what was your favorite zany baker move as manager

[redsmetz]

My "favorite" was when he stuck with Patterson at lead-off through 2.5 months of BB-free performance.

Why do people continue to spout these canards about Corey Patterson? The facts are easily verifiable. In fact, Corey Patterson was essentially the lead-off batter for the majority of games in April only (17 times out of 29 games). After April ended, he only led off 15 more times over the remaining 133 games. And he walked seven times during the month of April. So none of your statement is true.

In fact, Patterson wasn't even the Red with the most times leading off that season. It was Jerry Hairston (44), followed by Patterson (32), Dickerson (25), Bruce (22) and Freel (20), rounded out by five other players in the remaining 19 games.

It really is very simple to verify these things. These perceptions are clouded for many by their absolute disdain for anything Dusty Baker did while manager of the Reds.

[I see that Edabbs44 beat me to the punch, pointing out that Patterson didn't lead off anywhere near as much as folks say]

[lidspinner]

I did not love baker as manager, I think he would make a perfect assistant coach because players love him to death but dusty has the knack of making stupid decisions and backing them up with no clear reason....baker also lets his players run the team....that cannot work unless you Have a clear leader who holds everyone accountable....this year we did not have that so we needed dusty to be that guy and dusty would not, or could not do it.....I lost all faith in dusty to be a leader when Brandon Phillips came into his office and called C.Trent a fat arse and basically called Trent out for Trent doing his job......bakers response was "keep me out of this argument"......baker should have nipped it in the bud the second that BP got his feelings hurt by a reporter...

Baker is a great guy and a great baseball guy.....and a manager who will go down as one of the good ones.....he won't be looked at as a failure, he won't be looked at as a winner but he will be looked at as a good manager who managed great teams and great players. Not a bad resume to have.......he just couldn't win the big one, and he could not control his all star players.....if dusty would have been able to conquer those two attributes, he would be a sure fire hall of farmer and probably would have never managed the reds because he would have been with a team who would've had a top payroll and paid him better than we ever would have.

I am thankful for all that dusty has brought back to our team...a winning attitude and a thirst for the playoffs each and every year....we can thank dusty for that. Now we need to find someone who can take what dusty has instilled in his players and our fans and take them a few steps further.......

This is where Walt will earn his pay.....this is where Walt will either become a legend or become the next fired member of management for the reds. This manager has to be the right call.

[redsmetz]

Every manager makes head scratching moves. Dusty was no different. But he did win 90+ games for three straight seasons. He took the Reds to certain point and its time for someone else to take them another step forward. I'm not going to pile on and bring up things I thought weren't right. It was time for a change and its time for everyone to move on.

I'm going to build off of your post, which I concur with. Likewise both WOY and AlwaysRed made this same point. As others have said, every manager does things we disagree with and every manager makes mistakes. Just counting on this thread, I think maybe there's about seven moves out of nearly 1000 games managed as a Red (and keep in mind that's likely almost 25,000 AB's in that time) and you see the math is miniscule.

For some time now, I've said it was important that the Reds end the merry-go-round we've had in the managerial chair and they did that with Dusty Baker. And he returned winning baseball to Cincinnati. That can't be overemphasized. And threads like this ("oh, that zany Dusty") or the comments that always are prefaced with what a great human being Baker is overlook the fact that the man has had a very good managerial career, even if the ultimate prize, a World Series victory, eluded him.

I will say that mth123's post is perhaps the best in this thread that doesn't touch the "zany" thought, but is rather a decent critique of what are certainly valid arguments about Dusty's tenure here. But the rest of it is just silly, IMO. Every manager leaves fans scratching their heads. Dusty Baker wasn't any different.

And I agree it's time for a change. I think Dusty's largest failure ultimately was that he expected his players to be responsible for their game. He wasn't a head buster (and personally, I hate that style) and certainly for this season, it did not bode well. There's no question this club did not play well as a unit and it's the reason we lost many games we shouldn't have and why we had so few games we walked away from lucky to have won.

[BungleBengals]

I think a shorter list would be, what is the smartest move Dusty Baker has ever done?

[reds44]

Bringing in LeCure instead of Chapman with the bases loaded and nobody out in the 9th inning in San Diego in 2012 was pretty bad.

[PedroBourbon]

Taking the fall for Brook Jacoby.

[scott91575]

Why do people continue to spout these canards about Corey Patterson? The facts are easily verifiable. In fact, Corey Patterson was essentially the lead-off batter for the majority of games in April only (17 times out of 29 games). After April ended, he only led off 15 more times over the remaining 133 games. And he walked seven times during the month of April. So none of your statement is true.

In fact, Patterson wasn't even the Red with the most times leading off that season. It was Jerry Hairston (44), followed by Patterson (32), Dickerson (25), Bruce (22) and Freel (20), rounded out by five other players in the remaining 19 games.

It really is very simple to verify these things. These perceptions are clouded for many by their absolute disdain for anything Dusty Baker did while manager of the Reds.

[I see that Edabbs44 beat me to the punch, pointing out that Patterson didn't lead off anywhere near as much as folks say]

OK, how about batting Willy Taveras (and his .275 OBP) first 81 games in 2009? Is that better? There really is no need to exaggerate with Dusty. There is more than enough actual evidence to show his "zany" ways.

[redsrule2500]

The laughable list of leadoff hitters from 2008-2012: Corey Patterson, Willy Taveras, Orlando Cabrera, Drew Stubbs, Zack Cozart

I cannot emphasize this enough: Dusty Baker did not return winning baseball to Cincinnati, ownership did.

[redsmetz]

OK, how about batting Willy Taveras (and his .275 OBP) first 81 games in 2009? Is that better? There really is no need to exaggerate with Dusty. There is more than enough actual evidence to show his "zany" ways.

As with some of the criticisms of Baker, one really ask Walt Jockety was he was thinking bringing in a player like Taveras. The same was true with Patterson. I'll be the first to say player acquisition isn't done in a vacuum, but the fact is management is who secured both of those players. And I wouldn't call either of those "zany," which is really just a way for those who despised Baker completely to deride him on his way out.

As a number of us have said in this thread, the man brought the Reds back to being a winning team. In fact, for all the "he'll be horrible with young players," he brought along a very good crop of young players to this spot (both pitchers and hitters). How about those "zany" ways - winning baseball. Who'd a thunk?

[westofyou]

The laughable list of leadoff hitters from 2008-2012: Corey Patterson, Willy Taveras, Orlando Cabrera, Drew Stubbs, Zack Cozart

I cannot emphasize this enough: Dusty Baker did not return winning baseball to Cincinnati, ownership did.

Yep, ownership did provide the horses

But there is a healthy amount of fans who would rather walk over hot coals than give Baker support or kudos for anything at all. That's really their problem as far as I'm concerned. I'm fairly certain no one will every make them happy as the teams manager.

[bob jones]

Starting Leake in game 4 of playoffs was a disaster, Leake had done nothing, and it put all the onus on Latos for apossible game 5 instead of the giants having to defeat Latos and Arroyo, they had to defeat only Leake and Latos,, big error

[scott91575]

As with some of the criticisms of Baker, one really ask Walt Jockety was he was thinking bringing in a player like Taveras. The same was true with Patterson. I'll be the first to say player acquisition isn't done in a vacuum, but the fact is management is who secured both of those players. And I wouldn't call either of those "zany," which is really just a way for those who despised Baker completely to deride him on his way out.

As a number of us have said in this thread, the man brought the Reds back to being a winning team. In fact, for all the "he'll be horrible with young players," he brought along a very good crop of young players to this spot (both pitchers and hitters). How about those "zany" ways - winning baseball. Who'd a thunk?

You give Dusty way too much credit for the Reds being brought back to a winning team. It's not like if you handed him the Astros they would have been a winning team. You cannot deride Walt for Taveras and then give Dusty credit for the turnaround.

What I do know is Willy Tavares should never, ever lead off. It's bad enough being stuck with him, but it's completely moronic to put your worst hitter in the spot that sees the most at bats (something Dusty has done over and over and over again just because a guy has some speed).

On top of all of that, why can't people point out some of his "zany" decisions without people running to Dusty's aid like some sort of white knight. The guy made lots of strange managerial decisions. It is to the point that it's a running joke throughout baseball. On the flip side he was a good clubhouse manager. Yet that doesn't change the fact he consistently made head scratching managerial decisions.

[redsmetz]

You give Dusty way too much credit for the Reds being brought back to a winning team. It's not like if you handed him the Astros they would have been a winning team. You cannot deride Walt for Taveras and then give Dusty credit for the turnaround.

What I do know is Willy Tavares should never, ever lead off. It's bad enough being stuck with him, but it's completely moronic to put your worst hitter in the spot that sees the most at bats (something Dusty has done over and over and over again just because a guy has some speed).

On top of all of that, why can't people point out some of his "zany" decisions without people running to Dusty's aid like some sort of white knight. The guy made lots of strange managerial decisions. It is to the point that it's a running joke throughout baseball. On the flip side he was a good clubhouse manager. Yet that doesn't change the fact he consistently made head scratching managerial decisions.

I actually didn't deride Jocketty, I mentioned that one can (and probably should) his performance in this as well. I haven't suggested that the team's success was solely Baker's. Obviously management over the course of several years made changes in available players that led to that success. Given that pool of players, it was Baker's managing that brought that success. Might there have been more success? Probably so, but that can be said of any number of teams that fall short. Clearly this year, there is no question. Something just never gelled with this club and I think there's blame that run from top to bottom; from the front office, the coaching staff and pretty much every player at some point or another.

I've said this many times during Baker's time as manager. His major sin with many RZ posters is that he fails to genuflect when sabermetrics is mentioned. That will always be unforgivable to those who believe that a saber approach is the only way to play good baseball. I think it is that narrow segment of fans who believe Dusty Baker was a laughing stock.

Nowhere near a perfect manager (because there really is no such thing), but the man, in fact, along with management giving him the ponies, brought winning baseball back to this town.

[redsrule2500]

Nowhere near a perfect manager (because there really is no such thing), but the man, in fact, along with management giving him the ponies, brought winning baseball back to this town.

Honestly, I think that's laughable. He defied stats, and not just sabermetrics, and managed from "his gut".

With this roster, I could have brought winning baseball back to Cincinnati.

[scott91575]

Nowhere near a perfect manager (because there really is no such thing), but the man, in fact, along with management giving him the ponies, brought winning baseball back to this town.

and none of it matters when mentioning the fact he made a lot of head scratching decisions. Batting Willy Tavares first is one of them.