This is the line I’m referring to above my original post – This post was edited to remove a factual mistake regarding a managerial vote that was never taken.

Anyhow, this has spiraled far further than it should have and I apologize for my part in that as from your comments I think I misconstrued something that was not intended in such a way.

I’ll say this, the fact that you are this attentive to a message board incident on the site is a great thing and I appreciate the back and forth of hashing this out, we’re obviously passionate baseball guys and that’s enough for me.

Yours in baseball,

Dan

What I did not at all appreciate is the wording that the poll I referred to (that absolutely did take place)’never took place’.

That is flat-out calling me a liar — if the editing of my post had said ‘removed as information is not cited’ I would have had no problem with it.

The arrogance I refer to is not anything to do with the information or anyone’s opinion of the information and subject matter but phrasing that a poll you haven’t heard of ‘never took place’.

To say something did not happen simply because you didn’t know of it is the exact definition of arrogance (and just to be clear I’ve cited this below)

ar⋅ro⋅gance
  /ˈærəgəns/[ar-uh-guhns]
–noun
offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride.

If you go back to the days when Joe Torre managed the Mets you would fiind him ranked very low, if not at the bottom, but over time people adapt and learn. Time frames are of value in making such assertions because they provide a better framework for understanding the circumstances.

Do you consider Wyoming to be the fifth best football team in the country? Well, in a poll of college coaches Wyoming was ranked No. 5.
It was in 1968, but the Cowboys were ranked fifth. Are they still at that level? No. Things change over time. To cite a poll from 2003 as evidence of an inefficiency is not valid, particularly when you post it without any time reference, making it possible for readers to assume it is a recent poll.

I welcome opinions that are not personal attacks. And I welcome information that is substantiated. If you consider that arrogance than that is what it is. But bottom line is this is designed to be an exchange in which we can learn from each other, and not create false impressions by using data that does not have verification or is not timely.

Unfortunately, due to internet searches not being very good pre-2004, on a quick search, I cannot pull up the poll I was referring to online. Nevertheless, I am 100% positive that a 2003 or ‘04 poll of MANAGERS listed Hurdle 30th out of 30, which would be last if my math isn’t need of being edited in bold letters. Outside of the Rocky Mountain News, Hurdle consistently came in in the bottom of all forms of managerial polls ranging from players to press and his peers.

Your comment that it was pre-World Series is exactly my point, Clint was regarded as a poor manager across the league BEFORE the World Series run and just because a few hunches paid off for a magical spell of 2007, it did not make him any better of a manager. I can point to as many specific instances as it takes to hammer home this point of Clint making poor in-game decisions year after year. Clint has one of the worst career winning percentages of any manager who last as long as he did in the league and his second-highest win total was a whopping 76. This team underachieved for the vast majority of the time here and that is not debatable or editable in bold letters.

Beyond that, I find it incredibly arrogant that you would essentially call me a liar and delete my post because you never saw or don’t recall the poll that I was referring to.

Thanks,

Dan

In this one Clint was only voted fourth worst in baseball