For the Matheny haters

[ecleme22]

FWIW, Cranny likely does have acquaintances in or adjacent to the front office / ownership.

He’s not gonna “prove” it in any way that satiates your demand, but I’m familiar enough with Cranny to know he’s closer to that room than probably any other regular on the forum.

Suuuuure he does.

And, on the off chance he does, I guess it would explain the sycophancy.

It’s not an off chance. Seriously.

You don’t have to believe me, but I also have no reason to make it up.

Ol’ Friend, I believe you. And I’ve posted several times that to be so vehement in his defense of Mozo, Cranny must be connected with the FO, or be related to someone in the FO, or be friends with someone in the FO. I’ve derisively called him Mrs. Mozeliak in a couple of posts.

No normal Cardinal “just a fan” would be on here as much, blindly defending this incompetent organization.

Cranny isn't some insider. Maybe he knows one or two joe blows from his church.

Cranny doesn't defend Oli. He even said, when MM was fired, he didn't trust Oli.

Cranny didn't defend Fowler. In fact, he didn't like him and made that well known.

Cranny will do logic gymnastics to defend Matheny. To a lesser extent, Mo.

Cranny isn't a shill for the FO. He's just a Matheny lover.

I respected his toughness as a player. I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him. And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in. And then was made a scapegoat. That’s all.

You "I respected his toughness as a player."
Me: "Okay, he won GG. I liked him as a Cardinal"

You: I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him.
Me: Who cares? He was a nice. Cool, dude.

You: And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in.
Me: I agree. Matheny was at his best when he got rosters who just won the WS. Any other roster would show Matheny's lack of skills as a manager.

Ecleme -
One time I attended a charity event and Matheny was the guest speaker. The fee for a speaker was $15,000. He donated that entire speaking fee to the charity. He easily could have used that money for his family. He was more than just “nice”.

I guess what triggered me on this thread is the thread’s subject. Hate is a strong word.

And there it is (as if we didn’t know)

Cranny is sticking up for a guy he likes, not a manager he thinks was good.

I think he had no experience as a manager, and it showed in a number of ways. He was a tough, down and dirty, all out ball player who left it all on the field every game. He expected the same from each player and got down on them if they didn’t live up to that standard. That approach didn’t work with several players and it caused friction.

Lol.

“Mathenys biggest issue was he cared too much!”

S[top] T[hose] F[raudulent] U[tterances]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

No, that's not true.

[Cranny]

Suuuuure he does.

And, on the off chance he does, I guess it would explain the sycophancy.

It’s not an off chance. Seriously.

You don’t have to believe me, but I also have no reason to make it up.

Ol’ Friend, I believe you. And I’ve posted several times that to be so vehement in his defense of Mozo, Cranny must be connected with the FO, or be related to someone in the FO, or be friends with someone in the FO. I’ve derisively called him Mrs. Mozeliak in a couple of posts.

No normal Cardinal “just a fan” would be on here as much, blindly defending this incompetent organization.

Cranny isn't some insider. Maybe he knows one or two joe blows from his church.

Cranny doesn't defend Oli. He even said, when MM was fired, he didn't trust Oli.

Cranny didn't defend Fowler. In fact, he didn't like him and made that well known.

Cranny will do logic gymnastics to defend Matheny. To a lesser extent, Mo.

Cranny isn't a shill for the FO. He's just a Matheny lover.

I respected his toughness as a player. I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him. And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in. And then was made a scapegoat. That’s all.

You "I respected his toughness as a player."
Me: "Okay, he won GG. I liked him as a Cardinal"

You: I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him.
Me: Who cares? He was a nice. Cool, dude.

You: And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in.
Me: I agree. Matheny was at his best when he got rosters who just won the WS. Any other roster would show Matheny's lack of skills as a manager.

Ecleme -
One time I attended a charity event and Matheny was the guest speaker. The fee for a speaker was $15,000. He donated that entire speaking fee to the charity. He easily could have used that money for his family. He was more than just “nice”.

I guess what triggered me on this thread is the thread’s subject. Hate is a strong word.

And there it is (as if we didn’t know)

Cranny is sticking up for a guy he likes, not a manager he thinks was good.

I think he had no experience as a manager, and it showed in a number of ways. He was a tough, down and dirty, all out ball player who left it all on the field every game. He expected the same from each player and got down on them if they didn’t live up to that standard. That approach didn’t work with several players and it caused friction.

Lol.

“Mathenys biggest issue was he cared too much!”

S[top] T[hose] F[raudulent] U[tterances]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

No, that's not true.

It’s factual, not conjecture, Ecleme.

[ecleme22]

It’s not an off chance. Seriously.

You don’t have to believe me, but I also have no reason to make it up.

Ol’ Friend, I believe you. And I’ve posted several times that to be so vehement in his defense of Mozo, Cranny must be connected with the FO, or be related to someone in the FO, or be friends with someone in the FO. I’ve derisively called him Mrs. Mozeliak in a couple of posts.

No normal Cardinal “just a fan” would be on here as much, blindly defending this incompetent organization.

Cranny isn't some insider. Maybe he knows one or two joe blows from his church.

Cranny doesn't defend Oli. He even said, when MM was fired, he didn't trust Oli.

Cranny didn't defend Fowler. In fact, he didn't like him and made that well known.

Cranny will do logic gymnastics to defend Matheny. To a lesser extent, Mo.

Cranny isn't a shill for the FO. He's just a Matheny lover.

I respected his toughness as a player. I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him. And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in. And then was made a scapegoat. That’s all.

You "I respected his toughness as a player."
Me: "Okay, he won GG. I liked him as a Cardinal"

You: I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him.
Me: Who cares? He was a nice. Cool, dude.

You: And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in.
Me: I agree. Matheny was at his best when he got rosters who just won the WS. Any other roster would show Matheny's lack of skills as a manager.

Ecleme -
One time I attended a charity event and Matheny was the guest speaker. The fee for a speaker was $15,000. He donated that entire speaking fee to the charity. He easily could have used that money for his family. He was more than just “nice”.

I guess what triggered me on this thread is the thread’s subject. Hate is a strong word.

And there it is (as if we didn’t know)

Cranny is sticking up for a guy he likes, not a manager he thinks was good.

I think he had no experience as a manager, and it showed in a number of ways. He was a tough, down and dirty, all out ball player who left it all on the field every game. He expected the same from each player and got down on them if they didn’t live up to that standard. That approach didn’t work with several players and it caused friction.

Lol.

“Mathenys biggest issue was he cared too much!”

S[top] T[hose] F[raudulent] U[tterances]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

No, that's not true.

It’s factual, not conjecture, Ecleme.

No, it's not true.

Matheny had his favorites and was very poor at relating to players different than himself. Very poor communicator.

By the end, his teams were sloppy and unfocused.

[icon]

Feel free to prove me wrong.

FWIW, Cranny likely does have acquaintances in or adjacent to the front office / ownership.

He’s not gonna “prove” it in any way that satiates your demand, but I’m familiar enough with Cranny to know he’s closer to that room than probably any other regular on the forum.

Suuuuure he does.

And, on the off chance he does, I guess it would explain the sycophancy.

It’s not an off chance. Seriously.

You don’t have to believe me, but I also have no reason to make it up.

Ol’ Friend, I believe you. And I’ve posted several times that to be so vehement in his defense of Mozo, Cranny must be connected with the FO, or be related to someone in the FO, or be friends with someone in the FO. I’ve derisively called him Mrs. Mozeliak in a couple of posts.

No normal Cardinal “just a fan” would be on here as much, blindly defending this incompetent organization.

Cranny isn't some insider. Maybe he knows one or two joe blows from his church.

Cranny doesn't defend Oli. He even said, when MM was fired, he didn't trust Oli.

Cranny didn't defend Fowler. In fact, he didn't like him and made that well known.

Cranny will do logic gymnastics to defend Matheny. To a lesser extent, Mo.

Cranny isn't a shill for the FO. He's just a Matheny lover.

I respected his toughness as a player. I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him. And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in. And then was made a scapegoat. That’s all.

You "I respected his toughness as a player."
Me: "Okay, he won GG. I liked him as a Cardinal"

You: I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him.
Me: Who cares? He was a nice. Cool, dude.

You: And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in.
Me: I agree. Matheny was at his best when he got rosters who just won the WS. Any other roster would show Matheny's lack of skills as a manager.

Ecleme -
One time I attended a charity event and Matheny was the guest speaker. The fee for a speaker was $15,000. He donated that entire speaking fee to the charity. He easily could have used that money for his family. He was more than just “nice”.

I guess what triggered me on this thread is the thread’s subject. Hate is a strong word.

Well he never was good with money

You have no idea about that, sdaltons. He and other investors invested in a building and had a tenant lined up for the building. The tenant company moved in. When the recession hit, the tenant couldn’t pay the rent and the investors didn’t have rental income to pay the debt service on the building. The investors had personally guaranteed the Ioan. It happened all over the country.

He earned over 22 million in his baseball career. While after taxes and living expenses that doesn't really fall under generational wealth, but for anyone with any sense about money, that's enough to get through the rest of your life without ever ending up homeless/living with the in-laws.

Exactly. Anybody who is smart with money knows that you have to set aside a certain amount that you cannot afford to lose and only so-called gamble with a certain relatively low percentage of your money. Anybody who goes broke after making $22 million is a fool with money. And greedy to boot. $22 million was not enough for this greedy fool.

He shouldn't have been risking so much money that he could go broke. That's just stupidity on steroids. And this good, Christian man just stiffed creditors left and right. Is that a moral thing to do? Not that these creditors weren't stupid enough to lend money to somebody with no experience in real estate.

[An Old Friend]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

ecleme gets this way too frequently - when he starts doing this, there’s no turning back. My two cents: walk away from the debate with him.

I know what you’re getting at with Matheny, and I didn’t think he was in the wrong. I’m in the minority on Matheny opinions. I think he did a good job.

I’d probably have to search hard to find it but many years ago, Viva el birdos ran what was effectively a hit piece critiquing Matheny’s handling of starting pitchers and specifically how long he’d wait to go to the bullpen. It lacked any context or comps to his peers.

They quietly ran a follow up piece which amounted to a retraction as Matheny graded out favorably against his peers on the points they had previously argued were his weaknesses. No one remembers that because most in the media lack accountability, and this specific piece was barely shared.

The people that drone on about money and financial decisions have no idea what they’re talking about. Matheny was not an anomaly in the market crash, and the losses that he suffered should never be an indictment against him. It’s pure ignorance.

[icon]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

ecleme gets this way too frequently - when he starts doing this, there’s no turning back. My two cents: walk away from the debate with him.

I know what you’re getting at with Matheny, and I didn’t think he was in the wrong. I’m in the minority on Matheny opinions. I think he did a good job.

I’d probably have to search hard to find it but many years ago, Viva el birdos ran what was effectively a hit piece critiquing Matheny’s handling of starting pitchers and specifically how long he’d wait to go to the bullpen. It lacked any context or comps to his peers.

They quietly ran a follow up piece which amounted to a retraction as Matheny graded out favorably against his peers on the points they had previously argued were his weaknesses. No one remembers that because most in the media lack accountability, and this specific piece was barely shared.

The people that drone on about money and financial decisions have no idea what they’re talking about. Matheny was not an anomaly in the market crash, and the losses that he suffered should never be an indictment against him. It’s pure ignorance.

You are the one displaying pure ignorance. It's pure stupidity and greed to go broke after making $22 million in your career. That should set you up for life, and it would for most people. But it's never enough money for some.

It's reminiscent of the line from the movie Wall Street when Bud Fox confronts Gordon Gecko with the words, "How much is enough, Gordon? How many yachts can you water ski behind?" Greed is not good.

There is also an old investment industry saying that "bulls make money, bears make money, and pigs get slaughtered." Matheny was a pig.

[An Old Friend]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

ecleme gets this way too frequently - when he starts doing this, there’s no turning back. My two cents: walk away from the debate with him.

I know what you’re getting at with Matheny, and I didn’t think he was in the wrong. I’m in the minority on Matheny opinions. I think he did a good job.

I’d probably have to search hard to find it but many years ago, Viva el birdos ran what was effectively a hit piece critiquing Matheny’s handling of starting pitchers and specifically how long he’d wait to go to the bullpen. It lacked any context or comps to his peers.

They quietly ran a follow up piece which amounted to a retraction as Matheny graded out favorably against his peers on the points they had previously argued were his weaknesses. No one remembers that because most in the media lack accountability, and this specific piece was barely shared.

The people that drone on about money and financial decisions have no idea what they’re talking about. Matheny was not an anomaly in the market crash, and the losses that he suffered should never be an indictment against him. It’s pure ignorance.

You are the one displaying pure ignorance. It's pure stupidity and greed to go broke after making $22 million in your career. That should set you up for life, and it would for most people. But it's never enough money for some.

It's reminiscent of the line from the movie Wall Street when Bud Fox confronts Gordon Gecko with the words, "How much is enough, Gordon? How many yachts can you water ski behind?" Greed is not good.

There is also an old investment industry saying that "bulls make money, bears make money, and pigs get slaughtered." Matheny was a pig.

My point remains true. Better to remain silent sometimes, icon. True colors revealed. You’re blaming one of the many victims of a years long multinational financial crisis.

Misdirected hostility. You should read The Big Short… and no, don’t just watch the movie. While it was a solid adaptation, I think if you truly understood what actually happened, you’d realize how ignorant you sound blaming the people who suffered negative outcomes due to corporate greed and dishonesty.

[ecleme22]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

ecleme gets this way too frequently - when he starts doing this, there’s no turning back. My two cents: walk away from the debate with him.

I know what you’re getting at with Matheny, and I didn’t think he was in the wrong. I’m in the minority on Matheny opinions. I think he did a good job.

I’d probably have to search hard to find it but many years ago, Viva el birdos ran what was effectively a hit piece critiquing Matheny’s handling of starting pitchers and specifically how long he’d wait to go to the bullpen. It lacked any context or comps to his peers.

They quietly ran a follow up piece which amounted to a retraction as Matheny graded out favorably against his peers on the points they had previously argued were his weaknesses. No one remembers that because most in the media lack accountability, and this specific piece was barely shared.

The people that drone on about money and financial decisions have no idea what they’re talking about. Matheny was not an anomaly in the market crash, and the losses that he suffered should never be an indictment against him. It’s pure ignorance.

When it came to starter and bullpen management, Matheny managed out of fear. His goal every game:
1. Starter goes 6.
2. If winning, the same pitcher is used for all three outs in the 7th.
3. If winning, the same pitcher is used for all three outs in the 8th.
4. If winning, the closer is deployed in the 9th.

So in numerous examples, you could tell he was trying trying trying to get that starter to go 6. Because his simple formula dictated it.

Which is why:
1. His bullpen consisted guys worn out (Siegrist, Bowman, etc) and guys rarely used (ie. Lyons).
2. He would use guys like Lance Lynn in relief roles in the playoffs. It was one of the 'guys' he trusted.
3. If a guy who he 'trusted' was struggling, he would keep. giving. that. player. chances. Instead of pivoting (Rosenthal, Broxton, Wacha, Holland.)

[Cranny]

FWIW, Cranny likely does have acquaintances in or adjacent to the front office / ownership.

He’s not gonna “prove” it in any way that satiates your demand, but I’m familiar enough with Cranny to know he’s closer to that room than probably any other regular on the forum.

Suuuuure he does.

And, on the off chance he does, I guess it would explain the sycophancy.

It’s not an off chance. Seriously.

You don’t have to believe me, but I also have no reason to make it up.

Ol’ Friend, I believe you. And I’ve posted several times that to be so vehement in his defense of Mozo, Cranny must be connected with the FO, or be related to someone in the FO, or be friends with someone in the FO. I’ve derisively called him Mrs. Mozeliak in a couple of posts.

No normal Cardinal “just a fan” would be on here as much, blindly defending this incompetent organization.

Cranny isn't some insider. Maybe he knows one or two joe blows from his church.

Cranny doesn't defend Oli. He even said, when MM was fired, he didn't trust Oli.

Cranny didn't defend Fowler. In fact, he didn't like him and made that well known.

Cranny will do logic gymnastics to defend Matheny. To a lesser extent, Mo.

Cranny isn't a shill for the FO. He's just a Matheny lover.

I respected his toughness as a player. I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him. And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in. And then was made a scapegoat. That’s all.

You "I respected his toughness as a player."
Me: "Okay, he won GG. I liked him as a Cardinal"

You: I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him.
Me: Who cares? He was a nice. Cool, dude.

You: And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in.
Me: I agree. Matheny was at his best when he got rosters who just won the WS. Any other roster would show Matheny's lack of skills as a manager.

Ecleme -
One time I attended a charity event and Matheny was the guest speaker. The fee for a speaker was $15,000. He donated that entire speaking fee to the charity. He easily could have used that money for his family. He was more than just “nice”.

I guess what triggered me on this thread is the thread’s subject. Hate is a strong word.

Well he never was good with money

You have no idea about that, sdaltons. He and other investors invested in a building and had a tenant lined up for the building. The tenant company moved in. When the recession hit, the tenant couldn’t pay the rent and the investors didn’t have rental income to pay the debt service on the building. The investors had personally guaranteed the Ioan. It happened all over the country.

He earned over 22 million in his baseball career. While after taxes and living expenses that doesn't really fall under generational wealth, but for anyone with any sense about money, that's enough to get through the rest of your life without ever ending up homeless/living with the in-laws.

Exactly. Anybody who is smart with money knows that you have to set aside a certain amount that you cannot afford to lose and only so-called gamble with a certain relatively low percentage of your money. Anybody who goes broke after making $22 million is a fool with money. And greedy to boot. $22 million was not enough for this greedy fool.

He shouldn't have been risking so much money that he could go broke. That's just stupidity on steroids. And this good, Christian man just stiffed creditors left and right. Is that a moral thing to do? Not that these creditors weren't stupid enough to lend money to somebody with no experience in real estate.

You have no idea, and thus have no right to judge.

[Cranny]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

ecleme gets this way too frequently - when he starts doing this, there’s no turning back. My two cents: walk away from the debate with him.

I know what you’re getting at with Matheny, and I didn’t think he was in the wrong. I’m in the minority on Matheny opinions. I think he did a good job.

I’d probably have to search hard to find it but many years ago, Viva el birdos ran what was effectively a hit piece critiquing Matheny’s handling of starting pitchers and specifically how long he’d wait to go to the bullpen. It lacked any context or comps to his peers.

They quietly ran a follow up piece which amounted to a retraction as Matheny graded out favorably against his peers on the points they had previously argued were his weaknesses. No one remembers that because most in the media lack accountability, and this specific piece was barely shared.

The people that drone on about money and financial decisions have no idea what they’re talking about. Matheny was not an anomaly in the market crash, and the losses that he suffered should never be an indictment against him. It’s pure ignorance.

When it came to starter and bullpen management, Matheny managed out of fear. His goal every game:
1. Starter goes 6.
2. If winning, the same pitcher is used for all three outs in the 7th.
3. If winning, the same pitcher is used for all three outs in the 8th.
4. If winning, the closer is deployed in the 9th.

So in numerous examples, you could tell he was trying trying trying to get that starter to go 6. Because his simple formula dictated it.

Which is why:
1. His bullpen consisted guys worn out (Siegrist, Bowman, etc) and guys rarely used (ie. Lyons).
2. He would use guys like Lance Lynn in relief roles in the playoffs. It was one of the 'guys' he trusted.
3. If a guy who he 'trusted' was struggling, he would keep. giving. that. player. chances. Instead of pivoting (Rosenthal, Broxton, Wacha, Holland.)

You just described the M.O. of a number of managers.

[ecleme22]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

ecleme gets this way too frequently - when he starts doing this, there’s no turning back. My two cents: walk away from the debate with him.

I know what you’re getting at with Matheny, and I didn’t think he was in the wrong. I’m in the minority on Matheny opinions. I think he did a good job.

I’d probably have to search hard to find it but many years ago, Viva el birdos ran what was effectively a hit piece critiquing Matheny’s handling of starting pitchers and specifically how long he’d wait to go to the bullpen. It lacked any context or comps to his peers.

They quietly ran a follow up piece which amounted to a retraction as Matheny graded out favorably against his peers on the points they had previously argued were his weaknesses. No one remembers that because most in the media lack accountability, and this specific piece was barely shared.

The people that drone on about money and financial decisions have no idea what they’re talking about. Matheny was not an anomaly in the market crash, and the losses that he suffered should never be an indictment against him. It’s pure ignorance.

When it came to starter and bullpen management, Matheny managed out of fear. His goal every game:
1. Starter goes 6.
2. If winning, the same pitcher is used for all three outs in the 7th.
3. If winning, the same pitcher is used for all three outs in the 8th.
4. If winning, the closer is deployed in the 9th.

So in numerous examples, you could tell he was trying trying trying to get that starter to go 6. Because his simple formula dictated it.

Which is why:
1. His bullpen consisted guys worn out (Siegrist, Bowman, etc) and guys rarely used (ie. Lyons).
2. He would use guys like Lance Lynn in relief roles in the playoffs. It was one of the 'guys' he trusted.
3. If a guy who he 'trusted' was struggling, he would keep. giving. that. player. chances. Instead of pivoting (Rosenthal, Broxton, Wacha, Holland.)

You just described the M.O. of a number of managers.

Nope.

And remember, this was before the three batter rule…

[WLTFE]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

ecleme gets this way too frequently - when he starts doing this, there’s no turning back. My two cents: walk away from the debate with him.

I know what you’re getting at with Matheny, and I didn’t think he was in the wrong. I’m in the minority on Matheny opinions. I think he did a good job.

I’d probably have to search hard to find it but many years ago, Viva el birdos ran what was effectively a hit piece critiquing Matheny’s handling of starting pitchers and specifically how long he’d wait to go to the bullpen. It lacked any context or comps to his peers.

They quietly ran a follow up piece which amounted to a retraction as Matheny graded out favorably against his peers on the points they had previously argued were his weaknesses. No one remembers that because most in the media lack accountability, and this specific piece was barely shared.

The people that drone on about money and financial decisions have no idea what they’re talking about. Matheny was not an anomaly in the market crash, and the losses that he suffered should never be an indictment against him. It’s pure ignorance.

You are the one displaying pure ignorance. It's pure stupidity and greed to go broke after making $22 million in your career. That should set you up for life, and it would for most people. But it's never enough money for some.

It's reminiscent of the line from the movie Wall Street when Bud Fox confronts Gordon Gecko with the words, "How much is enough, Gordon? How many yachts can you water ski behind?" Greed is not good.

There is also an old investment industry saying that "bulls make money, bears make money, and pigs get slaughtered." Matheny was a pig.

Another thread highjacked...Matheny obviously isn't very bright.. he had access to millions of dollars but was wasn't smart enough to plan for his family's future...anyone with any business sense would understand that

[Cranny]

Ol’ Friend, I believe you. And I’ve posted several times that to be so vehement in his defense of Mozo, Cranny must be connected with the FO, or be related to someone in the FO, or be friends with someone in the FO. I’ve derisively called him Mrs. Mozeliak in a couple of posts.

No normal Cardinal “just a fan” would be on here as much, blindly defending this incompetent organization.

Cranny isn't some insider. Maybe he knows one or two joe blows from his church.

Cranny doesn't defend Oli. He even said, when MM was fired, he didn't trust Oli.

Cranny didn't defend Fowler. In fact, he didn't like him and made that well known.

Cranny will do logic gymnastics to defend Matheny. To a lesser extent, Mo.

Cranny isn't a shill for the FO. He's just a Matheny lover.

I respected his toughness as a player. I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him. And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in. And then was made a scapegoat. That’s all.

You "I respected his toughness as a player."
Me: "Okay, he won GG. I liked him as a Cardinal"

You: I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him.
Me: Who cares? He was a nice. Cool, dude.

You: And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in.
Me: I agree. Matheny was at his best when he got rosters who just won the WS. Any other roster would show Matheny's lack of skills as a manager.

Ecleme -
One time I attended a charity event and Matheny was the guest speaker. The fee for a speaker was $15,000. He donated that entire speaking fee to the charity. He easily could have used that money for his family. He was more than just “nice”.

I guess what triggered me on this thread is the thread’s subject. Hate is a strong word.

And there it is (as if we didn’t know)

Cranny is sticking up for a guy he likes, not a manager he thinks was good.

I think he had no experience as a manager, and it showed in a number of ways. He was a tough, down and dirty, all out ball player who left it all on the field every game. He expected the same from each player and got down on them if they didn’t live up to that standard. That approach didn’t work with several players and it caused friction.

Lol.

“Mathenys biggest issue was he cared too much!”

S[top] T[hose] F[raudulent] U[tterances]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

No, that's not true.

It’s factual, not conjecture, Ecleme.

No, it's not true.

Matheny had his favorites and was very poor at relating to players different than himself. Very poor communicator.

By the end, his teams were sloppy and unfocused.

To a certain extent you're right. He expected the same 100%+ effort out of all of his players that he had as a player, and was often disappointed. He had a hard time with that, and sometimes let the player know - which created a problem.

[ecleme22]

Cranny isn't some insider. Maybe he knows one or two joe blows from his church.

Cranny doesn't defend Oli. He even said, when MM was fired, he didn't trust Oli.

Cranny didn't defend Fowler. In fact, he didn't like him and made that well known.

Cranny will do logic gymnastics to defend Matheny. To a lesser extent, Mo.

Cranny isn't a shill for the FO. He's just a Matheny lover.

I respected his toughness as a player. I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him. And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in. And then was made a scapegoat. That’s all.

You "I respected his toughness as a player."
Me: "Okay, he won GG. I liked him as a Cardinal"

You: I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him.
Me: Who cares? He was a nice. Cool, dude.

You: And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in.
Me: I agree. Matheny was at his best when he got rosters who just won the WS. Any other roster would show Matheny's lack of skills as a manager.

Ecleme -
One time I attended a charity event and Matheny was the guest speaker. The fee for a speaker was $15,000. He donated that entire speaking fee to the charity. He easily could have used that money for his family. He was more than just “nice”.

I guess what triggered me on this thread is the thread’s subject. Hate is a strong word.

And there it is (as if we didn’t know)

Cranny is sticking up for a guy he likes, not a manager he thinks was good.

I think he had no experience as a manager, and it showed in a number of ways. He was a tough, down and dirty, all out ball player who left it all on the field every game. He expected the same from each player and got down on them if they didn’t live up to that standard. That approach didn’t work with several players and it caused friction.

Lol.

“Mathenys biggest issue was he cared too much!”

S[top] T[hose] F[raudulent] U[tterances]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

No, that's not true.

It’s factual, not conjecture, Ecleme.

No, it's not true.

Matheny had his favorites and was very poor at relating to players different than himself. Very poor communicator.

By the end, his teams were sloppy and unfocused.

To a certain extent you're right. He expected the same 100%+ effort out of all of his players that he had as a player, and was often disappointed. He had a hard time with that, and sometimes let the player know - which created a problem.

To review:
1. He expected 100% out of every player, like all managers do.
2. He had players not giving 100%, like all managers experience.
3. He didn’t have the emotional maturity to handle #2 in a way that was beneficial to the player and team.

Got it.

[Cranny]

I respected his toughness as a player. I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him. And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in. And then was made a scapegoat. That’s all.

You "I respected his toughness as a player."
Me: "Okay, he won GG. I liked him as a Cardinal"

You: I respect what kind of person he is because I’ve met him.
Me: Who cares? He was a nice. Cool, dude.

You: And I truly think he got the short end of the stick as far as the quality of players Mo brought in.
Me: I agree. Matheny was at his best when he got rosters who just won the WS. Any other roster would show Matheny's lack of skills as a manager.

Ecleme -
One time I attended a charity event and Matheny was the guest speaker. The fee for a speaker was $15,000. He donated that entire speaking fee to the charity. He easily could have used that money for his family. He was more than just “nice”.

I guess what triggered me on this thread is the thread’s subject. Hate is a strong word.

And there it is (as if we didn’t know)

Cranny is sticking up for a guy he likes, not a manager he thinks was good.

I think he had no experience as a manager, and it showed in a number of ways. He was a tough, down and dirty, all out ball player who left it all on the field every game. He expected the same from each player and got down on them if they didn’t live up to that standard. That approach didn’t work with several players and it caused friction.

Lol.

“Mathenys biggest issue was he cared too much!”

S[top] T[hose] F[raudulent] U[tterances]

Getting gross, Ecleme? Read my post again. He didn’t like payers who didn’t put out 110%. Was tough on players like that. They didn’t like it.

No, that's not true.

It’s factual, not conjecture, Ecleme.

No, it's not true.

Matheny had his favorites and was very poor at relating to players different than himself. Very poor communicator.

By the end, his teams were sloppy and unfocused.

To a certain extent you're right. He expected the same 100%+ effort out of all of his players that he had as a player, and was often disappointed. He had a hard time with that, and sometimes let the player know - which created a problem.

To review:
1. He expected 100% out of every player, like all managers do.
2. He had players not giving 100%, like all managers experience.
3. He didn’t have the emotional maturity to handle #2 in a way that was beneficial to the player and team.

Got it.

You're right about that. He struggled with containing himself when he saw a player giving less than 100%. And he also
had a problem with players who were more concerned with themselves than with the team. There were several who
stood out.

[An Old Friend]

After some searching, was able to track down the piece in Viva el birdos where it compared Matheny’s bullpen management to the rest of the league, and he graded out very well (including measuring better than Bochy & Francona).

https://www.vivaelbirdos.com/2016/11/5/ ... efficiency

The majority of media who cover (covered) the Cardinals were eager to parrot the same Matheny narratives over and over, but a deep data dive showed that much of that criticism was likely off target and unfair.