Originally Posted by Kc61
You like to use words like disingenuous, but it's you who keep asking the wrong question. A straw man.
Nobody is saying the difference between 2011 and 2012 was Dusty Baker. It's the wrong question. The starting pitching in 2011 was riddled by injury and illness, there was Volquez not Latos, the team was not going to the playoffs.
The real question is how Dusty did when he had teams with a reasonable playoff chance. In 2010 and especially in 2012 his teams were healthy enough and talented enough to have a chance.
And he did great in the regular season. His team did less than great in the post-season which is a reasonable topic for discussion. I think there are personnel factors there as well as any strategy issues.
As I said, I don't think Dusty is coming back. And that's fine, sometimes change is good, a fresh look. But I view his tenure as Reds manager as a success, and when compared to other recent managers, a huge success.
Yes I agree. The improved talent and health of the players is the reason why the team was better this year.
I think a good tactical manager could have squeezed a few extra wins out of the same personnel.
And I think that question I asked was the perfect question. You and others insist that Dusty can't be criticized because the Reds won 97 games this year, yet you can't explain how Dusty Baker is the reason why they improved by 18 games. If you are so sure Dusty was the reason then you should be able to explain why. He was the same manager that had a losing record in 2011. What did he do differently this year? I'll tell you what he did differently: he managed a better team that had more talent and better health than the year before. That is why the team was better -- because of the players, not the manager. Dusty managed the same way he always has. The criticisms of his managing style that were valid in 2011 are still valid in 2012. He makes a lot of mistakes that could be easily corrected. He does some things well too.
The Reds will be just fine whether Dusty comes back or not.
Some people think Dusty Baker got the most production possible out of this team. Some people think improved lineup construction and in-game strategy could have resulted in more wins. Everybody is entitled to their opinion. It isn't fair to say Dusty Baker was perfect and can't be criticized because the Reds won 97 games this year. No matter how many games they won they could always have done better. Even the best managers make mistakes and it is fair to discuss them.