Talk:Grady Little

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

A few things in this article are unclear. (1) It metions Jimy Williams departure as if he was the manager who preceeded Illt,e. He was not--it was Joe Kerrigan. (2) The article implies that ownership of the Sox decided to keep Grady on, despite their philospohical differences. However, it John Henry et all that hired Grady Little--he was their choice. ----------------MikeC

I have fixed the biased article. Please remove the POV check now.

Article is still biased; Little's Name was not even mentioned. Jendeyoung 01:23, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I believe you are reading the wrong page. I did a search on the article, and Little's name appeared at least seven times. I modified this page a few months ago to add extra information to the article. I believe the only reason Grady Little appears in an encyclopedia is his controversial coaching record with the Red Sox. I believe the article has to describe his often-questioned yet exciting tenure. How his personality led the Red Sox to the game 7 of the 2003 ALCS, and how this same personality ultimately led to the game 7 loss.--Jackbean 14:48, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Much of the acerbic commentary about Little has been buffered with a dose of factual perspective.

And the result is a biased article. Not that it's even biased in one direction or another but it reads like a debate. One side says Grady Little is good the other says he's bad. The reader doesn't need this. For example:

"Little managed by instinct, some say he ignored statistics and numbers, others note his long history in organized baseball and understanding of what was needed to win in actual game situations, as opposed to with computer models run by people who have never played the game." Who cares? Let's just can this whole sentence. Or maybe let's agree on something simple like "Little was an old school type manager."

We also don't need all the before and after scenarios It doesn't matter much who they added or subtracted or how many games they won with Terry Francona. Let's just report the facts. --Maxjoe 23:55, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the analysis section because it's redundant and biased. The reader already knows from the other sections that there is controversy regarding Little's managing so we don't need to rehash it. If there is to be an analysis section it should be brief and informative NOT an open debate. The debate should happen, but on some other web site. --Maxjoe 00:10, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can any article be completely devoid of perspective? For example, calling the Great Wall of China one of the six wonders of the World is a perspective, because the Six Wonders itself is a perspective. However, this perspective can be backed up by facts, and it is a useful tidbit to know. I think providing analyses supplemented with facts can make an article more informative. An article would have served its puropse if it is well covered and not biased. The key is that the arguments need to be relavent and the "coverage" unbiased. Obviously everything needs to be backed by facts.--Jackbean 01:28, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance that the article is unbiased enough to remove the tag now, Admins? Even though I had to strike out entire sections, I think I fixed enough to make it neutral; it still mentions what he's famous for, but eliminates (or at least adds the phrase "Some people" in places) the charged feelings inherent in the article. -- Coyote42 19:57, 13 March 2006

Chemistry[edit]

Wild speculation abound! I had to edit the hell out of this section as there is far too much credit given to Little for the improvement of the Red Sox. At the very least, "chemistry" is an unquanitifiable, largely meaningless concept in baseball that old baseball men like to credit for _everything_ that goes right or wrong with a team. It just so happens that Derek Lowe went from closer to 21-game winner in 2002, the first year of their 90+ win streak, and that David Ortiz was acquired in 2003 and went from modest hitter to one of the game's top sluggers that year. Little also had no effect on Manny Ramirez, who continued to sit out games and ask for trades throughout Little's tenure. It is ironic that Theo Epstein, who finally displayed the value of the Moneyball philosophy in a large market, is given little-to-no credit for the Sox' success in favor of praising Little for fostering chemistry in the clubhouse, a concept that Moneyball followers completely dismiss.

Regardless of which school of thought you're in -- the one based on data or the one based on hunches -- one cannot unequivocally credit Little's "chemistry building" for turning around a team in a supposedly unbiased article.

Latest Sweeping Edits[edit]

As much as I don't enjoy sweeping deletions, I think I have to agree with the last one. By eliminating both sections that have had controversy and speculation, it gets down to the bare facts: That Grady is honestly a manager in only his third year of MLB experience, that aside from the Red Sox mess hasn't created enough of a image that not much can be said yet. Coyote42 01:04, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV Tag[edit]

I think at this point the Boston section has been reduced to the bare facts and the NPOV tag is no longer warranted.

XINOPH | TALK 17:54, 20 February 2006 (UTC) 14:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contract Correction[edit]

I made a small correction: Little was not technically fired; his contract with Boston expired after the 2003 season and he was not tendered another one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.111.96.73 (talk) 19:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Playing Career[edit]

"After spending the 1969 season in the Marine reserves, Grady played in 167 as a catcher over five minor-league in the Braves and Yankees organizations. He posted a career .207 batting average with two homers and 37 RBI. He retired from playing in 1973."

There are clearly some words missing in the first sentence. He played in 167 games? Over five what? Five teams? Five seasons? I'd fix it myself but I am not sure what was left out. Vorenus 15:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Grady Little. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:21, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Grady Little. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:14, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Red Sox 2003 Win Loss Record[edit]

The Red Sox had a record of 95-67 in 2003. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.38.189.88 (talk) 01:42, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Grady_Little&oldid=1207647539"