The official around the MLB thread!

[brett05]

He's also 18th all-time in losses.

Again you have to be a great manager to lose that much. It's the way the game is.

No. Making the playoffs does not matter. Winning the playoffs matters.

Can't win if you don't make it. Playoffs absolutely matters.

 

[brett05]

And just so you know, Brett05, Sparky Anderson has more losses than Dusty Baker. Sparky Anderson was the superior manager. Championships matter.

I never said they didn't.
Bobby Cox won one title. He's a top 3-5 manager of all time in my book.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Correct, they do not. But bad managers aren't kept around to win as many games as he has.

Like everything else in baseball you have to look at a combination of numbers and the eye test. There are things about Dusty's style that don't pass the latter. In his three stops he was only relieved of his duties after a losing record once and that was with the Cubs. He won 95 games with the 2002 Giants and 90 games with the 2013 Reds and was let go. That means that those teams did not like the direction the team was going. In fact his last two seasons with each club he won 90 and 95 and 97 and 90 respectively and yet wasn't retained. When he was hired in Chicago all my Giants fan friends warned me that he was nowhere near as good as his record suggested and that he made rooting for his teams difficult. We know he did that in Chicago and then again in Cincinnati. There is no way that I'm calling a guy like that a great manager, because those circumstances with three clubs indicate something else. That said he could get Washington to the promised land. Once you're in the playoffs it's a crapshoot so best of luck to him. Given that the finalists were Bud Black and Baker, both at below market salaries, I would have taken Black 10 times out of 10 at twice the money.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Again you have to be a great manager to lose that much. It's the way the game is.

Can't win if you don't make it. Playoffs absolutely matters.

A team just has to be dumb enough to hire a manager. He wouldn't even have the job if Washington didn't piss Black off in their negotiations. What about Washington since shutting down Strasburg in the midst of a playoff run indicates to you that the Nationals even know what the hell they are doing?

The reason a manager is allowed to lose a lot, is because the organization feels he is doing the job they've asked him to do with the personnel they have provided. That isn't greatness. Let me know when he wins a WS and I'll put him right up there with Leyland and Piniella. Until then, he has had an above average career as a manager.

 

[brett05]

Like everything else in baseball you have to look at a combination of numbers and the eye test. There are things about Dusty's style that don't pass the latter. In his three stops he was only relieved of his duties after a losing record once and that was with the Cubs. He won 95 games with the 2002 Giants and 90 games with the 2013 Reds and was let go. That means that those teams did not like the direction the team was going. In fact his last two seasons with each club he won 90 and 95 and 97 and 90 respectively and yet wasn't retained.

He was released from the Reds because of the lack of progress in the playoffs. At the time The Reds thought they could hit the promise land with someone else. Plus he had to deal with a nut case in Phillips which it would appear media wise he choose to pass instead of address.

The Giants did not retain but the Cubs snapped him up right quick. We just see it differently and that is ok.

 

[brett05]

A team just has to be dumb enough to hire a manager. He wouldn't even have the job if Washington didn't piss Black off in their negotiations. What about Washington since shutting down Strasburg in the midst of a playoff run indicates to you that the Nationals even know what the hell they are doing?

The reason a manager is allowed to lose a lot, is because the organization feels he is doing the job they've asked him to do with the personnel they have provided. That isn't greatness.

Managers are allowed at times to loose a lot, but not in the numbers we are speaking of unless they are great managers. He did a lot more than get by. He won and got to the playoffs. Sorry, that's a great manager.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Managers are allowed at times to loose a lot, but not in the numbers we are speaking of unless they are great managers. He did a lot more than get by. He won and got to the playoffs. Sorry, that's a great manager.

LOL. As a Sox fan, it's clear you didn't watch the Cubs close enough to understand why he isn't a great manager.

 

[brett05]

LOL. As a Sox fan, it's clear you didn't watch the Cubs close enough to understand why he isn't a great manager.

Agian, you go back to my original post on this and you Cub fans take Baker overly harsh.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Agian, you go back to my original post on this and you Cub fans take Baker overly harsh.

LOL. As usual you get do caught up on stats that you miss the eye test. As TC mentioned, he doesn't pass it.

 

[DanTown]

Just so we're clear here,

Dusty Baker managed the Giants from 1993 to 2002. Kind of helps when you have Barry Bonds in his prime+steroid career.
Dusty managed the Cubs from 2003 to 2006. While injuries happen, Wood/Prior's egregious over use did nothing but set the franchise back to the point they had to completely retool their team.
Dusty managed the Reds from 2008 to 2013. Then Joey Votto/a bunch of young bats come up and give the Reds some talent.

And now, he goes and gets Bryce Harper at the rise of his career arc. Dusty Baker consistently has managed teams that haven't performed as well as they could have.

 

[Diehardfan]

Just so we're clear here,

Dusty Baker managed the Giants from 1993 to 2002. Kind of helps when you have Barry Bonds in his prime+steroid career.
Dusty managed the Cubs from 2003 to 2006. While injuries happen, Wood/Prior's egregious over use did nothing but set the franchise back to the point they had to completely retool their team.
Dusty managed the Reds from 2008 to 2013. Then Joey Votto/a bunch of young bats come up and give the Reds some talent.

And now, he goes and gets Bryce Harper at the rise of his career arc. Dusty Baker consistently has managed teams that haven't performed as well as they could have.

Meh, I can't really blame him for Wood and Prior. They both had terribly flawed motions. Wood was able to eventually straighten his out a bit but his stuff was never the same afterwards....Prior never did. Regardless, they were both injuries waiting to happen so no one can be certain overuse was the culprit. The problem I have with Baker stems from a lot of substandard managing...ranging from in game strategy, baseball philosophy and just overall mis-handling of a baseball team. IMOP, he's just not a very good game manager. And, let's never forget his line "walks just clog up the base paths". He can get a job in baseball if I'm an owner....I mean someone has to sweep up the clubhouse, right?

 

[brett05]

LOL. As usual you get do caught up on stats that you miss the eye test. As TC mentioned, he doesn't pass it.

Way to use non objective measures. Not shocked at all.

 

[brett05]

Just so we're clear here,

Dusty Baker managed the Giants from 1993 to 2002. Kind of helps when you have Barry Bonds in his prime+steroid career.
Dusty managed the Cubs from 2003 to 2006. While injuries happen, Wood/Prior's egregious over use did nothing but set the franchise back to the point they had to completely retool their team.
Dusty managed the Reds from 2008 to 2013. Then Joey Votto/a bunch of young bats come up and give the Reds some talent.

And now, he goes and gets Bryce Harper at the rise of his career arc. Dusty Baker consistently has managed teams that haven't performed as well as they could have.

Nothing to prove that it caused any harm to either of them.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Nothing to prove that it caused any harm to either of them.

Nothing to prove it didn't either. Also his mismanaging of a pitching staff is really not even that high up on my list of why I don't think this guy is any more than a slightly above average manager.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Way to use non objective measures. Not shocked at all.

When you evaluate baseball there is a very real set of objective stats and there is the eye test. I applies to pitchers, hitters, fielders and even managers and you are correct it is not objective but to people that have followed the game as long as I have it matters.

 

[Boobaby1]

Surpass Leyland? LOL. Leyland has 3 Pennants and a WS title. Lou also has a WS title. Number of wins is about how many years someone manages in the game, not greatness. That makes about as much sense as applauding a player for 3000 hits when hit #3000 comes when they are 45 and they were in the league at 19. In 20 years of managing, Dusty has 1 pennant. He needs to get a WS title before he surpasses either Leyland or Piniella in level of "greatness". To put that in perspective, Maddon has managed for 10 full seasons (not counting 2 different temporary stints with Angels) and has equaled Baker's number of Pennants. Championships matter.

Piniella won a WS in the 80's. Had some pretty stellar players in Johnson, Martinez, Griffey, A-Rod, Ichiro and a host of other complimentary players like Boone, Cameron, and Buhner.

He did nothing with the Rays when he was there, and then inherited a pretty stout team with the Cubs and won what? Two early exits in the playoffs and not one single win?

And Leyland? Not taking anything away from either one of them as a manager, but to imply that Leyland had Barry Bonds, Bonilla, and that team with the Pirates, the team the Marlins assembled in 97' with Sheffield, Bonilla, Johnson, Leiter, Brown, Alou, Renteria, and Nen, and then the teams that Detroit had after the rebuild was already in place when he joined them in 2006 with Granderson, Verlander, Rogers, Ordonez, Guillen, Young, Pudge, and an "at the time", lights out bullpen with Miller, Grilli, Rodney and Zumaya.

Not exactly walking in and opening up a bare cupboard.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Piniella won a WS in the 80's. Had some pretty stellar players in Johnson, Martinez, Griffey, A-Rod, Ichiro and a host of other complimentary players like Boone, Cameron, and Buhner.

He did nothing with the Rays when he was there, and then inherited a pretty stout team with the Cubs and won what? Two early exits in the playoffs and not one single win?

And Leyland? Not taking anything away from either one of them as a manager, but to imply that Leyland had Barry Bonds, Bonilla, and that team with the Pirates, the team the Marlins assembled in 97' with Sheffield, Bonilla, Johnson, Leiter, Brown, Alou, Renteria, and Nen, and then the teams that Detroit had after the rebuild was already in place when he joined them in 2006 with Granderson, Verlander, Rogers, Ordonez, Guillen, Young, Pudge, and an "at the time", lights out bullpen with Miller, Grilli, Rodney and Zumaya.

Not exactly walking in and opening up a bare cupboard.

Quit making excuses.

 

[Boobaby1]

Quit making excuses.

Quit implying that you are right, and the world is wrong.

It is opinion and not FACT.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Nationals hire Mike Maddux as pitching coach. Now that's a great get.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Quit implying that you are right, and the world is wrong.

It is opinion and not FACT.

What is fact is that Piniella and Leyland have won WS. That is not opinion. That's a FACT. You are making excuses why one manager has a WS ring and the one you think is "great" doesn't. FACT. Bochy won multiple titles in the same large market in which Baker could not. FACT.