I like this analogy (see the comments for the quote, but read the whole thing) for thinking about incompetent tactical baseball managers who may have other positive qualities:

Back in the day, I ran and participated in many blackjack (card counting) teams. There were many qualities that made for a successful card counter in a team context – honesty, ability to get along with others, comportment in the casino, ability to know when you are being surveilled, ability to convince the casino personnel that you were a “sucker,” etc. However, if you did not at least know perfect basic strategy and know how to count proficiently and when distracted (assuming that was your job on the team), you did not play on the team. All teams operated that way. There is no reason why a baseball team cannot and should not operate that way.

 

I would not be able to sleep at night or look myself in the mirror if I ran a team and my manager made sub-optimal decisions. Why would I allow that? “Yeah, he is a real good leader, so I let him make bad decisions all the time.” Uh, no. He is a real good leader and I take him into my office and explain to him the correct decisions. If he acts like Philip Seymore Hoffman in Moneyball, then he gets fired. But I guarantee that that would not be my hire. I would never hire a person like that, and don’t think I would have to. It is not like there would be 5 candidates in front of me, and 5 of them are the greatest leaders and motivators in the world, but are old-school and will never change, and 5 are the greatest strategists in the world, and own 14 copies of The Book, but couldn’t lead a Cub Scout troop. It doesn’t work that way. These are billion dollar corporations. They are not your local Cub Scout den…