Friday, March 10, 2006
Thoughts on JimBo's Extension and Frank's Future
I have a habit of leaping to the intellectual defense of anyone or anything that is being criticized, whether unfairly or not. Often, I don't really think before I do so, and this has often left me in the precarious position of trying to defend an idea without the best supporting data. So it has been with Jim Bowden, of whom, as regular readers here and on the BallParkGuys forum will note, I have been a fairly staunch defender. Here's a quick review of where I stood on some of JimBo's most criticized moves:
With my mea culpa regarding Bowden's apparent missteps out of the way, I'll state for the record that I'm glad he got his contract extended through the end of the 2006 season. With no owner (for the moment) and time running out on his and Tony Siegle's deals, it was only logical to do this. I have no doubt that had some sort of provisional month-to-month deal been pitched to him, he would have told Tavares to go screw and walked ... at least that's what I would have done given all the precariousness and uncertainty that he's had to put up with since he came on in 2004. Once the new owner comes in (Tony T. predicts late May, at the earliest), he's going to want to get his feet wet before making any rash decisions. In corp speak, he'll want to do an "environmental scan" before taking on any "action items."
(BTW, speaking of The Chosen One, is it just me or is the fact that Ted Lerner is going to be named the owner the worst-kept secret in Washington?)
Several of my fellow Nats bloggers had excellent turns of phrases which encapsulate my feelings on Bowden's stay of execution:
From Basil at Federal Baseball:
Frank's Future
Another question that has been debated over the past day or so in the Natosphere has been Frank Robinson's future in Washington once the owner comes in. As with Bowden, I fully expect Frank to be dozing in the dugout as usual at the end of the 2006 season. That said, I would be sad to see him go and I'm not so certain that it would be in the best interests of the franchise.
Like it or not, the Nationals have a long way to go if they want to shed their image as the place that white suburbanites go to entertain themselves. I'm not saying that the team does not have a diverse fanbase (and it does), but baseball in general is seen by many as a white man's entertainment. That race is a factor to be considered by the Nationals should have become apparent to everyone during the stadium debate. I guarantee that very few people in Washington's African-American community have forgotten that Clark Griffith had no black players on the Senators even after Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier in 1947. Despite steady gentrification (a nice way to say that the poor, generally African-American, community is being pushed out), Washington continues to be a majority black city. There is also a growing Hispanic community and the nation's capital is home to people from virtually every country on the planet. The team should be looking to capitalize on that diverse fanbase with more than just free tickets for inner-city youths. I do hope that the planned-for youth baseball complex helps to develop a new generation of little leaguers (and beyond) in D.C. The Nationals should make this complex a central part of their promotional strategy.
This is all a long way of saying that the team should consider the image that firing an African-American icon like Frank Robinson would project in this city. Some of my more conservative readers might think I'm suggesting that the best interests of the team should be set aside to avoid offending Washingtonians of color. I'm not. If a Joe Torre or Bobby Cox were to ask for the job tomorrow, I would have no reservations giving Frank the heave-ho. What I'm suggesting is that Frank's unique status as an African-American Hall of Famer managing a team located in the District is a quality that he brings to the job and should be taken in to account when discussing what is in the best interests of the franchise as a whole.
With the team now firmly established is the District for the forseeable future, it's time for the club to reach out to all its fans. The Nationals are uniquely placed to make baseball relevant again for a generation of young Washingtonians, especially African-Americans, who have been gravitating towards basketball and football and away from the nation's pastime. African-Americans and baseball have deep roots in Washington. I hope that the Nationals and the new ownership will remember that as we go forward.
- Signing Cristian Guzman to a 4 years, $16.8M deal - I noted at the time that the then 27-year-old Guzzie was entering his prime playing years and was primed to excel in DC. Even after his disastrous 2005 campaign, I led the "he can't POSSIBLY be that bad again," bandwagon.
- The Wilkerson/Sledge/Gallarraga for Soriano trade - I originally supported the deal since I thought that Soriano would bring needed power to the lineup, though I was worried about the extra salary we were taking on. I have soured on the deal since, as details of JimBo's non-discussions with Sori regarding a position change have come to light.
- Zach Day for Preston Wilson - As in the Sori deal, I felt that the team's offensive woes were sufficiently pressing that we needed to deal from a strength (at the time) to get a bigger bat.
With my mea culpa regarding Bowden's apparent missteps out of the way, I'll state for the record that I'm glad he got his contract extended through the end of the 2006 season. With no owner (for the moment) and time running out on his and Tony Siegle's deals, it was only logical to do this. I have no doubt that had some sort of provisional month-to-month deal been pitched to him, he would have told Tavares to go screw and walked ... at least that's what I would have done given all the precariousness and uncertainty that he's had to put up with since he came on in 2004. Once the new owner comes in (Tony T. predicts late May, at the earliest), he's going to want to get his feet wet before making any rash decisions. In corp speak, he'll want to do an "environmental scan" before taking on any "action items."
(BTW, speaking of The Chosen One, is it just me or is the fact that Ted Lerner is going to be named the owner the worst-kept secret in Washington?)
Several of my fellow Nats bloggers had excellent turns of phrases which encapsulate my feelings on Bowden's stay of execution:
From Basil at Federal Baseball:
So Bowden remains the decisionmaker because you cannot be without one, and even if he's relieved of his duties, the functional equivalent of him takes over. Sure, the oranges are rotten, but that's the juice we must squeeze.Brandon at The Curly W writes:
In fact, I'll be upset if we do get rid of Bowden before the end of the 2006 season. This franchise deserves the opportunity to conduct a dilligent search for the best GM on the market, and we really won't know who is available until teams start shaking things up in October. Now that the team's future in D.C. is guaranteed, the Nationals can get the best candidate their money can buy. The last thing the team needs is another stop gap guy, the likes of which are usually in abundance come August. The best course of action would be for the owner to dismiss Bowden in October and hire a new GM by Thanksgiving in time for the free agency period.
Frank's Future
Another question that has been debated over the past day or so in the Natosphere has been Frank Robinson's future in Washington once the owner comes in. As with Bowden, I fully expect Frank to be dozing in the dugout as usual at the end of the 2006 season. That said, I would be sad to see him go and I'm not so certain that it would be in the best interests of the franchise.
Like it or not, the Nationals have a long way to go if they want to shed their image as the place that white suburbanites go to entertain themselves. I'm not saying that the team does not have a diverse fanbase (and it does), but baseball in general is seen by many as a white man's entertainment. That race is a factor to be considered by the Nationals should have become apparent to everyone during the stadium debate. I guarantee that very few people in Washington's African-American community have forgotten that Clark Griffith had no black players on the Senators even after Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier in 1947. Despite steady gentrification (a nice way to say that the poor, generally African-American, community is being pushed out), Washington continues to be a majority black city. There is also a growing Hispanic community and the nation's capital is home to people from virtually every country on the planet. The team should be looking to capitalize on that diverse fanbase with more than just free tickets for inner-city youths. I do hope that the planned-for youth baseball complex helps to develop a new generation of little leaguers (and beyond) in D.C. The Nationals should make this complex a central part of their promotional strategy.
This is all a long way of saying that the team should consider the image that firing an African-American icon like Frank Robinson would project in this city. Some of my more conservative readers might think I'm suggesting that the best interests of the team should be set aside to avoid offending Washingtonians of color. I'm not. If a Joe Torre or Bobby Cox were to ask for the job tomorrow, I would have no reservations giving Frank the heave-ho. What I'm suggesting is that Frank's unique status as an African-American Hall of Famer managing a team located in the District is a quality that he brings to the job and should be taken in to account when discussing what is in the best interests of the franchise as a whole.
With the team now firmly established is the District for the forseeable future, it's time for the club to reach out to all its fans. The Nationals are uniquely placed to make baseball relevant again for a generation of young Washingtonians, especially African-Americans, who have been gravitating towards basketball and football and away from the nation's pastime. African-Americans and baseball have deep roots in Washington. I hope that the Nationals and the new ownership will remember that as we go forward.
# posted by JammingEcono @ 12:53 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
Cudos for taking on the "race card" in such a straight forward manner. In the world today, it is much easier to simply ignore these important issues instead of taking a chance and showing some courage by actually stating your opinions.
Well done.
ps...Stadium deal done. Nats on Cox cable. Owner to be announced soon. Pinch me please!
Well done.
ps...Stadium deal done. Nats on Cox cable. Owner to be announced soon. Pinch me please!
# posted by 
: 8:36 AM
: 8:36 AM
Zach Day is pitching pretty horribly for the Rockies in Spring Training right now (and was bad last year) He'd probably be something the Nats would be sending back down to NO. (if Frank didn't just rip his arm off)
Bloggers blasted the deal but not really for giving up Zack Day. The issue with that trade was more the acquisition of Preston Wilson (holding Ryan Church back, the fact he wasn't very good outside of Coors). It seemed like a poor choice of where to try to get power.
Post a Comment
Bloggers blasted the deal but not really for giving up Zack Day. The issue with that trade was more the acquisition of Preston Wilson (holding Ryan Church back, the fact he wasn't very good outside of Coors). It seemed like a poor choice of where to try to get power.
<< Home
