Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Sneaky Sweet Sassy Mollassey Lou Piniella

My favorite baseball blog FireJoeMorgan.com does a little thing known in the blog world as "fisking" where they criticize an article word-for-word by copying quotes and then highlighting the errors. If they find a good (/bad) enough article, then there will be dozens of excerpts to point out errors. I find it hysterical. It's very witty and exposes the incompetence in sports journalism.

The website started out as a bunch of college buddies emailed each other back and forth some quotes from Joe Morgan that were downright wrong or completely off-base. The biggest flaw in his journalism is his ignorance. He claims to be a baseball analyst but half the time he says things like "I don't know watch enough of X Player's games to have a good idea if he's a good player or not but I do know that second base is a tough position to play-- I should know because I'm a Hall of Famer."

So anyway, their favorite people to criticize are ESPN's own Joe Morgan (obviously), John Kruk, Steve Phillips and wouldn't you know it, several New York sports journalists (Michael Kay, Mike Celizic, and the uber-bad Wallace Matthews). I started reading the site last summer and I visit it almost everyday.

Here's an article I found today at work on Forbes.com that I needed to fisk. It was incredibly irrelevant and just plain dumb. Click on the link if you feel your head needs some scratching. Again, this article was on Forbes.com front page. The words in bold are direct quotes from the article you can find at the link below.

Be Like Lou Piniella. Buy Growth Stocks
by Ken Zarfalas, financial analyst and portfolio manager for Oberweis Asset Management.


The phrases in this title are as ambiguous and disconnected as: "Be Like Lou Piniella. Sing your children lullabies."Apparently, Lou Piniella buys growth stocks. You should too. Why? Let's find out!

Sneaky. That's how I would describe the latest version of Chicago's beloved Cubs and their new manager, Lou Piniella.

Bad start. Sneaky? That would probably fall at like #138 on my list of "Words to Describe the 2007 Chicago Cubs" right after "blueish". Go on.

The Cubbies were revamped and retooled for the 2007 season after spending a fistful of dollars over the winter to sign Alfonso Soriano and a slew of other free agents.

Yup. They spent a lot. GM Jim Hendry signed some big free agents for big bucks like starter Ted Lilly and former 40-40 2b/CF/LF Alfonso Soriano, extended the contract of their 3b Aramis Ramirez, and signed OF Jacque Jones. This will be VERY important later, so let me be clear: The GM is responsible for assembling the team and coaching staff. That means they sign players, waive players, trade players, demote players, and promote players when they feel it is necessary to have the best roster for the manager to put fill out the lineup card with.

And they hired "Sweet Lou" Piniella to run the team. It didn't take long for Cubs fans (and Cubs players) to learn that Lou is not particularly "sweet" and that he doesn't care to be.

Irrelevant to growth stocks. I am positive that the Cubs and their fanbase were well aware that he's "not particularly 'sweet' and he doesn't care to be." This is the most infamous manager in baseball. We are 3 paragraphs in and no one has a clue how anything relates to buying growth stocks. I mean this is the guy who ran himself out of Tampa Bay and Seattle for being either A) Being a bad manager B) Being an asshole C) A and B. Let's just say no one mistook Lou Piniella for a CareBear.

He is like the long-lost crazy uncle who makes you cringe when he arrives at your doorstep for Thanksgiving dinner, no telling what he might say or do.

You mean, Randy Quaid? I think what he was going for was Randy Quaid in National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation and Vegas Vacation. Kenny could have alluded to him but he chose not to. I hate you, Kenny. Also, his sentence was poorly written.

While the team struggled during the early part of the season, "Sneaky" Lou worked behind the scenes to change the face and attitude of the ball club, his ball club.

Again, an awkward comma at the end of the sentence. I'm no English major nor do I try to be, but this is poor writing. Also, "behind the scenes" is exactly the wrong (re: false) way to describe Lou's style of managing. In fact, I think he's the most public managers around baseball-- possibly of all time. This year, he's been thrown out of games, made rants in very not-behind-the-scenes-and-very-public press conferences, and has personally called out players in public for their struggles. Additionally, why do you need to reiterate that it is HIS ballclub? Does he own the Cubs? No. So it's not his. Wait... WHY DO I NEED TO BUY GROWTH STOCKS!!!

Only four starters from opening day remain regular starters today. Players have been benched, demoted to the minors and traded.

Wow. Let me jump head first. First of all, the turnover of Cubs regular starters has nothing to do with growth stocks. I'm pretty sure of this. Second of all, the fact that only four original starters remain as regulars today is more of a product of Cubs GM Jim Hendry's transactions and the players' horrible play than it is Sneaky Sweet Sassy Lou's managing style. Trades and demotions are decisions made by Hendry, not SSS Lou.
I'm assuming the 4 players he's referring to are Derrek Lee, Alfonso Soriano, Mark DeRosa, and Aramis Ramirez. Those that get benched are part of Sweet Sassy Lou's doing but how can you argue with him? These guys have fantastically underperformed. Nevermind that one could actually argue that Jacque Jones is still a regular player as he has started 3 out of the last 4 games for the Cubs. Obviously, Lou makes the decides who plays in a particular game but Jacque certainly didn't help himself by sucking whole-hardedly with a .620 OPS (OBP + Slg%). Matt Murton (and his .667 OPS) was sent down to the minors by the GM Jim Hendry. Michael Barrett was a clubhouse disaster and I'm sure any manager in baseball could tell he needed new surroundings. He was traded by the GM-- again not Lou Piniella. SS Cesar Izturis sucks (.601 OPS and good for 25th in the majors among SS). You don't need to be Sneaky or Sweet to have the balls to bench these guys who are contributing absolutely nothing. Third of all (and I know this was first of all), WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH GROWTH STOCK PURCHASES!!!

As a result, "Sneaky" Lou has the Cubs playing some sneaky baseball; they've won seven straight (as of June 30) and appear to be in the thick of the National League Central playoff hunt.

There's nothing Sneaky about Lou Piniella. Unless you count his flatulence on the dugout bench. Gets 'em every time. What does "sneaky" baseball mean? Are they wearing Hamburgler's outifts instead of their uniforms? Are they tip-toeing around the field? Do they wear masks? Maybe some Harry Potter magic? They have one of the biggest fanbases in baseball so I'm pretty sure people would take notice if they were being "sneaky" and are covered on ESPN all the damn time.

Growth stocks are also on a sneaky winning streak this year after a long Cub-like slumber.

Ahh... Here it is. 5 bleeping paragraphs into the article on Forbes.com do we hear a single word about finance. A "sneaky" winning streak. Also, I like the bear/hibernation Cub/slumber metaphor. Good stuff.

While it would be easy to stick with a winner and continue to ride your value stocks, we have suggested in recent issues of The Oberweis Report that the right move, à la Lou Piniella, is to shake up your portfolio, be a contrarian and buy growth.

I already mentioned this earlier, but the "shake up" was by GM Jim Hendry's. He traded his catcher. He demoted his starting left fielder to the minor leagues. The center fielder is till starting most of their recent games. So to recap, 7 out of the 8 "regulars" of the current Cubs lineup have nothing to do with Lou Piniella's shakeup. The only guy who Lou is responsible for no longer a regular ( i.e benching) is Cesar Izturis who, as you know, sucks. It doesn't take a managerial genius to know that he sucks and should not play everyday.

And those sneaky growth stocks, much like the Cubs, have quietly rallied the first half of the year to return 9.3% (for the Russell 2000 Growth Index) compared with 3.8% for the Russell 2000 Value Index.

Actually, it's nothing like the Cubs. Over the first half of the year (half of their 162 game season) the Cubs, who just added like $200 million dollars to their payroll over the winter, "rallied" to a record of 41-40. Ask any Cubs fan if they would consider that record a "rally" with the expectations coming into the season. But make sure you whisper the question to that Cubs fan... wouldn't want to be too loud for those sneaky Hamburgler Cubbies. You might increase their decibel level to undesired levels.

Growth stocks and the Chicago Cubs are sharing the same bandwagon, and it's time to jump on. They've both been sneaking around thus far, but soon they'll be obvious winners.

The same bandwagon? Do you honestly think that people jumping on the Cubs "bandwagon" are also jumping on the "Growth stocks" bandwagon? What would that bandwagon look like? I'm thinking lots of steroids and poor gas mileage. What a horrible article. I still don't know what "sneaking around" means especially when you attribute it one of the most popular baseball franchises in the history of the sport. That's like saying Paris Hilton has been sneaking around Los Angeles. There are a lot of people watching the Cubs. And another thing, Lou Piniella is NOT a "sneaky" manager. He is just the opposite. Stick to writing about finance Ken Farsalas.




No comments:

Post a Comment