PDA

View Full Version : BCast on Pete



nate
09-21-2007, 03:59 PM
From Fay (http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/redsinsider/2007/09/castellini-on-mackanin.asp):


“If we can get a couple of pitching holes filled, we can have a dynamite team for next year,” Castellini said. “The club has responded to Pete. If we go in another direction, we have to find someone else they respond to.”

“(But) Pete’s made a case for himself.”

Interesting. I like how Pete's handled the club so far and it looks like he might have the inside track on another shot next year. At least as far as the bossman is concerned.

pedro
09-21-2007, 04:00 PM
I like Mackanin.

redsfan30
09-21-2007, 04:14 PM
I was dead-set against bringing him back no matter what he did, but he's made me reconsider that stance.

Roy Tucker
09-21-2007, 04:21 PM
I was dead-set against bringing him back no matter what he did, but he's made me reconsider that stance.

Me too. I was dead-set against just because of the bad karma stemming from the recent record of hiring interim managers to full-time. But Mackanin seems to be the real deal.

I had to chuckle. When Junior was laying in RF injured with trainers and players all around him concerned, Pete was standing there scanning his lineup card with his wheels turning as to how he was going to juggle things.

RANDY IN INDY
09-21-2007, 04:25 PM
Mackanin seems to have a little something that the last few interim managers didn't. I can't really put my finger on it, but he has a little more of a commanding presence than any of the others. I wouldn't be opposed to seeing what he can do with the team next season.

RFS62
09-21-2007, 04:27 PM
Mackanin seems to have a little something that the last few interim managers didn't. I can't really put my finger on it, but he has a little more of a commanding presence than any of the others. I wouldn't be opposed to seeing what he can do with the team next season.



A personality for starters. Seems to have a sharp wit and good feel for managing the players.

Roy Tucker
09-21-2007, 04:32 PM
He always seems a half-step ahead of the action instead of the half-step behind of previous managers. The moves he makes seem to follow a logic that is well-conceived, be it the lineup, bullpen, or player substitutions.

Unlike previous managers whose moves seemed to come out of a grab-bag or random player generator.

top6
09-21-2007, 04:33 PM
at least Mackanin is Krivsky's man, so they will be on the same page. i guess that's good, anyway. (Narron was O'Brien's and didn't Miley start the season before O'Brien was fired?)

oneupper
09-21-2007, 04:50 PM
I like Mackanin more than Narron who I thought was an upgrade over Miley (at the time at least).

But...I'm not sure. Batting orders aside (we could go on for days), many of the decisions seem to have been forced upon him.

Castro's injury. Freel's injury. Gonzo's troubles, Conine's trade etc. all forced decisions which in the end became positives.

Was he lucky or is he good?

I see some positives. For example, although everyone hates Javy's Defense, Pete seemed to have recognized the need for not having an automatic out at the bottom of the lineup (in a supposedly adequate offensive team). Narron would NEVER compromise defense (in his mind) . Mac seems to understand the tradeoffs better.

(Still hate BP cleanup vs. Righties....there I said it).

NJReds
09-21-2007, 04:54 PM
It depends on who's available. If they are able to find a candidate on the level of what Detroit did when they hired Leyland, then I think they have to do it.

But I wouldn't get rid of Mack just to bring in Girardi or someone on that level.

Kc61
09-21-2007, 04:58 PM
Mack is a major improvement in knowing when a pitcher has had enough. He also is the first manager the Reds have had in years who has figured out how to have a reasonably set lineup with guys hitting in spots that make some sense.

I didn't like his overuse of Griffey down the "stretch" and his overreliance on certain relievers, notably Maj and Stanton, while not using guys like Bray and Salmon. I hope he is not wedded to pitchers based on performance from previous years with other teams in other days.

DoogMinAmo
09-21-2007, 05:18 PM
Mack is a major improvement in knowing when a pitcher has had enough. He also is the first manager the Reds have had in years who has figured out how to have a reasonably set lineup with guys hitting in spots that make some sense.

I didn't like his overuse of Griffey down the "stretch" and his overreliance on certain relievers, notably Maj and Stanton, while not using guys like Bray and Salmon. I hope he is not wedded to pitchers based on performance from previous years with other teams in other days.

I have a feeling that Maj and Stanton use are partially due to orders from above. Wayne needs to know who are keepers and who need to go, and also needs to fluff up some trade value. Bray and Salmon seem like near locksfor next year's pen.

There will be turnover of the roster yet again this off season, and Wayne needs to make sure it is for the better.

bucksfan2
09-21-2007, 05:20 PM
I hink Mack has done a pretty good job of managing a team with no pressure what so ever. I think anything was an upgrade over Narron and as stated above I wonder how much influence is coming from the front office on who to play. I wonder if it was a bonus not having Freel and Castro around and sending Coffey to AAA for a time?

I dont give him the job. I give him the opportunity to interview and be considered. However he hasn't managed to the point where I would give him an extention.

icehole3
09-21-2007, 05:20 PM
Overuse of Griffey. Could it br Jr had his imput as to when he would take a day off? I like how he has handled everything even sending Jr and Dunn the message play defense or you'll get replaced in the late innings. I think BCast has a good handle on what the Reds need to compete next year. That was good to hear.

Matt700wlw
09-21-2007, 05:23 PM
Do a search...make sure.

Don't jump the gun...the recent history of that is not good.


Pete's done a good job, don't get me wrong...but is he the answer?



I would still like an outside voice and influence that not associated with this organization

Jason Ellison starting in the double-header (which you could argue was the biggest series of the year at the time), while Josh Hamilton didn't start at all still bothers me.

acredsfan
09-21-2007, 05:35 PM
I say what the heck, bring him back. What is one more year going to hurt if he fails anyway, we're used to losing... /Sarcasm

Seriously though, he's handled the situation very well in my opinion, and most of you apparently feel the same way. If our other option is Girardi, you have to ask what he has done to prove he is better than Pete. He managed one year, so I guess he has more experience than Pete M., but he also has shown the ability to ruffle some feathers in the Front Office. Maybe it's not a bad thing, but if Pete is showing the same encouraging start as a manager, although a smaller sample size, why not give him a shot?

That all changes if you talk about Torre or LaRussa, but I doubt they consider us after all the other teams that will show interest. You can't argue with the results those two have shown over the years and even though everybody may not like it, it would be awfully difficult to explain why you passed on them for Mackanin.

RedsManRick
09-21-2007, 05:35 PM
When it comes to manager searches, I always wonder what the criteria is. I get the feeling that sometimes owners/GMs are wowed by the experienced guys who can talk about some past situation, and gloss over something like their inability to manage a bullpen, their fear of utilizing young players, etc. It becomes a likability and experience contest, rather than a defined set of skills and abilities on which they're judged.

Kc61
09-21-2007, 05:39 PM
Overuse of Griffey. Could it br Jr had his imput as to when he would take a day off? I like how he has handled everything even sending Jr and Dunn the message play defense or you'll get replaced in the late innings. I think BCast has a good handle on what the Reds need to compete next year. That was good to hear.


The Reds overused Griffey. No way he should have had 528 at bats. The last series v. Chicago, he looked worn out. And the Reds said they would rest him to preserve his health, which they did not do.

I have no idea who made the decision to keep playing him. It was unwise. Usually a manager decides who to play, but not always.

Ltlabner
09-21-2007, 05:55 PM
Pete has earned consideration for the managers role. He's definatley bumped himself up a notch of two from "no way in hell".

Stormy (can't remember what thread) suggested giving him a one year deal only because you don't know what happens to Kriv after next year. I can support that.

But I'd still be doing a top-notch managers search in the mean-time. Just toss PMacs name in the hat.

RedsManRick
09-21-2007, 06:10 PM
Seriously though, I wan't know how people evaluate managers.

Are there managers who routinely win with mediocre talent?
Are there managers who routinely lose despite a wealth of talent?
Is Buddy Bell a bad manager because he's got no good players?
Is Tony LaRussa a genius because he was given Mark McGwire, Jose Canseco, and Dave Stewart in Oakland and then given Albert Pujols, Chris Carpenter, and Jim Edmonds in St. Louis? How about Torre in NY?

I just think managers get too much credit for the quality of teams they get to manage. Joe Torre manages a bullpen like crap. Tony LaRussa makes platoon decisions off single digit at bat count histories. I bet Pete Mackanin could've led the Yankees to the playoffs this year too. Or is Jeter so great because of Torre?

I have no doubt that there are managers who get more from their teams than others. I think Jim Leyland is a perfect example of that. However, Jim Leyland couldn't have led us a division title. I just don't buy it.

Get a guy who has a good rapport with upper management, gets his players to play hard, and puts them in the best position to utilize their abilities and forget what his W/L record looks like. Even if a manager can make 5 games worth of difference in either direction, if he's given a string of 70 win talent-level teams, he's not going to win championships.

If anybody advocates bringing somebody else in, I'd really love to know what that guy brings to the table (besides jewelry earned by his players) that Pete doesn't.

/endrant

redsmetz
09-21-2007, 06:22 PM
I'm surprised I hadn't looked at this before. Mackanin has a heckuva pedigree as a player viz who his managers have been. Among others: Whitey Herzog, Billy Martin, Gene Mauch (twice), Dick Williams, Dallas Green and Danny Ozark and some lesser known individuals. Not a bad group of teachers.

Red in Chicago
09-21-2007, 06:27 PM
Do a search...make sure.

Don't jump the gun...the recent history of that is not good.


Pete's done a good job, don't get me wrong...but is he the answer?



I would still like an outside voice and influence that not associated with this organization

I agree. Do some interviewing. What is there to lose? Pete's a lot more like Jerry than some seem to remember.

Unassisted
09-21-2007, 07:41 PM
I would still like an outside voice and influence that not associated with this organization.

I was in this boat, too, until I saw the difference a smart, creative manager has made to the team's performance. To me, an outside voice implies someone who isn't always pulling his oars in sync with the front office. Sometimes, and on some days more than others, that's what the Reds had in Narron.

Also, if Krivsky is an upgrade over DanO, then Krivsky's handpicked manager choice Mackanin should logically be an improvement over DanO's handpicked manager Narron.

If we like the page that Krivsky is on, then it's better to let him keep the manager who is on the same page.

IslandRed
09-21-2007, 07:42 PM
Seriously though, I want know how people evaluate managers.

Well, first off, your presumption is correct -- the difference between a 90-win team and a 70-win team is in the players, not the manager. I've always subscribed to the theory that most managers are fairly interchangeable. If you look at a team's talent and circumstances (injuries, etc.), in most instances you can predict about how they should do without even knowing who the manager is. Only in rare cases can a manager raise a team above its talent level. It's probably more common, but still rare, for a manager to singlehandedly blow a hole in the bottom of a good team's boat because of incompetence or a bad personality match with his players.

Job number one for a manager: Don't be one of the bad ones.

Beyond that, if a guy can command respect in the clubhouse, keep things on track so the players stay focused between the lines, make sensible use of the assets he's given, and bring the team home with the record it should have based on the players it has, he's a good manager. Maybe not a great one, but a good one.

I don't mind the idea of doing an elephant hunt for someone with a "name" like LaRussa, but I haven't seen anything from Mackanin that suggests he can't meet the standard I just outlined. Whether we are or aren't a contender in 2008 is going to depend on what happens in the GM's office, not the manager's.

Reds4Life
09-21-2007, 07:57 PM
Do a search...make sure.

Don't jump the gun...the recent history of that is not good.


Pete's done a good job, don't get me wrong...but is he the answer?



I would still like an outside voice and influence that not associated with this organization

Jason Ellison starting in the double-header (which you could argue was the biggest series of the year at the time), while Josh Hamilton didn't start at all still bothers me.

You could take this thread, back date if a few years, and sub in the the name Narron or Miley. We've been down this path before, it's about time we learn from previous mistakes.

pedro
09-21-2007, 08:04 PM
You could take this thread, back date if a few years, and sub in the the name Narron or Miley. We've been down this path before, it's about time we learn from previous mistakes.

I think it'd be a mistake to assume that just because Mackanin was brought in as an interim guy that he should be lumped in with Miley and Narron, two guys who were hired by previous management.

I also think this "we need to get someone from the outside" doesn't make much sense as Mackanin really hasn't been with the Reds long enough to be considered an "insider" IMO.

The problem with the last two times the Reds changed managers wasn't that they decided to keep the interim guy, it was that they didn't do a thorough interview process to evaluate whether the interim guy was the best candidate.

Personally I'm in favor of keeping Mackanin, but not before an offseason search and interview process takes place.

Matt700wlw
09-21-2007, 08:07 PM
If Pete ends up being the guy....which I think could happen if their search for someone outside doesn't work out, for whatever reason, then I don't want anything more than a 1 year deal.

However, I don't think he's number one on the list at this point....but more of a fall back choice who is there if they need him.

That's my take.

pedro
09-21-2007, 08:09 PM
I also want to say that bringing in some "name guy" like Larussa or Girardi just to have a "name guy" would be a tremendous mistake.

Matt700wlw
09-21-2007, 08:11 PM
I think it'd be a mistake to assume that just because Mackanin was brought in as an interim guy that he should be lumped in with Miley and Narron, two guys who were hired by previous management.




It may not be fair, but it is what it is...

Pete could be a vicitim of circumstance more than anything else

Matt700wlw
09-21-2007, 08:12 PM
I also want to say that bringing in some "name guy" like Larussa or Girardi just to have a "name guy" would be a tremendous mistake.

If you're going to bring in a guy like LaRussa, you need to make sure he's doing it for the right reasons....you have to make sure the desire and passion are still there. He's been doing this a long time.


A guy like Girardi, you wouldn't have to worry about the passion and desire....it's there.

icehole3
09-21-2007, 08:14 PM
The Reds overused Griffey. No way he should have had 528 at bats. The last series v. Chicago, he looked worn out. And the Reds said they would rest him to preserve his health, which they did not do.

I have no idea who made the decision to keep playing him. It was unwise. Usually a manager decides who to play, but not always.

You dont think Jr wouldve cried like a little baby if McKanin wouldve say sat him down for 50 atbats which would be about 10 games. The guy cries about everything, remember last week he just had a piss contest with Phillips.

pedro
09-21-2007, 08:15 PM
It may not be fair, but it is what it is...

Pete could be a vicitim of circumstance more than anything else


well that's a stupid way to run a business IMO.

pedro
09-21-2007, 08:17 PM
A guy like Girardi, you wouldn't have to worry about the passion
and desire....it's there.

yeah but is there anything else there? I don't see a lot of evidence that he was a particularly good manager or that he was a good clubhouse guy.

He'd be a way worse choice than Mackanin IMO.

Matt700wlw
09-21-2007, 08:20 PM
yeah but is there anything else there? I don't see a lot of evidence that he was a particularly good manager or that he was a good clubhouse guy.



I don't know that....

I think he'd be a guy who would kick guys in the pants and make it clear that they do things his way...

Maybe Mackanin is too,I don't know...he's just more laid back about it, and not as public about it.




It should be an interesting offseason on several fronts...

MrCinatit
09-21-2007, 08:24 PM
I like Pete quite a bit, but I would keep the options open before signing him to a one year deal (no extensions allowed during the course of the season).

Many times, I am not entirely sure if the Reds are performing better with Pete because Pete is better, or Jerry was such a brutally bad manager on many dimensions.

OnBaseMachine
09-21-2007, 08:29 PM
I CAN'T stand Tony LaRussa, however, if Dave Duncan were to come with him in a package deal then I would highly consider bringing TL in just for Duncan alone. But as others have said, I have come around on Pete Machanin. He does seem to be different from Miley and Narron. I wouldn't be opposed to the Reds bringing Pete back for a one year deal if they can't land someone better (Davey Johnson for example).

Patrick Bateman
09-21-2007, 08:39 PM
A guy like Girardi, you wouldn't have to worry about the passion and desire....it's there.

Ya all you have to do is worry about the managerial decisions. Other than that he's a great choice.

oneupper
09-21-2007, 08:46 PM
Interim Jerry Narron wasn't that bad.
nor was Interim Dave Miley.

Once they "needed" to win...it got to them.

Wonder where Dunn and Griff's recliners ended up.

JaxRed
09-21-2007, 09:08 PM
I don't think the one year option is available on Mackanin.

Pete has now had 2 interim jobs. In both of them he far more sucessful then the manager he replaced. (and more succesful then the man that replaced him).

After his first job he was quoted as saying he hoped someone noticed and would give him another shot. Krivsky noticed.

Well, he's now had 2 interims, and this one will be 80 games. And he was wildly more successful then his predecessor. This time...... Everyone noticed.

You don't want Mackinin at all? Or you want to give him one year? No problem, because he is going to be on the interview list for every club that needs a manager this off-season, and he'll get one. Great resume and you know he'd be a great interview.

remdog
09-21-2007, 09:20 PM
Mackanin has managed to elevate my opinion of him. I think he's done a good job and, as 62 said, at least he has a personality.

Having said that I still want a thorough search done. Do a complete job on the search, including interviewing Pete and, if Wayne's neck is on the line in '08, let him make the call.

If the Reds do a complete search and don't come up with someone that they feel is better, offer Pete a one year deal---it's not like he's likely to get other offers. (Although I suppose stranger things have happened.)

One scenario I find is interesting is the one where LaRussa takes a year off and is ready to manage in '09. That coincides with Jocketty's contract expiring in St. Louis and Castellini luring him to Cincinnati. It's a stretch, I know, but ......(shrug)

Rem

remdog
09-21-2007, 09:26 PM
Jax:

I just read your post above and we are seeing different scenarios as far as MacKanin's value on the open market as a manager.

Admittedly, I don't pay a lot of attention to what the other clubs are doing in this area. You could be completely correct in saying that Pete will now get a lot of looks.

It just seems to me that some guys are thought of as 'interim' and once you get that tag it's hard to loose it. (shrug) MacKanin seems to have that tag (IMO) and I think his best bet to loose it is to get an offer with the Reds.

Rem

Eric_Davis
09-21-2007, 11:47 PM
Do a search...make sure.

Don't jump the gun...the recent history of that is not good.


Pete's done a good job, don't get me wrong...but is he the answer?



I would still like an outside voice and influence that not associated with this organization

Jason Ellison starting in the double-header (which you could argue was the biggest series of the year at the time), while Josh Hamilton didn't start at all still bothers me.

Yep. Prudence is good.

Eric_Davis
09-22-2007, 12:02 AM
They did respond to him, but as mentioned earlier, that double-header in Pittsburgh was a real bone-head move. That responding has settled back a little, where he had them playing closer to .600 for quite a while, they've settled back. They'd have to finish the season by winning their last 9 games starting tonight to finish at .600. While no team in the Majors is at .600 this year right now, 7 games over .500 isn't enough of performance result to justify handiing him the job. The "gift" of Castro being injured helped him immensely. No one could win whenever that guy started a game.

However, Encarnacion, Keppinger, Hopper, and others have had outstanding second halves. There are so many positives with Mackinen right now. Even shutting down Arroyo and Harang after 80-90 pitches this week while they were pitching well and winning the games was a great sign of someone looking ahead and not just trying to get a new contract for himself.

It's going to take someone special (LaRussa is not it) to overtake him as Mackinen has rounded the 8th pole and has a 3-length lead on the pack heading down the stretch.

KronoRed
09-22-2007, 01:59 AM
The guy cries about everything, remember last week he just had a piss contest with Phillips.

No he didn't.

KronoRed
09-22-2007, 02:00 AM
A guy like Girardi, you wouldn't have to worry about the passion and desire....it's there.

And sub .500 passion at that.

pedro
09-22-2007, 02:02 AM
I think the idea of evaluating a manager based on a single spot start he gave to a bench player in a double header against two lefties seems a little shallow to me. Especially when it's in the middle of a lost season.

membengal
09-22-2007, 12:24 PM
A personality for starters. Seems to have a sharp wit and good feel for managing the players.

Word. I don't think he should be cast aside solely because the last few interims were so unsatisfactory.

And to be more specific, the things I have like about Mackanin's style so far include:

1. He seems to have a real feel on when to get pitchers, and a general awareness of pitch counts. That's a nice change from previous regimes.

2. He established order and sanity to the bullpen, and has maximized the team's chances late in games.

3. He has had no problem in communicating his decisions to his players and they seem to respect his authority and his reasoning.

4. In general, he is more communicative to the fanbase, and while that is not a necessary requirement to manage a clubhouse well, I sure do appreciate it as a fan.

5. For whatever reason, a bunch of guys have responded positively to his term so far, notably EE, who has steadily gotten more relaxed and more productive as the year has gone on. I give major props to Mackanin for that development.

Look, I am just not sure why he would not be strongly considered for the post. He's basically an outsider himself, being very new to the organization. I hope, if they conduct a search, that he isn't cast aside for a name, but that if they replace him, it is because they truly believe they have someone better. Because Mackanin has been really good so far. And I don't see any reason to believe he won't continue to be solid.

(And, fwiw, I didn't feel this way about Narron at any point. Miley? I was more optimistic about his hire...)

WVRedsFan
09-22-2007, 12:46 PM
I'll say this much...

Give him the right players and you might have something. Since that doesn't seem to be in the cards (read...pitching), I don't know.

My money's now on him staying around, but if Krivsky gives him a two year deal (which he will--he gives that to nearly everyone), it could be trouble. Or it could be Sparky II. It depends on how much of a gambler you want to be.

WVRedsFan
09-22-2007, 12:50 PM
You dont think Jr wouldve cried like a little baby if McKanin wouldve say sat him down for 50 atbats which would be about 10 games. The guy cries about everything, remember last week he just had a piss contest with Phillips.

Seems to me it was Brandon that started it. Junior was minding his own business and Brandon comes up with that line, which was really stupid of him. Junior laughed it off, put in a zinger and we haven't heard anything about it since. Crying? Give me a break.

KronoRed
09-22-2007, 12:51 PM
Seems to me it was Brandon that started it. Junior was minding his own business and Brandon comes up with that line, which was really stupid of him. Junior laughed it off, put in a zinger and we haven't heard anything about it since. Crying? Give me a break.

It was the Reds writers trying to get something started in dull end of season boredom

SunDeck
09-22-2007, 08:16 PM
I think a search at the end of this year will net more interest than in previous years if only because Castellini has had some time to establish a better reputation for the club. And you can't just hand Mack the job; it's too important of a position to see if you can't find an even better match. Having said that, I like what he's done and he deserves to be rewarded by the club. He seems like a quality guy and they should do what they can to make sure he remains with the organization. I mean, he'd understand his chances if someone like Lou or Larussa came sniffing around.

redsmetz
09-22-2007, 09:19 PM
I think a search at the end of this year will net more interest than in previous years if only because Castellini has had some time to establish a better reputation for the club. And you can't just hand Mack the job; it's too important of a position to see if you can't find an even better match. Having said that, I like what he's done and he deserves to be rewarded by the club. He seems like a quality guy and they should do what they can to make sure he remains with the organization. I mean, he'd understand his chances if someone like Lou or Larussa came sniffing around.

Where's it written that you can't? Who's to say there is a better match? I think we're like folks who've been smacked down and lot and we just expect the bad all of the time. Managers have to start somewhere and, frankly, I like what I've seen of Mackanin thus far. I don't see this as Interim Redux all over again (is that redundant?).

OldXOhio
09-22-2007, 11:12 PM
Aside from the comments about Pete, it sounds like the 2008 Reds will look much like the 2007 Reds plus a few different arms.

KronoRed
09-23-2007, 12:59 AM
Aside from the comments about Pete, it sounds like the 2008 Reds will look much like the 2007 Reds plus a few different arms.

If so the Reds are betting the Central will continue to be the "first team to .500 wins" division, I think that's extremely risky.

westofyou
09-23-2007, 03:41 PM
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6742



Every Given Sunday
Changing of the Guards

by John Perrotto

Cincinnati interim manager Pete Mackanin: The Reds have gone 40-33 since making the unusual move of promoting their advance scout to manager, and owner Bob Castellini has become a Mackanin fan. While Mackanin has full support in the clubhouse, there is a suspicion Castellini may go for a manager with a bigger name, especially if La Russa leaves the Cardinals. However, Mackanin also has a strong supporter in GM Wayne Krivsky.

SunDeck
09-23-2007, 08:20 PM
Where's it written that you can't? Who's to say there is a better match? I think we're like folks who've been smacked down and lot and we just expect the bad all of the time. Managers have to start somewhere and, frankly, I like what I've seen of Mackanin thus far. I don't see this as Interim Redux all over again (is that redundant?).

Well, I looked everywhere and I couldn't find it written...except in my post. I am a firm believer in growing talent at home and he's a Reds' guy as far as I'm concerned. But, I don't think it's wise to hire a guy until you absolutely know he is the best option. Without looking around, you don't know that.
Players liked Narron, too, as I recall.