7/3 @ New York - The bullshit has got to stop

[a700hitter]

What a beautiful game pitched by Lester. When there was the occasional base runner, he threw a DP ball.

[das11209]

Goodnight all.

 

Night.

[Jayhawk Bill]

I just had a weird feeling that this is going to be one of those games that one remembers.

 

:thumbsup:

[BoSox21]

Lester was spectacular tonight

[TheKilo]

I see this being a battle of the pens. We typically have a rough O day against lefties and after we have a blowout like we had last night. The sox OTOH have gotten ridiculous production from Drew' date=' and the lefty on our mound should slow that down. I see this being a battle of the pens.[/quote']

 

Wrong

[ORS]

Wrong

Unfathomable.

 

Hahah! I watched this at a bar with 3 Yankee fans. I laughed all night as Lester packed their s*** in.

[TheKilo]

lol Girardi is flipping a s***

[yankeessuck013]

haha girardi

 

reporter: i bet the 4.5 million fans who go to the game [care] ...

girardi: it's between my team and ME!

[a700hitter]

Girardi had a half hour closed door session with his team and then acted like a royal ass having a hissy fit during his press conference. It was a real douche bag performance. I find it curious thta he picked tonight to throw a hissy fit. His most reliable starter had a bad night, and his offense ran up against the Red Sox hottest and possibly best pitcher. The World Champs and their hottest pitcher beat his team, so what the f*** was his problem. I'm sure he beat his team up for not making Lester throw more pitches, so if the Sox coaching staff and Beckett are smart the game plan tomorrow should include first pitch 95 mph fastball strikes.

 

Edit: Like I have said from the beginning, he's a dick.

[TheKilo]

I'm glad we have our ace pitching in this series.

 

And it's a good thing Beckett is pitching tomorrow.

[yeszir]

Excellent game by Lester. I'm impressed.

[riverside sluggers]

There we go, game needed by all. Especially one where the bullpen got a night off. A hell of a turnaround by Lester, truely incredible this year

 

Lester is the first Sox pitcher since Hideo Nomo in 2001 to throw at least 2 shutouts. First lefty to do so since Bruce Hurts in 87

 

The offense hit often & hard early against Pettitte, Ellsbury and Varitek got some much needed hits to possibly bring them out of their slumps. Crisp's first game back was as if he hadnt missed 5 games (2 for 3, 2 runs, SB ). I heard somewhere that Crisp could be valuable trade bait if Ortiz comes back before the deadline

[Jayhawk Bill]

Girardi had a half hour closed door session with his team and then acted like a royal ass having a hissy fit during his press conference. It was a real douche bag performance. I find it curious thta he picked tonight to throw a hissy fit. His most reliable starter had a bad night, and his offense ran up against the Red Sox hottest and possibly best pitcher. The World Champs and their hottest pitcher beat his team, so what the f*** was his problem. I'm sure he beat his team up for not making Lester throw more pitches, so if the Sox coaching staff and Beckett are smart the game plan tomorrow should include first pitch 95 mph fastball strikes.

 

Edit: Like I have said from the beginning, he's a dick.

 

a700hitter, I have never challenged you on your contention that Girardi is a dick. I merely contend that he is not an idiot.

[RedRuffing15]

Wow, real good game pitched by Lester. And the sox did a good job of making the yankees pay for their mistakes. I though it seemed wierd that every matchup in this series was a rookie vs a vet, but yesterday, it worked for the sox. Hopefully today, it can work for the Yankees. Unfortunatly, Rasner and Lester arent really comparable, hopefully the Yankee bats can go to work early.

 

I'd like the Yankees to win at least one of the next two because Im going to Sundays game, and I'd enjoy it to be for either a split or a series win, so Lets all enjoy a good Fourth of July day game between the Yankees and the Red Sox!!

[a700hitter]

a700hitter' date=' I have never challenged you on your contention that Girardi is a dick. I merely contend that he is not an idiot.[/quote']I do tend to use those terms interchangeably. I do think that interpersonal skills are a key part of a managers skill set. Girardi, being a dick, will have a very tough time succeeding despite his knowledge of the game. The knowledge of the game is the easy part. It's not Rocket Science.

 

 

BTW: For the young fans, today, July 4th is the 35th anniversary of the last shutout of the Yankees at Yankee Stadium by a Red Sox lefty--Rogelio (we used to call him Roger) Moret. I was at that game. It was the second game of an afternoon doubleheader. Moret won 1-0. In the opener, the Red Sox won 2-1 beating Sparky Lyle who came in to relieve Stottlemyre after Reggie Smith singled to lead off the 9th. Yaz scored the winning run as the relay from Bernie Allen skipped a few feet away from Ron Blomberg on an attempted DP. It was I believe Ray Culp's last good start of his career.

 

One last note. A Red Sox lefty has shut out the Yankees in their home ballpark since that date. Moret shutout the Yankees 6-0 in the nightcap of a double header in 1975 at Shea Stadium. I was there for that one too. The first came of the twinbill has been remembered for Fred Lynn's diving, sliding catch to rob Craig Nettles of a bases clearing two-out triple in the 7th or 8th inning. Sox won that game 1-0 ( Bill Lee). Yes, it was a double header shutout. Other than the two world championships, those two double headers -- 2-1, 1-0, 1-0, 6-0-- are my fondest Red Sox memories.

 

Edit: In case you didn't know, Bill Lee was also a southpaw. A DH southpaw shutout.

[Jayhawk Bill]

I do tend to use those terms interchangeably. I do think that interpersonal skills are a key part of a managers skill set. Girardi' date=' being a dick, will have a very tough time succeeding despite his knowledge of the game. The knowledge of the game is the easy part. It's not Rocket Science.[/quote']

 

Billy Martin seemed to do OK managing in New York. :dunno:

[a700hitter]

Billy Martin seemed to do OK managing in New York. :dunno:

He had his moments (winning a championship in 1977) while being fired 5 times. He probably would have been much more successful if he hadn't been such a dick. He probably would have been the manager in 1978 for the second championship and he might have gotten fired a few less times.

[Jayhawk Bill]

He had his moments (winning a championship in 1977) while being fired 5 times. He probably would have been much more successful if he hadn't been such a dick. He probably would have been the manager in 1978 for the second championship and he might have gotten fired a few less times.

 

Are you familiar with Goleman's Six Managerial Styles?

 

About twenty years ago I was responsible for teaching leadership to young Navy officers, as well as maintaining the curriculum. The research for Goleman's work was done back in the 1980's, except for the aspect of tying it to "Emotional Intelligence." I had to review all of that research, as well as the studies applying it to the Navy, as an aspect of my job. Joe Girardi is using what we called "coercive leadership," or what Goleman calls "commanding leadership."

 

In the professional workplace, of which I understand that you're an effective current member, coercive leadership is absolutely destructive. Workers take other jobs rather than endure such treatment.

 

In the military, officers have significant authority under the Uniform Code of Military Justice to destroy the lives of those who fail to follow direction. One cannot quit until one's enlistment contract lapses, and occasionally not even then. Coercive leadership was the traditionally favored style in the military well into the Twentieth Century, and it still has its place in military situations. As Goleman admits, coercive leadership decreases fear in emergencies by diminishing uncertainty. It is even appropriate in the private sector in a great crisis, or with problem employees, or to start organizational turnaround.

 

Let's look at Girardi's situation with the Yankees.

 

The Yankees are in third place, eight games behind the Rays and five games behind the Red Sox. Despite using accomplished veteran starter Andy Pettitte last night, the Yankees were humiliated. The players have no place else to go. They are under contract to an element of a legally-sanctioned monopoly: they cannot work in their profession elsewhere in North America. If they fail to perform, it destroys their career earning potential. These employees with no options are working for a firm whose metrics are in catastrophic decline. Joe Girardi was brought in to turn around the Yankees after a disappointing 2007. His workers aren't supporting him.

 

Given the situation, I emphatically support--in fact, applaud--Girardi's decision to kick ass in private. Look at the situation: no Yankees player was humiliated in public, singled out by name; Girardi has used commanding leadership to force turnaround, but he correctly selected the place and time.

 

If Girardi fails to turn around the Yankees, he's fired--he's got nothing to lose if this doesn't work. If he succeeds and doesn't switch to a more sustainable leadership style, then I'll fault him--but right now, he's doing his job right.

 

***

 

Billy Martin was an outstanding commanding leader. George Steinbrenner brought Martin in when he was needed and ditched him when he wasn't needed. Martin didn't fail--he was used to great success when his skills were required.

 

And I strongly disagree that he would've been much more successful had he not been such a dick--his personality was perfect for the times that he had a job.

[a700hitter]

Billy Martin was an outstanding commanding leader. George Steinbrenner brought Martin in when he was needed and ditched him when he wasn't needed. Martin didn't fail--he was used to great success when his skills were required.

 

And I strongly disagree that he would've been much more successful had he not been such a dick--his personality was perfect for the times that he had a job.

He wasn't the right manager for the '78 team. For all the talented Yankee teams that he managed, he only won one world championship. I don't think that is anything to squawk about Jayhawk. He had the skill set to teach young inexperienced players and to intimidate them into over-performing, but let's not forget how he wrecked that young A's staff by reckless overuse. Veteran teams did not respond very well to him.

[a700hitter]

Are you familiar with Goleman's Six Managerial Styles?

 

About twenty years ago I was responsible for teaching leadership to young Navy officers, as well as maintaining the curriculum. The research for Goleman's work was done back in the 1980's, except for the aspect of tying it to "Emotional Intelligence." I had to review all of that research, as well as the studies applying it to the Navy, as an aspect of my job. Joe Girardi is using what we called "coercive leadership," or what Goleman calls "commanding leadership."

 

In the professional workplace, of which I understand that you're an effective current member, coercive leadership is absolutely destructive. Workers take other jobs rather than endure such treatment.

 

In the military, officers have significant authority under the Uniform Code of Military Justice to destroy the lives of those who fail to follow direction. One cannot quit until one's enlistment contract lapses, and occasionally not even then. Coercive leadership was the traditionally favored style in the military well into the Twentieth Century, and it still has its place in military situations. As Goleman admits, coercive leadership decreases fear in emergencies by diminishing uncertainty. It is even appropriate in the private sector in a great crisis, or with problem employees, or to start organizational turnaround.

 

Let's look at Girardi's situation with the Yankees.

 

The Yankees are in third place, eight games behind the Rays and five games behind the Red Sox. Despite using accomplished veteran starter Andy Pettitte last night, the Yankees were humiliated. The players have no place else to go. They are under contract to an element of a legally-sanctioned monopoly: they cannot work in their profession elsewhere in North America. If they fail to perform, it destroys their career earning potential. These employees with no options are working for a firm whose metrics are in catastrophic decline. Joe Girardi was brought in to turn around the Yankees after a disappointing 2007. His workers aren't supporting him.

 

Given the situation, I emphatically support--in fact, applaud--Girardi's decision to kick ass in private. Look at the situation: no Yankees player was humiliated in public, singled out by name; Girardi has used commanding leadership to force turnaround, but he correctly selected the place and time.

 

If Girardi fails to turn around the Yankees, he's fired--he's got nothing to lose if this doesn't work. If he succeeds and doesn't switch to a more sustainable leadership style, then I'll fault him--but right now, he's doing his job right.

Bill, you are way out on a limb with this analogy to military management. This is not the military. Individually the Yankees are not failing to perform. Most of their veterans are having good years. Damon, ARod, Giambi, Abreu, Posada, Mo, and Moose are all performing at or above expectations. They are performing. The Yankees are just not winning enough. Because they are performing, Joe Girardi cannot hurt their earning ability. The theoretical underpinnings of this coercive style do not have any application to this situation.

[Jayhawk Bill]

He wasn't the right manager for the '78 team. For all the talented Yankee teams that he managed' date=' he only won one world championship. I don't think that is anything to squawk about Jayhawk. He had the skill set to teach young inexperienced players and to intimidate them into over-performing, but let's not forget how he wrecked that young A's staff by reckless overuse. Veteran teams did not respond very well to him.[/quote']

 

Replacing a Commanding Leader with an Affiliative Leader often produces a short-term surge in performance as morale improves but skills and standards are not yet eroded...Martin played an important role, IMO, in the Yankees' 1978 comeback, setting the standard for success, even if he was not there at the end.

 

FWIW, Martin ranks 20th all time in managerial wins over .500, a pretty impressive feat. He took the Twins, the Tigers, the Yankees and the A's to the LCS, and he did, as you point out, win a World Series. He managed the Yankees through three complete seasons, winning the AL twice; his overall record with the Yankees, counting the (many) seasons he was fired, was .591, a 96-win pace; he never had a losing record when he was fired by George Steinbrenner, and he was 52-42 when he was fired in 1978, hardly a shabby record.

 

And the only two teams that didn't play well for Billy Martin, the 1975 Rangers and the 1982 A's, were actually fairly young teams, not veterans.

 

***

 

Hmmm...Joe Girardi's "pep talk" may have worked. Off to the other Game Thread...

[Jayhawk Bill]

Bill' date=' you are way out on a limb with this analogy to military management. This is not the military. Individually the Yankees are not failing to perform. Most of their veterans are having good years. Damon, ARod, Giambi, Abreu, Posada, Mo, and Moose are all performing at or above expectations. They are performing. The Yankees are just not winning enough. Because they are performing, Joe Girardi cannot hurt their earning ability. The theoretical underpinnings of this coercive style do not have any application to this situation.[/quote']

 

If you'll take a moment to reread my post,

 

As Goleman admits, coercive leadership decreases fear in emergencies by diminishing uncertainty. It is even appropriate in the private sector in a great crisis, or with problem employees, or to start organizational turnaround.

 

Let's look at Girardi's situation with the Yankees.

 

The Yankees are in third place, eight games behind the Rays and five games behind the Red Sox. Despite using accomplished veteran starter Andy Pettitte last night, the Yankees were humiliated. The players have no place else to go. They are under contract to an element of a legally-sanctioned monopoly: they cannot work in their profession elsewhere in North America. If they fail to perform, it destroys their career earning potential. These employees with no options are working for a firm whose metrics are in catastrophic decline. Joe Girardi was brought in to turn around the Yankees after a disappointing 2007. His workers aren't supporting him.

 

Given the situation, I emphatically support--in fact, applaud--Girardi's decision to kick ass in private. Look at the situation: no Yankees player was humiliated in public, singled out by name; Girardi has used commanding leadership to force turnaround, but he correctly selected the place and time.

 

I stated clearly the context in which I first studied Coercive Leadership, but the reasons for Girardi's needing to use Commanding Leadership were stand-alone in context and properly referenced back to Goleman's work.

 

I humbly request that you reconsider your words, "The theoretical underpinnings of this coercive style do not have any application to this situation."

[a700hitter]

If you'll take a moment to reread my post,

 

 

 

I stated clearly the context in which I first studied Coercive Leadership, but the reasons for Girardi's needing to use Commanding Leadership were stand-alone in context and properly referenced back to Goleman's work.

 

I humbly request that you reconsider your words, "The theoretical underpinnings of this coercive style do not have any application to this situation."

I stand by my opinion. I think you are over-analyzing this event. Girardi was reacting emotionally and was not applying any carefully considered or studied style of management. In short, he got pissed. I have had plenty of managers who unsuccessfully employed that style.

[Jayhawk Bill]

I stand by my opinion. I think you are over-analyzing this event. Girardi was reacting emotionally and was not applying any carefully considered or studied style of management. In short' date=' he got pissed. I have had plenty of managers who unsuccessfully employed that style.[/quote']

 

Sorry that you've had Coercive Leaders. Before my transition to civilian life, I did, too--screamers suck to work for.

 

You may be right that it was emotional, not rational: I don't have that John Malkovich door into Girardi's head any more than I do into Tito's head. I stand by my opinion as well, though: coercive action, in private, was the correct thing to do for a team not meeting expectations, and right after a blowout, shutout loss was the time to do it.

[a700hitter]

Replacing a Commanding Leader with an Affiliative Leader often produces a short-term surge in performance as morale improves but skills and standards are not yet eroded...Martin played an important role' date=' IMO, in the Yankees' 1978 comeback, setting the standard for success, even if he was not there at the end.[/quote']Maybe the role he played was getting fired?

FWIW' date=' Martin ranks 20th all time in managerial wins over .500, a pretty impressive feat. He took the Twins, the Tigers, the Yankees and the A's to the LCS, and he did, as you point out, win a World Series.[/quote']He took a Twins team that came within 1 game of the WS in '67 and that went to the ALCS the year after Martin was fired. The A's had a hot stretch in the first half of the strike year 1981 fueled by a talented young staff that he destroyed in two years. He took and wrecked what remained of the '68 Tiger championship team. He threw Lolich 376 innings in 1971 and 327 innings in 1972 -- a strike year. He finished him off with 300+ inning in 1973 before he got canned.

He managed the Yankees through three complete seasons' date=' winning the AL twice; his overall record with the Yankees, counting the (many) seasons he was fired, was .591, a 96-win pace; he never had a losing record when he was fired by George Steinbrenner, and he was 52-42 when he was fired in 1978, hardly a shabby record.[/quote']I never said that he had a shabby record. I said that if he hadn't been such a dick that he would have been more successful. I don't see how you can argue about that.

 

And the only two teams that didn't play well for Billy Martin' date=' the 1975 Rangers and the 1982 A's, were actually fairly young teams, not veterans. [/quote']This is easy to understand. The '80 and '81 A's were young teams that overperformed. The '82 team took a downturn, because it came in the wake of Martin burning out the young staff over the prior two years. None of them were ever the same. The '75 team followed the usual path for Billy the Kid. After having a young Texas team overperform in '74 they came back to earth in '75.

[Jayhawk Bill]

I never said that he had a shabby record. I said that if he hadn't been such a dick that he would have been more successful. I don't see how you can argue about that.

 

Argue? Argue is such a strong word. I'm merely submitting other perspectives for consideration.

 

Coercive management often (not always, nor necessarily even usually in many types of workplaces) maximizes short term results at the price of long-term morale and cohesion. Billy Martin is 20th all-time in wins over .500, but he did that in NINE separate jobs in only 20 seasons. Martin got the most out of his players. He was fired when the young players stressed out in Texas and when his pitchers' arms fell off in Oakland (A's starters threw 60 complete games in 1981, a season with only 109 games). With the Yankees, he actually became almost the alternating manager, reestablishing standards, getting fired, and continuing the cycle for five iterations.

 

If Billy Martin hadn't been such a jerk, I don't know if he would have been good at all. We're not talking about a Chuck Tanner-type personality--we're talking about Billy Martin, whom you may remember as a hard-nosed player. Martin was who he was, and he won lots of games.

 

Girardi is in New York to win games. Hank Steinbrenner is not in the mood to finish anything but first. He's relying upon Girardi to communicate that, emphatically, to the players. If they win enough, Girardi might keep his job.

 

If not, well, remember 1978? Bob Lemon, on the heels of Girardi, was 28 games over .500 in 68 games. The rest of his 833-game managerial career he was 29 games UNDER .500. Lemon was not that good a manager--the situation in New York in 1978 was perfect for his easygoing style. The standards were known by the Yankees: they just needed to destress a bit.

 

How do you think Don Mattingly, or any other more laid-back manager, would be welcomed by the Yankees after a few more closed-door meetings with Girardi? Just sayin...

[a700hitter]

Argue? Argue is such a strong word. I'm merely submitting other perspectives for consideration.

 

Coercive management often (not always, nor necessarily even usually in many types of workplaces) maximizes short term results at the price of long-term morale and cohesion. Billy Martin is 20th all-time in wins over .500, but he did that in NINE separate jobs in only 20 seasons. Martin got the most out of his players. He was fired when the young players stressed out in Texas and when his pitchers' arms fell off in Oakland (A's starters threw 60 complete games in 1981, a season with only 109 games). With the Yankees, he actually became almost the alternating manager, reestablishing standards, getting fired, and continuing the cycle for five iterations.

 

If Billy Martin hadn't been such a jerk, I don't know if he would have been good at all. We're not talking about a Chuck Tanner-type personality--we're talking about Billy Martin, whom you may remember as a hard-nosed player. Martin was who he was, and he won lots of games.

 

Girardi is in New York to win games. Hank Steinbrenner is not in the mood to finish anything but first. He's relying upon Girardi to communicate that, emphatically, to the players. If they win enough, Girardi might keep his job.

 

If not, well, remember 1978? Bob Lemon, on the heels of Girardi, was 28 games over .500 in 68 games. The rest of his 833-game managerial career he was 29 games UNDER .500. Lemon was not that good a manager--the situation in New York in 1978 was perfect for his easygoing style. The standards were known by the Yankees: they just needed to destress a bit.

 

How do you think Don Mattingly, or any other more laid-back manager, would be welcomed by the Yankees after a few more closed-door meetings with Girardi? Just sayin...

I don't think Mattingly would be doing a better job. I think the Yankees would be in the same place under him. I just like it when the jerks of the world go down in flames. I always enjoyed it when someone got the better of that cheap shot artist Billy Martin. I don't put Girardi in Martin's category of jerk, but he also has not had Martin's success yet. Martin was a jerk, but he was a winner. He was a major jerk. He didn't have to transform to easy-going, but I believe that if he dialed it back just a bit, he would have still been fiery and much more successful. He was often out of control in his personal and professional lives. That is never a good thing.

[TheKilo]

There we go, game needed by all. Especially one where the bullpen got a night off. A hell of a turnaround by Lester, truely incredible this year

 

Lester is the first Sox pitcher since Hideo Nomo in 2001 to throw at least 2 shutouts. First lefty to do so since Bruce Hurts in 87

 

The offense hit often & hard early against Pettitte, Ellsbury and Varitek got some much needed hits to possibly bring them out of their slumps. Crisp's first game back was as if he hadnt missed 5 games (2 for 3, 2 runs, SB ). I heard somewhere that Crisp could be valuable trade bait if Ortiz comes back before the deadline

 

Why trade Crisp when he's having a better year than Ellsbury?