Playing pro baseball is good for your social life

Leave a comment

Doug Glanville was merely a decent outfielder during his nine-year career with the Phillies, Cubs, and Rangers, but since retiring following the 2004 season he’s become an excellent writer for the New York Times.
In the wake of the whole Tiger Woods “situation” Glanville’s latest column describes how signing a professional contract instantly transformed him from “kind of nerdy” in high school to someone who had little trouble attracting women. You should really read the whole piece, because Glanville is willing to share plenty of personal details in addition to being a smart, compelling writer, but here are a couple particularly interesting excerpts:

I was a diligent student, kind of nerdy, the son of a teacher, and as interested in baseball and computers as I was in girls. Still, I was told I had potential in the social department, if I applied myself. But something magical happened before I had to do much work. I signed a professional baseball contract as a junior in college and went away to my first spring training as a member of the Chicago Cubs organization.



[…]



Because I had a few shells to bust out of, I put my toe in that party water, too. I was just 20 when I was drafted and it didn’t take long to understand that a new kind of woman was interested in me: the sort of woman who in the past had stirred my insecurity. It was like a kid finding Batman’s belt in the lost and found. No point in giving it back until you’ve tried all your new powers. But we forget to ask, will I be able to stop once I’ve tasted these powers?

My problem? I don’t even have a belt.

The Angels are giving managerial candidates a two-hour written test

Getty Images
9 Comments

Jon Morosi of MLB.com reports that the Los Angeles Angels are administering a two-hour written test to managerial candidates. The test presents “questions spanning analytical, interpersonal and game-management aspects of the job,” according to Morosi.

I can’t find any reference to it, but I remember another team doing some form of written testing for managerial candidates within the past couple of years. Questions which presented tactical dilemmas, for example. I don’t recall it being so intense, however. And then, as now, I have a hard time seeing experienced candidates wanting to sit for a two-hour written exam when their track record as a manager, along with an interview to assess compatibility should cover most of it. Just seems like an extension of the current trend in which front offices are taking away authority and, with this, some measure of professional respect, from managers.