Dale Sveum to Manage Cubs

[davearm2]

Sveum points to Fielder's work ethic as the type of synergistic impact he's hoping to instill with Cubs players.

 

"If you can have three or four guys like him on the team then other guys start to follow," Sveum said. "You don't always have the so-called team leader anymore but when you can get three, four, five guys running out balls hard, playing the game then the other five or six guys say 'Hey, I want to be like them. I don't want to be the one guy that's dogging it.' That's why it was nice to have Prince. The other guys knew what would happen if they didn't run a ball out."

I gotta say, it shocks me that there are so many folks on this board that think the notion Sveum expresses here is a bunch of nonsense.

I'm sure he regards it as important. I don't think that's in question, actually. He's answering questions put to him about changing the culture, etc and giving the expected answers. And I'm confident he actually believes those answers, too.

 

What matters, though, is that he also has a focus on things that actually matter. He is going to get guys to take a more patient approach. He will stress preparation that includes things like defensive positioning based on thorough analysis. That's not getting talked about as much because the press corps isn't asking those questions. But he can answer culture questions all day and tell the press what they want to hear as long as the other things are also stressed to the team.

Obviously Sveum (and Theo) regard the culture issues as important.

 

What I find amazing is that posters here think they don't matter. Basic human nature tells us they do.

 

If the best, highest paid players on the team work their tails off and bring professionalism and intensity to the ballpark every day, that will trickle down to everyone else, and that team is likely to overachieve relative to their true talent level.

 

Conversely, if the top guys routinely cut corners and get away with not working as hard as they can, everyone else will notice, and it will become acceptable. Once it's acceptable, it'll soon be the norm. That team is going to underachieve.

 

We're talking about those subtle edges and fringe effects that add up over a 162 game schedule. Surely "culture" is just as important as something like defensive positioning. Probably way more important.

[Guest]

Sveum points to Fielder's work ethic as the type of synergistic impact he's hoping to instill with Cubs players.

 

"If you can have three or four guys like him on the team then other guys start to follow," Sveum said. "You don't always have the so-called team leader anymore but when you can get three, four, five guys running out balls hard, playing the game then the other five or six guys say 'Hey, I want to be like them. I don't want to be the one guy that's dogging it.' That's why it was nice to have Prince. The other guys knew what would happen if they didn't run a ball out."

I gotta say, it shocks me that there are so many folks on this board that think the notion Sveum expresses here is a bunch of nonsense.

I'm sure he regards it as important. I don't think that's in question, actually. He's answering questions put to him about changing the culture, etc and giving the expected answers. And I'm confident he actually believes those answers, too.

 

What matters, though, is that he also has a focus on things that actually matter. He is going to get guys to take a more patient approach. He will stress preparation that includes things like defensive positioning based on thorough analysis. That's not getting talked about as much because the press corps isn't asking those questions. But he can answer culture questions all day and tell the press what they want to hear as long as the other things are also stressed to the team.

Obviously Sveum (and Theo) regard the culture issues as important.

 

What I find amazing is that posters here think they don't matter. Basic human nature tells us they do.

 

If the best, highest paid players on the team work their tails off and bring professionalism and intensity to the ballpark every day, that will trickle down to everyone else, and that team is likely to overachieve relative to their true talent level.

 

Conversely, if the top guys routinely cut corners and get away with not working as hard as they can, everyone else will notice, and it will become acceptable. Once it's acceptable, it'll soon be the norm. That team is going to underachieve.

 

We're talking about those subtle edges and fringe effects that add up over a 162 game schedule. Surely "culture" is just as important as something like defensive positioning. Probably way more important.

Sure - but putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time can easily lead to negative consequences as I pointed out previously. I also think it's a given that coaches are going to do what they can to get guys to work hard. Whereas a focus on things like controlling the strike zone isn't the focus of every manager.

[SouthSideRyan]

If the best, highest paid players on the team work their tails off and bring professionalism and intensity to the ballpark every day, that will trickle down to everyone else, and that team is likely to overachieve relative to their true talent level.

 

Conversely, if the top guys routinely cut corners and get away with not working as hard as they can, everyone else will notice, and it will become acceptable. Once it's acceptable, it'll soon be the norm. That team is going to underachieve.

 

They're not in little league. They are making a ton of money, and stand to lose or gain a lot of money based on their level of play. If you think Darwin Barney turning his back to the playing field during play is going to lead to a bunch of guys doing the same you're out of your damn mind. If you think Mark Grace going out and getting tanked every night led to the Cubs being mediocre to bad his entire time here, I don't know what to tell you.

 

We're talking about those subtle edges and fringe effects that add up over a 162 game schedule. Surely "culture" is just as important as something like defensive positioning. Probably way more important.

 

Probably not.

[SouthSideRyan]

BTW, what evidence do we have that the 2011 Cubs were cutting corners and weren't trying as hard as they could?

[davearm2]

If the best, highest paid players on the team work their tails off and bring professionalism and intensity to the ballpark every day, that will trickle down to everyone else, and that team is likely to overachieve relative to their true talent level.

 

Conversely, if the top guys routinely cut corners and get away with not working as hard as they can, everyone else will notice, and it will become acceptable. Once it's acceptable, it'll soon be the norm. That team is going to underachieve.

 

They're not in little league. They are making a ton of money, and stand to lose or gain a lot of money based on their level of play. If you think Darwin Barney turning his back to the playing field during play is going to lead to a bunch of guys doing the same you're out of your damn mind. If you think Mark Grace going out and getting tanked every night led to the Cubs being mediocre to bad his entire time here, I don't know what to tell you.

 

We're talking about those subtle edges and fringe effects that add up over a 162 game schedule. Surely "culture" is just as important as something like defensive positioning. Probably way more important.

 

Probably not.

A strong clubhouse with accountability and high expectations leads to more wins. A lax clubhouse where guys are free to slack off and blow off the little things leads to more losses. I can't tell you exactly how many wins and losses, so don't bother asking. If you think if it can't be counted then it must not matter, then I don't know what to tell you.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

BTW, what evidence do we have that the 2011 Cubs were cutting corners and weren't trying as hard as they could?

 

Did you watch the games?

 

 

Because if you had, you would have noticed how not white many of their players were.

 

[Guest]

A strong clubhouse with accountability and high expectations leads to more wins. A lax clubhouse where guys are free to slack off and blow off the little things leads to more losses. I can't tell you exactly how many wins and losses, so don't bother asking. If you think if it can't be counted then it must not matter, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

Prove it.

[Guest]

A lax clubhouse leads to relaxed players who perform at their absolute peak, unhindered by the pressures brought on by demanding leadership. I know this. I don't know how many wins a relaxed atmosphere leads to, but I know it does. Why? Because I said so.

[davearm2]

Sure - but putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time can easily lead to negative consequences as I pointed out previously. I also think it's a given that coaches are going to do what they can to get guys to work hard. Whereas a focus on things like controlling the strike zone isn't the focus of every manager.

The suggestion that putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time would be a net negative is just, well I guess it perfectly exemplifies what I'm so shocked by.

[Hollandsworths mug]

Yes, pretty amazing that we have Theo, Jed and Dale tell us how important it is, but posters on here dismiss it. And if you think they were just paying lip service to the media, why not just tell them that we do not feel playing the game the right way brings a winning culture and that we want 25 talented slackers who do not care if they win or lose.

 

They want talented players who play hard, play smart and set an example. Not the other way around.

Edited November 18, 2011 by Hollandsworth's mug

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Sure - but putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time can easily lead to negative consequences as I pointed out previously. I also think it's a given that coaches are going to do what they can to get guys to work hard. Whereas a focus on things like controlling the strike zone isn't the focus of every manager.

The suggestion that putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time would be a net negative is just, well I guess it perfectly exemplifies what I'm so shocked by.

 

Do you want the batters to swing from their heels, as hard as they possibly can, every time out?

 

Do you want the pitchers to overthrow their fastballs?

[davearm2]

A strong clubhouse with accountability and high expectations leads to more wins. A lax clubhouse where guys are free to slack off and blow off the little things leads to more losses. I can't tell you exactly how many wins and losses, so don't bother asking. If you think if it can't be counted then it must not matter, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

Prove it.

Basic human nature proves it.

[Guest]

Sure - but putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time can easily lead to negative consequences as I pointed out previously. I also think it's a given that coaches are going to do what they can to get guys to work hard. Whereas a focus on things like controlling the strike zone isn't the focus of every manager.

The suggestion that putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time would be a net negative is just, well I guess it perfectly exemplifies what I'm so shocked by.

 

Do you want the batters to swing from their heels, as hard as they possibly can, every time out?

 

Do you want the pitchers to overthrow their fastballs?

Try to take extra bases and run themselves into outs.

 

Try to throw out the lead runner when there is no shot

 

Etc etc

[davearm2]

Sure - but putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time can easily lead to negative consequences as I pointed out previously. I also think it's a given that coaches are going to do what they can to get guys to work hard. Whereas a focus on things like controlling the strike zone isn't the focus of every manager.

The suggestion that putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time would be a net negative is just, well I guess it perfectly exemplifies what I'm so shocked by.

 

Do you want the batters to swing from their heels, as hard as they possibly can, every time out?

 

Do you want the pitchers to overthrow their fastballs?

How you reached these ridiculous conclusions, I'll never know.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

How you reached these ridiculous conclusions, I'll never know.

 

A question is not a conclusion.

[davearm2]

How you reached these ridiculous conclusions, I'll never know.

 

A question is not a conclusion.

OK then, the answer is no. As should have been plainly obvious.

[Guest]

Sure - but putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time can easily lead to negative consequences as I pointed out previously. I also think it's a given that coaches are going to do what they can to get guys to work hard. Whereas a focus on things like controlling the strike zone isn't the focus of every manager.

The suggestion that putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time would be a net negative is just, well I guess it perfectly exemplifies what I'm so shocked by.

 

Do you want the batters to swing from their heels, as hard as they possibly can, every time out?

 

Do you want the pitchers to overthrow their fastballs?

Try to take extra bases and run themselves into outs.

 

Try to throw out the lead runner when there is no shot

 

Etc etc

 

I'm not on this side of this argument, but come on, those are just mistakes. You don't have to do stupid things like that to try your hardest.

[Guest]

How you reached these ridiculous conclusions, I'll never know.

 

A question is not a conclusion.

OK then, the answer is no. As should have been plainly obvious.

About as obvious as others not wanting to have players turn doubles into singles, stay in good shape, etc.

[Guest]

Sure - but putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time can easily lead to negative consequences as I pointed out previously. I also think it's a given that coaches are going to do what they can to get guys to work hard. Whereas a focus on things like controlling the strike zone isn't the focus of every manager.

The suggestion that putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time would be a net negative is just, well I guess it perfectly exemplifies what I'm so shocked by.

 

Do you want the batters to swing from their heels, as hard as they possibly can, every time out?

 

Do you want the pitchers to overthrow their fastballs?

Try to take extra bases and run themselves into outs.

 

Try to throw out the lead runner when there is no shot

 

Etc etc

 

I'm not on this side of this argument, but come on, those are just mistakes. You don't have to do stupid things like that to try your hardest.

They are easily indicitve of someone trying too hard, too.

 

So I guess we can agree that wgat we are really looking for is a team that plays smart, not necessarily one that goes balls out all the time.

[Hollandsworths mug]

So I guess we can agree that wgat we are really looking for is a team that plays smart, not necessarily one that goes balls out all the time.

 

Yes. But Soriano has no business hitting a ball he thinks is gone, spits as he makes contact and trots to first only to have it hit off the wall. That is what we're talking about. Not a laser one hop grounder to second where he is 5 steps out of the box.

[Hollandsworths mug]

A lax clubhouse leads to relaxed players who perform at their absolute peak, unhindered by the pressures brought on by demanding leadership. I know this. I don't know how many wins a relaxed atmosphere leads to, but I know it does. Why? Because I said so.

 

The 1992 and 1993 Dallas Cowboys under Jimmy Johnson say hello. What utter crapola that statement is.

[Guest]

A lax clubhouse leads to relaxed players who perform at their absolute peak, unhindered by the pressures brought on by demanding leadership. I know this. I don't know how many wins a relaxed atmosphere leads to, but I know it does. Why? Because I said so.

 

The 1992 and 1993 Dallas Cowboys under Jimmy Johnson say hello. What utter crapola that statement is.

 

 

lol

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yes. But Soriano has no business hitting a ball he thinks is gone, spits as he makes contact and trots to first only to have it hit off the wall. That is what we're talking about. Not a laser one hop grounder to second where he is 5 steps out of the box.

 

And the amount of time spent talking about it is orders of magnitude worse than the amount it costs the team.

[CUBZ99]

Sveum points to Fielder's work ethic as the type of synergistic impact he's hoping to instill with Cubs players.

 

"If you can have three or four guys like him on the team then other guys start to follow," Sveum said. "You don't always have the so-called team leader anymore but when you can get three, four, five guys running out balls hard, playing the game then the other five or six guys say 'Hey, I want to be like them. I don't want to be the one guy that's dogging it.' That's why it was nice to have Prince. The other guys knew what would happen if they didn't run a ball out."

I gotta say, it shocks me that there are so many folks on this board that think the notion Sveum expresses here is a bunch of nonsense.

I'm sure he regards it as important. I don't think that's in question, actually. He's answering questions put to him about changing the culture, etc and giving the expected answers. And I'm confident he actually believes those answers, too.

 

What matters, though, is that he also has a focus on things that actually matter. He is going to get guys to take a more patient approach. He will stress preparation that includes things like defensive positioning based on thorough analysis. That's not getting talked about as much because the press corps isn't asking those questions. But he can answer culture questions all day and tell the press what they want to hear as long as the other things are also stressed to the team.

Obviously Sveum (and Theo) regard the culture issues as important.

 

What I find amazing is that posters here think they don't matter. Basic human nature tells us they do.

 

If the best, highest paid players on the team work their tails off and bring professionalism and intensity to the ballpark every day, that will trickle down to everyone else, and that team is likely to overachieve relative to their true talent level.

 

Conversely, if the top guys routinely cut corners and get away with not working as hard as they can, everyone else will notice, and it will become acceptable. Once it's acceptable, it'll soon be the norm. That team is going to underachieve.

 

We're talking about those subtle edges and fringe effects that add up over a 162 game schedule. Surely "culture" is just as important as something like defensive positioning. Probably way more important.

Sure - but putting in "110%" effort and "going all out" all the time can easily lead to negative consequences as I pointed out previously. I also think it's a given that coaches are going to do what they can to get guys to work hard. Whereas a focus on things like controlling the strike zone isn't the focus of every manager.

 

Putting in "110%" effort rarely, if ever leads to negative consequences. Of course, it is also such a vague term it really doesn't have an objective meaning in the baseball context.

[Hollandsworths mug]

A lax clubhouse leads to relaxed players who perform at their absolute peak, unhindered by the pressures brought on by demanding leadership. I know this. I don't know how many wins a relaxed atmosphere leads to, but I know it does. Why? Because I said so.

 

The 1992 and 1993 Dallas Cowboys under Jimmy Johnson say hello. What utter crapola that statement is.

 

 

lol

 

You basically said demanding leadership leads to pressure that leads to poor performance. The 1992 and 1993 Dallas Cowboys say hello. Oh, so do the 85 Bears.