. I don't like it when a player (let's call him "Mike Greenwell") complains about poor treatment that's really just an accurate assessment of his ability to contribute to the club in the future. I understand why players take it personally -- rejection in any form is tough to take, and these are guys who are not used to any form of rejection -- but I still wish they wouldn't do it. I was just pointing out that I can imagine Ramirez's departure being more of a reason/rationalization for Ortiz to decide to leave than for him to stay.

It's been my BBTF dream to be called 'batshit' by kevin.

Listen, I've already said that pull quote was more than a little overheated, but as usual, you go too far back the other direction. "All the press did was report what was happening?" -- you mean like Manny dissing the cancer kids four months after the fact? If that was news, it was news when it happened, not part of the campaign to justify dumping Ramirez. Why all the stories about giving Francona an ulcer, all his teammates voting to dump him If the Boston press' job is to flack for the Red Sox, job well done.

None of this is to say that Ramirez didn't push the envelope to get out of those option years, likely at the behest of Boras and with the goal of landing more guaranteed money. But many if not most Red Sox fans lived with Manny's detrimental behavior until now. He's always loafed on the bases and in the field. He laid out the last five weeks of the 2006 season with a phantom injury. The difference now is that he was coming to the end of his contract and his value has declined from his prime years. If the Red Sox and Manny needed to part ways, it was over the contract or lack of one, and not because of his behavior.

What's really funny about your posts is that upthread you said you didn't need the press to explain Manny's behavior, but then you justify their Manny-trashing by saying the fans need their help to understand what's going on.

Gold star for Red Sox boy.

I could air all of my workplace's dirty laundry to give a full picture of why the above example was poor management, but I doubt anybody wants to hear it. My real problem is that living up to policy and doing your best only applies to those low on the totem pole; those up the line get away with policy abuse and much more. Basically, the termination was just the latest piece of a workplace purge of 20-somethings who don't look like the middle- and old-agers who run the place, people who don't see the benefit the youngsters bring to the table for the rough edges.

Good management would have integrated these people into the workplace because what they bring is production -- as a whole, they produced 50 percent more work than the vets on staff who coast at half-speed but more closely toe the line in a rule-oriented culture.

I'd say it's time for me to move on as well, despite a tough market and a genuine like of the work itself. Unfortunately, unless I go for self-employment, I'm likely to find more of the same out there. Workplace culture as a whole becomes more bloodless every day.

Basically, the termination was just the latest piece of a workplace purge of 20-somethings who don't look like the middle- and old-agers who run the place, people who don't see the benefit the youngsters bring to the table for the rough edges.

Well then, you work for a crappy organization. Why do I not find that surprising? Water seeks it's own level.

If you put more of yourself into your job instead of whining about what maangement should or should not be doing, maybe they would see enough value in you to allow you to be making decisions of import, and you wouldn't be carrying around this victimm mentality you seem to be nurturing so carefully.

He laid out the last five weeks of the 2006 season with a phantom injury. The difference now is that he was coming to the end of his contract and his value has declined from his prime years. If the Red Sox and Manny needed to part ways, it was over the contract or lack of one, and not because of his behavior.

The answer to that, of course, is his behavior was sinking an otherwise promising season and he had to go. Like, right now. Plus, as you also seem to be totally unaware of, the Red Sox have been trying to move him for years so the fans, who do not have the power to make personnel decisions (in case you haven't figured that out yet either) had no choice but to tolerate his transgressions and hope his bat would make up for it all. Somedtimes it did and sometimes it didn't. This was one of the years it didn't and, since Manny himself chose to force the issue by being a dog, we are all relieved the situation has been resolved as best as one could have hoped.

Manny has, of course, burned his bridges with the fans. Tanking games is NOT a legitimate way to resolve grievances. This problem is entirely of Manny's creation. Now he's somebody else's problem. I wished Nomar and Vaughn the best when they left because I recognized that, whatever their issues were, they gave their best when they were on the field (I still silently root for Nomar and want him to do well). The same cannot be said of Manny. Good riddance.

Manny has, of course, burned his bridges with the fans.

This is news to me. Maybe he's burned bridges with a few fans, but not most of them.

Water seeks it's own level.

You a sewer manager?

This is news to me. Maybe he's burned bridges with a few fans, but not most of them.

Check out that SoSH Manny picture thread. I think most fans still have overwhelmingly positive feelings towards Manny. Unless he signs with the Yankees, I'm sure the next time he comes to bat in Fenway he'll get a huge standing ovation, just like Pedro.

kevin --

Your attacks too often veer into personal insult, you act cocksure where you are in fact ignorant, you carry on vendettas beyond all reason and endurance... but despite your faults, you were right about my complaints. If I find myself hip-deep in a toxic workplace, I either need to do what I can to change things or get the hell out of there if I can't. No excuses.

You can often learn more in a fight than in hours of civil discussion.

Thanks.

You're welcome.

What you said is true. Either change from within or without if you find yourself in grinding job. If you don't do something, it will beat you down.