So the A's are back to peddling Eric Byrnes. An interesting subplot now is the possibility that he's on the block because he and his manager, Ken Macha, don't get along.
And I could be wrong about this, but I believe the possibility of Macha coming to manage the Pirates in 2006 was one of the factors in McClendon not getting an extension before the start of the season. Macha is from this part of the country.
I see a lot of somewhat-political bullshit whenever a new owner, manager, or GM takes over a team that has not been successful. The new boss replaces good people with new people, or goes about making dramatic roster moves to "send a message." There's a lot of bullshit barking at the employees to form new lines and walk new ways. Unless the previous boss was corrupt or incompetent, things get worse before they get better. A team that wants to win consistently needs stability in the front office.
McClendon has come a long way. He knows the rest of the NL Central as well as anyone. I'd like to see him retained come October. I will not be impressed or optimistic if the Pirates let him go.
Back to Byrnes. I don't know what to think of the possibility of acquiring him. It depends, I suppose, on what he costs in talent and on who he replaces on the 25-man roster. I certainly wouldn't deal Mike Gonzalez or Zach Duke for him. Would he play center? I also wonder what we could expect from him from the start. Would he hit much in his first tour of National League pitching? (Do GMs have a good idea which hitters put up good numbers only because they know the opposing pitchers so well [Jason Kendall, e.g.], and which hitters put up good numbers regardless of who is pitching?) I'd worry that Byrnes would not adapt to the NL quickly. Can we bear to watch another new acquisition suck for two months?
No comments:
Post a Comment