The Legend of Jeff Francoeur's Leadership Needs to Die
This originally ran on Thursday, July 8th.
If you want to know how to approach the game, teammates or life, watch Jeff Francoeur.
He leads by example.
- Lee Judge, Judging the Royals 06/02/11 Kansas City Star
That was the dramatic conclusion of Lee Judge's June 2nd "Judging the Royals" game report for the KC Star. It's been a good year for Judge. He went viral by getting beaned by a pitching machine and seemingly every time I go on the Star's online sports section, I accidentally end up on the ever more prominently featured Judging the Royals portal. It isn't really my thing, but I do think it's an interesting conceit to build a blog around. A quick glance at the scoring system reveals numerous problems of both valuation and scaling, but... in the end, we're all just wasting our primes talking about sports anyway, right? Live and let live.
However... Judge telling his readers that Jeff Francoeur, in any way, gives lessons on how to approach life, LIFE, is one of the most preposterous things I've seen in some time. Yet, it isn't in any way surprising. We've been told by those in the know, from the beginning, that Francoeur is a tremendous leader, a paragon of... of... of well things that are good and inspiring and just right about the world. We've heard this so much that it sounds normal.
The legend of Jeff Francoeur's leadership won't die. However, that legend appears to hold no connection to any discernible results, either from Francoeur's teams or his own career. Worse still, the myth of Francoeur's value as some kind of lesson to fans and readers (nevermind fellow players) is a deeply insulting one that holds us, the readers, in contempt. A myth that assumes we are lazy ne'er-do-wells in need of a kick in the pants to make something of our miserable and pathetic lives. Francoeur the player is harmless and probably even laudable in some completely generic sense. Francoeur the media creation is a burden on our daily discussions of the Royals and Major League baseball generally. However, in a larger sense, Francoeur is just a placeholder, a name that can be auto-filled into hundreds of thousands of sports stories written in the last hundred years.
Since the piece was posted, the Royals have gone 1-5. Even after last night's three hit game, Francoeur is hitting just .231/.222/.269 since his pregame chat with Judge. In a backwards way, he is leading by example. Judge's primary example of Francoeur's clubhouse leadership is a heartening story about Francoeur taking BP in his underwear, with reference to a previous time in which he did the same fully nude. Really, that's the example. Still, this is progress of a sort, as we often never get any tangible examples of great veteran leadership.
If you want to know how to approach the game, teammates or life, watch Jeff Francoeur.
Jeff Francoeur is 27 years old and these are his go-to moves. These are moves that are raved about. The product is awful, but the fact that it's being peddled is even worse. And again, it's not just about Lee Judge. Judge is just the guy who was fated to write this particular story on that particular day. I don't mean to isolate Judge, I mean to isolate the rhetoric Judge used, which is widespread generally and ubiquitous when it comes to this player. There are fifteen guys standing behind Lee Judge waiting to write that story. There are a hundred "baseball men" in the stands and in front offices waiting to tell that story. You can tell how pervasive the approval for this kind of utterly meaningless behavior is by how clearly Judge had no hesitation in praising it. And all of that is cool and all, if people wanna think male nudity is inherently funny, and then we assume that laughter equals better performance. Baseball's not alone in that regard on the first matter, just ask Will Farrell. However, the Hollywood press isn't lecturing to me that Farrell's various grotesquely posed characters are giving me life lessons. And I'm sure Michael Scott would strongly believe that making people laugh makes them better workers.
I can't look back at what happened during the second instance, like a good urban legend the details are too hazy. We do, however, know what happened when the Royals wore pink on a Sunday this season, when "Jeff picked everybody [up?]" with his antics. That was on Mother's Day, May 8th. That day they went out and lost to the Athletics 5-2. They managed just six hits all game and committed two errors. Thank goodness Francoeur was there. Everyone was dragging and he lifted them up.
In addition to semi-naked BP, we're also told of a time that Francoeur was nice to Louis Coleman, about how he ran hard on a triple, and about how he demanded that some pictures of minor league prospects be taken down. (There's an obvious selfish subtext to the latter, which of course was completely glossed over.)
Since Mother's Day, that magical moment of Francoeur leadership, the Royals are 8-21. Since May 8th, Francoeur has hit .257/.298/.354. We're often told that sports is all about results, which makes it some kind of fantasy land of pure free market meritocracy. Pampered academics, like I used to be, obviously would fail miserably within the crucible that is unfettered competition. All lesser men who can't measure up to some Teddy Roosevelt gladiatorial image of masculinity from the Strenuous Age shall crumble in the arena. This line of thinking dominates our sports thinking, which is why every championship game or round or series somehow becomes more about who is clutch or who choked than who actually won.
Well, what has been the result of all of Francoeur's good works? What has been the payoff for how nice he's been? For how encouraging he's been? For that time he was really funny? The Royals keep losing and Francoeur is, when everything in his flawed game goes right, an average player. How is he competing and winning?
How would Lee Judge, or your average over-macho sportswriter, respond to the fundamentals of the Francoeur narrative, only one about a struggling middle school teacher somewhere, doing what she can to get a pretty rag tag group of students to do better. This teacher is kind, understanding, and works hard. She took extra time to encourage little Sally on the day that Sally forgot her backpack and started crying. They'd point to the test scores and say, "all of that touchy feely stuff is important, and I appreciate that, but I care about results!" What would the reaction be to a salesman who is really funny around the office, just the nicest guy you'd ever meet, and a devoted family man... with middling sales figures. Would anyone be defending him? Demanding he gets a second chance? Talking about he leads his company to success?
Francoeur's individual results are middling and his ability to alter the team's fortunes as a whole appear to be non-existent or even deleterious. You could easily write a "Since Antics, Royals Have Slumped" story here, one that would much better fit the facts.
It's amazing that stats guys are consistently mocked for not living in the real world, for imagining that these guys aren't human, for dismissing the "feel" of the game and ignoring what has really happened. "Do you even watch the games ?" we're mocking asked. Indeed.
So what is the lesson for life that Francoeur's example truly gives us? Well, he does offer sparkling and spectacular evidence that one should be nice to reporters. Unfortunately, that applies to basically none of us. He also reminds us that, if you work in a heavily bilingual environment, it's good to be one of the English speakers. Fair enough. And finally, he's generically a hard worker. When I get off the train tomorrow at 8:45 I'll be able to throw a rock and hit six hard workers with one throw. People work hard. Marginally useful I guess to be reminded of this.
Unfortunately, most of our lives suck not because we don't work hard enough, but because we're simply mediocre and have been a little unlucky in life. But yea, work hard! Remember that 8th inning double that Francoeur stretched into a triple. Sure, he had roughly 100,000 people watching him in person and on TV, but remember that hustle when you have one last invoice to file at 4:25 on a Thursday afternoon in your office. Remember Francoeur's hustle when you're three hours in to a six hour shift at Target. Totally and 100% comparable situations.
Really, if we truly wanted to rhapsodize about the deep meaning of Francoeur, and turn his life into a short story with an easily identifiable payoff at the end, it would be something like this:
Impress someone when you are young, in this case, high school. Now, a big part of that is based off of how you look, how your body projects going forward. But smile a lot and be nice. Really connect with this older figure. Make impressing him priority number one. OK, great. Now take the next five or six years easy. Coast on what you have been able to do since 19. Hustle as you do it, but fundamentally do not change or expand your skillset. Don't worry about improving. Actually, feel free to get worse.
At some point, the person that you really impressed as a teenager, will get hired in a new location. He'll remember how awesome you were. Sure, your career has stalled and even regressed since those early days, but this person still loves believes in you. He's got a position to fill and well, the job is totally yours if you want it. No questions asked, no pressure, guaranteed. He'll even pay you well. Just look at you, you still look as good as you did at 19. It's all there.
If you can't replicate this glorious scenario in your own life, you have no one to blame but yourself. Go die somewhere you sickening failure.
###
To attempt to learn more from the Book of Francoeur, I will be running a regular advice column on this site. Submit to us your problems, and I will, in all seriousness, look at Francoeur for answers.
202 comments
|
35 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Brilliant.
Excellent work Will. Do they give Pulitzer’s to bloggers?
Regarding the content
I have to admit that I like Francoeur more than I thought I would… and by a long shot. His penchant for drawing walks in the 9th is particularly impressive given his self-admitted lack of plate discipline.
That being said, it’s truly amazing how some players can coast off of reputation. You would think sports would be the ultimate results driven industry. And it amazes me with the amount of money that pro athletes can make that it isn’t a completely 100% meritocracy.
I mean, that’s why these guys get paid what they do, right? I suppose a good personality can drive ticket/merchandise sales… but that would be very hard to quantify – and presumes that player was effective for at least a portion of their career.
Francouer was more than effective early in his career
The argument works just as well without ignoring the fact that Francoeur put up 3.2 WAR in 70 games in his rookie season (for comparison, if we normalize for games played, Hosmer is producing at less than half that rate) and put up almost 4 WAR in his third season. The idea that this is all high school results and body type is wrong.
To clarify
I’m not suggesting these guys didn’t earn their paycheck at some point in their careers, just how long they can sustain that high level of pay based on reputation.
Look at a guy like Ryan Freel. He had a solid year in 2006 and played sub-par ball for another 3 years based on it. Or Darrin Erstad. The guy played basically 10 more years based on his crazy 9 WAR year. Two of his last four years he was below replacement… not saying he didn’t have some good years after 2000, just no where near as good – with some outright bad years towards the end.
Rivas
Or look at Luis Rivas, who never had a positive WAR in a full season, consistently posted an OPS+ at around 80, and always had lousy range in the field, but still was given 2290 PA in 648 games (and paid $4.4m) in the big leagues (-2.8 WAR, 78 OPS+ career) just because he impressed some Twins scouts and coaches with his “tools” as a youngster.
Francouer at least had 1.5 good seasons in his early years with the Braves, and he actually had a good half-season when he first joined the Mets in 2009, too. Now, at age 27, his 123 OPS+ isn’t far off the production he flashed as a rookie; if he keeps it up all season, he’ll have the best WAR of his career. So he’s inconsistent, but he does occasionally repay a club’s belief in his potential, if only for awhile.
the baseball player almost doesn't exist anymore
Francoeur has had his moments this season, and overall, he’s been better than I certainly thought. I’m happy to do a mea culpa if he ends up with a good season.
I just don’t care about the time he was nice to Louis Coleman, which is almost held up as if it is more important.
by Freneau on Jun 9, 2011 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
I just don't think you appreciate how difficult it is to be nice to Coleman
he is inherently unlikeable and even puppies and old ladies bite his fingers and peep on his shoes. For Frenchy to take time out from his busy leadership schedule to be nice to this sub-human is more than note worthy. It is to be revered.
He will be the next French Pope once he hangs up his pink cleats.
This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.
by KC_Satchmo on Jun 9, 2011 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I understand the pushback from his behavior being considered a positive
but I don’t view it as inherently negative just because it’s childish. If we want to lock up any of our young players long term, having a non-Jose Guillen like atmosphere in the clubhouse is the least we could hope for.
"That's fine wood from... somewhere."
by KeepItCopacetic on Jun 9, 2011 12:00 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, playing baseball is not exactly serious business like trading oil futures
The sport is inherently childish.
The sport is inherently childish.
Isn’t it though? It still amazes me that 30 grown men run out onto the field to jump around, hug each other, pile on each other, etc. after relatively not very meaningful walk-off regular season victories. Even last place teams with no hope of making the post-season do this.
Can't spell "Colletti" without LOL.
Maybe true
But, I’d give up my left nut to join them.
I need to go take a Davies and wipe my Elarton. Excuse me.
by royaldaddy on Jun 9, 2011 1:58 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Is the trading oil futures comment sarcasm?
Hard to tell in this format. But as someone who traded futures at one point, I can tell you it’s as equally non-serious as baseball and other pro sports. Surprisingly similar in fact. I think there might be an inverse relationship between how much you make and how serious your professional environment is.
Agreed.
I actually think the correlation is the result of the instant feedback on performance. Workplace cancers are allowed to persist if they produce at a high level (because the production is there for all to see) and then guys like Jeff Francoeur become valuable because they can stop the entire workplace from degenerating into a Lord of the Flies environment, especially when the team/trading desk is losing.
I actually think that this is the best case that can be made for Francoeur — that, in an environment with the level of pressure, the amount of instant performance feedback, and competition both between players and between teams, you need people who can stop it from degenerating
Is there a
conch shell in the clubhouse?
I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.
by mitchfreakingmaier! on Jun 9, 2011 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess one could see it that way
and as one who is also in the finance industry, I get where you are arguing that it is non-serious in terms of the atmosphere at times. But when you are dealing with serious money that can evaporate – along with your job – in a matter of minutes, it quickly can move into a stressful and serious mode. Knowing many traders though, I probably should have picked something like pediatric surgery.
I was often struck at the difference between traders and portfolio managers
It’s basically the same stakes and the same incentives, but the time horizons and average ages are different. For whatever reason, there was a huge difference in culture.
Yeah I am on the research side
working with PM’s and it is definitely a lot more stuffy. We get to goof off every now and then (usually when the PM is out and it is a slow market day), but we haven’t done anything close to some of the stories i’ve heard on the trading desks (same vein of $11 Taco Bell contests).
I moved from the buy-side to the sell-side
And the stuff that took place on the sell-side trading floors blew my mind. Of course, that was at Bear Stearns, which I think might have tolerated a bit more of that stuff than the other places.
This is also increasingly out of date. I left the industry in 2005, and I don’t have many friends who still work there.
Yeah Bear was pretty notorious
I’ve heard the trading desks were like the Wild West there in the heyday with Jimmy Cayne in charge. This is all from hearsay and old stories though, that was before my time.
Floor traders are the craziest, a lot like pro athletes.
Especially in futures. In fact, some of those guys are ex pros. Options and fixed income guys tend to be a bit more cerebral and a little less wild.
I was on the trading floor in Chicago in the late 90's
Some really crazy stuff going on down there on slow days. Couldn’t believe what traders could get clerks to do for money.
Yeah, now on the research side myself. PMs can be very stuffy – although I found the best hedge fund managers I’ve worked with are also the most laid back or personable.
I basically agree with Will's piece, but ...
I also think it’s over the top — much like Will is accusing Judge of being.
Look, baseball writers get paid to find deeper meanings in baseball, meanings that often aren’t really there. We’re all guilty of this — it’s the way we come to terms with the fact that we’re obsessing over a GAME involving a dude trying to hit a round object with a stick. Fans, players, writers — we all want it to somehow mean more to justify the time, money and heartache we pour into this infernal sport.
So a writer like Judge comes along, sees a can-do player like Franceour, and writes a somewhat sensationalist piece with some deeper life lessons in it. You can disagree with his analysis/conclusions, but don’t trash the idea of reading more into a player than is actually there — an idea that’s existed since the beginning of baseball (ever heard of Babe Ruth?).
It’s exactly the same thing Posnanski did in The Soul of Baseball, about Buck O’Neill (who, just to be clear, is in no way comparable to Franceour). Great, interesting read. There were also lots of stretched analogies and overwrought analysis — some even condescending — about what Buck can teach us about life.
But that’s fine. It’s all part of what a baseball writer does.
Well, that's just like your opinion, man.
some truth there
Look, baseball writers get paid to find deeper meanings in baseball, meanings that often aren’t really there. We’re all guilty of this — it’s the way we come to terms with the fact that we’re obsessing over a GAME involving a dude trying to hit a round object with a stick.
and you are right, that’s why i was no fan of SOB
I haven't been a fan of any of the Buck O'Neil hagiographies
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
But Buck books are illustrative of the field
One could arguably say that 90% of baseball writing is hagiography in one form or another. Saber stat heads do it, too. And it’s totally natural — it’s how we infuse the game with meaning.
You can disagree with the author’s conclusions — I personally don’t believe Frenchy has much to teach me about life. But I don’t agree with the basic thrust of Will’s piece, which is that it’s crazy/ridiculous/offensive/etc. for a writer to even write this KIND of piece.
Well, that's just like your opinion, man.
I think Will's point was that it is repetitive
Same stuff, over and over and over, about how some guy who plays sports should be looked up to. In any field there are a few special examples—baseball has Christy Mathewson, Jackie Robinson, Lou Gehrig, Henry Aaron, and Dan Quisenberry—of people who are genuinely worth our admiration because of their personal qualities. You could probably even find five lawyers—Clarence Darrow, Abe Lincoln, and, well, three other guys—to say the same thing about.
I have a friend named Chris who’s a lawyer in OP. He does stuff like write up people’s wills. He’s a good guy, good family man, personally honest, etc. But he’s no more admirable than half a million other guys. Same for baseball players.
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
I agree with criticisms of the media's obsessions with celebrities
I don’t understand who buys US Weekly or how photographers can make money as paparazzi. And I agree with criticisms that such coverage is ultimately harmful to society. However, I don’t think those criticisms should be found on celebrity news sites.
People on Royals Review construct false narratives all the time. Guys get sent down or fired not because of bad performance but because they were brought in by Allard Baird. Players get signed to contracts not because the scouts like them, but because they once were Braves. Hell, Will does that in this very article.
Hypocrisy is a mindless insult, and I’m not going to lob it here. I’ve done repeatedly done things I’ve criticized in other settings. But the more I think about it, the less I agree with this piece. If someone doesn’t want to see people write about the personalities of the people involved with the Royals, there’s more than enough examples on this site regarding Dayton Moore alone to keep a vigilante busy full time. If the real objection that the coverage is fawning instead of cynical, then that’s just a difference in taste.
by KSinDC on Jun 13, 2011 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I do disagree with Will's short story
(the part in italics) because I’m not sure it’s a fair analysis of what Frenchy has actually done. And it’s probably not true that Frenchy is a starting MLB outfielder because of Moore; he must have had several other offers from, admittedly, not very good teams last season.
I would personally like to see more personality stories about the Röyals; I’d like to get to know them better. Several of them must be pretty interesting guys. Several of them must be pretty big dickheads. I wouldn’t mind knowing who’s who. Sometimes it seems like Boom Boom Mazzaro is just a line of stats when, you know, he’s really a 24-year-old kid who’s full of feelings and thoughts like everybody else.
That’s something they do in Spain; there are these daily sports newspapers that sell about 100,000 copies or more daily, normally associated with one football club or another. They have to fill up tons of space every day and so they do it with personal stories on the players. Most of them probably aren’t too revealing, but occasionally you hit on a detail that for some reason is fascinating. Did you know Luis Figo’s favorite dish is duck with rice, which is apparently a delicacy in Portugal?
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
OT: Most underrated baseball person ever: Christy Mathewson
It was all a long time ago, the pre-Babe Ruth era, 106 years ago when Mathewson threw three shutouts in the World Series. But he did more than anyone to clean up the game, first by showing that not all ballplayers were Ty Cobb thugs or Rube Waddell drunks, and helping to bring a respectable middle-class element into a cultural phenomenon that had been entirely working-class at a professional level.
Besides that, he was aggressively clean. He personally banned Hal Chase from his team in 1918 because he knew Chase was fixing games, and he was one of the very few people (cf. Eight Men Out) who was on to the Black Sox and made his knowledge public.
Finally, he was a war victim: when America entered WWI Mathewson volunteered and they made him an officer. He was invalided after accidentally being gassed during a training exercise, which put an end to his military and baseball playing careers, and he died a few years later of lung illness caused by his gassing.
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
Christy Matthewson, the original _christian_ baseball player
I tend to agree with you about him being underrated. Of the original five inductees into the Hall of Fame (the other four were Ruth, Cobb, Johnson, Honus Wagner), Matthewson is the one you hear the least about today.
My admiration of Matthewson increased when I recently read this article (http://baseballcrank.com/archives2/2011/06/baseball_a_hist.php) and discovered that the reputation of his great rival, Three Finger Brown, appears to have been, in part, the product of playing in front of a great defense, which Matthewson never did.
I like the Crank
Haven’t heard anyone bring up the Tinker/Evers/Chance HOF debate recently, but those stats sure show their defensive WAR was very high.
Your all-college-kid team from the old days would include Mathewson, Eddie Collins, Frankie Frisch, Joe Cronin, Red Faber, and Lou Gehrig.
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
I am quite sure that the part in italics is a totally unfair analysis of what Frenchy has actually done
It’s the only part of the piece I think can be criticized without reservation. The rest of the criticism (mine and others) is just subjective differences.
How can duck with rice be a delicacy? I know Portugal isn’t as rich as the rest of western Europe, but what?
Exactly
Wil’s whole piece is built on the false assertion that Judge and fans of Franceour are unique offenders when it comes to creating narratives about players that outstrip reality.
That’s patently and obviously untrue.
If what he really means to write is that a lot of writers like Franceour, and he doesn’t, that’s another issue entirely.
Well, that's just like your opinion, man.
what are you talking about?
I said multiple times Judge was not alone. I am confused.
by Freneau on Jun 13, 2011 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Will, you're not even trying
Re-read my sentence: “… false assertion that Judge AND FANS OF FRANCOEUR are unique offenders.” [caps for emphasis]
No, you didn’t say Judge was alone, and I didn’t say that, either. But your entire piece IS based on the assumption that “the Legend of Jeff Francoeur” — created by Judge AND OTHERS — is somehow a uniquely egregious example of false baseball hagiography.
My counter is that this is patently untrue, and instead of addressing that argument, you create this false one about Judge being alone. Please, don’t change what your critics are saying, because it means you miss the criticism entirely.
Well, that's just like your opinion, man.
Will, how can you NOT be a JoPo fan? and SOB is JoPo at his finest ...
seriously, relax … Frenchie is being Frenchie, and he’s not Jose Guillen (or worse, he’s not MannyBManny!)
relax, Will … go read Andrew Sharp’s splendid writeup on the NBA Finals … give ya a good feeling inside (esp if you hate the now deposed King James as much as I do)
Winner: 2009 Nostradamus of Arrowhead Pride Award
"I shall conquer untruth by truth" - Mahatma Gandhi
"It's always easier to sell 'em some shit than it is to give 'em the truth" - Shel Silverstein, The Perfect High
hi, Mo! 5 minutes!!!
Actually, I should probably change the header of my comment to
“I really don’t agree with Will’s piece” because his assertion that Judge and Frenchy fans are uniquely guilty of creating bogus personal narratives about players is obviously not true.
Well, that's just like your opinion, man.
I like how Jeff Fancoeur swings at
39.2% of the pitches he sees outside the strike zone, 10th highest in the league.
That sets a good example for kids everywhere.
Can't spell "Colletti" without LOL.
Will, you're a great writer
I don’t agree with all of the sentiments here (as big a fan of sabremetrics as I am, I don’t believe numbers completely capture what anyone does), but it’s a joy to read.
as big a fan of sabremetrics as I am, I don’t believe numbers completely capture what anyone does
There is no doubt this is true (and for the record, I don’t think anyone involved in sabermetrics thinks that numbers do or even can capture everything in baseball). But the problem with traditionalists (like Judge) is that they ascribe real meaning to intangibles. They don’t just say that someone like Francoeur is a good clubhouse guy. They say that his various intangibles (leadership, grit, etc.) make him a better player. Often they say much more than that. They take the immeasurable and give it great meaning. They give meaning to the unknowable and tell us how incredibly important it is.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jun 13, 2011 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Frenchy's good clubhouse guyness
does make him a better employee to have on your team than, say, Milton Bradley or Shea Hillenbrand or José Guillén. If I were Ned and talking to the rookies I would tell them, “Look at Frenchy, he works hard and doesn’t get drunk and beat up women and tries to be nice to everyone. You should do what he does. It will help your career. You wanna wind up like Ambiorix Burgos or Lenny Dykstra or something?”
However, it doesn’t make him a better player. That can actually be measured pretty well.
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
Outstanding
And I say that as someone who doesn’t even mind Francoeur all that much. What I DO mind is the mindless repetition of claims unsupported by evidence—such as the one you take down here.
by WaywardSaint on Jun 9, 2011 12:17 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Mike Redmond
Former Twins backup Catcher Mike Redmond used to be known for occasionally taking “naked batting practice,” supposedly to keep the team loose. Minnesota media and fans generally thought it was a funny, endearing quirk that helped clubhouse chemistry. And when the Twins got off to an awful start this year, there was at least one “the Twins sure do miss colorful characters like Mike Redmond this season” article in the local press. Only in baseball. I’m not sure that there is an equivalent to “naked batting practice” even in other team sports. I never read about “naked layup drills” or linemen stripping down before hitting the blocking sleds, anyway.
"Don't look at the facts...
look at the meaning of the facts and once you look, you have changed the facts and in reality there is no meaning."
The greatest moment of my childhood was when [insert name] did [insert insane thing].
by 2motley4thetitle on Jun 9, 2011 12:29 PM EDT reply actions
the statistical thing that amazes me
is that Francoeur keeps hitting cleanup, despite slumping and not being the Royals best power hitter. Francoeur accumulating hits a lot more often when the game isn’t close is another happy coincidence. It’s like when he has to try hard, he tries too hard. Like how he hits 8 HRs, then starts trying to hit home runs and he begins to suck worse.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bhindepmo
Chairman, The Melky Cabrera Seasoning Sauce. It's great on your outfield!
What do you think the reaction would have been to Jose Guillen taking Naked BP?
by BlueEyes_Austin on Jun 9, 2011 12:51 PM EDT reply actions
JoGui tried to be the loose, fun veteran guy once

but then the crazy, douchebag/asshole came right back. The suck was always there, though. Never left, just bubbled right below the surface for a little while.
by Sweep_the_Leg on Jun 9, 2011 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Didn't he try to
kill one of the clubhouse guys with a machete about 10 minutes after this photo was taken?
by Black and Gold on Jun 9, 2011 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I just view that as marketing gimmicks
He’s the fan favorite, so they need to hype him more, but there’s really not much to praise so they praise his personality.
“Buy tickets to see Frenchy grins!”
Strange that on one hand everyone know 2011 is the trial year, on the other hand everyone is like “THIS GUY IS SO BAD, GET RID OF HIM, MUST WIN NOWWWWWWW”
I am probably the only Royals fan in Hong Kong?
by Yamfun Cheng Kamfun on Jun 9, 2011 12:52 PM EDT reply actions
So much sarcasm and morbid humor here...
I get that most of this is supposed to be tongue-in-cheek or sarcastic (I hope), but I can’t help but question why you would attack this topic.
Taking life lessons from a pro athlete, probably isn’t going to get you very far, but what’s wrong with emulating Francoeur?
Positive attitude, works hard, extremely polite and nice, doesn’t seem to let his numerous past failures deter him from attempting to succeed in the future, etc.
If more people in this country had that kind of attitude and didn’t always try to project the blame elsewhere, maybe we’d all be a lot happier (and successful).
If I completely missed the boat on this, then please explain, thanks.
by xrayxtals on Jun 9, 2011 1:47 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
what percentage of people don't work hard and aren't nice?
Its funny, but if asked that about people we know, we feel like, “oh, yea, they pretty much all work hard”
but then if we are asked about everyone, suddenly its “everyone is lazy”
by Freneau on Jun 9, 2011 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I'm not understanding where "everyone is lazy" is coming from
When I praise all the folks on RR that went down to help in Joplin, I’m not saying that the folks that didn’t (or the world at large) is selfish. Even if I said we could all learn something from their example, I’m not criticizing them. Nobody’s perfect, even good people. I feel like some of the outrage here is imagined.
I don't think I've ever felt that way about most of my co-workers.
Maybe when I worked at Wal-Mart, when I felt solidarity in our mutual indentured servanthood.
"That's fine wood from... somewhere."
by KeepItCopacetic on Jun 9, 2011 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions
he's not cricicising Francouer
other than for being bad at baseball. He’s criticizing the media that is too lazy to find a new (or a real) angle and not write something they haven’t written a dozen times before.
2011 Royals Review NCAA Bracket Challenge Winner, by process of attrition
erm... criticizing
what the heck, I missed two letters in it.
2011 Royals Review NCAA Bracket Challenge Winner, by process of attrition
And don't forget
the angle is fucking stupid. There is not relationship between keeping the clubhouse loose and winning. In fact, it almost seems like the only reason you need a guy like Frenchy is to allow your team to muddle through losing with a little less pain. It is not a useful skill in a competitive environment (i.e. the Yankees are full of dicks, yet they still win); it perhaps even makes things worse.
But no one writes that headline.
“Judging the Royals: Frenchy takes the pain out of losing.”
Won’t find that above the fold at the news stand.
by bas on Jun 9, 2011 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions
This is too strong
I have no idea what the relationship is between a loose clubhouse and winning. Neither does anyone else. That’s true for Lee Judge, but it’s also true for the people here.
what 'bothers' me the most
Is the sentiment that yes, we the public, do know what it takes to win in baseball, what it takes to have a successful ball club and what makes a good ballplayer, simply by the power of outsider observation.
Right
Just because it can’t be observed/measured doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
Of course, that statement covers all manner of sins, and I think Judge’s piece is completely overblown, but, especially for people using the scientific method and working with data, it’s important to remember that humility is a critical component of that.
Humility
is useful for more than just data collection. I think the point of the piece is to explode the “in the know” myth about the importance of clubhouse culture. Lee Judge lacks humility.
by bas on Jun 9, 2011 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Humility is difficult to have
I’ll be honest, it’s not my strong suit. Frankly to be a writer you have to be pretty egotistical and narcissistic. I’m sure that humillity in baseball is equally lacking because it won’t help you too much. You have to have an absurdly big ego and insane focus to get to the major leagues.
But in the end, all writers are pretending at some point. We can gather information, but somewhere along the way we have to put our balls on the line.
by brokenbatsingle on Jun 9, 2011 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Joe Posnanski
is an excellent and well-respected writer partly because he is humble. Maybe this won’t get him into certain fraternities, but it works for him. You don’t have to be narcissistic to be a writer. Rewind yourself.
by kgustaf on Jun 9, 2011 7:12 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, I agree Judge lacks humility
That’s why I said his piece is overblown.
It's a long season
Writers gotta write about something and the average sports page reader seems to like uplifting stories about guys who are good in the clubhouse. None of it is meant to be taken particularly seriously.
Basically, Lee Judge is writing for one audience and you are writing for another. Warm, fuzzy human interest stories aren’t everyone’s cup of tea. But then again, gloomy blog posts filled with world-weary cynicism and ironic literary references aren’t either. To each his own, eh?
by maguro on Jun 9, 2011 2:02 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Good writing Will, but aren't you making a bit of a straw-man here?
I read that Lee Judge piece (disclosure: I’ve become very good friends with Lee. I understand why he writes what he writes and disagree with him on things as well) and I don’t see him drawing a direct line from Francoeur being a clubhouse-leader to winning more games immediately after his shenanigans and leadershipy stuff.
I think it would be silly for anyone to believe that the difference between the Royals and the Rangers is more or less leadership or “quality clubhouse guys”. Talent always has and always will win out. It’s why teams that have hated each other have won and so have teams that have loved each other.
All other things being equal, I would imagine that anyone would agree that a comfortable/easy environment is preferred. In my own work, I’d rather be around people who I enjoyed being around, who made me laugh and who helped me when I was struggling. I can’t imagine a baseball team would be diffferent.
Clearly if I could choose the dick who helped me get a 50% pay increase over the worthless dude who makes me laugh, I’m going with the former.
There’s no doubt that part of the Francoeur mystique is that he’s a white, english-speaking guy who gets along with the media. It makes telling the story much easier for the story-tellers. It doesn’t inherently make it less true though.
I’ve spent a little time around Francoeur and he does seem to be to be a pretty solid dude. I think that emulating the way he does his job is probably not the worst thing one can do. Now, in all situations, stripping down to underwear isn’t going to be the best idea. But in the context of MLB baseball, it is. I’ve been in work environments where people did absurdly silly things that helped lighten the mood or to shake things up. In general it’s been a good idea.
Just to repeat, the francoeur narrative can be repetive and over-simplified, but I don’t think it’s completely without merit or value.
Well if there isn't a correlation to winning, what's the value in what he's doing?
Isn’t the number one dirtballer old-school message that it’s all about winning?
There might be something buried in there about mentoring young guys, but it’s completely killed by the story about taking down the pictures of the minor leaguers, which is also celebrated.
by Freneau on Jun 9, 2011 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
Well, its sort of the big conundrum, isn't it?
i think that having a guy, not frenchy, but any guy who is a great clubhouse guy is a net positive for the team. The question, and it’s almost certainly unanswerable is how much positive? Is it one game over 162? Is it 1 game out of 10,162, is it 15 games out of 162? I think that it clearly depends on the personel involved and a number of other factors.
I do think that it can have a cumulative effect though. I think there is real tangible benefit to young players who will in the future be running the clubhouse themselves to come into a clubhouse that is a better working environment. Which is why I think Francoeur was brought in specifically at this time when young guys like Hosmer and Moustakas will be called up.
As to the picture. I get your point, but I get the sentiment. Part of baseball (rightly or wrongly) is respecting the veterans, the past players and by extension the game itself. Francoeur saw guys who hadn’t made the show put in the same light as those who had and he felt (again rightly or wrongly) that it was an insult to them.
I’m a bit on the fence in regards to that, but I think that in the context of an MLB clubhouse it probably makes sense.
by brokenbatsingle on Jun 9, 2011 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions
This is where we have to leave our emotionally-based expectations at the door.
i think that having a guy, not frenchy, but any guy who is a great clubhouse guy is a net positive for the team.
As someone said above, “leadership” would be Francoeur focusing on his flaws such as being more selective at the plate – that would set a good, tangible example; instead, it gets washed out by “great clubhouse guy” stories that seem to actually have paltry significance when it comes to performance on the field.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2011 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
well, there is the value of making it a place where people want to work
there’s likely little to no effect on the field, but it might be the difference between someone like Hosmer walking after arbitration or sticking around for a few more years.
batter nine you sucky
This..
I also heard something on ESPN about a study showing that a positive clubhouse environment correlates positively to wins, but as for the specific details, I don’t know.
Perhaps it’s simply in warding off a full mutiny/collapse as we’ve seen a number of times in the sports world and that threatens rebuilding projects (like what happened to the Detroit Pistons this year, for example). Again, I’m all for it (along with keeping young guys around).
"That's fine wood from... somewhere."
by KeepItCopacetic on Jun 9, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I think there is a correlation
just in the opposite direction
then after the fact all the players feel like, “yea, it was because we believed! and fought for each other!”
No, there actually was an academic study done.
"That's fine wood from... somewhere."
by KeepItCopacetic on Jun 9, 2011 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions
provide a link
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 11, 2011 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions
a good clubhouse is a winning clubhouse
a winning clubhouse is one with good players in it.
problem solved!
one other point
“hat would the reaction be to a salesman who is really funny around the office, just the nicest guy you’d ever meet, and a devoted family man… with middling sales figures. Would anyone be defending him? Demanding he gets a second chance?”
And actually, yes this happens all the time. I can assure you. People like to paint work atmospheres as if only the results matter, but in actual business I’d say it’s less of a meritocracy than baseball. Good guys that people enjoy working with get a MUCH, MUCH longer leash than the assholes who create issues but do better work.
by brokenbatsingle on Jun 9, 2011 2:11 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
But is the business press writing hero-profiles of them?
Is the Wall Street Journal praising them and demanding more hiring and and extension of their benefits?
This seems like a weird sentimental spot for the sports media.
I think they would, if the general public gave two shits about
if the general public gave two shits about business personalities. I think one of the biggest issues here, correct me if i’m wrong, is the over-saturation of this particular narrative. I can agree wholeheartedly with that.
It’s repeated ad-nauseum. In fact, I invoked it myself on the radio yesterday without irony and almost without knowing it happened. But I still feel confident about the statement I made, and it felt weird.
There is certainly some fawning over Francoeur by the media, which is compounded by the extremely strange atmosphere created in a mlb clubhouse. Having a player which you can go and speak with at the clubhouse, when you’re there for 81 games can be extremely important, just from a sanity state of mind.
One of the least tread and most important topics here is how valuable Francoeur is to the media. He helps them do their job immensely, which in the end is good for both the reader and the media, but can cause some over-praise for francoeur…if that makes sense.
by brokenbatsingle on Jun 9, 2011 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions
it's not good for the reader
I don’t see how you can make that argument.
2011 Royals Review NCAA Bracket Challenge Winner, by process of attrition
by sfeldkamp on Jun 9, 2011 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
What do we gain from writers in the clubhouse?
In general, I think we get information that we don’t get elswhere, if the job is done right. The writers in the clubhouse SHOULD be an extension of the readership. Asking them our questions to gather information to present to us to both entertain and educate us.
Now, that’s not what is always happening, but it should happen.
If that’s the goal, then having a guy who is always willing to speak with the media and do so in a friendly, honest and open way is a benefit to that end.
by brokenbatsingle on Jun 9, 2011 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions
the clubhouse reporters can't ask
the reader’s questions because they’d get punched in the mouth.
In general I just don’t understand why sports journalism has a need to frame everything in a narrative.
2011 Royals Review NCAA Bracket Challenge Winner, by process of attrition
by sfeldkamp on Jun 9, 2011 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It's convenient for the most part.
Lebron is the villian, and everyone can follow that narrative and parrot it. It’s much more difficult though intellectually honest to write something outside of the typical narrative, but I think even then you’re still writing to a narrative, jsut a different one.
by brokenbatsingle on Jun 9, 2011 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Frenchy provides reporters with plenty of good copy
Therefore, the readers benefit because they can read stuff they might find interesting that wouldn’t come from any other player. Now, the hardcore baseball fan doesn’t benefit, since Frenchy never says anything particularly new or interesting to us, but the average Joe Röyals fan does, and that’s 90% of the people who pay for the sport we like to overanalyze.
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
Next time I see a colleague in the dumps about his boring office job,
I’ll get naked and punch him. At trial for public indecency and battery, my plea will simply be: “Francouer taught me these invaluable life lessons.”
by kansasjohn on Jun 9, 2011 2:11 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Will, this is when you're at your best
must be all the posting in your underwear that goes on around here.
2011 Royals Review NCAA Bracket Challenge Winner, by process of attrition
This whole issue is "writers" vs bloggers writ small
Imagine you’re lee judge: francouer is the most popular guy in the room, funny, self-effacing, perceptive, and exceedingly nice to YOU. Who wouldn’t be charmed by that? And who wouldn’t be impelled to write nice things? This is the cost/benefit of proximity/distance. Francouer’s actually been nice to me personally (and my kid), so I get that part of it. You’re 100% right though. What Judge is really saying is that it’s better to be nice than not. And but he can’t just write that so he decides to call niceness (directed to him, Judge) “leadership”, which is an incredible distortion of what leadership actually is.
by billexgordler on Jun 9, 2011 2:25 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 4 recs
I think this is 95% correct
An excellent analysis of the dynamic that’s produced Judge’s crappy column.
I would disagree only to the extent that keeping morale up in the face of failure is a lot of what leadership actually is, and calling it niceness probably undersells it.
And but he can’t just write that so he decides to call niceness (directed to him, Judge) "leadership", which is an incredible distortion of what leadership actually is.
Hit the nail on the head there.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
I think "leadership" is probably an overuses and
mis-intepreted term. It’s so nebulous that to apply it to anyone is courting disaster. I don’t like the “francoeur is a leader” narrative which is different, I believe than “francoeur is a good clubhouse guy” which is more accurate.
by brokenbatsingle on Jun 9, 2011 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Most importantly, these unknown and immeasurable intangibles are described by the mainstream, traditionalist sports press as being extremely important. And this is done either completely without evidence or with really horrible attempts at evidence like “and then his team went out and scored 11 runs.”
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jun 13, 2011 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
From the Saturday game vs Angels recap:
Angels manager Mike Scioscia didn’t mince words during his closed-door meeting with his top three run producers: Torii Hunter, Bobby Abreu and Vernon Wells. The offense wasn’t getting the job done, and they were being held accountable.
The rest of the Los Angeles hitters must have been listening outside the door of Scioscia’s office during the expletive-laced session, because the team responded with a big night at the plate.
7 runs on Saturday…no mention in Sunday’s recap of how the team got blanked by Vin “No Strikeouts” Mazzaro.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 13, 2011 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions
BTW, I crossed my fingers and made a wish on a falling star that the Royals would shutout the Angels on Sunday. And then the Royals went out and won 9-0. Therefore crossing fingers and wishing on falling stars works.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jun 13, 2011 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
If you could throw a rock and hit 6 hard workers with one throw
You’d be better than half of our pitching staff
batter nine you sucky
by marbotty on Jun 9, 2011 2:29 PM EDT reply actions 3 recs
don't worry, once we clear out the Baird guys it'll be 1996 Atlanta all over again
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 9, 2011 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I dunno
I think he just looked around the club house and thought: what am I going to write about today? Everything’s going so poorly, but I can’t say anything negative about the players. Hey there’s Frenchy.
It’s either laziness or timidity on the part of the reporters. We deserve better than that and we get it here. That’s why I don’t read schlock like Lee Judge or Kaegel any more.
2011 Royals Review NCAA Bracket Challenge Winner, by process of attrition
It's really funny you should mention this.
I actually had a really long discussion with Lee last night about writing negative things about players, proximity to the clubhouse and how that changes things.
We were discussing the benefits/downsides to clubhouse access and blogs/print…etc.
In Lee’s case, his writing isn’t about being negative in general and would impede him to doing what he does best. He is willing to and will go negative if he feels it is important. I don’t want to speak for him and I’ve disagreed or disliked plenty of thing’s he’s written. But I don’t think his writing would benefit from being negative. Which is why i’m glad that both sides exist to be honest.
by brokenbatsingle on Jun 9, 2011 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Look, Lee Judge's writing is a joke.
It is not very thoughtful or creative, and he is
typically either defending some completely
ridiculous point or defending himself against
people like Will who point out how silly he is.
And that’s all he is, a goofball – the pitching
machine abuse is exhibit A1a. We’d all be
better off to ignore him unless we have an
urge to get ticked off or something.
If the Royals were winning, we could try to give
some credit to Frenchy’s leadership – but how
can anyone go around lauding his “method”
when the team in sinking back into the cellar?
by kgustaf on Jun 9, 2011 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
I can also assure you there is a lot of timidity in the clubhouse by the media
I’m no stranger to that myself. It’s a very intimidating atmosphere and it’s designed to be that way. It’s difficult to try and straddle the line between digging in and asking the tough questions and trying to establish a repport with a player.
You have to take future considerations into your head before you do things. Is this angle/story more important to me than what I could glean from this player in the future? It’s a difficult question and conservatism usually wins out for better or worse.
by brokenbatsingle on Jun 9, 2011 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Power differential
jock v. normal guy
by BlueEyes_Austin on Jun 9, 2011 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Endless Francoeur talk
He’s a mediocre player who deserves his starting role until somebody better comes along. He’s a very friendly and outgoing guy, so a lot of fans and media types like him. This leads to him getting more media coverage than his performance warrants.
We know that Francoeur gets a lot of meaningless fluff pieces. We also know that we don’t have to read them. Let’s move on.
by kcdc1 on Jun 9, 2011 2:56 PM EDT reply actions 4 recs
i feel like the francouer story is eerily similar to Kendall's
except Kendall is now old and no one even pretends he’s good anymore, though that doesn’t stop the “feel good” stories that keep him employed.
Todd Haley's kids know more swear words than I do.
by kcisbetterthanstlateverything on Jun 9, 2011 2:58 PM EDT reply actions
I suppose I agree with this
But honestly, I find the sabermetric backlash against Frenchy almost as mystifying as the MSM love over him. He’s a meh player not really worth this much anguish over. Does he get extra love from writers because he’s a great interview and nice? Sure. But so long as the team doesn’t actually care about that stuff – and its clear from DM’s recent interview he doesn’t, then who cares? He’s a decent enough stop gap that probably isn’t hurting anyone’s long-term development.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jun 9, 2011 3:13 PM EDT reply actions 5 recs
We'll stop when they'll stop
There was just a story in Baseball Weekly about Francoeurs greatness as well.
by Freneau on Jun 9, 2011 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Makes more sense to stop when people stop taking interest
And judging by the number of comments this article has gotten, I suppose I’m in the minority opinion when I say that I don’t care that Frenchy gets more fluff pieces than others of his skill level.
I care when the mainstream media doesn’t understand how good players really are, and attempts to describe mediocre players as good, significantly because of intangibles.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jun 13, 2011 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions
The team doesn't care about Francoeur's intangibles?
I don’t believe that for a second. I think leadership, grit, etc. is an important part of this FO’s process of evaluating any and every player. Of course it isn’t all-important. Moore has brought in or attempted to acquire his share of a-holes. But I think we he talks about the high value of a player’s leadership, etc., he really means it.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jun 13, 2011 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
I like Frenchy, and I suggest you learn to like him also.
IMO, chances are very good that he signs a 3-year deal with KC.
That information is somewhat classified.
maybe instead, you should learn to like...
people ripping on Francouer for the next three years.
If women only slept with nice guys...guys would only be nice. And they don't. And we're not.
by setupunchtag on Jun 13, 2011 8:00 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't think we should learn to like every player that signs a multi-year deal with the Royals
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jun 13, 2011 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions
The Royals always have touted veteran leadership
without any tangible results whatsoever. Whether its Bloomy’s grit or Kendall’s veteran presence or Frenchys leadership- the results are always the same.
Nothing changes in the win/loss column and as far as I can tell, no young players are developing or overachieving because of it. Yeah, maybe these vets can tell the young guys when to leave for the airport, but other than that, there is no benefit whatsoever to this myhical veteran leadership Moore touts.
Daddy
They may have touted it, but they haven't acted on it
The Royals clubhouse prior to this year was a toxic mess and has been for quite a long time. I’m not saying that it creates a bunch of Wins, but they haven’t had a bunch of great clubhouse guys running around in the recent past.
In fact, they kind of went against that whole ideal when they acquired Jose Guillen.
by brokenbatsingle on Jun 9, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
i dont see any problem with the artice
Frenchy is a likable, outgoing, honest and hard working player who is easy to approach and talk to and obviously enjoys the little parts of being on a baseball team. Whether this site likes it or not, that is a viable storyline that is going to get a lot, probably too much publicity considering frenchys early and present success.
If Target had millions of people watching their cashiers and media covering them, then the example u mentioned would get publicity. Just because it doesn’t, doesn’t mean that worker is getting disrespected. It really is worthless to talk about.. you are looking too deep into a cliche and hyperbolic final sentence . I work very hard too and don’t give a shit about that sentence. I actually enjoy hearing the similarities between a millionaire on a dreadful team and your average run of the mill employee, and like to read examples of frenchys antics.
Just because judge is writing about Frenchys attitude and work ethic doesn’t mean he is bashing everyone else’s.
by LimaTime10 on Jun 9, 2011 3:42 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
and i dont see why
Frenchy taking the pictures down is selfish. Do you think betemit wants to look at a picture of moose? How about Francis or Davies with monty? Melky with Cain? I know I wouldn’t want my team pimping pictures of my replacements, guys that haven’t even made the bigs yet…
by LimaTime10 on Jun 9, 2011 3:55 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
The only argument i see here
Is that frenchys leadership gets too much pub. And I agree.
But trying to turn it into something much more? Not buying it.
by LimaTime10 on Jun 9, 2011 3:58 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs
Two comments:
1. For a site and writer who are so invested in statistical analysis, there is absolutely nothing here to indicate that Francouer’s behavior has any relationship whatsoever to the success or failure of the team outside of anecdotes.
2. As a result of 1, this turns out just to be basically someone ranting because everyone else likes someone he doesn’t. So you don’t think naked batting practice is funny, or that his behavior is good. Obviously others disagree with you. There are ways to express that disagreement without being a pompous ass. If you want to debate the validity of humor, there’s a strong argument to be made that Francouer’s behavior isn’t funny just because he’s nude, it’s funny because being nude in that situation is completely absurd. It defies expectation, which, it turns out, is the basis of a rather significant portion of humor (see: Monty Python). Again, you may not think it’s funny, but you can say that without being such an ass.
Bottom line is, the media storyline you’re railing about is “Jeff Francouer is a pretty nice guy who some people think is funny.” Is it really worth getting this worked up about? Aren’t there better things you could expend your energy on?
We all understand what being a Mizzou fan is like. That’s no excuse for being a douche.
by jaeger on Jun 9, 2011 5:22 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
An ass?
I won’t debate the merits of the oft-cited case law of Pot v. Kettle based on your post. Rather, I’ll follow up by atcually being an ass, in place of someone who was called an ass unjustifiably. Ranting lunatic? Perhaps. But if you think this was just him being an “ass”, then you likely have no context of what this site, or that writer, is like. I suggest you go read the “Bibliomancy” series of posts. Then come back to this, tell me if you don’t see the exact same style of writing, and then decide whether maybe you were a little trigger happy on the ass-cusations.
At any rate: did you read the post, or just skim it? Because it seems to me, that the entire motivation for the article is not “I hate that people think Frenchy is funny”, or “I hate it that others like Frenchy”, or “I don’t think Jeff is a pretty nice guy who some people think is funny.” If you actually read the post, you might have noticed the excerpt from Judge saying that you should take Frenchy as an example for how to live your life. It’s right up there… right at the top… where people often put the motivation for their writing. And then he states that this is his motivation for starting this post. And then, much of the ranting actually comes from the motivation - meaning, about how Frenchy is not necessarily a life philosophy. There are some tangents, sure… but I think most are linked back to the “narrative” issue and the “Frenchy as a role model” issue and the potential hypocrisy if this weren’t about some gritty baseball player. Oh, and… did you miss those two italicized paragraphs at the end? They weren’t italicized because it was a secret you weren’t allowed to read - it was more of a literary device. At any rate, that, and other portions, all devoted to “WWFD (What Would Frenchy Do) is not how one should look for inspiration in their lives” suggest that maybe you have made a gross mischaracterization of the post.
Oh, and an interesting first point you made - there is no statistical evidence that Frenchy’s antics have any relationship to success or failure??? Why didn’t somebody think of that before you and post it? Oh wait. The author of this post did, in fact, do that, pointing out the Royals’ performance on May 8, record since then, and how the same story could be spun as “Since Antics, Royals Have Slumped”. Don’t worry, that was just buried somewhere in the post that you didn’t read, but still decided you should kvetch about.
As they say at slash dot: RTFA.
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Jun 9, 2011 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions 12 recs
+1
It seems like several commenters have strayed from the actual point of the post, as you said. I think this paragraph holds the article’s thesis; but if you don’t read it carefully, you apparently get the idea that “Will hates Jeff”:
The legend of Jeff Francoeur’s leadership won’t die. However, that legend appears to hold no connection to any discernible results, either from Francoeur’s teams or his own career. Worse still, the myth of Francoeur’s value as some kind of lesson to fans and readers (nevermind fellow players) is a deeply insulting one that holds us, the readers, in contempt. A myth that assumes we are lazy ne’er-do-wells in need of a kick in the pants to make something of our miserable and pathetic lives. Francoeur the player is harmless and probably even laudable in some completely generic sense. Francoeur the media creation is a burden on our daily discussions of the Royals and Major League baseball generally. However, in a larger sense, Francoeur is just a placeholder, a name that can be auto-filled into hundreds of thousands of sports stories written in the last hundred years.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2011 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions
You succeeded in being an ass
I think it’s awfully hard to read these three paragraphs of the article:
Really, if we truly wanted to rhapsodize about the deep meaning of Francoeur, and turn his life into a short story with an easily identifiable payoff at the end, it would be something like this:
Impress someone when you are young, in this case, high school. Now, a big part of that is based off of how you look, how your body projects going forward. But smile a lot and be nice. Really connect with this older figure. Make impressing him priority number one. OK, great. Now take the next five or six years easy. Coast on what you have been able to do since 19. Hustle as you do it, but fundamentally do not change or expand your skillset. Don’t worry about improving. Actually, feel free to get worse.
At some point, the person that you really impressed as a teenager, will get hired in a new location. He’ll remember how awesome you were. Sure, your career has stalled and even regressed since those early days, but this person still loves believes in you. He’s got a position to fill and well, the job is totally yours if you want it. No questions asked, no pressure, guaranteed. He’ll even pay you well. Just look at you, you still look as good as you did at 19. It’s all there.
as anything other than an attack on Francoeur. If Will doesn’t hate him, we’re just parsing the meaning of the word “hate.”
I like Will. I like his style of writing. I like the creativity he brings to Royals Review and the work he does in creating and sustaining such a great site for Royals fans. I don’t like what he’s doing in this article. He’s minimizing Francoeur’s accomplishments (Frenchy had a far better rookie season than even the great Hos is having and his age-23 season in 2007 has been topped by exactly one Royals hitter since then) for no reason that I can understand except that he doesn’t like Lee Judge. I wouldn’t have put it the same way as jaeger, but I don’t think you need to jump down his throat about it.
by KSinDC on Jun 9, 2011 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
Glad I succeeded in being an ass ---
Now maybe you can compare my ACTUAL ass-ish-ness to Will’s writing, and we can see the difference.
I notice that your post starts off as Will hates Frenchy (or at least is attacking him, and you are defending the person saying that Will hates French) and winds up with he doesn’t like Lee Judge (which, seriously, where on Earth did that come from? Didn’t Will explicitly point out that it’s not Judge, it’s the rhetoric and the narrative that any number of other writers would be lining up to write? I mean, seriously, I’m reading the same post as everyone else, right?)
See there, I did it again… look at me being an ass… then look at Will writing something that is not aggressive and meant to be humorous/insightful. Big difference.
And finally, those paragraphs you quote - mildly slighting Frenchy, with the “coasting”, “not expanding the skillset”, sure. And with the overall point of “you’re not as amazing as some make you out to be.” But actually most of the attach is really on Moore, in my eyes, or just a statement about how different the facts are compared to the repeatedly parroted narrative.
I just… I just don’t get it. The author of this post is not an ass. I am. The author did not write an “I hate Frenchy” or “I hate Judge”-motivated piece. It was “I hate and am tired of this narrative, it has insufficient basis in reality.” It’s all there in black and white. Feel free to cover your eyes, ears, or mouth as necessary.
Ass out.
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Jun 10, 2011 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Honestly, if you read those three paragraphs as only saying “you’re not as amazing as some make you out to be,” then I can see why you reacted to Jaeger’s post the way you did. Suffice it to say that I read them differently.
When I read those paragraphs I see them assuming/arguing the career of Francouer, who has posted the highest single-season WAR of anyone on the Royals roster and has played for four different teams is best explained up by impressing Dayton Moore when he was high schooler and then coasting from there. It’s hard for me to understand how you read those paragraphs as “mildly slighting” him, but if you do so honestly, then all we can do is agree to disagree.
Agreed
To disagree. I mean, I agree, that we can just agree to disagree. And respectfully, at that. I think I actually probably over-reacted to your post… once you had that Lee Judge part in there, I think I pretty much mentally lumped your post together with jaeger’s, but in reality yours was actually mostly reasonable. So, for that I apologize. (Though I stand by my original assessment of jaeger’s post, and I guess you see why now.)
I think we do disagree on how to read those last three paragraphs, and even a bit on the overall Frenchy interpretation (I, too, am originally a Mets fan, to add to the chorus of those above and below). But as I said, I think I can disagree respectfully. In an ass-free way this time. (Hopefully.)
by wentToARoyalsGameBeforeRR on Jun 10, 2011 10:18 PM EDT up reply actions
It would be funny if
it helped us win, or even if it seemed to help us win.
Have we completely forgotten what it feels like to win?
Oh.
"If you don't have an iPhone, well, ... just go fucking kill yourself already."
This is what consumerfrancoeurism has taught us.
by Official Arrowhead Pride Parade on Jun 9, 2011 5:50 PM EDT reply actions
As a Mets fan who roots for the Royals in the AL
I just want to say how sorry I am you have to endure this.
The 2011 New York Mets: Limit the Damage
Taboo topic...
Maybe I’m crazy, and certainly I don’t want to offend everybody who goes to church, but I have to ask you to wonder what role Frenchy’s evangelical Christianity plays in his ability to endear himself to the Royals management and certain journalists. Some people I’ve known during my time in the Midwest will ask you if you are a Christian within the first five minutes. And if you are a member of the club, you can get away with a lot of failure in this life because nothing is as important as giving it up to the Savior.
by kgustaf on Jun 9, 2011 7:08 PM EDT reply actions 4 recs
we're not supposed to talk about that, but, um, yeah
Hillman’s faith clearly had a lot to do with the relationship he and Moore built. I’d be willing to bet a subconscious (or maybe even conscious) emphasis is placed on religion in the Royals front office.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got to purchase some tickets for Christian Family night. Don’t have a family, per se, but what an atmosphere!
What the NFL labor dispute needs is a modern-day Robin Hood
Is Frenchy a fundamentalist?
I hadn’t heard that he was. Does he go around pushing Jesus like Sweeney did?
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
http://www.christianindex.org/3068.article.print
I had given eighty percent of my life to Christ, but I had kept back a part of it for myself. That night I decided to give one hundred percent of my life to Him. Jacob wrestled with the Lord, and that walk in the rain was my wrestling match with God. He won that contest and I surrendered the rest of my life to Him.
Francoeur has Joshua 1:9 inscribed on his batting gloves. The Christian Index asked him if the glove manufacturer placed the scripture verse on the batting glove.
"I told Under Armour, the provider of the athletic apparel, that if they wouldn’t put the verse on the glove I would not sign a contract with them," He explained. "Joshua 1:9 states: ‘Do not be terrified; do not be discouraged, for the Lord your God will be with you wherever you go.’"
What the NFL labor dispute needs is a modern-day Robin Hood
Yep, he sure is a hardcore Jesushead who pushes it on others
Thanks for the info. I dig Jesus’ message, myself, but I pass on the supernatural stuff, and I don’t approve of folks who try to convince others of their religious beliefs, since I don’t go around telling everyone he ought to be an agnostic like me. The folks I respect are those who behave according to their Christian (or Jewish, or whatever) beliefs and keep more or less quiet about it.
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
Interestingly, I thought that the FA signing of Jose Guillen sort of made this topic
go away for awhile.
"That's fine wood from... somewhere."
by KeepItCopacetic on Jun 13, 2011 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions
This article made my day.
I haven’t read any sports related material this good in a long time.
Thanks.
by wt on Jun 9, 2011 7:43 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
From the recap of today's 3-2 win over Toronto, jsut thought I'd share
the recap writer’s take on Francoeur’s 2-RBI texas-leaguer to right:
Melky Cabrera then reached on a fielder’s choice and Francoeur rifled a two-run single into right
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 9, 2011 8:10 PM EDT reply actions
Will.........u are obsessed!!
U read way to much into that comment………just be secure w/ who u are….u seem to be projecting
"As a Karate expert, I will not talk about any of you." Jimmy McMillan
by PREGNANT ROLLERSKATE on Jun 9, 2011 10:04 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I cant believe youre looking so deep into that one sentence.
I haven’t heard anyone else say that readers and fans should approach life like Frenchy, so where did this big myth start (besides an exaggerated powerful closing line ) and why is it worth so much energy?
He works hard, his teammates love him, he is great to the media and everyone else, he does things to break the maddening routine of a 162 game season… Who cares if writers praise him for it?
Thru his career, Frenchy has built a reputation as a high character leader, in the same way Milton Bradley has built one as a cancer, zambrano a hot head, bloomquist an old fashioned ball player etc… These stereotypes are everywhere, I can’t believe how much this one gets under your skin. We always heard about sweeney being the nicest guy in baseball, his teams didn’t win either, did I miss the article like this about him?
by LimaTime10 on Jun 9, 2011 10:58 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs
For the record, this high character leader got pissy last year after the Mets were gonna platoon because he sucked
So he demanded a trade. Real team player
I think what gets people about Francoeur is that most of the positive things about him are unsubstantiated and his good relationship with the media gets him a pass for his horrible playing on the field.
Yeah, it's funny how everyone conveniently forgets about this
“He’s a great guy… as long as he gets to play as much as he wants no matter how horribly he’s playing!”
That’s really the essence of a great locker room guy, right there.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 11, 2011 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
How Jealous Are You??
Are you seriously that jealous to write a whole blog about Lee Judge? Let him be?! This is not the first time I have seen him mentioned. His behind the scence looks at things that we don’t see are very interesting and I like hearing stories of him and being a goofy fun guy. When someone makes an error Lee will talk to him and ask him what he saw and Frenchy will say I just messed up it was a dumb play. Or when Brian Pena didnt block the plate he asked him about it and Pena told him his view. Sorry you can’t be on the the field to tell us these stories like Lee is…
“How can you say live life like Frenchy” … He is always with a smile on his face, he seems like he is nice and caring to all his teammates, does goofy things when they are in a funk to pick them up, he is quick to admit he makes mistakes and what he can do to fix it. That is a terrible way to live life… being goofy, having fun, smiling, being nice to fans and co-workers, and admitting when you make a mistake and how to fix it… that is horrendous. Give it a break already. Go talk about the Red Sox or Yankees if all your going to do is hate on the Royals and their writers because the Royals are struggling. I would read Lee’s blog anyday over the hatred you put about the entire world it seems.
Learn to have fun and find the good things in people and not hate on everyone and look at all the faults in everyone. Live life with a smile … like Frenchy :)
2012... the year the Royals finish above .500
by Somewhere Over Dwayne Bowe on Jun 10, 2011 4:04 AM EDT reply actions
joined to comment on this. great piece overall though.
right, except frenchy does not admit his mistakes and does nothing to fix them. he has been making the same hitting mistakes and taking the same terrible approach to plate discipline across three teams.
he might be a nice guy with a smile on his face, as you say, unless he gets benched. with atlanta, frenchy refused to accept an assignment to the minors to work on his approach to hitting and was vocal about what he perceived to be a lack of respect by the organization.
with the mets, as evan pointed out earlier, frenchy complained to the media over his lack of playing time and demanded a trade in the papers.
these are not the actions of a good teammate and leader.
by cntrlalt on Jun 10, 2011 7:17 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
I can't comment on this...
I am unsure about that… I am speaking about what I know in Kansas City. And I was talking when reporters ask him about mistakes he says usually “I just messed up it was stupid.” Also, at the plate he admitted another mistake that he is getting pull happy and needs to lay off inside pitches and look for something over the plate. However, pitchers know this too and are going to throw two seamers that look over the plate to break to the inside so they look over the plate at first to get him to swing. Then a reporter asked about the inside pitches and he joked and said its a work in progress and laughed cuz the reporter called him out on it…
2012... the year the Royals finish above .500
by Somewhere Over Dwayne Bowe on Jun 10, 2011 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Here's a little background for you, then.
From August 10, 2010 in NJ.com
Benched to make room for a 21-year-old rookie, marginalized as a platoon player, Mets outfielder Jeff Francoeur has told the club through his representatives that he is interested in being traded to a team that would play him more, both sides confirmed yesterday.
Yeah, what a great guy/teammate.
The 2011 New York Mets: Limit the Damage
by CTRefJay on Jun 10, 2011 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
That doesn't make him a bad guy
It’s not like the Mets were in a pennant race or anything. Frenchy decided he didn’t like his job, and instead of quitting and looking for one with another company as we would, the rules of baseball contracts forced him to ask his current employer to transfer him to another one. I don’t see that as being pissy.
It does mean that Frenchy is not playing baseball for altruistic reasons, he’s doing it for money and fame. He seems to be a nicer guy than most of the others who do what he does, but he’s no different ethically than any other citizen who’s basically honest and law-abiding. Should he be? Of course not.
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
And in fairness to Frenchy
Didn’t he accept a role position with the Rangers?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Being traded for Joaquin Arias tends to (briefly) humble a guy
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jun 13, 2011 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
all of this is true
however, it ignores the fact that frenchie was also vocal about his displeasure to the atlanta front office when asked to take a demotion.
as another poster pointed out, there’s nothing inherently wrong with refusing assignment either…its a player’s right.
the problem lies in that the media portrays frenchie as a team first, great clubhouse leader, when his past suggests that he’s just like any other player with an inflated sense of self-worth.
that discrepancy between the reality and the media’s expectations is what gets people annoyed.
Who the fuck is Brian Pena?
SBN's most random and mysterious lurker
by Lum on Jun 10, 2011 11:19 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
SODB gives a good summary
of the other side, with a special bonus of ad hominem “jealousy” attack thrown in.
Will does not attack Judge personally.
Beautiful essay, Will.
Thank you.
If women only slept with nice guys...guys would only be nice. And they don't. And we're not.
i joined this site just to mention how awesome this peice is
i couldn’t have said it better. francouer has been the same mediocre player since his great rookie year. as a met fan i heartly rec this
"it's not easy being green"-kermit the frog
"we the mets are an improved ball club, now we lose in extra innings"-casy stengal
i cant spell a nosebleed
he's gone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!OLIE PEREZ IS GONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
haha!
That makes three Mets fans who came over here to comment just because it’s about Failcoeur. I wish his defenders who are KC fans would understand that it takes a lot to generate this much vitriol from an entire fanbase.
The 2011 New York Mets: Limit the Damage
what exactly is this vitriol all about?
who precisely is defending Frenchy’s ability? most people think he’s a not-great ballplayer. he’s playing at 1.5 WAR right now, with the potential for 3 WAR for the entire season, but i think most people agree that this is pretty much the best you could hope for. everyone knew he had some upside, given his early history, but most people expected him to be average or probably worse. the fact that he’s been OK this year (well, at least earlier this year) is a pleasant surprise to pretty much everyone.
but i just don’t understand what the “vitriol” is about…he apparently asked to be traded to a team where he could play more—he didn’t exactly go on strike or kill people, right? is he just annoying because he’s so nice, and not good enough to justify such niceness? do we think that inside his smiling head there is a plan for world domination? that he could be 20x better if he’d just try? are we mad at management because they keep falling for his charms? does he keep claiming that he’s amazing, or that he’s nationwide?
will’s piece really isn’t about Frenchy generating vitriol (although, as i note below, the story does dip into the implausible idea that he isn’t trying as hard as he should be), but rather about him generating bad or meaningless narratives (and, maybe, those narratives generating vitriol?). this all seems a bit meta. in fact, if there’s something which is played out, it might be the act of being annoyed by media love for franceour.
it’s baseball. it has a history. people write stories about it and look for meaning in it. people ascribe purpose to it, or find purpose in it. so what if baseball can’t support that purpose or meaning.
seriously: newsflash: very little we do can support the meaning we try to find in it, in any objective sense. but we keep trying. when a month goes by without an article about smiling struggling Frenchy, we’ll know that baseball’s cultural capital has diminished sadly. i mean, there was just an article in the nytimes about the inventor of the hashtag #. journalists write about little things all the time, because when you add the little things up you get life. i don’t get the vitriol. i mean, do you all want tinkerbell to die?
by Paris_of_the_Plains on Jun 13, 2011 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Several: synonyms: for: vitriol:
from thesaurus.com
bitterness, acrimoniousness, contempt, disdain, hatefulness, hostility, malevolence, maliciousness, nastiness, sarcasm, venom, virulence, sulfuric acid
Late to the game here, but
Really awesome piece, Will. Rec’d, facebook’d.
The Chiefs’ version of Franceour is Thomas Jones, btw.
What the NFL labor dispute needs is a modern-day Robin Hood
funny you mention that
as a jet fan i always thought he was overrated.
"it's not easy being green"-kermit the frog
"we the mets are an improved ball club, now we lose in extra innings"-casy stengal
i cant spell a nosebleed
he's gone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!OLIE PEREZ IS GONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I like your point will
This is not leadership.
However, when you are in a daily grind, (which believe it or not, a long baseball season can become) it is good to have a guy that can make you laugh. I spent many years dealing on a dice table in a casino. My favorite guy to work with was not one of the best dealers. He was a guy that could make me laugh on a day that the customers were being confrontational, or one where we were working hard and not making any money. I needed that, and sometimes teams do as well.
I read Lee Judge every day, but I take it with a grain of salt, and separate the wheat from the chaff. He doesn’t understand the sabermetric principles I enjoy, and he spends a lot of time defending indefensible moves by the manager and organization. He is also very defensive of the players. I somewhat understand this, as it gets him his insider status, allowing him access to quotes and stories that other sources don’t have. These guys have become his friends, and that combined with a sense of hero worship lends itself to a loss of perspective.
On the good side however, he really sees some of the nuances of the game I played for 14 years, the little things that most fans miss. I am speaking of things that happen on the field that 99%+ fans are completely unaware. There are educational nuggets among the opinions that are even interesting to someone with playing experience, but to a casual fan can open up a whole new perspective on little things that happen on nearly every play. His relationships with the various coaches allow them a medium to explain some other things that people don’t understand as well. I glean the information, judge the opinions myself, and balance it with other sites (like this one) that have different strengths, as well as different weaknesses.
"Trying is the first step to sucking" -Jimmy Chance
If he'd stick with the stuff you talk about in his last paragraph, I'd enjoy it a lot more.
Instead we get round about excuses about dumb plays or old school rationalizations about how a player who failed to pull the ball failed to get a runner to 3rd and then two batters later the average fly ball would have scored a run. Mix in the ridiculous point system and it adds up to a lot of mess and little interesting stuff, for me at least.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Rock Chalk Talk
by Warden11 on Jun 11, 2011 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is a well-put rebuttal.
But if Judge’s hero worship means we have to watch this team lose for another decade, then he can shove it.
the idea that Frenchy can just learn a new skillset is...
…a bit odd. MLB is hard. i’m sure there are players who refuse to take hitting advice, or learn a new skill, or just coast. i think they’re pretty rare. the money to be made by improvement, along with the improved self-image as a winner and contributor and the general human desire to succeed, is too great.
Frenchy is probably performing at 99% of his ability. it’s not his fault that he’s not that great. i actually like him a lot, that he keeps up the charm even as he works really hard at being a baseball player who isn’t that good.
that actually is something we can learn from life. we are all a bit mediocre—at least, almost everyone we know is. to continue in mediocrity, while working really really hard, and keeping up spirits, is a good thing. it’s sort of existentialist: Frenchy is baseball’s Sartre: Frenchy knows that eventually we’re all dead, and decides that he can control how hard he works and the attitude he takes to it, and thus create who he is, even if he probably knows he’ll never have another great season. he’s creating himself as a baseball player.
he could retire like Meche, refusing to take money. the real fault here is on our management. but i think people could do a lot worse than take Frenchy as a good role model.
as for judge, he is creating a narrative. but that’s also not a bad thing. most narratives aren’t there until we find them. we inject meaning into things, because that’s what we do, and if we stopped, we’d just plain stop. if we are a losing team, there are good reasons to plug a player who is a loser (like most of the rest of the royals) but who is optimistic. what else can you do?
you could say there’s just too much sportswriting, that these stories are played out. but all long-term relationships get played out. do you say that there’s too much marriage here, that the day-in day-out is played out? no: you put a good spin on every day, trying to find stuff to love so that the wait between magical things happening doesn’t seem too painful, and maybe you find a bit of magic in the everyday. sometimes you have to say “i love you” at 7:45pm on a tuesday even if the words have lost any sense of meaning, because if you say it, maybe it’ll be true again in the way it used to be, and even if it isn’t there’s a sort of beauty in plugging away at a commitment.
i would rather have frenchy hit 300/400/500, no doubt. given who he is by nature, he just probably can’t, and it’s hard to hold it against him. given the way the team is constructed, it’s good that he’s an optimist. given the lack of money the royals have, frenchy is not a bad guy to have for a lot of reasons. if we track all of our problems to their ultimate conclusion, we just get bigger and bigger questions. sometimes it’s nice just to read an article about a hard worker who tried a few funny stunts to try to cheer people up, and focus them, in a tough situation. that’s pretty similar to real life.
by Paris_of_the_Plains on Jun 13, 2011 8:22 AM EDT reply actions 3 recs
OK, good points
Agreed that Meche (who of course was already more than set for life, with literally dozens of millions in the bank) showed unusual decency for an employee when he declined to take a lot of his employer’s money that he could have had legally.
"They may make cool judgements after the fact
But the name of the game is be hit and hit back" --Warren Zevon
This is nicely thought-out and written
(except for the capitalization problem, which makes it very hard to actually read)
but as a fan who hasn’t given up on winning, I will continue to demand that our team puts the best players on the field, and my worry is that when Freedomy collapses (and I hope he doesn’t), Yost doesn’t resign him for 3 years just because he likes getting naked and can’t stop smiling.
thanks--wasnt really supposed to be a rebuttal of will.
there are some interesting comparisons between will and frenchy. (this is partly in response to your comment well above and well below.)
they both got early credentials (getting a phd is not easy, although phdoctors may self-bash a fair bit: it takes a lot of hours, pushing through a lot of desire to quit, and you have to have at the very least an unusually thoughtful sort of mind to do it, and be quite smart to do it at all well). they are both now doing things that most of us probably couldn’t do: hit a 95mph fastball at least occasionally out of the park, or run an entire site with gems scattered throughout. (“[T]he Royals are less young than they are not old, if you catch my drift.”) i write some funny things occasionally, but i couldnt do it as well or as often as RR does, and i doubt many people could. maybe will thinks this is a hobby blog, but i think its a bit bigger. finally, we hope that one day they both will make it big: frenchy as an all-star, and RR maybe will write the next “the natural” about hosmer and, when eric starts dating her, madonna as nimueh. but for the time being theyre just doing really cool things in a big field most of us couldnt succeed at.
i do think frenchy is a dangerous player to sign for large bucks—he did his typical good start thing, and is now winding back the WAR, like the odometer on cameron’s dad’s ferrari. i dont think that frenchy is lacking focus on improving himself, or i doubt it: mlb is just hard. and i dont think he’s selling himself as a big fish. thats management’s take, not his. unless we expect him to not just pull a meche (returning money) but actually refuse future mediumishly large contracts, i think he deserves in a subjective sense whatever the market will bear (keeping in mind that some market participants are idiots). and i dont care about his antics: to my mind, ceteris paribus, theyre a good thing.
as for the caps: i just got a british keyboard because my american mac air died, and the weird placement of the left shift and return keys are killing me. i plan on training myself, but not yet.:)
by Paris_of_the_Plains on Jun 14, 2011 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions
after rereading this,
i think the most odd thing is the conclusion. in what was meant to be an uplifting article about playing hard and keeping a good attitude, will’s takeaway interpretation is that if we can’t be winners (or schmooze the system or something), we should go away and die.
i mentioned that we all struggle to find meaning in things, and that the struggle is a huge part of it. this blogpost is proof of something Stanley Fish might say, that you can start at point A and interpret it in any direction. that a Frenchy article could be interpreted as a criticism of anyone, rather than an exhortation to do your best even if you basically suck, is pretty odd.
the oddity is that Will has the makings of a Frenchy. the english phd world is pretty small, and pretty silly, a lot like baseball. a lot like a lot of things, actually. Will did a phd, which indicates that he was a good rookie, and now he’s writing really incredibly well written blog posts, i would say some of the most interesting in sports writing. i mean, whether you like bibliomancy or not, it’s like batting the pitcher 8th. no matter what he does, Will is just like the rest of us, in that he probably isn’t going to hit 300/400/500, or write the Great American Novel, or refound all criticism, or whatever, even though we all have dreams like that when we start out. but he has a chance to be proud of his credentials, and proud of his current work, and bully about the future. my doctoral thesis wasn’t spectacular, and i’m no longer in my original field, but i’m still pretty proud to be a doctor, and it’s something no one can ever take away from me (unless my frauds are discovered!), and it makes me feel pretty cool at pretty random times. Frenchy is one of those guys who will always be a talented small fish in the elite big pond, because he believes in himself, and toughs it out. I think, oddly, that’s where Will is. the difference is Frenchy is willing to get naked for batting practice.
how about it, Will? how about a naked blog post? (note that i didn’t say naked picture!)
by Paris_of_the_Plains on Jun 13, 2011 10:11 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs
I think I just reacted negatively to Judge's big payoff of "work hard"
(if that was even the lesson of Frenchy) because I think that it implies that many people are lazy. I just have problems with that.
I definitely don’t think people who arent deemed winners should go away and die, i was being sarcastic on that.
Definitely a good rebuttal to Will
(can’t you please reach over to the key more often?).
There is (almost definitely) a big difference between Will and Freedomy. Freedomheart did not have to toil in obscurity for a small reward during his early/mid twenties. He supposedly has great ability, he was given recognition in the form of fame and fortune for this ability when he was 18, and he has greatly underperformed. He’s not being sold as a “talented small fish,” just as Will has (probably) never been sold as the next Salinger. Francoeur has a lot to prove in order to earn his big money using his first-round talent, while Will is simply writing a hobby blog.
Many people wish that Freedomheart would quietly take the time to improve himself and lead by example rather than be a big goofball. Unless we really start winning, then he can run around naked with his hair on fire and a donkey tail all day long, and I’ll laugh.
I refuse to read one word of "Judging the Royals",
and, in my opinion, the Star loses a lot of credibility for letting a writer subscribe to such a stupid point system in this age of enlightened statistics.
Alas, I once read that the newspaper is geared towards a person with a 6th grade education, in order to be as inclusive as possible. One can seek no better validation of that assertion than Judge’s drivel.
"We're gonna win with pitching and defense" General Manager Dayton Moore, circa winter 2009
"Where did all these Indians come from?" General George Armstrong Custer, circa summer 1876
After Mellinger's column on Butler, a writer noted that Judge's point system has Billy last
Judge said that’s one of the virtues of the system — it shows how much Billy’s lack of defense hurts the team.
Whatever useful analysis he provides can be explained by the “stopped clock is right twice a day” or “blind mouse finds a nut” or other similar aphorism. The man does not understand baseball.





















