PDA

View Full Version : Baker has to go



Pages : [1] 2

Dan
04-14-2012, 06:32 AM
I posted this in the game thread but thought I would bring it here to open the discussion.

You can second guess when Dusty should have brought what pitcher in when, but really those moves aren't managerial mistakes. Just moves that didn't work out. They may have been the best moves at the time.

My issue is with the totally egregious use of ozart in the 11th. Sending him up in hat situation is fine, but then wasting his at bat with a bunt? Wtf? Guy's been on fire since the start of the year, and a hit scores a run, and you're having him deliberately make an out? Just...wow!

To me, that is the thinking of someone who: Has. To. Do. Things. A. Certain. Way. Every. Time. He can't wrap his mind around the possibility of doing something different. No flexibility.

The other thing I noted is that it doesn't seem like the team is taking a strategic approach to the games. It seems like the Reds are playing checkers and the other team is playing chess. That falls on the manager too. Totally uninspired baseball.

And to think Terry Francona doesn't have a job this year.

edabbs44
04-14-2012, 06:43 AM
If he does his job, would this thread be started?

Vottomatic
04-14-2012, 06:57 AM
How good could this team be with a legit manager?

Dan
04-14-2012, 07:08 AM
If he does his job, would this thread be started?

Cozart? Absolutely. I was watching the game at the time and criticizing the move even before the outcome. I don't mind the bunt that much, and don't mind batting Cozart for Harris there, but having Cozart bunt there? That makes no sense no matter how it turned out.

Vottomatic
04-14-2012, 07:10 AM
A room full of 30+ people groaned when Dusty took Arroyo out after the soft ground ball to the mound in the 8th.

Everyone can see it but Dusty. Also known as clueless.

PuffyPig
04-14-2012, 07:33 AM
If Arroyo stays in and gives up a HR, everyone groans about leaving him in.

The HR brought the groan, not the manager's choice.

A runner on 2nd, no outs, tie game in extra's? Lot's of managers would bunt. I doubt anyone has ever been fired for doing so.

Buckeye33
04-14-2012, 07:51 AM
If Arroyo stays in and gives up a HR, everyone groans about leaving him in.

The HR brought the groan, not the manager's choice.

A runner on 2nd, no outs, tie game in extra's? Lot's of managers would bunt. I doubt anyone has ever been fired for doing so.

Of course a lot of managers would bunt there, but why would you PH Cozart for Harris to do it? There is no way Cozart is that much a better bunter then Harris to make that move. That was my issue with that move.

oneupper
04-14-2012, 07:55 AM
This team has hit .204 in its first 8 games and scored 22 runs. That's 2.75/game. It's a miracle they're 3-5 and not 1-7.
Dusty? He may have a part of the blame, for he has input into roster construction, and of course for lineups and deciding who plays. The in-game decisions have been meh, but not outrageous, which is pretty much his history.

The offense will get better, but like last year when the mantra was "it will be fine". No, it won't. The team has trouble getting ahead in games (like last year) and embellishes its scoring totals by roughing up relievers in blowouts (for and against).

I don't like Dusty as a manager, never have. But this team, the way it is now, isn't good enough to win the division, even with a genius at the helm.

Mario-Rijo
04-14-2012, 08:02 AM
This team has hit .204 in its first 8 games and scored 22 runs. That's 2.75/game. It's a miracle they're 3-5 and not 1-7.
Dusty? He may have a part of the blame, for he has input into roster construction, and of course for lineups and deciding who plays. The in-game decisions have been meh, but not outrageous, which is pretty much his history.

The offense will get better, but like last year when the mantra was "it will be fine". No, it won't. The team has trouble getting ahead in games (like last year) and embellishes its scoring totals by roughing up relievers in blowouts (for and against).

I don't like Dusty as a manager, never have. But this team, the way it is now, isn't good enough to win the division, even with a genius at the helm.

I said in the offseason this offense needed work, few agreed. Now they will say it's early yet or small sample size or slumps but the truth is the offense as a whole isn't real good. Dusty is a small part of the problem unless of course he is the one telling Walt we have enough offense.

757690
04-14-2012, 08:02 AM
Of course a lot of managers would bunt there, but why would you PH Cozart for Harris to do it? There is no way Cozart is that much a better bunter then Harris to make that move. That was my issue with that move.

Harris is a lefty. The bunt needed to be to the thirdbase side of the mound to advance the runner to third. Much easier for a right handed bunter to do that. I know when I played, way back when, and we were doing bunting drills, and we were practicing bunting the guy from second to third, my coach would have me sit that part out. I'm a lefty, and he said he would never ask me to do that.

The real question, is why pinch hit Cozart there? Harris makes good contact, and should have been able to pull the ball and advance the runner. Although, considering that the next two batters K'd, maybe that's what Baker was afraid of.

These threads always pop up, no matter whose the manager, for every team. I have seen around 15 Reds managers in my day, and every single one made moves that drove me crazy. I understand the frustration, but I realize that no matter who is brought in, I will always be frustrated.

traderumor
04-14-2012, 08:03 AM
I wonder if this will be the only stretch in this season where the team doesn't hit and loses 5 of 8. Or maybe the stretch will be a pitching slump where they lose 5 of 8. Or maybe the bullpen will blow late leads for a stretch. But I bet this isn't the last 5 of 8, or 3-7 stretch, whatever the bad stretch is. Since it happens out of the gate, it is magnified.

Personally I'm glad to see us pitching right now the second time through the rotation. I suppose I could join the rest and start railing at Latos for two so-so starts, but I think it is probabably wise to withhold judgment after two starts, don't you agree? But that is the true concern on this team. Will there be enough pitching.

But this slump certainly does bring the "its the offense, fire Dusty" lynch mob out in the streets in full force, no matter how many times the facts of the last two years of RS/RA are posted here. And the myths of "beating up on relievers in blowouts" and "they'll score 15 runs here soon to pad the stats" get dragged back out. Makes you wanna spit.

edabbs44
04-14-2012, 08:05 AM
This team has hit .204 in its first 8 games and scored 22 runs. That's 2.75/game. It's a miracle they're 3-5 and not 1-7.
Dusty? He may have a part of the blame, for he has input into roster construction, and of course for lineups and deciding who plays. The in-game decisions have been meh, but not outrageous, which is pretty much his history.

The offense will get better, but like last year when the mantra was "it will be fine". No, it won't. The team has trouble getting ahead in games (like last year) and embellishes its scoring totals by roughing up relievers in blowouts (for and against).

I don't like Dusty as a manager, never have. But this team, the way it is now, isn't good enough to win the division, even with a genius at the helm.

95% of the season left. I'm not ready to make any broad statements just yet.

kbrake
04-14-2012, 08:18 AM
If he does his job, would this thread be started?

I thought even you said last night that was a pointless move to burn a bench spot to call for a bunt with Willie Harris being the guy coming up.

And I agree with the OP, Dusty needs to go. Never thought I'd be 8 games in fire the manager guy but I wasted all my patience last year. Not saying last year was Dusty's fault I just don't want to wait around all season waiting for them to click. And the games we've seen the last week or so can be how playoff games go, close games and runs can be tough to come by and what we've seen from Dusty scares the hell out of me.

hebroncougar
04-14-2012, 08:28 AM
Harris is a lefty. The bunt needed to be to the thirdbase side of the mound to advance the runner to third. Much easier for a right handed bunter to do that. I know when I played, way back when, and we were doing bunting drills, and we were practicing bunting the guy from second to third, my coach would have me sit that part out. I'm a lefty, and he said he would never ask me to do that.

The real question, is why pinch hit Cozart there? Harris makes good contact, and should have been able to pull the ball and advance the runner. Although, considering that the next two batters K'd, maybe that's what Baker was afraid of.

These threads always pop up, no matter whose the manager, for every team. I have seen around 15 Reds managers in my day, and every single one made moves that drove me crazy. I understand the frustration, but I realize that no matter who is brought in, I will always be frustrated.

That makes no sense. It's actually an acquired skill. Pushing a bunt was always easier than dragging a bunt for the players I coached. I NEVER once considered the handedness of a batter when calling for a bunt.

That being said, I didn't have a problem with the Arroyo move. I did have a problem with Bray, instead of Chapman. If you're keeping what legitimately could be your ace (once he acquires the stamina) in the bullpen because you need him there, he needs to be used in high leverage situations instead of other guys. Last night was a perfect example of when he should have been used. Your offense isn't scoring, you have a one run lead, it's the eighth inning, and evidently Arroyo said he was gassed.

Using Cozart as a PH, then bunting him, is about as dumb as the above. Harris is an accomplished bunter, and didn't need to be replaced defensively, and Cozart is one of 3 bullets you have on your bench at that point (really 2 because you don't want to use Mesoraco). You don't use a bullet to bunt, you use him to hit. And using him to HIT in that situation made sense. Not using him to bunt.

The team not hitting well doesn't fall on Baker, but not maximizing the team's chances of winning two nights in a row is Baker's fault. I'm sure if he continues down this path, he won't be long for a job. Ownership has too much money invested, there is too much at stake at this point.

Captain Hook
04-14-2012, 08:38 AM
This team has hit .204 in its first 8 games and scored 22 runs. That's 2.75/game. It's a miracle they're 3-5 and not 1-7.
Dusty? He may have a part of the blame, for he has input into roster construction, and of course for lineups and deciding who plays. The in-game decisions have been meh, but not outrageous, which is pretty much his history..

I think we can all agree that Dusty's strongest asset as a manager is his ability to keep everyone happy, even when things aren't going well.He's the ultimate players coach.While I don't think Baker should be blamed every time someone goes into a slump, getting guys to preform is one thing a players coach should be able to do.Even the best in game manage would struggle the way the Reds players are preforming right now but Dusty seems completely clueless.If he can't get his guys to play well he's not much good as a coach.

mth123
04-14-2012, 08:58 AM
He is my take, I have three issues with Dusty so far, but its not all Dusty IMO.

1. Simon is a mop-up man. He should only be used to soak up innings in a lost cause or as a last resort. He did well last night, but it doesn't change a thing. The guy is 31 and has never been a good pitcher. Trying to discover a hidden gem in him is a fools errand IMO.

2. Rolen should hit 7th or maybe second if he's hitting well and Cozart is slumping. That said, the middle of the order has three spots (3, 4, 5 ) and the Reds really only have two guys who should be penciled in there. We'd be having the same gripes about anybody else hitting in one of those spots who isn't Votto or Bruce.

3. My biggest gripe is more with the organization or possiby Bryan Price. For the 3rd year in a row this team has left spring training with a staff that just isn't ready for the season IMO. The starters haven't gotten deep enough into games during spring to be considered ready and the relievers haven't been stretched or worked enough in back to back games. Inviting 30 pitchers to camp and giving them all innings has played a big part in this IMO. This team invites guys who have no shot of making the staff even if the top 15 or so all were involved in a plane crash. What happened to the days when starters got six starts and went 2, 3, 3, 5, 7, and 5 innings? Get stretched on the fifth start and back off on the last one to make them strong for the season. Relievers in the last couple weeks of spring should be getting stretched to two or even three innings at least once and go back to back a couple of times. I think this is a contributing factor in why we've seen so many short starts early in the year the last three seasons and why the pen is used up and in trouble by the end of the 2nd week.

jojo
04-14-2012, 09:07 AM
It's a marathon, not a sprint.

RedlegJake
04-14-2012, 09:10 AM
It's a marathon, not a sprint.

Yes, and with Dusty managing I feel like a 300 pound donut muncher starting the 26 mile run...

oneupper
04-14-2012, 09:13 AM
But this slump certainly does bring the "its the offense, fire Dusty" lynch mob out in the streets in full force, no matter how many times the facts of the last two years of RS/RA are posted here. And the myths of "beating up on relievers in blowouts" and "they'll score 15 runs here soon to pad the stats" get dragged back out. Makes you wanna spit.

2010: RS 790 RA 685 (91-71)
2011: RS 735 RA 720 (79-83)

Not sure why this stimulates expectoration urges, but the team did drop 55 runs from 2010 to 2011. Of those 44 runs were lost in away games.

Away Games

2010: RS 391 RA 344 (42-39)
2011: RS 347 RA 352 (37-44)

And the team had trouble getting ahead in games..

Runs through 6 innings:

2010: RS 523 RA 474 (Pythag 88 wins)
2011: RS 500 RA 506 (Pythag 80 wins)

So the “beating up on relievers” has some data to back it up, although it is not extreme. These things are usually not.

In any case, "playing from behind" is not a winning formula in baseball.

I guess the key to the offense is if the 2012 version is better than the 2011 version. I don’t think it is, and that worries me. Yes, only 8 games in.

Of course, the Pirates have scored 11 runs in 8 games. They should be mortified.

Ghosts of 1990
04-14-2012, 09:18 AM
The worst move was he brought in Bray to face a RH batter to try and save Chapman. As irony had it; with 5 outs to go, Dusty got caught with his pants down.

Oh, and he spent the whole bullpen in the process. And we lost in 13.

I really like Dusty as a man, but he's bad sometimes.

traderumor
04-14-2012, 09:47 AM
2010: RS 790 RA 685 (91-71)
2011: RS 735 RA 720 (79-83)

Not sure why this stimulates expectoration urges, but the team did drop 55 runs from 2010 to 2011. Of those 44 runs were lost in away games.

Away Games

2010: RS 391 RA 344 (42-39)
2011: RS 347 RA 352 (37-44)

And the team had trouble getting ahead in games..

Runs through 6 innings:

2010: RS 523 RA 474 (Pythag 88 wins)
2011: RS 500 RA 506 (Pythag 80 wins)

So the “beating up on relievers” has some data to back it up, although it is not extreme. These things are usually not.

In any case, "playing from behind" is not a winning formula in baseball.

I guess the key to the offense is if the 2012 version is better than the 2011 version. I don’t think it is, and that worries me. Yes, only 8 games in.

Of course, the Pirates have scored 11 runs in 8 games. They should be mortified.
Scoring was down league wide in 2011. If you look at the spread from league average, the offense was pretty much a push from 2010 in scoring runs.

The team had trouble in 2011 getting ahead early in games because of poor starting pitching. Our rotation got outpitched by the other team's rotation. Your data supports that. Surely you aren't concluding from that data it is on the offense?

BTW, the myth is beating up on middle relievers in blowout games produces top of the league offensive production over the course of the season.

Really, no matter how you slice and dice this squad, its going to come back to having enough starting pitching. The offense will do its thing when it does and by the end of the game score in the neighborhood of 4.5 runs.

OldXOhio
04-14-2012, 09:51 AM
This team has hit .204 in its first 8 games and scored 22 runs. That's 2.75/game. It's a miracle they're 3-5 and not 1-7.
Dusty? He may have a part of the blame, for he has input into roster construction, and of course for lineups and deciding who plays. The in-game decisions have been meh, but not outrageous, which is pretty much his history.

The offense will get better, but like last year when the mantra was "it will be fine". No, it won't. The team has trouble getting ahead in games (like last year) and embellishes its scoring totals by roughing up relievers in blowouts (for and against).

I don't like Dusty as a manager, never have. But this team, the way it is now, isn't good enough to win the division, even with a genius at the helm.

A year ago we started off 5-0 and looked like world beaters. Were we good enough then?

OldXOhio
04-14-2012, 09:54 AM
The worst move was he brought in Bray to face a RH batter to try and save Chapman. As irony had it; with 5 outs to go, Dusty got caught with his pants down.

Oh, and he spent the whole bullpen in the process. And we lost in 13.

I really like Dusty as a man, but he's bad sometimes.

Bray was brought in to face a lefty. DJ countered by hitting Nady instead.

nate
04-14-2012, 09:58 AM
I'm not big on Dusty's field management but I do think he's good at managing personalities in the clubhouse.

To me, it seems far too early to be making any declarative statements about the Reds. 8 games isn't really indicative of anything.

Roy Tucker
04-14-2012, 10:08 AM
I'm not big on Dusty's field management but I do think he's good at managing personalities in the clubhouse.

To me, it seems far too early to be making any declarative statements about the Reds. 8 games isn't really indicative of anything.

This is where I'm at too.

Dusty has his strengths (longer term player relationships and motivation) and weaknesses (short-term roster management and in-game moves). The trouble is, I'm afraid this team is currently playing tight, low-scoring games where the manager has to be smart and astute as to what he does when which is his weakness.

So with a the proverbial small sample size, Dusty's strengths haven't shown yet but his weaknesses sure as heck have.

I hate to be losing the games the way they way they have, but you have to let it play out for a while yet. No panic buttons, no knee-jerk moves, and be in it for the long term. But if it comes June and the team is sputtering, his job may be in danger.

kbrake
04-14-2012, 10:19 AM
To everyone who is still relaxed about everything. At what point is it time to make some changes? I'm honestly curious to what you guys think because I had the "its a marathon not a sprint" attitude last year and then before you knew it the season was shot. So when will you guys start to push for changes?

HokieRed
04-14-2012, 10:22 AM
I'm pretty neutral on Dusty; he has some strengths, some pretty obvious weaknesses. But as to where we'd be with a "legit" manager, I'd say, lucky to be 3-5. With 5 inning starts and next to no offense, it's hard to see how we'd be better. And it is a marathon rather than a sprint, but even in a marathon, you can't let yourself get too far behind without making a change. I'd give Jacoby twenty games, Stubbs 25, Dusty maybe 40.

Kc61
04-14-2012, 10:34 AM
Dusty isn't known as a great in game strategic manager, and his prowess comes up in these low scoring games which are decided on or two key plays.

But the basic problem with the team isn't Dusty, who on balance is a good manager.

When a GABP team cannot score runs, there is a problem. It's not the manager's problem. The hitting right now stinks. Look at the team hitting numbers so far, they are pathetic. Pittsburgh's numbers are worse, which is truly frightening for their fans.

The team is poorly constructed for offense and right now is in a major team slump. I don't blame Dusty for these key facts.

Unassisted
04-14-2012, 10:35 AM
If you're getting rid of Dusty, you have to have a plan to replace him with someone better. With the millions Dusty's making (even if fired) and the millions being plowed into payroll, I doubt the Reds can afford someone known to be better. Which means he'd be replaced with someone inexperienced. I didn't enjoy the Dave Miley and Bob Boone eras and I don't remember reading on RedsZone where anyone was pining for those. Yet that is the most likely scenario if Dusty goes.

nate
04-14-2012, 10:49 AM
To everyone who is still relaxed about everything. At what point is it time to make some changes? I'm honestly curious to what you guys think because I had the "its a marathon not a sprint" attitude last year and then before you knew it the season was shot. So when will you guys start to push for changes?

That's a very complex question but a gross oversimplification would be a month.

OldXOhio
04-14-2012, 10:49 AM
Dusty isn't known as a great in game strategic manager, and his prowess comes up in these low scoring games which are decided on or two key plays.

But the basic problem with the team isn't Dusty, who on balance is a good manager.

When a GABP team cannot score runs, there is a problem. It's not the manager's problem. The hitting right now stinks. Look at the team hitting numbers so far, they are pathetic. Pittsburgh's numbers are worse, which is truly frightening for their fans.

The team is poorly constructed for offense and right now is in a major team slump. I don't blame Dusty for these key facts.

To say the team is poorly constructed offensively is a bit extreme don't you think, certainly when we can all recognize half the lineup is in an early slump.

154 games left, I'm not anywhere close to forming lasting judgments about this team.

George Anderson
04-14-2012, 10:53 AM
I am not a huge Dusty fan by any means, but firing him 8 games into the season when he has arguably the best resume of any current MLB manager is a sure sign of overreacting.

PuffyPig
04-14-2012, 11:03 AM
The worst move was he brought in Bray to face a RH batter to try and save Chapman. As irony had it; with 5 outs to go, Dusty got caught with his pants down.

Oh, and he spent the whole bullpen in the process. And we lost in 13.

I really like Dusty as a man, but he's bad sometimes.

Not accurante.

Bray was brought in to face the LH Tracy. Nady then PH for Tracy.

You are right, it is ironic, someone else has been caught with "his pants down".

;)

traderumor
04-14-2012, 11:10 AM
Not accurante.

Bray was brought in to face the LH Tracy. Nady then PH for Tracy.

You are right, it is ironic, someone else has been caught with "his pants down".

;)
Most baseball moves make one manager look like a genius while the other one looks stupid. Like Wednesday, Matheny doesn't respect Heisey's reverse righty splits (two years running trend) and brings in his righty, who gets a ball up and Heisey hits the game winner.

It would seem, for all the baseball knowledge bandied around on this board, that these simple dynamics would not continually trap people in taking the opposite side on managerial moves. Yet here it is, dominating the conversation about the team. If they're going good, its the players succeeding despite the manager. Losing is, of course on the manager, the players being unable to compensate for the stupidity of the fat old guy in the dugout wearing a baseball uniform badly.

alloverjr
04-14-2012, 11:11 AM
Not accurante.

Bray was brought in to face the LH Tracy. Nady then PH for Tracy.

You are right, it is ironic, someone else has been caught with "his pants down".

;)


If you're going to spank someone, use spell check. :p

Brutus
04-14-2012, 11:15 AM
http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/imagebuzz/web02/2010/3/21/16/overreaction-28119-1269203708-18.jpg

westofyou
04-14-2012, 11:46 AM
How good could this team be with a legit manager?

Yes, guys with as many games managed as Dusty are a big fake... good observation.

Kc61
04-14-2012, 12:00 PM
To say the team is poorly constructed offensively is a bit extreme don't you think, certainly when we can all recognize half the lineup is in an early slump.

154 games left, I'm not anywhere close to forming lasting judgments about this team.

Read the other thread on early season offense, please.

As I've said there, the early slump is unfortunate, it happens, the Reds will do better.

But the team is poorly constructed offensively by any measure. It is three stars -- Votto, Bruce, Phillips -- and a series of modest hitters, all right handed, most of whom are impatient hitters, few of whom hit righties well.

The team lacks lefty/righty balance, has zero switch hitters, lacks patient hitters -- and has one hitter whose inability to make contact is, well, alarming yet plays every single day against all pitchers.

The team has a very odd platoon in LF of two modest hitters who are both right handed and do not complement each other particularly well.

The team's bench is all righty except for Harris making it tough to match up against late inning righty relievers.

The team's cleanup hitter is a great player but at this stage shouldn't be hitting cleanup, which will result in Votto getting nothing to hit.

All this is discussed at length in the other thread, I hope you'll go over there and read the discussion.

757690
04-14-2012, 12:44 PM
That makes no sense. It's actually an acquired skill. Pushing a bunt was always easier than dragging a bunt for the players I coached. I NEVER once considered the handedness of a batter when calling for a bunt.

Well, to be fair to my coach, I never acquired any skills, lol.

But I know I never practiced bunting a guy to third or a suicide squeeze. Was always held out of those sessions.

While you might not consider handedness of a batter when calling for a bunt, there are plenty of managers that do. For the record, Drew Stubbs has bunted to the first base side of the mound, just once in his career, on opening day this year.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 01:01 PM
A room full of 30+ people groaned when Dusty took Arroyo out after the soft ground ball to the mound in the 8th.

Everyone can see it but Dusty. Also known as clueless.
I am a huge "Dusty-hater". I have no desire to watch him manage my favorite team. I think he is a flat out terrible in game manager. His strategies are terrible, his line ups suck (even when he isn't hamstrung by bad players, he doesn't get the idea that players aren't what he thinks they should be). I groaned when Arroyo came out for the 8th. I was happy when he pulled Arroyo after the ground out. It was the right move. It didn't work out, but I still believe that it was 100% the right move and all I do is hope that the next time a similar situation presents itself, that Dusty does the same thing rather than leave Arroyo in there to try and get it done himself since yesterday happened.


Yes, guys with as many games managed as Dusty are a big fake... good observation.
Big fake, no? Not a good manager? Yeah, I can go with that. When has Dusty won when he didn't have the best player in baseball? He had Bonds in San Francisco. He won in Chicago when he had a healthy Prior/Wood combo who were both Cy Young contenders. He won when Votto took home an MVP.

Chip R
04-14-2012, 01:27 PM
I'm pretty neutral on Dusty; he has some strengths, some pretty obvious weaknesses. But as to where we'd be with a "legit" manager, I'd say, lucky to be 3-5. With 5 inning starts and next to no offense, it's hard to see how we'd be better. And it is a marathon rather than a sprint, but even in a marathon, you can't let yourself get too far behind without making a change. I'd give Jacoby twenty games, Stubbs 25, Dusty maybe 40.

I agree. Awful hard to win scoring 1 run.

westofyou
04-14-2012, 01:49 PM
Big fake, no? Not a good manager? Yeah, I can go with that. When has Dusty won when he didn't have the best player in baseball? He had Bonds in San Francisco. He won in Chicago when he had a healthy Prior/Wood combo who were both Cy Young contenders. He won when Votto took home an MVP.

Exactly

Dusty has more games managed than Billy Southworth , Roger Craig, Paul Richards, Tom Kelly, Charlie Grimm, Miller Huggins, Earl Weaver, Chuck Tanner, Al Lopez, Fred Clarke, Bill Rigney and Whitey Herzog.

In my POV that creates a case seeping of legitamacy.

I might not agree with his approach in any aspect of the game or clubhouse, but that's an opinion.

His record in the game is a fact.

WMR
04-14-2012, 01:53 PM
While Uncle Bob is spending the cabbage, how about peeling off a few more million for Terry Francona?

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 02:34 PM
While Uncle Bob is spending the cabbage, how about peeling off a few more million for Terry Francona?

Uncle Bob is the one who wants Dusty. :bang:

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 02:36 PM
Exactly

Dusty has more games managed than Billy Southworth , Roger Craig, Paul Richards, Tom Kelly, Charlie Grimm, Miller Huggins, Earl Weaver, Chuck Tanner, Al Lopez, Fred Clarke, Bill Rigney and Whitey Herzog.

In my POV that creates a case seeping of legitamacy.

I might not agree with his approach in any aspect of the game or clubhouse, but that's an opinion.

His record in the game is a fact.

Sure, his record is a fact. But does his record or even number of games managed actually tell us whether he is any good at his job? I don't think it does. What if he took over the Royals in 1993 instead of the Barry Bonds fueled Giants?

George Anderson
04-14-2012, 03:00 PM
Baker kinda reminds me of Casey Stengal in a way. It is easy to win with Mantle, Maris, Berra and Ford on your team but not so easy when the stars on the team are Lonny Frey and Frenchy Bordagaray.

Really the same could be said about Sparky.

westofyou
04-14-2012, 03:02 PM
Sure, his record is a fact. But does his record or even number of games managed actually tell us whether he is any good at his job? I don't think it does. What if he took over the Royals in 1993 instead of the Barry Bonds fueled Giants?

"What if's" is a parlor game.

I don't care to go down that rabbit hole, it's a time sucker.

My point is the guy does something right to continue in the game.

Either except that as a fact or continue to create walls from it getting to you, that's your decision.

westofyou
04-14-2012, 03:04 PM
Really the same could be said about Sparky.

And Bill Mcketchie, Frankie Frisch, Al Lopez, Joe Torre and on and on and on...

Blitz Dorsey
04-14-2012, 03:09 PM
If Dusty is not back in 2013, what are some thoughts about Terry Francona taking over as Reds' manager? Personally, I would love it. Former Red player (although that has nothing to do with why I want him).

Everyone knows about the great things he did in Boston. But many gloss over the fact that he took a bad Phillies team one year and kept them in a race all season. Guy is a proven quality manager, and considering the Reds' front office has shown long-term commitments to key players like Votto, Phillips and Bruce, I could see Tito being interested in the gig.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 03:16 PM
And Bill Mcketchie, Frankie Frisch, Al Lopez, Joe Torre and on and on and on...

This is incredibly true. I am not arguing that it isn't. You can only do so much with what you have. But my point is that Baker has had some incredibly elite players in his time and that is why he has won, not because he is anything resembling a good manager.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 03:19 PM
"What if's" is a parlor game.

I don't care to go down that rabbit hole, it's a time sucker.

My point is the guy does something right to continue in the game.

Either except that as a fact or continue to create walls from it getting to you, that's your decision.

I will accept that he has found himself in awesome situations. The guy is a bad manager. His in game strategy sucks. He has no ability to adapt. He sees players for what he wants them to be rather than what they are.

Unassisted
04-14-2012, 03:21 PM
Uncle Bob is the one who wants Dusty. :bang:Not everything happens for baseball reasons.

Given how few minority managers there are in MLB and the importance that Bud Selig places on diversity, I suspect that having Dusty at the helm helps keep the Reds in on the good side of the ledger at MLB HQ. Selig has been around long enough to remember the stains that Pete Rose and Marge Schott put on the sport. Like it or not, the Reds need to offset some of their negative history to gain favor with the commissioner.

westofyou
04-14-2012, 03:30 PM
I will accept that he has found himself in awesome situations. The guy is a bad manager. His in game strategy sucks. He has no ability to adapt. He sees players for what he wants them to be rather than what they are.

Luck is the residue of design

Branch Rickey

traderumor
04-14-2012, 03:38 PM
Good manager, bad manager, what objective measures? Well, there really is none, since record always gets dismissed. So the discussion goes on "I think he sucks" and 100 reasons why, while those who disagree are left without much ammunition other than something like "he has reached the playoffs everywhere he's managed." Response? "He has players." It's like arguing the existence of God with an atheist, it doesn't really matter what arguments are made, good, bad and indifferent, folks have their minds made up.

In the end, its like discussing decor, food, or music, just a matter of taste. But the manager haters are very vocal and shout down anyone trying to be fair.

BTW, who had game #8 in the "Fire Dusty" poll?

757690
04-14-2012, 03:41 PM
This is incredibly true. I am not arguing that it isn't. You can only do so much with what you have. But my point is that Baker has had some incredibly elite players in his time and that is why he has won, not because he is anything resembling a good manager.

Managers need good players to win, but the history of baseball is filled with managers who failed even with good players. Ray Knight is a perfect example. If Dusty is truly as bad as you say he is, than his teams never would have won, no matter who was on them.

AtomicDumpling
04-14-2012, 03:48 PM
I think Dusty Baker is a man with an old-fashioned mind that has never had an original thought. He manages the Reds in the 21st century with a 1970's mindset. He was a good player and a poor manager. That being said, I don't think the manager of a baseball team has all that much impact on the team's success or failure in the long haul. Definitely much less impact than the coach of a college basketball team or an NFL team.

edabbs44
04-14-2012, 03:51 PM
To everyone who is still relaxed about everything. At what point is it time to make some changes? I'm honestly curious to what you guys think because I had the "its a marathon not a sprint" attitude last year and then before you knew it the season was shot. So when will you guys start to push for changes?

We're in the 4th qtr of the first game of the NFL season.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 03:52 PM
Good manager, bad manager, what objective measures? Well, there really is none, since record always gets dismissed. So the discussion goes on "I think he sucks" and 100 reasons why, while those who disagree are left without much ammunition other than something like "he has reached the playoffs everywhere he's managed." Response? "He has players." It's like arguing the existence of God with an atheist, it doesn't really matter what arguments are made, good, bad and indifferent, folks have their minds made up.

In the end, its like discussing decor, food, or music, just a matter of taste. But the manager haters are very vocal and shout down anyone trying to be fair.

BTW, who had game #8 in the "Fire Dusty" poll?
I am sure we all have different criteria as to what makes a good manager. My general idea is that a manger makes decisions with a good basis. Last night, Dusty caught flack for pulling Arroyo from a bunch of people. I back up his decision there. Simply because it didn't work out doesn't mean it was a bad idea.

My issue as to why I think Dusty is a bad manager, is that I simply can't figure out his reasoning (or at least make sense of his reasoning when he does present it) on a whole bunch of his decisions. There is a long history of it. That is why I think he is a poor manager.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 03:53 PM
I think Dusty Baker is a man with an old-fashioned mind that has never had an original thought. He manages the Reds in the 21st century with a 1970's mindset. He was a good player and a poor manager. That being said, I don't think the manager of a baseball team has all that much impact on the team's success or failure in the long haul. Definitely much less impact than the coach of a college basketball team or an NFL team.

Well, you know, until Mark Prior's arm blows up and Aaron Harang falls apart because he had to change his mechanics because he was used in a terrible manner....

westofyou
04-14-2012, 03:57 PM
Most managing is done in the clubhouse, the game time genius in the dugout is a baseball myth 90% of the time (Charlie Dressen - "Keep em close for 7 fellow's I'll think of something.")

The ones that stay on are guys who play the percentages and mange human beings with skill and assemble crack staffs of professionals to help at game time.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 03:58 PM
Most managing is done in the clubhouse, the game time genius in the dugout is a baseball myth 90% of the time (Charlie Dressen - "Keep em close for 7 fellow's I'll think of something.")

The ones that stay on are guys who play the percentages and mange human beings with skill and assemble crack staffs of professionals to help at game time.

Dusty's line ups say that he doesn't understand playing the percentages.

fearofpopvol1
04-14-2012, 05:46 PM
I'm not the biggest Dusty fan at all, but I don't think his decisions have vastly affected the outcomes of the wins/losses so far. As I mentioned elsewhere though, I cannot understand Dusty continuing to put Scott Rolen in the 4 hole, who had an OPS last year of under .700.

jojo
04-14-2012, 06:01 PM
Sit through a season of Mike Hargrove and Dusty would look like a flash of color on a grey canvas....

powersackers
04-14-2012, 06:02 PM
Reds today: 21 outs 66 pitches for Edwin Jackson. Approach stinks, who's our hitting coach ?

pedro
04-14-2012, 06:07 PM
Dusty's line ups say that he doesn't understand playing the percentages.

I think you overestimate the importance of what you think you'd be good at and underestimate the importance of things you probably wouldn't be.

alexad
04-14-2012, 06:09 PM
Reds today: 21 outs 66 pitches for Edwin Jackson. Approach stinks, who's our hitting coach ?

Exactly. Jacoby needs to be the first to go.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 06:13 PM
I think you overestimate the importance of what you think you'd be good at and underestimate the importance of things you probably wouldn't be.

I think I wouldn't bat terrible batters leadoff for years simply because they are fast.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 06:13 PM
Sit through a season of Mike Hargrove and Dusty would look like a flash of color on a grey canvas....

Simply because there are worse options doesn't mean Baker is good.

jojo
04-14-2012, 06:15 PM
Simply because there are worse options doesn't mean Baker is good.

I think with managers, mostly, the grass is always greener....

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 06:18 PM
I think with managers, mostly, the grass is always greener....

Maybe, but with Dusty, it seems that just about everyone thinks he sucks at his job.

westofyou
04-14-2012, 06:19 PM
Fact is most managers are brought in for a reason, to be comforting, lead, teach, coddle, yell at, manipulate, inspire etc...

Fact is most managers get fired because they don't do everything that a manager is suppose to accomplish, mostly because it's pretty darn near impossible.

Dusty was brought in to transition a young team into a team of well rounded season pros, not as an x's and o's guy.

The next Reds manager will be that guy as that will be the Achilles Heel of Dusty, it's inevitable he'll lose out on that bargain.

The next guy?

He'll still drive you crazy, bank on it

westofyou
04-14-2012, 06:20 PM
Maybe, but with Dusty, it seems that just about everyone thinks he sucks at his job.

"seems"

"just about"

"everybody"

Can't get more vague than that.

pedro
04-14-2012, 06:41 PM
I think I wouldn't bat terrible batters leadoff for years simply because they are fast.

You seem to have a very shallow perception of the full breadth of a manager's job.

I suppose Bobby Cox was a lousy manager too. Fact is, lots of managers might not do things that you think are "smart", but then again,they actually have to manage human beings, not just wax poetic about it.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 06:44 PM
You seem to have a very shallow perception of the full breadth of a manager's job.

I suppose Bobby Cox was a lousy manager too. Fact is, lots of managers might not do things that you think are "smart", but then again,they actually have to manage human beings, not just wax poetic about it.

No, I simply was pointing out one thing. I can't say if Bobby was or wasn't a lousy manager. I didn't watch him day in and day out.

Managing human beings is fine and dandy. But if you can tell a guy that he isn't good enough to start, you can tell that guy that he doesn't get on base enough to bat leadoff. This isn't rocket science here.

Always Red
04-14-2012, 07:00 PM
The next guy?

He'll still drive you crazy, bank on it

truer words have never been spoken.

I like Dusty. He makes me feel better and more hopeful about people, in general. I like him much better than I did when he first got the job.

I watched today's game and wished Davey Johnson was still managing this team. Not sure why he was out of a job for so long, other than maybe he is kind of a free spirit.

The bats are slumping- that's all this is about. Once they start hitting again, Dusty will become a better manager. The sad thing is they are wasting some decent pitching right now...decent pitching doesn't come every day around here.

mth123
04-14-2012, 07:03 PM
I've come to the realization that a change may not do much. I've been a frequent complainer about Dusty's in-game moves, but when pressed to name some one who might be different, I have a hard time coming up with a realistic alternative.

I'd rather see the game evolve to more of a football style leadership structure where the Manager is more of a head coach who is a leader of men and the team turns over the X's and O's to an offensive (Bench Coach) and defensive (Pitching Coach) coordinator. Let the Bench Coach make out the line-ups, determine who pinch hits and defensive substitutions. The Pitching Coach should decide all the pitching changes and uses of the pen. That structure would work better IMO and would really play into Dusty's strengths.

The Manager would still retain veto power, but if he's really a leader of men, he would be delegating responsibility and not using that power frequently. If he is using the veto, he's not really doing his primary job.

Brutus
04-14-2012, 07:11 PM
Funny thing is, I see Terry Francona's name pop up. I wonder what Phillies' fans would have thought of Francona before he went on to make a name for himself in Boston. People forget his best record in Philly from 1997-2000 was 77-85.

pedro
04-14-2012, 07:12 PM
No, I simply was pointing out one thing. I can't say if Bobby was or wasn't a lousy manager. I didn't watch him day in and day out.

Managing human beings is fine and dandy. But if you can tell a guy that he isn't good enough to start, you can tell that guy that he doesn't get on base enough to bat leadoff. This isn't rocket science here.

I'm confident you would have railed on Bobby for all the things that you don't like about Dusty's lineup construction and downplayed the "fine and dandy" manner in which he managed everything else.

Dusty isn't a genius with the lineup, but that skill alone doesn't define a good manager, despite your constant assertions as such.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 07:14 PM
Funny thing is, I see Terry Francona's name pop up. I wonder what Phillies' fans would have thought of Francona before he went on to make a name for himself in Boston. People forget his best record in Philly from 1997-2000 was 77-85.

See, that is why I generally never say who I want as a manager, because I honestly don't know. If I were ever to be put in charge of finding a manager, there would be about 50 questions I would like to have answered by the manager before I could start going through resumes.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 07:16 PM
I'm confident you would have railed on Bobby for all the things that you don't like about Dusty's lineup construction and downplayed the "fine and dandy" manner in which he managed everything else.

Dusty isn't a genius with the lineup, but that skill alone doesn't define a good manager, despite your constant assertions as such.

That isn't the only reason I think Dusty isn't a good manager. And it certainly isn't the only thing I ever bring up. His inability to adapt. His stubbornness toward only using players in preconceived roles. His thinking a player is what he wants them to be rather than what they are. His lineups are just easy because he does it every day and for the majority of his career he has been using players terribly at the top of it.

pedro
04-14-2012, 07:27 PM
That isn't the only reason I think Dusty isn't a good manager. And it certainly isn't the only thing I ever bring up. His inability to adapt. His stubbornness toward only using players in preconceived roles. His thinking a player is what he wants them to be rather than what they are. His lineups are just easy because he does it every day and for the majority of his career he has been using players terribly at the top of it.

Don't hurt yourself when you get bucked off that horse, you're up there pretty high.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 07:29 PM
Don't hurt yourself when you get bucked off that horse, you're up there pretty high.

I won't. I avoided horses.

hebroncougar
04-14-2012, 07:32 PM
That isn't the only reason I think Dusty isn't a good manager. And it certainly isn't the only thing I ever bring up. His inability to adapt. His stubbornness toward only using players in preconceived roles. His thinking a player is what he wants them to be rather than what they are. His lineups are just easy because he does it every day and for the majority of his career he has been using players terribly at the top of it.

C'mon, this is easy. It's been going on so long. :D

westofyou
04-14-2012, 07:39 PM
If you have nine hitters and nine batting order slots to put them in there are 362,880 ways to do it, and only one of them is right.

Bill James

pedro
04-14-2012, 08:10 PM
I won't. I avoided horses.

Could of fooled me.

traderumor
04-14-2012, 08:11 PM
I've come to the realization that a change may not do much. I've been a frequent complainer about Dusty's in-game moves, but when pressed to name some one who might be different, I have a hard time coming up with a realistic alternative.

I'd rather see the game evolve to more of a football style leadership structure where the Manager is more of a head coach who is a leader of men and the team turns over the X's and O's to an offensive (Bench Coach) and defensive (Pitching Coach) coordinator. Let the Bench Coach make out the line-ups, determine who pinch hits and defensive substitutions. The Pitching Coach should decide all the pitching changes and uses of the pen. That structure would work better IMO and would really play into Dusty's strengths.

The Manager would still retain veto power, but if he's really a leader of men, he would be delegating responsibility and not using that power frequently. If he is using the veto, he's not really doing his primary job.Tried and failed, see Cubs "College of Coaches" attempt in the 60s. That idea is Ichabod.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 08:20 PM
Tried and failed, see Cubs "College of Coaches" attempt in the 60s. That idea is Ichabod.

Lots of things have failed after just one try.

westofyou
04-14-2012, 08:24 PM
Tried and failed, see Cubs "College of Coaches" attempt in the 60s. That idea is Ichabod.

Read a great article on that recently, in a nutshell the team ended up gravitating to the single general idea eventually as only a few actually managed and even that got kooky



Under the circumstances, the result was predictable. Without firm and consistent leadership, chaos reigned in the Cubs' dugout. The head coach position rotated among four different men in 1961 and three more in 1962 — two of whom were holdovers from 1961 — and all seven had losing records.

mth123
04-14-2012, 08:28 PM
Read a great article on that recently, in a nutshell the team ended up gravitating to the single general idea eventually as only a few actually managed and even that got kooky



Under the circumstances, the result was predictable. Without firm and consistent leadership, chaos reigned in the Cubs' dugout. The head coach position rotated among four different men in 1961 and three more in 1962 — two of whom were holdovers from 1961 — and all seven had losing records.

That doesn't sound like what I'm talking about. There wouldn't be any rotating.

traderumor
04-14-2012, 08:29 PM
I am sure we all have different criteria as to what makes a good manager. My general idea is that a manger makes decisions with a good basis. Last night, Dusty caught flack for pulling Arroyo from a bunch of people. I back up his decision there. Simply because it didn't work out doesn't mean it was a bad idea.

My issue as to why I think Dusty is a bad manager, is that I simply can't figure out his reasoning (or at least make sense of his reasoning when he does present it) on a whole bunch of his decisions. There is a long history of it. That is why I think he is a poor manager.I would say this response proves my point. This reasoning is shallow and subjective, certainly not a fair evaluation at any level.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 08:31 PM
I would say this response proves my point. This reasoning is shallow and subjective, certainly not a fair evaluation at any level.

Which part of it is shallow or fair?

traderumor
04-14-2012, 08:35 PM
Lots of things have failed after just one try.
Then there are things that fail so miserably they are never tried again. But if this concept is resurrected, it would be approprite for the Cubs to be dumb enough to try it again.

traderumor
04-14-2012, 08:42 PM
Which part of it is shallow or fair?He makes lots of decisions you don't understand or agree with. Textbook subjective argumentation, as well as begging the question.

mth123
04-14-2012, 08:45 PM
Then there are things that fail so miserably they are never tried again. But if this concept is resurrected, it would be approprite for the Cubs to be dumb enough to try it again.

The idea of having 8 guys who rotate coaching roles, including as top guy, is pretty different from what I'm suggesting and its not what they do in the NFL which was the example I used for the type of roles I'm suggesting.

traderumor
04-14-2012, 08:59 PM
The idea of having 8 guys who rotate coaching roles, including as top guy, is pretty different from what I'm suggesting and its not what they do in the NFL which was the example I used for the type of roles I'm suggesting.You're bandying the idea of multiple decision makers in game, with input from a CEO type role. The parallel is in multiple decision makers for strategy and personnel decisions.

_Sir_Charles_
04-14-2012, 09:04 PM
Just out of curiosity, are we discussing this in part because of today's game? If so, it's beyond silly IMO. We got TWO HITS. I don't care HOW you shuffle a lineup or who starts where...TWO HITS. No amount of manager-magic is going to turn that into anything but an old fashioned butt-whipping. Personally, I think we should just give credit to Jackson who threw a dandy.

mth123
04-14-2012, 09:08 PM
You're bandying the idea of multiple decision makers in game, with input from a CEO type role. The parallel is in multiple decision makers for strategy and personnel decisions.

Actually, I'm suggesting that there are too many aspects to being a manager for one solitary man to be the best choice for all of them. Why not recognize it and let the best guys for a particular role play that role? I wouldn't want the guy in charge of the hospital operating on my brain. Maybe the guy in charge of the team isn't always the best guy to determine when to change pitchers or who to PH with. What makes Baseball so unique that it can't be successful through establishing roles and delegating authority when many other more complex organizations do the same. Actually the ones that refuse to do that are usually the most poorly run.

jojo
04-14-2012, 09:17 PM
Generally i wouldnt even bother putting the manager's name on the back of their jersey. IMHO most of them are fungible as they all generally cancel each other out. Here's something to think about though. Dusty is a player's manager whose strength is managing the clubhouse. Is it possible that the Reds are developing "manager fatigue" concerning Dusty?

757690
04-14-2012, 09:18 PM
I've come to the realization that a change may not do much. I've been a frequent complainer about Dusty's in-game moves, but when pressed to name some one who might be different, I have a hard time coming up with a realistic alternative.

I'd rather see the game evolve to more of a football style leadership structure where the Manager is more of a head coach who is a leader of men and the team turns over the X's and O's to an offensive (Bench Coach) and defensive (Pitching Coach) coordinator. Let the Bench Coach make out the line-ups, determine who pinch hits and defensive substitutions. The Pitching Coach should decide all the pitching changes and uses of the pen. That structure would work better IMO and would really play into Dusty's strengths.

The Manager would still retain veto power, but if he's really a leader of men, he would be delegating responsibility and not using that power frequently. If he is using the veto, he's not really doing his primary job.

This generally is what happens in most clubhouses these days, including Dusty's.

Dusty usually asks Chris Speier about when to bunt, hit and run, etc, and asks Price when to take out pitchers and who to use out of the pen. Dusty makes the final call, but only after asking theses guys.

mth123
04-14-2012, 09:21 PM
This generally is what happens in most clubhouses these days, including Dusty's.

Dusty usually asks Chris Speier about when to bunt, hit and run, etc, and asks Price when to take out pitchers and who to use out of the pen. Dusty makes the final call, but only after asking theses guys.

So, the issue with Dusty is not that he's making the wrong moves, but he has the wrong guys in those jobs? I buy that. I've never understood the blind love for Bryan Price BTW.

pedro
04-14-2012, 09:21 PM
Generally i wouldnt even bother putting the manager's name on the back of their jersey. IMHO most of them are fungible as they all generally cancel each other out. Here's something to think about though. Dusty is a player's manager whose strength is managing the clubhouse. Is it possible that the Reds are developing "manager fatigue" concerning Dusty?

These things are cyclicle so it'll probably happen sooner or later. And they'll bring in the Terry Collins, my way or the highway type. I don't think it's happening yet though.

HokieRed
04-14-2012, 09:38 PM
Generally i wouldnt even bother putting the manager's name on the back of their jersey. IMHO most of them are fungible as they all generally cancel each other out. Here's something to think about though. Dusty is a player's manager whose strength is managing the clubhouse. Is it possible that the Reds are developing "manager fatigue" concerning Dusty?

I'm intrigued by this. By "manager fatigue," do you mean that they are beginning to feel overmanaged?

jojo
04-14-2012, 09:47 PM
I'm intrigued by this. By "manager fatigue," do you mean that they are beginning to feel overmanaged?

No. Too lackadaisical or too comfortable due to over familiarity......

HokieRed
04-14-2012, 09:54 PM
No. Too lackadaisical or too comfortable due to over familiarity......

I can think of another manager (not T. Francona) who might be available and who would certainly be an antidote to this!

kaldaniels
04-14-2012, 09:59 PM
Not a CEO but I've got to think if you are trying to improve a business, unless you have a "fire sale" of sorts I have to think you start by focusing on the weakest link.Only I don't think Dusty is the weakest link at this point. If I wasn't on my phone I would post the OPS+ of the 24 position players in the lineup who started the past 3 days. I understand Dusty may be an underperforming manager, and the argument can be made "so replace him". Today? Because of this seasons start? Cause it sure feels like that is the catalyst for calling for Dustys head so passionately.

Roy Tucker
04-14-2012, 10:20 PM
Do the Reds have a bench coach? If so, Dusty would be well-served to consult with him more often.

powersackers
04-14-2012, 10:36 PM
Just out of curiosity, are we discussing this in part because of today's game? If so, it's beyond silly IMO. We got TWO HITS. I don't care HOW you shuffle a lineup or who starts where...TWO HITS. No amount of manager-magic is going to turn that into anything but an old fashioned butt-whipping. Personally, I think we should just give credit to Jackson who threw a dandy.

Jackson threw the ball, and we swung at it to the tune of about 3 pitches per batter faced. Maybe he had good stuff, but the Reds didn't take the time to even look at it.

REDREAD
04-14-2012, 10:48 PM
Big fake, no? Not a good manager? Yeah, I can go with that. When has Dusty won when he didn't have the best player in baseball? He had Bonds in San Francisco. He won in Chicago when he had a healthy Prior/Wood combo who were both Cy Young contenders. He won when Votto took home an MVP.

Name a manager that has won a division title without good players..
This is a silly arugment. Every division title winner has had good players.
Did LaRussa suck because he's had good players? Of course not.
On the other hand, plenty of managers have not won, in spite of having good players.

How many managers have won division titles with 3 different franchises? Not many.
It's absurd to say any manager with of Votto, Bonds, or Prior/Wood would've also won..

REDREAD
04-14-2012, 10:57 PM
That isn't the only reason I think Dusty isn't a good manager. And it certainly isn't the only thing I ever bring up. His inability to adapt. His stubbornness toward only using players in preconceived roles. His thinking a player is what he wants them to be rather than what they are. His lineups are just easy because he does it every day and for the majority of his career he has been using players terribly at the top of it.

I don't think it's an inablity to adapt or stubborness.

The team started off with Phillips in the leadoff slot. Phillips got hurt.
There's no one good to put in Phillips place.. no one.
Stubbs is as good of a choice as anyone. Sure, Stubbs is flawed, but it's hard to argue that there's a better option at this point. It's not stubborness or stupidity.. it's adapting to what you have. I'm sure Dusty would love to have a LF with a 400 OBP to plug into the top of the order, but he has to make do with what he has..

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 11:55 PM
I don't think it's an inablity to adapt or stubborness.

The team started off with Phillips in the leadoff slot. Phillips got hurt.
There's no one good to put in Phillips place.. no one.
Stubbs is as good of a choice as anyone. Sure, Stubbs is flawed, but it's hard to argue that there's a better option at this point. It's not stubborness or stupidity.. it's adapting to what you have. I'm sure Dusty would love to have a LF with a 400 OBP to plug into the top of the order, but he has to make do with what he has..
Sure, if we are talking about 10 games of 2012 rather than his entire managerial career. But I wasn't talking about 10 games in 2012.

traderumor
04-15-2012, 08:35 AM
No. Too lackadaisical or too comfortable due to over familiarity......
So they should try harder and their current manager can't get them to try harder? Really, jojo?

jojo
04-15-2012, 09:09 AM
So they should try harder and their current manager can't get them to try harder? Really, jojo?

You really need to tone down the tude Mr Snarky. It's entirely possible to become too comfortable and lose your edge. Listen to your favorite album ten ones a day for a week straight and and it starts to sound like the adults in a Peanuts holiday special.

The primary players have all been around while and there's no surprises.

RANDY IN INDY
04-15-2012, 10:08 AM
I didn't recognize any attitude, until your last post. He disagreed with you.

jojo
04-15-2012, 10:18 AM
I didn't recognize any attitude, until your last post. He disagreed with you.

:laugh:

_Sir_Charles_
04-15-2012, 10:57 AM
Jackson threw the ball, and we swung at it to the tune of about 3 pitches per batter faced. Maybe he had good stuff, but the Reds didn't take the time to even look at it.

But here's the thing, were they swinging at bad pitches? If they're swinging wildly out of the zone, I'd agree with you. But if the guy is pounding the zone, taking extra pitches is only working things even MORE into his favor. Swing at pitches you can hit, look at pitches you can't unless there are 2 strikes then protect the plate if possible. That's ALWAYS been the approach I took. I'd be surprised if MLB players took a different one. Taking pitches just to work the count doesn't work if the pitcher is throwing strikes.

RANDY IN INDY
04-15-2012, 11:40 AM
Factor in that the Reds have faced some really good pitching performances, early this season. Guys that just had everything working. Sometimes you just have to tip your cap to that.

dougdirt
04-15-2012, 01:42 PM
Drew Stubbs crushes lefties. Chris Heisey can't hit lefties. Lefty on the mound. Heisey starts in center, Stubbs sits. Unless I missed something about Stubbs being hurt, this is another one of those really confusing decisions.

OldXOhio
04-15-2012, 02:28 PM
Drew Stubbs crushes lefties. Chris Heisey can't hit lefties. Lefty on the mound. Heisey starts in center, Stubbs sits. Unless I missed something about Stubbs being hurt, this is another one of those really confusing decisions.

Lesser of two evils perhaps? Stubbs isn't crushing anyone at this point and hasn't for some time now.

dougdirt
04-15-2012, 02:54 PM
Lesser of two evils perhaps? Stubbs isn't crushing anyone at this point and hasn't for some time now.

Playing to his strengths (against LHP) may pull him out of this slump some though.

mth123
04-15-2012, 03:40 PM
Maybe they are taking the opportunity to sit Stubbs while the ground ball guy is on the mound for the Reds.

OldXOhio
04-15-2012, 03:56 PM
I'm not sure what constitutes a slump with Stubbs any longer. Clearly he's struggling badly, but his numbers are putrid dating all the way back to the AS break last year.

alexad
04-15-2012, 04:41 PM
There is a reason Jim Riggelman was hired. We may see him sooner than Walt expected.

westofyou
04-15-2012, 04:56 PM
There is a reason Jim Riggelman was hired. We may see him sooner than Walt expected.

Awesome, then he can quit on the Reds like he did on the Nationals

JaxRed
04-15-2012, 04:58 PM
I was just about to post the same thing. I think Riggleman is a "commodity". The vast majority of managers fall within such a narrow range, that changing them doesn't change much. Unless you actually have a bad manager that actually underperforms his talent. Like Dusty

I think if Dusty goes Riggleman is the logical legitimate interim.

Brutus
04-15-2012, 05:08 PM
Awesome, then he can quit on the Reds like he did on the Nationals

Everyone else is quitting on them on this board, so perhaps that would be a fitting hire lol

:thumbup:

dougdirt
04-15-2012, 05:09 PM
Everyone else is quitting on them on this board, so perhaps that would be a fitting hire lol

:thumbup:
Speak for yourself! I am no quitter. :D

Brutus
04-15-2012, 05:13 PM
Speak for yourself! I am no quitter. :D

Duly noted, Doug!

I amend my previous statement to say everyone else (except Doug) is quitting on them :beerme:

wheels
04-15-2012, 05:33 PM
There is a reason Jim Riggelman was hired. We may see him sooner than Walt expected.

Are you being serious?

I don't agree with many of Dusty's on field machinations, but firing him ten games into the season and replacing him with Jim Riggleman of all people is beyond silly.

I don't know if anyone's noticed, but most managers are kinda dumb. I completely agree with Jim Bouton's take on most of these guys. It's basically just an honorary position, and bench coaches are even more honorary.

Point is, getting all riled up about managers isn't really worth the time. I like listening to them during interviews and stuff, but beyond that.... Meh. They're just old guys that somehow still get to wear a uniform.

Blitz Dorsey
04-15-2012, 11:36 PM
Funny thing is, I see Terry Francona's name pop up. I wonder what Phillies' fans would have thought of Francona before he went on to make a name for himself in Boston. People forget his best record in Philly from 1997-2000 was 77-85.

Those Phillie teams were pretty bad, and Francona kept them in the race into September one year. Dude is a solid manager. I remember telling a friend I wanted Francona hired as the Reds manager, and this was before Francona got the Red Sox job and won two titles. And we all know how easy it is to win titles in Boston. I would love to see Tito as the next Reds manager. (Although I'm sure he's loving his TV gig right now. Making big money, no pressure, sign me up for that.)

GAC
04-16-2012, 05:01 AM
I don't know if anyone's noticed, but most managers are kinda dumb. I completely agree with Jim Bouton's take on most of these guys. It's basically just an honorary position, and bench coaches are even more honorary.

So they're like Presidents who rely on the hard work of their underlings, but take the heat (blame) if something goes wrong or isn't working out as planned. :D

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120415&content_id=28739978&notebook_id=28739938&vkey=notebook_cin&c_id=cin


Cincinnati entered Sunday's game vs. the Nationals batting .191 as a team, including .138 with runners in scoring position. Bruce had three home runs through the team's first three games, but the team came into the series finale homerless in the previous six games.

The individual batting averages have been low from key hitters. Scott Rolen entered batting .111; Ryan Ludwick was batting .150, and Bruce had dipped to .235.

Add to the above that BP has been out with the hamstring (still isn't 100%), and yet all this is Baker's fault???

These guys are going to come around. These guys are going to hit.

MartyFan
04-16-2012, 09:08 AM
So they're like Presidents who rely on the hard work of their underlings, but take the heat (blame) if something goes wrong or isn't working out as planned. :D

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120415&content_id=28739978&notebook_id=28739938&vkey=notebook_cin&c_id=cin



Add to the above that BP has been out with the hamstring (still isn't 100%), and yet all this is Baker's fault???

These guys are going to come around. These guys are going to hit.

YES...lets get him out while we still can...I've never NOT been supportive of a Manager and until late last year was supportive of Dusty. I just do not like him as manager of this team and want a change, the fact that the team is in a slump gives us some reason to get people worked up to cry for it. :beerme:

jojo
04-16-2012, 09:16 AM
Here's an interesting post from the Sundeck (the emphasis on the Dusty part added by me for, well emphasis):


A nugget of good news for the Stubbs haters I picked up at the Royals and Indians game tonight. I sit in the press box, thus do get to hear real baseball gossip rather than made up stuff. Reds and Indians have discussed a deal for disappointing outfielders. Personally could see it (if it happens) being an awful deal that is being set up by a 9 game into season panic situation. Checking with a few people I know, Dusty is likely retiring (he wants to be with his son the next few years) at the conclusion of the season. I assume when this happens you will hold a message board parade and the Reds will be a lock to go 162-0 next season.

dunner13
04-16-2012, 09:17 AM
I think Dusty probably manages the egos and personalities of the clubhouse above average and manages the on the field part of the game slightly below average to average. This is based on assuming that the average is lower then we would like to think considering the number of managers that still manage by the old school rules. So overall I would say that compared to the other ML managers in the league Dusty is slightly above average. I know this isn't a popular opinion on this board but look around the league I would rather have Dusty then jim tracy or fredi gonzalez. Dusty does have a track record of winning, like it or not he is the manager that got the reds to the playoffs for the first time in years. Although he may bring in a different relief pitcher or use a different pinch hitter then I want, I think his overall impact on the winning of the club is at least positive.

jojo
04-16-2012, 09:26 AM
I've said many times the identity of the manager is mostly a meh in the end as "it all cancels out". There's a great gnashing of teeth about the manager but I think it's mostly just pecking at the periphery.

I actually like Dusty. His quotes are always worth a few threads of discussion, he makes some moves seemingly every game that lend themselves to legitimate discussion/argument, and he's a part of the fabric of one of my favorite eras of baseball being a link between guys like Mays and the present (and gosh knows when guys like Dusty go away, few in the current generation are even going to be aware that they played baseball back in those days). Frankly, and this shouldn't be marginalized, he's a good human being too.

I just don't particularly care for watching his brand of Reds baseball. That said, it is light years more compelling than watching Hargrove's brand or McLaren's brand.

We've got an interesting character at the helm. It could be lots worse.

Roy Tucker
04-16-2012, 09:39 AM
I think when the Reds play a series of tight games (like 3 out of 4 games going extra innings), it magnifies Dusty's in-game foibles.

In the overall grand scheme of the big 162, his player management strengths come into play and it averages out. But in the middle of that string, it can be maddening.

REDREAD
04-16-2012, 09:58 AM
Sure, if we are talking about 10 games of 2012 rather than his entire managerial career. But I wasn't talking about 10 games in 2012.

Dusty was criticized for how he handled Wood/Proir in Chicago. Seems like he learned from that. He certinaly hasn't overworked any of the young pitchers in Cincy.

I understand that you don't think Dusty is a good manager, but it's unfair to say that he's stubborn and never changes.

traderumor
04-16-2012, 10:03 AM
I think when the Reds play a series of tight games (like 3 out of 4 games going extra innings), it magnifies Dusty's in-game foibles.

In the overall grand scheme of the big 162, his player management strengths come into play and it averages out. But in the middle of that string, it can be maddening.I'd say tight games provide more debatable points. The "foibles" conclusion implies that all factors influencing the decision were known by all parties and that it can be objectively proven that a wrong decision was made, as in "A was the right move, all factors to consider made A possible, and Dusty chose B." Good luck proving a "foible."

cumberlandreds
04-16-2012, 10:06 AM
If Arroyo stays in and gives up a HR, everyone groans about leaving him in.

The HR brought the groan, not the manager's choice.

A runner on 2nd, no outs, tie game in extra's? Lot's of managers would bunt. I doubt anyone has ever been fired for doing so.

You can mark me as one fan that would not have moaned. I did groan when Dusty walked to the mound because I knew what he was going to do. I was there and Arroyo had the Nats totally off balance. I would have left him in until someone got on base or a HR. Just a stupid,stupid move.
Now should be fired now? I'm not ready to pull that trigger but if they are under .500 by Memorial Day I would seriously consider it if I were Bobby C and Walt.

RichRed
04-16-2012, 10:09 AM
I've said many times the identity of the manager is mostly a meh in the end as "it all cancels out". There's a great gnashing of teeth about the manager but I think it's mostly just pecking at the periphery.

I actually like Dusty. His quotes are always worth a few threads of discussion, he makes some moves seemingly every game that lend themselves to legitimate discussion/argument, and he's a part of the fabric of one of my favorite eras of baseball being a link between guys like Mays and the present (and gosh knows when guys like Dusty go away, few in the current generation are even going to be aware that they played baseball back in those days). Frankly, and this shouldn't be marginalized, he's a good human being too.

I just don't particularly care for watching his brand of Reds baseball. That said, it is light years more compelling than watching Hargrove's brand or McLaren's brand.

We've got an interesting character at the helm. It could be lots worse.

I mostly agree with this. Regarding discussion-worthy quotes, this one is from Saturday, per Fay:


The Reds are not hitting, but that’s not why Baker shook up the lineup.

“It’s not lack of offense,” he said. “It’s lack of sleep. When you have a lack of offense is kind of like everybody lacks of offense. If somebody was hot and swinging real good you wouldn’t have the lack of offense.”


Umm, what? Considering the source, it's possible the actual quote was butchered, but that's some good stuff.

Many of Dusty's in-game moves drive me nuts, but I bet he'd be a great guy to have a beer and talk baseball with.

traderumor
04-16-2012, 10:57 AM
The Reds are not hitting, but that’s not why Baker shook up the lineup.

“It’s not lack of offense,” he said. “It’s lack of sleep. When you have a lack of offense is kind of like everybody lacks of offense. If somebody was hot and swinging real good you wouldn’t have the lack of offense.”I heard the context of this on Marty's pregame show. He was talking about lack of sleep himself when the team's not hitting, losing sleep trying to figure it out.

RichRed
04-16-2012, 11:07 AM
I heard the context of this on Marty's pregame show. He was talking about lack of sleep himself when the team's not hitting, losing sleep trying to figure it out.

That's what I get for trying to infer meaning and context from a Fay blog post. Thanks for the clarification.

traderumor
04-16-2012, 11:43 AM
That's what I get for trying to infer meaning and context from a Fay blog post. Thanks for the clarification.Yea, Fay stutters and mumbles when he writes. :)

Dan
04-16-2012, 11:48 AM
I'd say tight games provide more debatable points. The "foibles" conclusion implies that all factors influencing the decision were known by all parties and that it can be objectively proven that a wrong decision was made, as in "A was the right move, all factors to consider made A possible, and Dusty chose B." Good luck proving a "foible."

I still think the whole Cozart pinch-hit bunt debacle is perfect. Factors (Cozart is hitting at a good clip, Cozart hits lefties well, bringing in Cozart might force a reliever change, if things don't work out, there's only one bat left on the bench; Harris can bunt, a bunt is not a bad play here with a runner on 2nd and nobody out) were considered. Dusty had 2 choices: A) Send Cozart up to hit and let him swing away, hopefully driving in the run or at least hitting it to the right side in hopes of advancing the runner, or B) have a hitter (Harris or maybe a pitcher) put a bunt down, but save the bench. Dusty chose C) Burn up the bench by essentially making an out. To me, that's a "foible."

Roy Tucker
04-16-2012, 12:13 PM
I'd say tight games provide more debatable points. The "foibles" conclusion implies that all factors influencing the decision were known by all parties and that it can be objectively proven that a wrong decision was made, as in "A was the right move, all factors to consider made A possible, and Dusty chose B." Good luck proving a "foible."

More debatable points, that's for sure.

A foible is a minor weakness. I'd say its at least a debatable point that Dusty's in-game moves could be a weakness of his.

As far as "proving" it, jeez, I'm just a guy on an internet bulletin board. I don't know what Dusty was thinking and I don't know all the facts. I don't think any of us do. I'm just being a fan and offering up my opinion.

traderumor
04-16-2012, 12:36 PM
More debatable points, that's for sure.

A foible is a minor weakness. I'd say its at least a debatable point that Dusty's in-game moves could be a weakness of his.

As far as "proving" it, jeez, I'm just a guy on an internet bulletin board. I don't know what Dusty was thinking and I don't know all the facts. I don't think any of us do. I'm just being a fan and offering up my opinion.Well of course, and so am I. However, folks continually present themselves (not saying this is true of you) as masters of the game in their posts, then throw out "geez, I'm just on an internet board" when challenged.

jojo
04-16-2012, 12:38 PM
Well of course, and so am I. However, folks continually present themselves (not saying this is true of you) as masters of the game in their posts, then throw out "geez, I'm just on an internet board" when challenged.

How often does that truly happen?

Brutus
04-16-2012, 12:44 PM
More debatable points, that's for sure.

A foible is a minor weakness. I'd say its at least a debatable point that Dusty's in-game moves could be a weakness of his.

As far as "proving" it, jeez, I'm just a guy on an internet bulletin board. I don't know what Dusty was thinking and I don't know all the facts. I don't think any of us do. I'm just being a fan and offering up my opinion.

I think people would find more common ground and less resistance to a point they disagree with if it weren't soaked in such a hardline stance such as "Baker has to go" and haphazardly throwing around the reasons he absolutely is a terrible manager as if managing weren't subjective in the million different scenarios that could play out in a baseball game.

There are definitely a lot of things open to criticism. And it would definitely be hard to prove any of them. But some people make some pretty matter-of-fact claims that probably should be softened a bit.

traderumor
04-16-2012, 12:47 PM
How often does that truly happen?

Often. I've gotten that response each of the last two days, on different subjects, in fact. I guess the dogmatism/know-it-all from the seats on subjects is getting excessive from my peanut gallery seat.

Its played like a right bar whenever it is brought up that there may be more to decisions and playing the game than can be known by those not intimately and directly involved with the game. "Well, tr, this is just an internet board." Gee, thanks, I forgot that.

traderumor
04-16-2012, 12:48 PM
I think people would find more common ground and less resistance to a point they disagree with if it weren't soaked in such a hardline stance such as "Baker has to go" and haphazardly throwing around the reasons he absolutely is a terrible manager as if managing weren't subjective in the million different scenarios that could play out in a baseball game.

There are definitely a lot of things open to criticism. And it would definitely be hard to prove any of them. But some people make some pretty matter-of-fact claims that probably should be softened a bit.You said this better than I did, but yes, that is where I am coming from.

Roy Tucker
04-16-2012, 01:00 PM
Well of course, and so am I. However, folks continually present themselves (not saying this is true of you) as masters of the game in their posts, then throw out "geez, I'm just on an internet board" when challenged.

OK, that's cool. I'm certainly not a master of the game. I like to express my opinion, but it's just that.

reds44
04-16-2012, 01:02 PM
I think every manager on every team gets ripped for moves he makes during the game. Dusty is no different. My biggest issue with Dusty is I feel like this teams offensive struggles have a lot to do with how much theyre hacking which is a directly philosophy of Dusty.

jojo
04-16-2012, 01:09 PM
Often. I've gotten that response each of the last two days, on different subjects, in fact. I guess the dogmatism/know-it-all from the seats on subjects is getting excessive from my peanut gallery seat.

Its played like a right bar whenever it is brought up that there may be more to decisions and playing the game than can be known by those not intimately and directly involved with the game. "Well, tr, this is just an internet board." Gee, thanks, I forgot that.

But if someone makes a reasoned argument, they get shouted down for being dogmatic and forgetting this is an internet board and possibly spending too much time on the Texas Instruments computer in their mother's basement... It's kinda of funny truthfully. But Dusty is darned if he does and darned if he doesn't. Maybe that's why he doesn't give a darn about the opinions of fans on the interweb. In a way, Dusty is a buffer. Many of the things he says that get so roundly criticized on here are said in essence to absorb the heat and take it off of the player. Appreciating that is a key first step to understanding the enigma that is Dusty.

Caveat Emperor
04-16-2012, 01:26 PM
We've now moved, in two different threads, to discussing protocol on how to argue with one another.

Just saying...

RichRed
04-16-2012, 01:36 PM
We've now moved, in two different threads, to discussing protocol on how to argue with one another.

Just saying...


...which, in addition to being off-topic, is an utter snoozefest. I think the board needs a group hug, or more likely just a nice 4-game winning streak.

traderumor
04-16-2012, 01:37 PM
But if someone makes a reasoned argument, they get shouted down for being dogmatic and forgetting this is an internet board and possibly spending too much time on the Texas Instruments computer in their mother's basement... It's kinda of funny truthfully. But Dusty is darned if he does and darned if he doesn't. Maybe that's why he doesn't give a darn about the opinions of fans on the interweb. In a way, Dusty is a buffer. Many of the things he says that get so roundly criticized on here are said in essence to absorb the heat and take it off of the player. Appreciating that is a key first step to understanding the enigma that is Dusty.I'm not talking about "reasoned arguments," I'm talking about dogmatic assertions on inherently subjective topics...e.g. slump busting theory and Dusty's managerial skills

HokieRed
04-16-2012, 02:11 PM
But if someone makes a reasoned argument, they get shouted down for being dogmatic and forgetting this is an internet board and possibly spending too much time on the Texas Instruments computer in their mother's basement... It's kinda of funny truthfully. But Dusty is darned if he does and darned if he doesn't. Maybe that's why he doesn't give a darn about the opinions of fans on the interweb. In a way, Dusty is a buffer. Many of the things he says that get so roundly criticized on here are said in essence to absorb the heat and take it off of the player. Appreciating that is a key first step to understanding the enigma that is Dusty.

I think the last part of this highlights what is a very important function of a manager or a coach, particularly in today's world of great media intensity. It's one I think Dusty performs quite well.

RANDY IN INDY
04-16-2012, 03:36 PM
I'm not talking about "reasoned arguments," I'm talking about dogmatic assertions on inherently subjective topics...e.g. slump busting theory and Dusty's managerial skills

:beerme:

Vottomatic
04-16-2012, 03:58 PM
I'm not talking about "reasoned arguments," I'm talking about dogmatic assertions on inherently subjective topics...e.g. slump busting theory and Dusty's managerial skills

....what managerial skills? Dusty has zero. He's terrible.

Shoulda been canned after last season but Walt and Bob are too cheap.

This team has never been able to manufacture runs like good teams. The patheticness just goes on and on and on and on............

It won't end until Toothpick is gone.

Vottomatic
04-16-2012, 03:59 PM
I think the last part of this highlights what is a very important function of a manager or a coach, particularly in today's world of great media intensity. It's one I think Dusty performs quite well.

I'm glad he's good at something because he's not good at managing. I'm counting the days until he's fired and the Reds move on without him to better things.

Brutus
04-16-2012, 04:02 PM
....what managerial skills? Dusty has zero. He's terrible.

Shoulda been canned after last season but Walt and Bob are too cheap.

This team has never been able to manufacture runs like good teams. The patheticness just goes on and on and on and on............

It won't end until Toothpick is gone.

This kind of response is just illustrating the issue being referenced rather than diminishing it.

Hoosier Red
04-16-2012, 04:07 PM
....what managerial skills? Dusty has zero. He's terrible.

Shoulda been canned after last season but Walt and Bob are too cheap.

This team has never been able to manufacture runs like good teams. The patheticness just goes on and on and on and on............

It won't end until Toothpick is gone.

Wow. Too cheap? Votto and Phillips(Not to mention Bruce, Cueto, Marshall, Madson, and Chapman) aren't enough to convince you that perhaps cheapness isn't the main motivator?

Perhaps there is some characteristic they like that you're not seeing? Nah, it's because they're too cheap.

It's not to say that Baker's unimpeachable, but every manager has his strengths and weaknesses, perhaps they just value his strengths more than you do.

pedro
04-16-2012, 04:13 PM
....what managerial skills? Dusty has zero. He's terrible.

Shoulda been canned after last season but Walt and Bob are too cheap.

This team has never been able to manufacture runs like good teams. The patheticness just goes on and on and on and on............

It won't end until Toothpick is gone.

well that's one opinion as to what might be described as "patheticness".

redsmetz
04-16-2012, 04:15 PM
Weekends are always harder for me to post things and today's been busy, but I'll jump into this topic now. I can't say I didn't say this a week or two ago. I suggested this was going to be a long season with folks railing for Dusty's head day in and day out, particularly with the poor start. Actually it's a wonder our record is what it is so far, given how horrid the offense has been.

I'm heartened to see so many folks chime in that folks tend to be unhappy no matter who the manager is. I continue to say I'd love to be able to see in real time what an internet discussion board thread would look like with a Sparky Anderson. Can you imagine dissecting Casey Stengel comments? Whoo boy!

And there will be an absolute meltdown here if Castellini does what he suggests he wants to do; extend Baker beyond this year. I will say that Dusty's testiness anymore may well be chalked up to how much everyone knows with micromanaging and have it fed to him in questions from some of the media (I'm looking at you, John Fay!).

Let's just get these boys hitting and start winning some games and things ought to quiet down overall. Of course, those that have hated Baker since he was hired will never be placated until he's gone. Then it will be off to the next one to disdain. Such is life.

CySeymour
04-16-2012, 04:20 PM
This team has never been able to manufacture runs like good teams. The patheticness just goes on and on and on and on............

What? You can't manufacture anything until you get baserunners.

dougdirt
04-16-2012, 05:34 PM
What? You can't manufacture anything until you get baserunners.

This is true... but batting Scott Rolen behind the only two guys who have actually been able to get on base this season doesn't help.

CySeymour
04-16-2012, 05:36 PM
This is true... but batting Scott Rolen behind the only two guys who have actually been able to get on base this season doesn't help.

Right, but that again comes back to having guys actually hitting.

Boss-Hog
04-16-2012, 05:38 PM
....what managerial skills? Dusty has zero. He's terrible.

Shoulda been canned after last season but Walt and Bob are too cheap.

This team has never been able to manufacture runs like good teams. The patheticness just goes on and on and on and on............

It won't end until Toothpick is gone.
Don't take this personally, but I expect to see higher quality posts than this - certainly in the ORG. A post like this one does absolutely nothing to promote intelligent discussion.

dougdirt
04-16-2012, 05:39 PM
Right, but that again comes back to having guys actually hitting.

Sure, but Scott Rolen isn't going to hit. Even when he does 'start hitting', he isn't going to be hitting. He has no reason to be hitting directly behind the teams highest OBP guy. If Rolen bats clean up all year, Joey Votto is going to walk 160 times. Yeah, early on most guys haven't hit. But even when guys start to hit to what is expected, our cleanup spot is still going to be terrible and it is going to lead to lesser run production because Joey Votto will be walked and Scott Rolen will continue to not hit or walk.

CySeymour
04-16-2012, 05:43 PM
Sure, but Scott Rolen isn't going to hit. Even when he does 'start hitting', he isn't going to be hitting. He has no reason to be hitting directly behind the teams highest OBP guy. If Rolen bats clean up all year, Joey Votto is going to walk 160 times. Yeah, early on most guys haven't hit. But even when guys start to hit to what is expected, our cleanup spot is still going to be terrible and it is going to lead to lesser run production because Joey Votto will be walked and Scott Rolen will continue to not hit or walk.

I totally agree, Doug. You're actually preaching to the choir. My original point was about manufacuring runs, which usually is thought of as bunting, hitting and running, small ball things. These may have their place, but until the team as a whole starts hitting, won't really increase scoring.

But Dusty will always insist on splitting up Votto and Bruce, and until the organization gets a quality bat to hit between them, you will continue to see Votto pitched around constantly. I am starting to wonder if maybe the team should move Votto up to second in the order if he is going to be walked so much.

RedsManRick
04-16-2012, 06:33 PM
I totally agree, Doug. You're actually preaching to the choir. My original point was about manufacuring runs, which usually is thought of as bunting, hitting and running, small ball things. These may have their place, but until the team as a whole starts hitting, won't really increase scoring.

But Dusty will always insist on splitting up Votto and Bruce, and until the organization gets a quality bat to hit between them, you will continue to see Votto pitched around constantly. I am starting to wonder if maybe the team should move Votto up to second in the order if he is going to be walked so much.

Given how much of his value comes from his OBP, I'd love to see him bat 2nd. I hate seeing him come up in the 1st with 2 out and none on.

But most of all, I just want to see Dusty stop using 1 run strategies early in the game. Upping your chances of scoring 1 run at the expense of your average expected runs is a loser of a strategy unless you are fairly confident that next run will win you the game.

Vottomatic
04-16-2012, 06:56 PM
Don't take this personally, but I expect to see higher quality posts than this - certainly in the ORG. A post like this one does absolutely nothing to promote intelligent discussion.

Obviously I can't stand Dusty. I haven't been able to stand him for awhile. I thought 2010 involved a bit of luck. Almost like a blind squirrel finding a nut.

But I will cool it, although I find it funny that the title of the thread is "Baker needs to go". I'll leave it at that.

Roy Tucker
04-16-2012, 07:20 PM
Obviously I can't stand Dusty. I haven't been able to stand him for awhile. I thought 2010 involved a bit of luck. Almost like a blind squirrel finding a nut.

But I will cool it, although I find it funny that the title of the thread is "Baker needs to go". I'll leave it at that.

Not that I know Dusty personally, but from what I've read, he's a cool dude and someone I'd really like to know. He's someone that I'm sure would be fascinating to have a beer with and just hang out with and listen to his stories and general outlook on baseball and life. He seems to have good leadership skills, is a good leader of men, and generally keeps the Reds ship going in a forward direction. No small task in the world of big league hardball.

As many have mentionend (including me), he's not quite as swell at the nits and nats of in-game management. Play the same situations the same way all the time, players have pre-conceived roles, lineup and bullpen handlng, blah blah blah.

It was kinda interesting to see the "Baker must go" title because, at the time it appeared, I was all torches and pitchforks about getting rid of Dusty like yesterday. But lots of people have put good stuff in this thread and I came down off the ledge and now I've calmed down some and am willing (like anyone cares) to give him some more rope and see where this all goes. But for a couple days there, I was ready to toss him like yesterday's trash. Just a nutjob fan, I guess.

TOBTTReds
04-16-2012, 07:28 PM
Play the same situations the same way all the time, players have pre-conceived roles, lineup and bullpen handlng, blah blah blah.


Actually, I think it was yesterday, he played the Tracy AB complete opposite of what he did the last time (same scenario that everyone blew up on him for). It was one of the first times I've seen him learn from a screw up immediately.

Tracy PH, put in Bray, they burn Tracy and go with Nady (HR).
Then next time, same scenario, goes with Ondrusek. It was his subtle way of saying, "I screwed the pooch last time."

westofyou
04-16-2012, 07:53 PM
I'm glad he's good at something because he's not good at managing. I'm counting the days until he's fired and the Reds move on without him to better things.

Of course if all one thinks "managing" is setting a lineup and choosing utility players then they might come to a conclusion such as this

But that's not what it all is now is it?

Vottomatic
04-16-2012, 07:57 PM
Of course if all one thinks "managing" is setting a lineup and choosing utility players then they might come to a conclusion such as this

But that's not what it all is now is it?

No. It's seeing a rubberarm pitcher (Arroyo) at only 94 pitches, pitching a gem, with his latest out a simple comebacker to the mound, and deciding to take him out for some unknown reason.

It's leaving Simon in when he clearly doesn't have it and not seeing the urgency of the situation.

I could go on and on, but I thankfully I don't keep a diary of all of the poor decisions, otherwise I'd completely go nuts as opposed as only partially go nuts. :D

Brutus
04-16-2012, 08:09 PM
No. It's seeing a rubberarm pitcher (Arroyo) at only 94 pitches, pitching a gem, with his latest out a simple comebacker to the mound, and deciding to take him out for some unknown reason.

It's leaving Simon in when he clearly doesn't have it and not seeing the urgency of the situation.

I could go on and on, but I thankfully I don't keep a diary of all of the poor decisions, otherwise I'd completely go nuts as opposed as only partially go nuts. :D

You say "clearly" Simon didn't have it, but he did have two outs and was within two strikes or an in-play out of getting out of the inning. It's not such a cut and dried decision to yank him there.

What some people call a "poor" decision others might believe is a "good" decision. There's perhaps nothing more subjective in sports than debating what constitutes a good or bad decision in baseball by a manager.

westofyou
04-16-2012, 08:17 PM
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66059

This stuff is old rants

And this still applies as far as I can see


A managers duties can be broken down into three distinct areas:

1. Game level decision making.
2. Team level decision making
3. Personal management and instruction

In best I can estimate, a manager makes about 70 game level decisions a game, or about eleven thousand a year.

Seventy a game, each a decision with multiple variables, more then most people make in a month of work.

With that in mind I tried to define the recent Reds signing of Dusty Baker as the manager, a choice that was evidently pursued longer then most knew about and in the end I see eye to eye on a statement that James makes regarding managers and the three areas of the game they encompass:


“Most managers don’t pursue all three areas with equal skill, nor do they get they always get the result that they are brought in for. Most managers are fired before they can leave on their own, often they are brought in for a reason and when that reason is fulfilled they have then often outlived their usefulness to the organization.”


Bill James Baseball Abstract 1988






“You can have all the young talent in the world, but you need somebody to guide those players and show them the way to winning,” Maddon said. “Now a layman might say that’s the manager’s job and he would be correct. However, there is also a dynamic in a major league clubhouse that is hard to explain if you haven’t actually been in one to see what goes on. A player is more likely to listen to a veteran who has won before than a manager or coach when it comes to talking about how to win. Furthermore, a player is a lot less likely to get a sympathetic audience from his peers if another player corrects him on the way of going about how to be a professional than he would if he is corrected by a manager or coach. That’s just the way human nature is, and you can never take the human element out of the game.”

John Maddon 2008



The business of baseball and running a team on the field and off the field is not a solid reality, it's an onion, layer after layer after layer of things that are not rooted in patterns that occur in small recognizable routes.

It's chaos in a controlled environment.

If it was so damn easy the Reds would not have churned through 8 managers since Dusty took his first job in 1993.

1993... the year the Reds hired a bat on the ball manager, a player who had poor walk rates his whole career.

Too bad he got canned so fast... I'm sure he probably saw the game a lot like Dusty does.... that could have been interesting.

Vottomatic
04-16-2012, 08:54 PM
You say "clearly" Simon didn't have it, but he did have two outs and was within two strikes or an in-play out of getting out of the inning. It's not such a cut and dried decision to yank him there.

What some people call a "poor" decision others might believe is a "good" decision. There's perhaps nothing more subjective in sports than debating what constitutes a good or bad decision in baseball by a manager.

All I know is I'm right most of the time compared to Dusty. :laugh: ;)

OUReds
04-16-2012, 09:15 PM
No. It's seeing a rubberarm pitcher (Arroyo) at only 94 pitches, pitching a gem, with his latest out a simple comebacker to the mound, and deciding to take him out for some unknown reason.

Dusty discussed it with Arroyo the inning before. Arroyo said he was out of gas, so they gave him one batter, then got him out. The decision was based on feedback from the player himself, something we aren't privy to, yet he gets raked over the coals for it.

Amusingly, Dusty got skewered here in Arroyo's first start for leaving him in too long. Apparently he should have see it coming and had a quick hook.

For the record I love Dusty. Best manager since Davy.

VR
04-17-2012, 12:21 AM
Dusty discussed it with Arroyo the inning before. Arroyo said he was out of gas, so they gave him one batter, then got him out. The decision was based on feedback from the player himself, something we aren't privy to, yet he gets raked over the coals for it.

Amusingly, Dusty got skewered here in Arroyo's first start for leaving him in too long. Apparently he should have see it coming and had a quick hook.

You've been around awhile OU....surely you are aware of the bi-polar nature of our musings.

For the record I love Dusty. Best manager since Davy.

Is it even close?


Dusty has his moments, no doubt. His players are on board w/ him. Forget fans, baseball executives, or the media. If anyone knows a fraud, it's the players. (Ask the Red Sox)
Reds players respect the guy.....there's your best litmus test.

Slyder
04-17-2012, 02:01 AM
Dusty discussed it with Arroyo the inning before. Arroyo said he was out of gas, so they gave him one batter, then got him out. The decision was based on feedback from the player himself, something we aren't privy to, yet he gets raked over the coals for it.

Amusingly, Dusty got skewered here in Arroyo's first start for leaving him in too long. Apparently he should have see it coming and had a quick hook.

For the record I love Dusty. Best manager since Davy.

Saying Dusty is the best manager since Davy is killing with feignt praise. Just remember the names of the guys who held that position since. I fully believe that having a random fan's seat pulled before the game and told they get to manage would have been better than many of the guys in that seat for Cincy during the last 15 years. The only guy that I would bother making a case for was Jack McKeon of the non-interm guys.

But I have a question about Stubbs. Anyone know how much Dusty is involved with the hitting philosophy? I ask that because could he POSSIBLY be hurting Stubbs' development with all the talk about being aggressive? He had a career .364 obp in the minors coming up. Some people are just better with different approaches, is Dusty's old school philosophy POSSIBLY hurting Stubbs or/and Bruce meanwhile Votto found his "comfort" zone in it?

Plus Plus
04-17-2012, 02:25 AM
It's splitting hairs, I know, but I think that a convincing argument could be made that Jack McKeon was the best manager since Davy.

mth123
04-17-2012, 04:53 AM
Saying Dusty is the best manager since Davy is killing with feignt praise. Just remember the names of the guys who held that position since. I fully believe that having a random fan's seat pulled before the game and told they get to manage would have been better than many of the guys in that seat for Cincy during the last 15 years. The only guy that I would bother making a case for was Jack McKeon of the non-interm guys.

But I have a question about Stubbs. Anyone know how much Dusty is involved with the hitting philosophy? I ask that because could he POSSIBLY be hurting Stubbs' development with all the talk about being aggressive? He had a career .364 obp in the minors coming up. Some people are just better with different approaches, is Dusty's old school philosophy POSSIBLY hurting Stubbs or/and Bruce meanwhile Votto found his "comfort" zone in it?

Do you reallly think Mr. "take two belt high down the middle before thinking about taking the bat off my shoulder" Stubbs is being too aggressive? Stubbs swings at lousey pitches because he didn't crush the cookie earlier in his plate appearance and falls behind in the count. He has to protect the plate far too often and is forced to hack at that borderline pitch near the outside corner at the knees. Dusty is right on target in Stubbs case. Worst plate discipline of any player I've ever seen and its not because he's too aggressive. He's Mr. Passive.

He has the same problem on defense BTW. He has all the ability in the world defensively, but grades out a tick below average because he pulls up far too often on those balls hit in front of him and plays them on a bounce. One more easy step and he'd catch a ton of those. Passive, passive, passive.

VR
04-17-2012, 11:09 AM
It's splitting hairs, I know, but I think that a convincing argument could be made that Jack McKeon was the best manager since Davy.

Dusty has a free pass compared to the beatings Jack used to take on the message boards.

Plus Plus
04-17-2012, 12:01 PM
Dusty has a free pass compared to the beatings Jack used to take on the message boards.

I was between the ages of 10 and 13 while Trader Jack was managing the Reds, so I had no idea. I just know that he won a lot of games and then went to Florida and had success there. What was the criticism of McKeon, if I may ask?

savafan
04-17-2012, 01:49 PM
I was between the ages of 10 and 13 while Trader Jack was managing the Reds, so I had no idea. I just know that he won a lot of games and then went to Florida and had success there. What was the criticism of McKeon, if I may ask?

I was a McKeon fan, but the criticisms with Jack were the opposite of what Dusty gets praise for, that he was out of touch with his players.

redsmetz
04-17-2012, 02:39 PM
I was a McKeon fan, but the criticisms with Jack were the opposite of what Dusty gets praise for, that he was out of touch with his players.

I had heard through one acquaintance of mine, who had a relative who worked for the Reds, that there was much more than meets the eye with McKeon not returning.

Vottomatic
04-17-2012, 03:18 PM
The manager Castellini should have hired is coaching the Nationals.

Loved Davey. He got a raw deal from Marge.

He lets his guys play, but isn't afraid to rock the boat or insult ego's if necessary. Does what he has to do to win. Doesn't wait for the wheels to fall off like some managers I know.

RichRed
04-17-2012, 03:27 PM
The manager Castellini should have hired is coaching the Nationals.

Loved Davey. He got a raw deal from Marge.

He lets his guys play, but isn't afraid to rock the boat or insult ego's if necessary. Does what he has to do to win. Doesn't wait for the wheels to fall off like some managers I know.

Is this the same Davey Johnson who consistently batted Roger Bernadina (.301 OBP) and Ian Desmond (.298 OBP) leadoff last year? Don't get me wrong, I liked Davey too, but we're kidding ourselves if we think the board wouldn't be flooded with "What is Davey thinking?!?!" posts.

Hoosier Red
04-17-2012, 03:41 PM
The manager Castellini should have hired is coaching the Nationals.

Loved Davey. He got a raw deal from Marge.

He lets his guys play, but isn't afraid to rock the boat or insult ego's if necessary. Does what he has to do to win. Doesn't wait for the wheels to fall off like some managers I know.

While I'm a much bigger fan of Baker than you, I agree whole heartedly in the praise of Davey Johnson.

Enough stature to put people in their place, but a small enough ego to know he doesn't have to do it every day.

RANDY IN INDY
04-17-2012, 03:47 PM
Johnson has always been good with pitchers.

MartyFan
04-17-2012, 04:13 PM
The manager Castellini should have hired is coaching the Nationals.

Loved Davey. He got a raw deal from Marge.

He lets his guys play, but isn't afraid to rock the boat or insult ego's if necessary. Does what he has to do to win. Doesn't wait for the wheels to fall off like some managers I know.

No, no, no...the guys name is Pete Mackinan :)

cincrazy
04-17-2012, 11:39 PM
Dusty has no feel for this roster. I'd compare him to a college coach who is a great recruiter, great on the living room couch, but when it comes to the sideline on fall Saturdays, he leaves much to be desired. Dusty is respected by his players. Is a good "baseball man." But he has no place managing this team. None. And it being a lame duck year for him doesn't make things any better.

kbrake
04-17-2012, 11:44 PM
Does anybody see any real downside to firing Dusty right now?

Brutus
04-17-2012, 11:46 PM
Does anybody see any real downside to firing Dusty right now?

Take a poll among the players and I imagine you'll find there's quite a downside...

kbrake
04-17-2012, 11:48 PM
Take a poll among the players and I imagine you'll find there's quite a downside...

After watching this offense for the first 2 weeks, maybe that's a good thing.

cincrazy
04-17-2012, 11:49 PM
Take a poll among the players and I imagine you'll find there's quite a downside...

True. Because they're comfortable. Time to shake up their world. If the Reds truly hope to fill the park with fans this summer and in the future, they better not hesitate to fix a glaring problem at some point. There need to be boundaries to Castellini's loyalty.

Reds/Flyers Fan
04-17-2012, 11:52 PM
Take a poll among the players and I imagine you'll find there's quite a downside...

And therein lies the problem.

Who cares what the players think? They're the ones getting paid to go through the motions in freaking April.

Brutus
04-17-2012, 11:55 PM
True. Because they're comfortable. Time to shake up their world. If the Reds truly hope to fill the park with fans this summer and in the future, they better not hesitate to fix a glaring problem at some point. There need to be boundaries to Castellini's loyalty.

Teams go through slumps all the time. If this were an 11-game stretch in the middle of June, we'd think it was nothing more than a slump.

Why should we give extra weight to a slump now than in June? It's really a stretch to assume that because they're in a slump it's because "they're comfortable" and thus things need to be shaken up.

Give a month, for crying out loud. The season is SIX months long. Let's wait longer than two weeks to consider "shaking things up."

In fact, I urge you to go watch Moneyball the movie. You'll remember that the A's that year started out 23-26 before going on to win 100 games. What would have happened if Billy had decided to shake things up when Art was going against his roster construct?

kbrake
04-17-2012, 11:59 PM
Teams go through slumps all the time. If this were an 11-game stretch in the middle of June, we'd think it was nothing more than a slump.

Why should we give extra weight to a slump now than in June? It's really a stretch to assume that because they're in a slump it's because "they're comfortable" and thus things need to be shaken up.

Give a month, for crying out loud. The season is SIX months long. Let's wait longer than two weeks to consider "shaking things up."

In fact, I urge you to go watch Moneyball the movie. You'll remember that the A's that year started out 23-26 before going on to win 100 games. What would have happened if Billy had decided to shake things up when Art was going against his roster construct?

He did shake things up by dealing guys off. You think Art Howe is the reason they won? Dusty got the patience last year. I'm sorry but I'm not waiting another two weeks. I've seen enough.

WVRedsFan
04-18-2012, 12:01 AM
Hmmm. Well because we are playing a team three games in front of us (now four) and still the pitching decisions are maddening. Yes, we only score one run, but that should be factored in. So Logan pitches well, we tie the game and instead of bringing in Chapman or Marshall, we bring in Sam, who does what he does (very hittable) and follow with Bray ( the inherited base runner scoring king) and expect to win. So flawed.

nate
04-18-2012, 12:02 AM
Teams go through slumps all the time. If this were an 11-game stretch in the middle of June, we'd think it was nothing more than a slump.

Why should we give extra weight to a slump now than in June? It's really a stretch to assume that because they're in a slump it's because "they're comfortable" and thus things need to be shaken up.

Give a month, for crying out loud. The season is SIX months long. Let's wait longer than two weeks to consider "shaking things up."

In fact, I urge you to go watch Moneyball the movie. You'll remember that the A's that year started out 23-26 before going on to win 100 games. What would have happened if Billy had decided to shake things up when Art was going against his roster construct?

Word.

High five!

Brutus
04-18-2012, 12:04 AM
He did shake things up by dealing guys off. You think Art Howe is the reason they won? Dusty got the patience last year. I'm sorry but I'm not waiting another two weeks. I've seen enough.

He waited more than 11 games to do it didn't he? Despite people telling him for the first two months of the year that what he was doing was awful and it wouldn't work, he stayed the course. When he made the trades, he did so by trading the guys that he knew weren't part of the puzzle. Even though the manager was disrupting things, he didn't fire him. Instead, he simply nudged him into using his parts and was patient enough to let it work.

Guess what? It did.

If you've "seen enough" on April 17, you should find a different sport. Baseball is a marathon, not a sprint. Stumbling out of a starting gate in a 26-mile race is a blip on the radar. Yet you're worried about waiting another two weeks? Good grief, even in two weeks we'll only be one month into a six-month season.

kbrake
04-18-2012, 12:06 AM
He waited more than 11 games to do it didn't he? Despite people telling him for the first two months of the year that what he was doing was awful and it wouldn't work, he stayed the course. When he made the trades, he did so by trading the guys that he knew weren't part of the puzzle. Even though the manager was disrupting things, he didn't fire him. Instead, he simply nudged him into using his parts and was patient enough to let it work.

Guess what? It did.

If you've "seen enough" on April 17, you should find a different sport. Baseball is a marathon, not a sprint. Stumbling out of a starting gate in a 26-mile race is a blip on the radar. Yet you're worried about waiting another two weeks? Good grief, even in two weeks we'll only be one month into a six-month season.

I understand your point of view, I get it. I just don't share it, not this year. So at what point will you say is enough? You want to give Dusty two more weeks?

Brutus
04-18-2012, 12:07 AM
I understand your point of view, I get it. I just don't share it, not this year. So at what point will you say is enough? You want to give Dusty two more weeks?

Historically, standings don't start settling in until the end of May or early June.

If in the middle of May the Reds aren't starting to get hot, I'd say it's time to consider all alternatives.

kbrake
04-18-2012, 12:08 AM
Historically, standings don't start settling in until the end of May or early June.

If in the middle of May the Reds aren't starting to get hot, I'd say it's time to consider all alternatives.

Honestly you're probably right I just know I felt that way all last year and then all of a sudden the season was shot. Add that to the fact that this is about the worst start possible and it is giving me a sense of urgency. This team is lucky to not be 1-10.

Brutus
04-18-2012, 12:10 AM
Honestly you're probably right I just know I felt that way all last year and then all of a sudden the season was shot. Add that to the fact that this is about the worst start possible and it is giving me a sense of urgency. This team is lucky to not be 1-10.

Well, on the other hand, they've lost three out of their last four games in extra innings. How much different would everyone's perspective be if they'd won those extra inning games rather than lost them?

They'd be sitting at 7-4 and tied for first place.

I think that just shows how much of a sample we're dealing with.

kbrake
04-18-2012, 12:12 AM
Well, on the other hand, they've lost three out of their last four games in extra innings. How much different would everyone's perspective be if they'd won those extra inning games rather than lost them?

They'd be sitting at 7-4 and tied for first place.

I think that just shows how much of a sample we're dealing with.

It does but it also shows how wretched Dusty can be in a tight game. If tonight is a playoff game I sure as hell hope he isn't saving Marshall because it's not a save situation.

Brutus
04-18-2012, 12:15 AM
I want to add, I'm frustrated. Very frustrated.

However, I am absolutely 100% positive these 11 games are in no way, shape or form indicative of the Reds' real offense. Heck, just look at their career histories. Almost every single one of them are nowhere near their typical production. I'm not saying the Reds' offense is great or will lead the league in runs scored, but it should not be anything like this.

As such, what's happening is that the offense has been SO BAD so far, the decisions Dusty makes is being unduly exacerbated by people because they need somewhere to place blame. Dusty's decisions are subjective at best. Unfortunately when you score one run a game, or two runs a game, every decision gets put under a magnifying glass. People are overreacting to things they disagree with because they need somewhere to place their frustration.

The bottom line is when a team struggles to score more than one run in 10-12 inning games, nothing Dusty or any manager does is going to wind up pleasing people. The Reds could have John McGraw managing right now and it wouldn't matter much as long as the Reds hit like this. Fortunately, they won't. They'll start hitting to their ability and then we'll have a better feel for what the Reds have or don't have. But this ain't it.

dougdirt
04-18-2012, 12:16 AM
I don't want to fire Dusty for 2012. I want to fire him for his entire Reds tenure. This team sucks right now and even if Dusty makes the 'right' moves, we have one, maybe two at best more wins and still are playing poorly. Still, I can't find a reason to think he should be the manager of our team.

Kc61
04-18-2012, 12:29 AM
Whether the Reds offense is really "this" bad is totally besides the point, it's a false issue. Virtually no major league offense will be this bad, in part because eventually they will face below average pitching and will score some runs.

The issue is whether the offense has been structured to succeed and whether the manager is using the guys in a way that promotes success.

IMO the offense is poorly structured for many reasons outlined in the other thread on this point. My problem with Dusty is more on the pitching side, although he bunts too much for my taste on offense, a small quibble. Generally i have found Dusty to be ok.

But that doesn't mean he should stay forever. I have always believed that a fresh managerial approach after awhile is a positive thing for teams. Obviously you don't fire managerial greats, but most managers should have "term limits" in my opinion.

The Reds were below .500 last year and if they don't pick up soon, I wouldn't be opposed to a change. I like Dusty, but teams need a new approach after awhile, and the Reds may be such a team.

Brutus
04-18-2012, 12:40 AM
Word.

High five!

On the side!

reds44
04-18-2012, 01:03 AM
Teams go through slumps all the time. If this were an 11-game stretch in the middle of June, we'd think it was nothing more than a slump.

Why should we give extra weight to a slump now than in June? It's really a stretch to assume that because they're in a slump it's because "they're comfortable" and thus things need to be shaken up.

Give a month, for crying out loud. The season is SIX months long. Let's wait longer than two weeks to consider "shaking things up."

In fact, I urge you to go watch Moneyball the movie. You'll remember that the A's that year started out 23-26 before going on to win 100 games. What would have happened if Billy had decided to shake things up when Art was going against his roster construct?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he trade Carlos Pena and Jeremy Giambi before they turned it around? Is that not shaking it up?

Brutus
04-18-2012, 01:20 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he trade Carlos Pena and Jeremy Giambi before they turned it around? Is that not shaking it up?

That's true, but they weren't planning on those guys being integral pieces to their lineup (well, perhaps Giambi was expected but Pena was not supposed to be starting).

My point was that they wanted to stick to the lineup they planned on having out there everyday.

membengal
04-18-2012, 06:40 AM
Ownership just committed to $300 million dollars of payroll to two players. I am guessing there may be more pressure on Dusty than many suspect. A slow start will be magnified this year.

edabbs44
04-18-2012, 06:58 AM
Dusty very well might go and it could "change" the fortunes of this team, but we are still talking about a very small sample and the underperforming of some key players. The team will get better and it will likely not solely be because of the manager.

dougdirt
04-18-2012, 07:13 AM
Dusty very well might go and it could "change" the fortunes of this team, but we are still talking about a very small sample and the underperforming of some key players. The team will get better and it will likely not solely be because of the manager.

Dusty is 7 games under .500 as the Reds manager and has had only one winning season in three.

Roy Tucker
04-18-2012, 08:21 AM
I don't expect the team to hit .205 the rest of the year. But it may be an indicator that this offense will be below league average.

The Reds are currently next to last in the NL in team OPS at .565. League average is currently .689. Last year it was .710.

Team ERA is 3.53 which is smack dab in the middle of the NL.

So the pitching is OK. Its a matter of how much the bats are going to warm up. And when. 12 games is 7% of the season. Yes, its a long season, but lets not dawdle away here, boys. Have some urgency.

jojo
04-18-2012, 08:39 AM
Just for some context, the first 11 games have been mostly an unmitigated disaster. Their offense is ranked 15th in th NL based upon wOBA. Their defense rated only 8th so far based upon UZR which would be a major decline from last year if it were an accurate estimate of their true team ability, their rotation is ranked 15th in the NL based upon FIP/xFIP, while their pen, despite all of the gnashing of teeth about Dusty in this regard, has been the only above average aspect (ranked 6th via FIP/xFIP).

To top it off, the Cardinals have came out of the gates well. So the Reds are 11 games in and already 4 games out.

I get why people are complaining. The Reds haven't been good relative to the league in very much so far and they are digging a hole.

I doubt the first 11 games will be representative of their season going forward but it has been unpleasant to watch especially given the excitement and anticipation the off season moves created.

Hoosier Red
04-18-2012, 09:18 AM
While you or I may not agree with it, it's a bit unfair to blame Baker for not using his closer in these situations. Right or wrong most managers have a closer they use specifically to pitch the last half inning of a game. This means in an extra inning game on the road, he only comes in if other options had been used and/or the team takes the lead in the top half.

I say this in the vein of 'Baker has to go' but he'd be replaced most likely by another manager who would do the exact same thing.

As for not using Chapman to start the 10th to pitch 2-3 inning if necessary? I got nothing.

CySeymour
04-18-2012, 09:37 AM
I don't expect the team to hit .205 the rest of the year. But it may be an indicator that this offense will be below league average.

The Reds are currently next to last in the NL in team OPS at .565. League average is currently .689. Last year it was .710.

Team ERA is 3.53 which is smack dab in the middle of the NL.

So the pitching is OK. Its a matter of how much the bats are going to warm up. And when. 12 games is 7% of the season. Yes, its a long season, but lets not dawdle away here, boys. Have some urgency.

Good points. The offense is exposing Dusty's weakness,w hich is handling the bullpen. Since the team is playing so many tight games and extra inning games, it is showing his lack of understanding when to use relievers.

I know the Reds were second in the league in runs scored last year, but I ended up being very suprised by that. They actually ended up with a 99 OPS+, suggesting there was some luck involved in the runs scored stat they may be hard to duplicate this season.

westofyou
04-18-2012, 09:48 AM
Good points. The offense is exposing Dusty's weakness,w hich is handling the bullpen. Since the team is playing so many tight games and extra inning games, it is showing his lack of understanding when to use relievers.

I know the Reds were second in the league in runs scored last year, but I ended up being very suprised by that. They actually ended up with a 99 OPS+, suggesting there was some luck involved in the runs scored stat they may be hard to duplicate this season.

Do we actually think in this day and age Dusty is the one who decides? He has a pitching coach, a BP coach and BP catcher and they all have input on what approach to take and who to use, dropping the sole decision in his lap is likely a false reality.

Kc61
04-18-2012, 09:53 AM
Funny, I think Dusty has handled the pen well this year. I have hated his use of the pen in earlier years, overused guys, but this year I'm ok with it.

I think Chapman is being stretched out. I think the intention is to give him more rest and use him for longer innings. Some of these posts indicate that he should pitch constantly, whenever there is a problem inning. I don't think that is the plan.

Bray is a good enough reliever to pitch in extra innings. He's been solid for several years. He does have injury issues, but I can't criticize Dusty for using him, he's not some third rate reliever.

And Dusty has used Ondrusek well, he's been effective. He's even had some good outings from Simon.

Let's face it, relievers aren't perfect, if you constantly are in low scoring, tie games, you'll win some and lose some. The issue is strictly an inability to score for the Reds right now.

CySeymour
04-18-2012, 10:07 AM
Do we actually think in this day and age Dusty is the one who decides? He has a pitching coach, a BP coach and BP catcher and they all have input on what approach to take and who to use, dropping the sole decision in his lap is likely a false reality.

Uh, yeah...sorry, it's the manager who ultimately has to decide who plays and who doesn't. If he is letting the other coaches deciding, he still has to answer.

westofyou
04-18-2012, 10:27 AM
Uh, yeah...sorry, it's the manager who ultimately has to decide who plays and who doesn't. If he is letting the other coaches deciding, he still has to answer.

Yes it's his responsibility in the end

But let's also note that the BP has a 2.83 era and averages 10 k per nine and compared to the starters that's gold from where I sit

jojo
04-18-2012, 10:33 AM
Do we actually think in this day and age Dusty is the one who decides? He has a pitching coach, a BP coach and BP catcher and they all have input on what approach to take and who to use, dropping the sole decision in his lap is likely a false reality.

This is a very important point.

First, the performance of the pen has been the best part of the Reds production this season-it's been above average over the first 11 games.

But second, we don't even know who is orchestrating the management of the staff. Brian Price essentially ran the show in that regard under Lou P in Seattle. It's probably likely that, at a bare minimum, Price has significant influence on decisions regarding the staff.

But really, firing a manager 11 games into the season? That's very unusual without a catastrophic catalyst. Then considering that Dusty has a track record, its really an extremely premature conversation IMHO.

Hoosier Red
04-18-2012, 10:34 AM
Good points. The offense is exposing Dusty's weakness,w hich is handling the bullpen. Since the team is playing so many tight games and extra inning games, it is showing his lack of understanding when to use relievers.
I know the Reds were second in the league in runs scored last year, but I ended up being very suprised by that. They actually ended up with a 99 OPS+, suggesting there was some luck involved in the runs scored stat they may be hard to duplicate this season.

Just because I've heard the charge of Baker can't manage in close games quite a few times, I thought I'd go back and look this up. For his career, Baker has a .514 Winning % in one run games.

Since joining the Reds, Baker's win % in one run games(105-103) is actually better than his overall record as Reds manager.(326-333)

So he may not be a good manager, but it ain't the tightest games proving it.

flyer85
04-18-2012, 12:57 PM
Dusty being Dusty. Jocketty sure didn't help him by getting rid of Francisco and letting him keep the three amigos (Cairo, Valdez, Harris).

Not giving Mesoraco 5 or 6 starts a week and batting him in the middle of the order is hard to fathom but Dusty loves his vets.

Reds are in serious trouble as Walt pushed all in on Latos and it is really starting to look like pitching is not going to be the problem. Instead holes in LF, CF, 3B and C (as long as Hanigan keeps getting the majority of starts) are likely to be the anvil that drags the Reds down.

RichRed
04-18-2012, 01:06 PM
Just because I've heard the charge of Baker can't manage in close games quite a few times, I thought I'd go back and look this up. For his career, Baker has a .514 Winning % in one run games.

Since joining the Reds, Baker's win % in one run games(105-103) is actually better than his overall record as Reds manager.(326-333)

So he may not be a good manager, but it ain't the tightest games proving it.

Very interesting post, Hoosier, thanks for that. Those numbers certainly go against what the biased crazy little man in my head has been saying.

Next up: How Dusty always screws up and turns big leads into one-run games. :evil:

flyer85
04-18-2012, 01:14 PM
don't care who the manager is the Reds have a lot of replacement level offensive players (Rolen, Hanigan, Stubbs ) and below replacement level types(Valdez, Cairo, Harris). That is a lot of dead weight to overcome with pitching and defense.

savafan
04-18-2012, 01:52 PM
Those who believe that a manager is only responsible for 3-4 losses a year should be happy with the start to this season, as Dusty is getting his losses out of the way early. ;)

CySeymour
04-18-2012, 02:16 PM
Just because I've heard the charge of Baker can't manage in close games quite a few times, I thought I'd go back and look this up. For his career, Baker has a .514 Winning % in one run games.

Since joining the Reds, Baker's win % in one run games(105-103) is actually better than his overall record as Reds manager.(326-333)

So he may not be a good manager, but it ain't the tightest games proving it.

Fair point!

redsmetz
04-18-2012, 03:08 PM
Those who believe that a manager is only responsible for 3-4 losses a year should be happy with the start to this season, as Dusty is getting his losses out of the way early. ;)

This is the first thing on this board that has made me laugh in a long tmie.

Hoosier Red
04-18-2012, 03:45 PM
Fair point!

Thanks, I'd love to compare it to say Tony La Russa or Jim Leyland or some other <insert bullpen usage genius here>, but the only way I was able to get the splits for Dusty was to go year by year on Baseball-Reference so if someone has a better way, please let me know.

RedlegJake
04-18-2012, 03:58 PM
I don't buy this nonsense about poor players blah blah blah - these aren't poor players!!!! But you make them look darn bad when you pinch run Devin freakin Mesaraco of all the guys available, when you bat guys continually in the wrong spots, when you call for small ball tactics early in the game and give up outs, when your handling of the bullpen is a mish-mash of what? coin-flipping?? I've never said a word about Baker in any of these threads before - I've always figured the manager is the first guy everyone looks to and Baker has his weaknesses and his strengths BUT this year he seems to be really panicking with some of these dumb dumb dumb moves. Last night's managing WAS a case of the manager losing a game. That was a ridiculously managed ballgame.

CySeymour
04-18-2012, 04:00 PM
Thanks, I'd love to compare it to say Tony La Russa or Jim Leyland or some other <insert bullpen usage genius here>, but the only way I was able to get the splits for Dusty was to go year by year on Baseball-Reference so if someone has a better way, please let me know.

Now let's not let facts get in the way!!! :laugh:

CySeymour
04-18-2012, 04:02 PM
I don't buy this nonsense about poor players blah blah blah - these aren't poor players!!!! But you make them look darn bad when you pinch run Devin freakin Mesaraco of all the guys available, when you bat guys continually in the wrong spots, when you call for small ball tactics early in the game and give up outs, when your handling of the bullpen is a mish-mash of what? coin-flipping?? I've never said a word about Baker in any of these threads before - I've always figured the manager is the first guy everyone looks to and Baker has his weaknesses and his strengths BUT this year he seems to be really panicking with some of these dumb dumb dumb moves. Last night's managing WAS a case of the manager losing a game. That was a ridiculously managed ballgame.

Soooo, the players don't have any responsibility to actually play well?

Brutus
04-18-2012, 04:02 PM
I don't buy this nonsense about poor players blah blah blah - these aren't poor players!!!! But you make them look darn bad when you pinch run Devin freakin Mesaraco of all the guys available, when you bat guys continually in the wrong spots, when you call for small ball tactics early in the game and give up outs, when your handling of the bullpen is a mish-mash of what? coin-flipping?? I've never said a word about Baker in any of these threads before - I've always figured the manager is the first guy everyone looks to and Baker has his weaknesses and his strengths BUT this year he seems to be really panicking with some of these dumb dumb dumb moves. Last night's managing WAS a case of the manager losing a game. That was a ridiculously managed ballgame.

The Reds were about to pinch hit for the nine spot on top of having to replace Hanigan by pinch running for him. If they'd used a pinch runner, that would have been literally three position players used in one half of an inning that wasn't the 9th inning.

Mesoraco was going to have to replace Hanigan regardless. Since Mesoraco runs at least moderately better than Hanigan, I think he made the right choice to not use a pinch runner.

RedlegJake
04-18-2012, 05:02 PM
Soooo, the players don't have any responsibility to actually play well?

First they aren't playing poorly - they just aren't hitting, big difference. They are not getting bombed, running themselves out of games, making errors that cost them - bullpen wildness is the closest thing to poor play I've seen. Team wide slumps happen and the makeup of this club isn't the cause of ridiculously low averages - a slump is. They just aren't hitting right now and that will end. Baker looks to be almost in a frantic mode trying to push buttons right now to force things. I stand by the comment - I think last night was a badly managed game and Baker was as almost as much at fault for the loss as the lack of hitting.

MartyFan
04-18-2012, 10:28 PM
tick.....

reds44
04-18-2012, 10:34 PM
tick.....
Exactly. A manager in the last year of his deal has very little wiggle room.

dougdirt
04-18-2012, 10:36 PM
Someone needs to be throwing things in the locker room after this game. Whether it is Baker or a player, I don't really care.

traderumor
04-18-2012, 10:43 PM
tick.....Turret's or the bug? ;)

Chip R
04-18-2012, 11:04 PM
I'm not necessarily in favor of firing Dusty but Bob has sunk a lot of money into this team and given up a lot of young talent to get guys like Latos. He's going to want some return on his investment. We also know Bob wants to win badly. If the Reds don't improve soon, someone's going to take the fall and I don't think it's going to be Walt.

So if Dusty is fired, who takes his job? My guess it would be someone in the organization like Berry or Speier.

REDblooded
04-18-2012, 11:06 PM
Someone needs to be throwing things in the locker room after this game. Whether it is Baker or a player, I don't really care.


If Rolen does it, he's on the DL.

westofyou
04-18-2012, 11:08 PM
So if Dusty is fired, who takes his job? My guess it would be someone in the organization like Berry or Speier.

Or The Jim Riggleman Quitting Machine

reds44
04-18-2012, 11:09 PM
So if Dusty is fired, who takes his job? My guess it would be someone in the organization like Berry or Speier.

My guess is Walt makes a run at LaRussa and if that doesn't work gives it to David Bell.

KronoRed
04-18-2012, 11:10 PM
Hmm..LaRussa running the Reds, be worth it to hear Marty's head explode on the air.

kaldaniels
04-18-2012, 11:11 PM
Heck let Rolen manage after his retirement.

kbrake
04-18-2012, 11:11 PM
Does anyone think they will actually pull the trigger on Dusty soon?