Originally Posted by pedro
You're certainly entitled to your opinion and while after reading it I'll admit that it's not the worst piece of tripe that Keith Law ever wrote the best thing I can say about it is, you're right, it is redundant. Dusty has his flaws but I honestly believe he's a better manager than many here give him credit for. You can call it a "rubber stamp" all you want but if the Reds had hired Joe Girardi I'd be hopping mad. Frankly I could just as easily say you've got your own rubber stamp, it just has a "no" on it instead of a "yes" and that certainly doesn't make it any more insightful, whether you think so or not.
I obviously don't think you are of a 'rubber stamp' mentality, as you're one of my favorite posters. I also don't think my take is particularly unique or insightful, but as we're dealing with a known quantity in Dusty Baker, I don't think great insight or discovery is needed. That's why I liked Law's article, it simply states exactly what Dusty Baker is, and what we can likely expect in several areas of his management oversight. And each of them will likely come into play next year.
And my 'rubber stamp' doesn't say 'no' as I've been on the praise Krivsky train for months after initially deriding many of his moves, and I thought his appointment of Pete was a spectacular interim fit. I like the direction Krivsky had us headed, and thought we were 2-3 arms away from serious contention in 2008... I just hate the dramatic changing of course which this is likely to entail, in the name of hiring a splashy manager. I'd rather win (which we were on the path to doing), than pay lip service to the concept (which I feel this move embodies).