Cuckoo for Nick Canepa: Assumptions and false narratives

This morning MLB owners approved the Padres sale from John Moores to the O'Malley/Fowler/Mickelson group. Last evening Nick Canepa wrote a column called, Padres appear headed in right direction. It made me say, "Cuckoo." . . .

For the most part the column wasn't bad. Canepa advocated retaining CEO and President, Tom Garfinkel, with which I wholeheartedly agree (I'll say something about the Garfinkel Situation later). Canepa also said other stuff. I hate to nitpick but I come undone when I read confounding ideas, and all it takes is one. To wit:

Byrnes reminds me a bit of former GM Kevin Towers. After former boss Jeff Moorad fired Towers, I wrote Moorad’s first major decision would be the worst he would make as an owner. I wasn’t wrong. Moores, who still had controlling interest in the team, shouldn’t have allowed it to happen.

Oh yes Nick, I remember. I believe it was October of 2011 when you last referenced this sentiment and I skewered your column for it.

But there wasn't just one confounding idea. There were at least two! Canepa would go on to write his next puzzling tidbit in the subsequent paragraph:

But that’s baseball. Towers is doing fine in Arizona. And, after making the decision to replace KT with Jed Hoyer — another mistake, not because Hoyer was ill-equipped, just a bad fit here — Moorad made it right in naming Byrnes GM after Hoyer bailed to take on the unenviable (but more lucrative) task of trying to put the Cubs back together again.  

Cuckoo. I'm going to try and work this one out. Here it goes . . .

Jed Hoyer was not ill-equipped to take a job as GM of the Padres. This means that he was equipped to take a job as GM of the Padres. Yet another way to say it would be to write that he was qualified, prepared or ready.

So if Jed Hoyer was qualified for the job of general manager then why on earth was he a bad fit in San Diego?

I'm relying on a thesaurus now.

If you are fit then one could say that you are competent. Or, qualified. Or, prepared. Or even, ready.

But if you are a bad fit then you are the opposite of fit, which means you are incapable. At least that's what the thesaurus says: Incapable is the antonym for fit. And since Jed Hoyer was a bad fit in San Diego I am left to assume that Nick Canepa believes that Jed was simultaneously incapable and qualified. 'Tis a conundrum we have here.

The reader is left to assume what Nick Canepa is talking about. Since I am someone who is dialed in to the local baseball scene I am going to make an assumption which may be totally off-base.

I think Canepa is trying to convey that while Jed Hoyer was qualified and ready to become a GM in major league baseball he was not suited for the job in San Diego. Jed came from large market Boston where the pockets were deep and perhaps Canepa feels that he didn't have the proper mindset to operate on a shoestring budget in small market San Diego. Does that sound reasonable?

It doesn't sound reasonable when you consider that Jed Hoyer focused heavily on the draft (a place where small market teams can exploit available talent at relatively modest cost) and also emphasized building a club that could use PETCO Park to its advantage. Using PETCO to its advantage means building a strong rotation and bullpen along with defense and speed which are all relatively inexpensive attributes when juxtaposed with free-agent power hitters. It kind of sounds like Jed Hoyer understood what it meant to build a club in small market San Diego and maybe he was . . . a good fit?

This isn't a defense of Jed Hoyer. He's gone. Whatever.

I wrote this because Nick Canepa makes no sense. When I write things I always re-read them to see if it makes sense. Sometimes my ideas are not coherent. So I go back and fix what I wrote. Sometimes it still doesn't make sense and I say, "Too bad, you're reading this for free!"

I tried to figure out what Nick said. I offered an idea. And then I debunked myself and quite possibly Nick. I'm pretty sure it's what Nick Canepa meant and all I can think is: He sure displays an amazing commitment to a false narrative.

Where art thou, Tim Sullivan?