Hiring managers without managing experience is the new fad in baseball. The White Sox chose former third baseman Robin Ventura from way out of left field, and the Cardinals just picked their old catcher, Mike Matheny, over a two-time World Series champion manager who seemed like a pretty perfect fit for a veteran team.
So, why shouldn’t the Red Sox hand the reins over to Jason Varitek as they look to replace Terry Francona?
Many believe Varitek will be a manager someday. Boston’s captain since Dec. 2004, he’s well regarded throughout the game for his quiet leadership. It seems he’s mostly escaped the tarnish of Boston’s September collapse last season. To the outside world, he appears to command the respect of every player in the Red Sox clubhouse.
Choosing Varitek as a manager now would certainly be speeding up the timetable a bit. For one thing, there’s no indication that he’s finished playing. Of course, player-managers are still allowed by baseball, even if there hasn’t been one since Pete Rose retired after the 1986 season (he managed the Reds for 2 1/2 years as a player and then two more years after retiring). Realisitically, though, a player-manager probably isn’t going to work in this day and age. There’s too much media scrutiny and too many questions to be asked and answered.
As a retired player, Varitek would make more sense as a candidate. Of course, there’s still nothing to say that the Red Sox would see him as one. The fact that they’d be turning him from teammate to boss might be too problematic. Varitek’s relationship with the 20 or so veterans returning to the Red Sox next year could work against him even more than it would favor him. It’s not always easy dealing with a boss who used to be an equal.
So, it’s likely a fantasy anyway. The shame of it is that Varitek could very well be an excellent manager someday and that it probably won’t be with the Red Sox. While the concept of hiring him now is intriguing enough to at least be worthy of a discussion, his history with the Red Sox isn’t a good enough reason to favor him over experienced candidates.
Right-hander Dale Thayer and the Orioles have agreed to a minor-league contract that includes an invitation to spring training.
Thayer had a rough 2015 season for the Padres, posting a 4.06 ERA and spending time in the minors, but he was a solid part of San Diego’s bullpen from 2012-2014 with a combined 3.02 ERA and 173/50 K/BB ratio in 188 innings.
At age 35 there’s no guarantee that Thayer will look good enough to claim a spot on the Opening Day roster, but he’s got a strong chance to wind up pitching middle relief for Baltimore.
Taylor Featherston, who was designated for assignment by the Angels last week, has been traded to the Phillies for a player to be named later or cash.
Featherston stayed in the majors with the Angels for all of last season due to being a Rule 5 pick from the Rockies organization, but the 25-year-old infielder hit just .162 in 169 plate appearances.
He’s been much better in the minors, but nothing about his track record there screams quality regular and the Phillies are likely viewing him as a defense-first bench option for now.
Flags fly forever! Hooray for The Process championship!
Ah, sorry. This is about as much rooting as I’ll get to do this year, so cut me some slack.
This is the week when ESPN’s Keith Law releases his prospect and farm system rankings. He kicks off his content this week with a top-to-bottom ranking of all 30 farm systems. As a rule he limits his analysis to players who are currently in the minors and who have not yet exhausted their rookie of the year eligibility. The top system: the Atlanta Braves. The bottom: the Los Angeles Angels, about whom Law says “I’ve been doing these rankings for eight years now, and this is by far the worst system I’ve ever seen.” Enjoy Mike Trout, though, you guys.
If you want to know the reasons and the rankings of everyone in between you’ll have to get an ESPN Insider subscription. Sorry, I know everyone hates to pay for content on the Internet, but Keith and others who do this kind of work put a lot of damn work into it and this is what pays their bills. I typically don’t like to pay for content myself, but I do pay for an ESPN Insider subscription. It’s worth it for Law’s work alone. And though he drives me crazy sometimes, Buster Olney’s daily column/notes thing is also worth the money over the course of the year.
The funny thing about that “stick to sports” stuff I was going on about the other day is that, in reality, a whole lot of the people who say “stick to sports” don’t really want to just stick to sports. They’re totally cool going on about political, social or cultural stuff as long as it fits their world view. It’s not “stick to sports.” It’s “don’t talk about the social implications of sports-related stuff in ways that upset me.” If sports and culture come together in other ways, however, they’re completely fine in grinding their axe.
For example, Beyonce is playing a concert a Citi Field this summer. The show is so popular that they added a second date. The Mets’ Twitter feed just announced that tickets will go on sale for the new show soon:
A while lotta Mets fans responded to that negatively. For political/social/cultural reasons that they are willingly bringing in to a conversation about a pop singer and a baseball stadium that will double as a concert venue:
And they go on and on.
How much do you want to bet that a whole lotta these respondents would tell you to “stick to baseball” if you wanted to bring up how race affects the sport or how, if instead of Beyonce, this was announcing a Kid Rock/Ted Nugent-headlined festival and you mused whether that was a case of the Mets somehow endorsing their messages?