1 Burst results for "Joe Stansky"
"joe stansky" Discussed on Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast
"I think joe stansky wrote about it or advocated for it at the time but it just seems like who better to bring in like if you want to fix baseball if you think that baseball is broken or to the extent that it has problems who better than the guy who fix the red sox fixed the cubs ended those droughts like maybe it's a tall order to change things about baseball. But i have about as much faith in the and to do that. Do in any one and baseball has problems. Beyond the three true outcomes and epstein isn't the perfect person to address all of them just to name one. He's pointed the finger at himself for the lack of diversity in the people he's hired and the role that he's played in perpetuating that problem and even when it comes to balls in play or pay supply. I don't know how much power or he will have can't come in and just unilaterally imposed things like a lot of the difficulty of doing. All of this is that a lot of it has to be negotiated. The players association has say they may not agree to every blue sky. Idea we might have on this podcast were that you might have but clearly. He cares about this clearly. He's smart he knows what he's doing and i am quite excited to see what comes up this if anything. I think that i am also excited. I think that my reaction to it is is definitely made better by some of his comments since he's left chicago about sort of grappling with the ascetic ramifications of some of the trends. That you know he did not start on his own with the cubs by any means. But the you know have been sort of exemplified by modern offices which is not to say that. I imagine i will always agree with his assessment. But it is. It is nice to have the person who is sitting in that role. Both someone who has recently been on the team side. And i think is probably perhaps a little bit better equipped to speak to what teams are doing now. What teams are likely to find sort of compelling or tolerable depending on what the idea is. Because i think you're right that getting consensus around some of this stuff can be. Its own challenging. Perhaps the challenge to getting it done but also someone who has demonstrated that they have both the capacity and willingness to be sort of self reflective about particular transit may have gone too far and have diminished the viewing experience for fans. And so. i think if you're able to you know we'll have to see him do it. But if if he is able to sort of marry those two perspectives to give recommendations. I think that that that's a really valuable point of view to have when you're trying to balance a lot of competing interests because sometimes what fans want to see in sometimes what teams wanna do. Don't line up with one. another right. they might be in direct conflict and so having someone who is able to sort of sort through prioritize that stuff not by himself and certainly not always successfully. I would imagine but who comes to it with that perspective. I think is really valuable. We've talked before about how i think. That manfred instinct to tinker sometimes gets a worse rap than it necessarily deserves. Because you know you you want to address problems within the sport before they become real issues. But i do think that even though my a in the past my sort of tolerance level for that was perhaps higher than other people's he does have a tendency to throw spaghetti at the wall and be like. Let's see what sticks. And also i have made a mess with the spaghetti right. I love that. I made manfred like deeply italian in that moment. I'm allowed. i'm also italian. it's some of us. I'm great wish rabid for spoke like that. That would make more fun. Yeah but but sometimes the the tinkering causes a lot of unnecessary consternation and sometimes it is clear that the tinkering is mostly if not solely geared making baseball a ton shorter than it. And so i appreciate that. There are going to be other perspectives. That are perhaps a bit more. That are a bit have recently. Been a bit closer to the field but also are aware of what effect what has happened on. The field might have on the people in the stands so So we will be. We will be optimistic. This would be a good development. And i look forward to. I hope that we get the opportunity to hear more from theo. About sort of how his thinking on the aesthetic side has changed and how it continues to change and how he is prioritizing. The various competing interests that are present in those conversations as he is confronted with potential rule changes. So i think it's good. And i hope that they allow him to be pretty public facing in terms of the thought process that he and the league have because i think having a nuanced end sort of deep conversation around that stuff rather than it being one line item on the commissioners list of forty things that he has to deal with in any given moment would be valuable to kind of how we talk about this stuff in the game so the aesthetics discourse you want to see in the world peo- like you. I was not so much against men. Initially when he was hired entertaining these ideas or paying lip service to the fact. That baseball doesn't have to stay the same forever. And i think some of the experiments in the minor leagues are in partner..