Ian Kinsler: Angel Hernandez needs to find a new job.

[Mr. Brooks]

What was personal about Kinsler's comments? He called out Hernandez for being a bad ump and said his poor performance is affecting the outcome of games; which it is. Did you read the whole article and all the comments Kinsler made? I didn't see anything I would classify as malicious or vicious.

I don't understand what he's trying to accomplish.

You are not allowed to argue balls and strikes, so he has no standing if he's upset about being tossed.

He admits in the article that he doesn't think Hernandez is missing calls on purpose, so what is the point of calling him out so publically like this?

Does he expect Hernandez to just quit a really good job because some of the players think he's bad? Yeah right, that's laughable.

 

How distasteful would we find it if an umpire was publically calling out a player for performing poorly? What if an umpire said something like this about an underperforming player, "player x just isn't very good at baseball, he needs to just go away. Just go away today and not play anymore, he is performing so poorly he's bad for baseball."?

We'd all think that was unacceptable. Being true or not would have no impact on that.

 

The way to address it is to discuss it privately with mlb.

Doing it publically just seems like piling on for no good reason, and that makes it seem possibly personal.

[KirbyDome89]

 

I don't understand what he's trying to accomplish.
You are not allowed to argue balls and strikes, so he has no standing if he's upset about being tossed.
He admits in the article that he doesn't think Hernandez is missing calls on purpose, so what is the point of calling him out so publically like this?
Does he expect Hernandez to just quit a really good job because some of the players think he's bad? Yeah right, that's laughable.

How distasteful would we find it if an umpire was publically calling out a player for performing poorly? What if an umpire said something like this about an underperforming player, "player x just isn't very good at baseball, he needs to just go away. Just go away today and not play anymore, he is performing so poorly he's bad for baseball."?
We'd all think that was unacceptable. Being true or not would have no impact on that.

The way to address it is to discuss it privately with mlb.
Doing it publically just seems like piling on for no good reason, and that makes it seem possibly personal.

The point of calling him out publicly is to hopefully force some change. Hernandez acting like a head case and missing calls isn't a recent development. Clearly "private discussion," isn't getting anything done in terms improving his on field antics or his performance. Umpires don't have to worry about calling out poor players because they don't last in the league for 20+ years. That's kind of the point of all of this. 

 

You're comparing apples and oranges. The two jobs are completely different. Nobody buys the "if I did this at my job," argument when applying a work situation to MLB. The umpire vs. player debate should be no different.  

[Mr. Brooks]

The point of calling him out publicly is to hopefully force some change. Hernandez acting like a head case and missing calls isn't a recent development. Clearly "private discussion," isn't getting anything done in terms improving his on field antics or his performance. Umpires don't have to worry about calling out poor players because they don't last in the league for 20+ years. That's kind of the point of all of this.

 

You're comparing apples and oranges. The two jobs are completely different. Nobody buys the "if I did this at my job," argument when applying a work situation to MLB. The umpire vs. player debate should be no different.

1)What antics? Kinsler admits in the article that he doesn't think Hernandez is missing calls on purpose. All umpires miss calls, that alone isn't "antics".

 

2) Do we have any data that says Hernandez even misses more calls than most? Or are we just taking Kinsler and an unnamed source at their words?

Because if he rubs players the wrong way, they could notice the bad calls more than they do with umps they like.

Hernandez claims he grades out well, so without data it looks like he said/ she said to me.

[ThejacKmp]

 

Just to emphasize your point, Joe West was suspended for three games for calling Adrian Beltre the biggest complainer in the game, and his comments were nowhere near as malicious as what Kinsler said. West's comments were in response to a direct question (at least, that's the only way they make sense) and were really fairly light-hearted: "It's got to be Adrian Beltre. Every pitch you call that's a strike, he says, "Whoa! Whoa! Whoa!' I had a game with him recently and the pitch was right down the middle. He tells me, "That ball is outside.' "I told him, 'You may be a great ballplayer, but you're the worst umpire in the league. You stink.'' I think Joe West could have told that with Beltre sitting next to him and there would have been no ill will between them. (Beltre would have laughed and said "it was a foot outside, Joe" but that would have been it.)

 

This is amazing and you're absolutely right on all points. I'm not a Joe West fan but man, he got jobbed on that one.

[SweetOne69]

 

1)What antics? Kinsler admits in the article that he doesn't think Hernandez is missing calls on purpose. All umpires miss calls, that alone isn't "antics".

2) Do we have any data that says Hernandez even misses more calls than most? Or are we just taking Kinsler and an unnamed source at their words?
Because if he rubs players the wrong way, they could notice the bad calls more than they do with umps they like.
Hernandez claims he grades out well, so without data it looks like he said/ she said to me.

It's been awhile since I read the article, but I do believe that Kinsler did say that Hernandez was blatantly missing calls (i.e. missing calls on purpose).

[big dog]

 

This is amazing and you're absolutely right on all points. I'm not a Joe West fan but man, he got jobbed on that one.

I do  think there's a big difference between a player judging an umpire and an umpire judging a player.  The player doesn't have to be fair about umpires, he has to do his job and put up with what the umpire calls.  The player's opinion about an umpire shouldn't matter to the game, unless he gets way out of control and gets tossed.

 

If the umpire likes or dislikes certain players, that could easily influence their calls (See: any NBA ref, ever) and thereby influence the game.

 

I don't really care if players appear to be neutral about umpires.  I think it's critical that umpires appear to be neutral about players.

[bird]

I was thinking as I scanned this thread, and realized I can't recite the name of a single umpire right now other than the two names mentioned here. That to me is an indication of the quality of the work being done.

 

MLB should just have a rule: if birdwatcher knows their name, pink slip.

[KirbyDome89]

 

1)What antics? Kinsler admits in the article that he doesn't think Hernandez is missing calls on purpose. All umpires miss calls, that alone isn't "antics".

2) Do we have any data that says Hernandez even misses more calls than most? Or are we just taking Kinsler and an unnamed source at their words?
Because if he rubs players the wrong way, they could notice the bad calls more than they do with umps they like.
Hernandez claims he grades out well, so without data it looks like he said/ she said to me.

It isn't just missing calls. How would you describe a situation where an umpire's skin is so thin that a comment results in an ejection and affects a game? 

 

He hasn't graded well since the system was revamped under Joe Torre. It isn't just Kinsler who has an issue with him. A quarter of the players voted him as the single worst umpire in the game a few years back and he has consistently ranked at the bottom since. If there are executives, players, and a grading system that all say he's doing a poor job then yeah, I think that's enough data. This isn't a he said/she said, it's what Hernandez said vs. the truth. 

[Mr. Brooks]

It isn't just missing calls. How would you describe a situation where an umpire's skin is so thin that a comment results in an ejection and affects a game?

 

He hasn't graded well since the system was revamped under Joe Torre. It isn't just Kinsler who has an issue with him. A quarter of the players voted him as the single worst umpire in the game a few years back and he has consistently ranked at the bottom since. If there are executives, players, and a grading system that all say he's doing a poor job then yeah, I think that's enough data. This isn't a he said/she said, it's what Hernandez said vs. the truth.

Well there is zero gray area when it comes to arguing balls and strikes, it's an automatic ejection. Not sure why anyone would take issue with that.

Maybe the rule is bad, but Hernandez doesn't write the rules.

 

Do you have a link to his grades?

I find it odd that they left that out of the article if it's available, seems extremely relevant.

 

Players voting him the worst isn't hard data. It's hard to know whether not liking him causes them to be biased in their evaluation of him.

[Mr. Brooks]

It's been awhile since I read the article, but I do believe that Kinsler did say that Hernandez was blatantly missing calls (i.e. missing calls on purpose).

I think by blatant he means that they aren't borderline pitches, not that he missed them on purpose.

He says at least twice in the article, clearly and explicitly that he doesn't believe he's missing calls on purpose.

[KirbyDome89]

 

Well there is zero gray area when it comes to arguing balls and strikes, it's an automatic ejection. Not sure why anyone would take issue with that.
Maybe the rule is bad, but Hernandez doesn't write the rules.

Do you have a link to his grades?
I find it odd that they left that out of the article if it's available, seems extremely relevant.

Players voting him the worst isn't hard data. It's hard to know whether not liking him causes them to be biased in their evaluation of him.

There is chatter from the catcher or hitter, or dugout on nearly every pitch so we'll disagree on whether a gray area exists for questioning balls and strikes. 

 

I don't believe the umpire grades are made public but if I'm wrong feel free to dig.

 

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/umpire-angel-hernandez-sues-mlb-alleging-racial-discrimination/

 

His decline in grades are mentioned in nearly every article I read regarding his lawsuit. 

 

Being consistently voted one of if not the worst umpire in baseball by all players isn't a small feat. Like I said previously, it isn't just the players, FO members of teams and obviously MLB executives all seem to share the opinion that he isn't doing his job well. I think it's hard to look at that type of consensus across three different levels of MLB and say it's simply bias. 

[PDX Twin]

I spent 15 years as a soccer referee and was subject to frequent assessment. I never reached these higher levels, but I was told by multiple sources that there is a referee assessor at every college/professional game whose specific job it is to grade the performance of the referee and assistant referees and to offer constructive criticism where due. Referee assessments focus less on specific calls and more on positioning and situational management, which are more important in soccer than in baseball, but it's hard for me to imagine that umpires are not graded in some way ... unless the union has somehow managed to prohibit that in contract negotiations.

 

Does anyone know the details of the umpires' contract and whether assessment is built in or proscribed?

[Mr. Brooks]

There is chatter from the catcher or hitter, or dugout on nearly every pitch so we'll disagree on whether a gray area exists for questioning balls and strikes.

 

I don't believe the umpire grades are made public but if I'm wrong feel free to dig.

 

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/umpire-angel-hernandez-sues-mlb-alleging-racial-discrimination/

 

His decline in grades are mentioned in nearly every article I read regarding his lawsuit.

 

Being consistently voted one of if not the worst umpire in baseball by all players isn't a small feat. Like I said previously, it isn't just the players, FO members of teams and obviously MLB executives all seem to share the opinion that he isn't doing his job well. I think it's hard to look at that type of consensus across three different levels of MLB and say it's simply bias.

If the grades are not available, then why did you claim he grades poorly under the new grading system?

 

The article you link makes no mention of his grades.

Even if you show me one that claims its declined, that doesn't hold much substance without the actual grades. Perhaps it's declined from good to just average? Who knows without the grades.

 

I'll have to agree to disagree on player votes. Sounds like a popularity contest to me more than objective evidence.

 

I also haven't seen FO members or teams or MLB say that he's not doing his job well.

Not being good enough to work the WS isn't the same as being terrible. Only 1 crew gets the WS.

Anonymous quotes are again, not objective evidence to me.

 

I'm not a fan of thin skinned umps, and I want electronic strike zones yesterday, so I'm not trying to defend this ump or be argumentative. I'm just trying to come into this objectively, and I've yet to see any actual evidence that this ump is so terrible that he needs to leave the game.

[jimmer]

Angel Hernandez, Joe West, Laz Diaz, CB Bucknor.  Consistently the worst umpires out there.

[KirbyDome89]

 

If the grades are not available, then why did you claim he grades poorly under the new grading system?

The article you link makes no mention of his grades.
Even if you show me one that claims its declined, that doesn't hold much substance without the actual grades. Perhaps it's declined from good to just average? Who knows without the grades.

I'll have to agree to disagree on player votes. Sounds like a popularity contest to me more than objective evidence.

I also haven't seen FO members or teams or MLB say that he's not doing his job well.
Not being good enough to work the WS isn't the same as being terrible. Only 1 crew gets the WS.
Anonymous quotes are again, not objective evidence to me.

I'm not a fan of thin skinned umps, and I want electronic strike zones yesterday, so I'm not trying to defend this ump or be argumentative. I'm just trying to come into this objectively, and I've yet to see any actual evidence that this ump is so terrible that he needs to leave the game.

"The complaint alleges Hernandez received positive evaluations for most of his big league career, which began in 1993, but says "following Torre's arrival in Major League Baseball's front office in 2011, the notion that Hernandez `just wanted to be noticed' permeated Hernandez's yearly evaluations, as did Torre's general negative attitude towards Hernandez."

 

Torre's response was that Hernandez needs to "gain greater mastery of the official playing rules and replay regulations, continue to improve situation management, and display an ability to refocus and move forward after missing calls or receiving constructive feedback from the office."

 

If his grading isn't declining then why is it a key part of his lawsuit? To me those statements make it clear his evaluations began to reflect his reputation. You're going to have to show me where I called for him to leave the game; that was Kinsler. 

 

You can't take the word of a vast majority of players that deal with him on a daily basis because they're biased. A FO executive (mentioned in the OP article btw) who has to remain anonymous or risk being fined isn't valid because of the anonymity. I'm not sure what your issue with Joe Torre's stance is. Are you being objective or just obstinate? 

 

I realize you aren't defending him, and you're punching holes in the "evidence," but the standard you've set (personally reading over MLB evaluations) is unreachable. If reporting, polling of players, FO executive comments from both a MLB and team level aren't enough to satisfy you that's fine. Personally I have a hard time believing he can accidentally earn such a poor reputation across that much of baseball.  

 

 

[Mr. Brooks]

"The complaint alleges Hernandez received positive evaluations for most of his big league career, which began in 1993, but says "following Torre's arrival in Major League Baseball's front office in 2011, the notion that Hernandez `just wanted to be noticed' permeated Hernandez's yearly evaluations, as did Torre's general negative attitude towards Hernandez."

 

Torre's response was that Hernandez needs to "gain greater mastery of the official playing rules and replay regulations, continue to improve situation management, and display an ability to refocus and move forward after missing calls or receiving constructive feedback from the office."

 

If his grading isn't declining then why is it a key part of his lawsuit? To me those statements make it clear his evaluations began to reflect his reputation. You're going to have to show me where I called for him to leave the game; that was Kinsler.

 

You can't take the word of a vast majority of players that deal with him on a daily basis because they're biased. A FO executive (mentioned in the OP article btw) who has to remain anonymous or risk being fined isn't valid because of the anonymity. I'm not sure what your issue with Joe Torre's stance is. Are you being objective or just obstinate?

 

I realize you aren't defending him, and you're punching holes in the "evidence," but the standard you've set (personally reading over MLB evaluations) is unreachable. If reporting, polling of players, FO executive comments from both a MLB and team level aren't enough to satisfy you that's fine. Personally I have a hard time believing he can accidentally earn such a poor reputation across that much of baseball.

1) Torres comments don't tell me anything about where he ranks compared to the other umps.

Again, for all I know he declined from good to average.

 

2) I never claimed it had to be accidental. It could be that he's just an average umpire who rubs guys the wrong way.

[drjim]

Defending Angel Hernandez this vigorously is true yeoman's work.

[Mr. Brooks]

Defending Angel Hernandez this vigorously is true yeoman's work.

I haven't defended him once. Don't know enough about him either way.

Simply asking for actual (not anecdotal or subjective) evidence that he's such a terrible umpire before I just take Ian Kinsler's word for it.

Still yet to see any.

[KirbyDome89]

 

1) Torres comments don't tell me anything about where he ranks compared to the other umps.
Again, for all I know he declined from good to average.

2) I never claimed it had to be accidental. It could be that he's just an average umpire who rubs guys the wrong way.

The point is that his performance rating has trended down. I don't think it's a coincidence that has occurred following the implementation of a new grading system. Players have made it clear for years, and now there are team and league executives making public statements about his performance to go along with his newly diminished grade(s). I doubt all of that occurs simply because Hernandez might be an a**hole.

 

 

[gil4]

 

I was thinking as I scanned this thread, and realized I can't recite the name of a single umpire right now other than the two names mentioned here. That to me is an indication of the quality of the work being done.

 

MLB should just have a rule: if birdwatcher knows their name, pink slip.

I know this thread is old, but I'm catching up on some reading.  Homework: Memorize the names Phil Cuzzi and CB Bucknor (just in case MLB implements your rule suggestion.)