Speaking on WEEI earlier this week, former pitcher Curt Schilling said that several players have complained to him about Valentine’s behavior.
“I thought that the manager that managed the Mets that I was not a big fan of was now going to be a different manager, and I don’t think there’s anything different at all,” Schilling said. “And I don’t think that that is going to be conducive to doing well here. There’s a lot of things I think that are happening not just from his perspective, but when you talk to these guys—and I’m still talking to some of these guys—I don’t think this is going well. And I think it’s going bad quicker than I expected it to.”
...He also said that the players don’t like how much attention Valentine has brought to the clubhouse.
“The point I made the other night was that he’s doing a lot of things right now that are forcing his players to extend their media involvement to answer questions about him and the situation when it’s already a challenge enough to do it, to play in this market and to win,” he said.
“Any time you introduce the wild card—the guy who’s going to flip over the spread or throw something against the wall or act and react in an unpredictable way—it’s not a positive thing.”
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Wins Above Paul Westerberg Posted: March 28, 2012 at 05:28 PM (#4091649)If the seasons end the same way, me too!
Beckett had a very good year last year. There are plenty of reasons that Beckett should be told to be quiet and do what the manager says, but poor performance is not one of them.
Is this even news?
So Valentine is trying to manage the team in his own style, isn't that what he was hired for? Let's see how it plays out this year. I'll hold my praise or criticisms until then.
He's also probably sort of sticking up for Tito here.
Beckett, Lester, Youkilis, Pedroia, Ellsbury, Ortiz.
In other words, most of the team's stars.
I'd put Evans, Burks and Greenwell over most of those guys in star appeal.
Management disagrees. The perception, true or not, was that Tito was too lax and the players took advantage of him. Even if that's only half true, it makes sense to have a more stern manager. Also, is Valentine actually known to throw temper tantrums? I know he's a bit of a smartass, can be tough on the media (which I personally think is great)... but I didn't realize he was known to "flip over the spread". I just can't figure out how Schilling can see how things went down last year and honestly say that having a different personality in the clubhouse is a bad thing.
In terms of people who have gone on the record concerning actual personal experiences with him since he took over, I'm not sure there are any. The media has certainly been trying, though.
It's really quite simple. Schilling thinks that Saint Francona is perfect in every way and any manager that would dare take his job after he was fired is obviously terrible. See also: Red Sox fans on SOSH.
Valentine should be smart enough to avoid responding to a guy who clearly has his head so far up Francona's ass that he can see out of his mouth.
And clearly Bard, who already throws a change up decently, should stop working on it in favor of developing an arm-shredding splitter from scratch.
Unlike much of what he pontificates about, this is something that Schilling actually knows a thing or two about and probably should be taken seriously on. At least as far as it the relative ease and effectiveness of the two pitches anyway. I have no idea whether it's true that the Red Sox put too much emphasis on Bard developing a change. And I've never heard the splitter referred to as "arm-shredding" before.
Schilling's advice sounds like, "Dan Bard should do exactly what i did in my career.". It worked for him, I don't see why it would necessarily be the best plan for someone else.
It was bad when the hire was announced. Valentine is a circus clown
Well that excludes Ortiz. If there is anyone with big gut, its BIG Papi
The only relevant question is does it matter. Players will continue to cash their big checks under Bobby V, and will do their best on the field since nobody wants to embarrass themselves and there is more money coming for the young guys.
The biggest problem I see with Bobby V is not keeping players happy, it's with overmanaging and attention seeking and conflict with the GM, and being dumb to accommodate any or all 3. For example, having Aviles lead off is dumb. Keeping Lavarnway as the 3rd catcher would be dumb. Not allowing Bard to start to open the regular season would be dumb. Waving to ejected managers to mock them is dumb. Complaining about another manager not wanting to play 10 innings in a night game on the road before having 2 day games the next day is dumb.
Or, for that matter, Curt Schilling.
Some guys, like Palmer, enjoyed making Earl's life a bit tougher; Earl enjoyed the mental sparring with Palmer as well.
But then again, there's almost never been a bigger prima donna that Jimmy P.
With today's salaries I imagine that most players dont care nearly as much for the payday as they do the glory of winning a WS.
Way too early to tell about Valentine and Boston; I also dont doubt there are a number of prima donnas on that team.
An attention-whoring media whore who criticizes his players to the press?
Um....no.
I think it is actually helpful. As annoying as Bobby V. can be I think having him as lightning rod is probably helpful for guys like Beckett, Lester, Youkilis and others who were in the middle of it over the winter. Obviously the media has not let last year go but I feel like having Valentine there to say God knows what at any time has taken that away.
If they had hired Gene Lamont or someone like that yesterday's off day stories would have been "you know, Beckett hasn't REALLY apologized for beer and fried chicken" instead of "Bobby V. sucks/is awesome and here's why."
There is no evidence of conflict with the GM that is not a product of Chris Gasper's fevered imagination.
IT IS SPRING TRAINING.
Why? Plenty of reasonable people have concerns about this. Also, IT IS SPRING TRAINING.
Who ####### cares? Are you serious?
Are you really taking the bait on this media-created story? Come on.
Look, I'll be happy to jump all over Valentine when he actually does something that matters, but the Valentine-derangement syndrome I'm seeing already is insane. Between this and thinking Iglesias should be the opening day SS, Red Sox insanity seems to be at an all-time high, which is saying something.
Is "learn a splitter" sometimes a code word for "doctor the baseball"?
Maybe. It seems like the spitball doesn't get talked about much anymore. When I was a kid (y'know, when everything was perfect) it seemed like there were endless discussions of who threw it, anyone with a good sinker was accused and guys like Joe Niekro, Rick Honeycutt and Jay Howell got busted. And of course there was Gaylord Perry.
Now no one seems to mention it. I don't think I've ever read an article about Derek Lowe throwing a spitball but he's the kind of guy in the 80s who everyone would have just assumed was throwing it.
Not really a good or bad here, just an observation.
I don't know about the splitter, but the spitter as I know it is pretty tough on the arm.
Now no one seems to mention it. I don't think I've ever read an article about Derek Lowe throwing a spitball but he's the kind of guy in the 80s who everyone would have just assumed was throwing it.
Yeah, I mean it seems to me that if you're a pitcher with great hard stuff (FB, cutter, whatever) and can't master a breaking pitch or change, a spitter is the answer to your prayers.
And, since the bottom falls out like a splitter, it's a great cover story.
My understanding is exactly the opposite.
WOW!
Count da ring!
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main