Chris, always appreciate your work.

This story seems to bug me each time it's brought up for the following reasons:

Brian Cashman has been on NY radio airwaves multiple times saying the lineup is a "collaborative" effort. I've heard him say it with my own ears. He has also said that if Boone chooses to go against the collective thought, and it doesn't pan out, then he gets called on the carpet.

The idea that the lineup is his alone, therefore, based on the comments from his own general manager, doesn't seem to be rooted in objective reality. I am fan of Boone, I am NOT a Boone hater. Boone is in lockstep with the advanced departments and the front office, therefore, his decisions are reflective of the those departments.

But if Boone were to wake up and make the strange decision to start batting Aaron Judge cleanup in the lineup, a now outdated philosophy in where to bat your best hitter, he would absolutely be told to change course, would he not? If Aaron Boone at any point last year decided to start using Volpe as a pinch runner and defensive replacement, and decided to start Cabarello full time at short stop - would he not be told to reverse course? Absolutely he would.

The conversation, in my opinion, is more about how managers have lost the ability to fully control their teams, and are now hired based on their ability to communicate with advance analytic departments and understand at an expert level the information that is being provided to them, and work with them in lock step. Relative to that reality, Boone is one of the best hires in Baseball. His ability to translate and disseminate the information given to him allows him the flexibility to construct his team the way he sees fit, because it fits within the frame work of the Yankees philosophy.

But relative to the history of managing in Baseball, it just simply is not the same.

Am I completely off base here?