Heck no.
Heck no.
The last 15 years should be blamed on the ownership and general managers. Not Bob, Kriv, or walt but the previous
I'll say maybe. Depends on player moves. Also depends if the player leadership/culture could move forward with another manager who would perhaps see things in a fresh way. It would be just like Dusty's luck to get canned at this point.
It doesn't matter. The Reds are winning games a lot more now than they were earlier and I think it's ignorance to not give the manager some credit for that.
I think the Reds are a better team with Dusty Baker than without him. And that's really all that matters to me at this point.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
And what manager would you want to manage the Reds? You get to the playoffs and it is a crapshoot. Should have the Reds won the series? Yep. Should have Dusty Baker had Hanigan bunt in that situation instead of going for a double steal? Considering Drew Stubbs was up next I could understand Baker's thinking.
Instead of replacing the manager, find a stopgap centerfielder who can lead off until Billy Hamilton is ready.
If you think small, you'll go nowhere in life.
One more thing....Sparky Anderson didn't win the World Series in 1970 and 1972 and Bob Howsam didn't fire him. And look how that turn out.
If you think small, you'll go nowhere in life.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
No. But he will.
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
I think the Reds need to go in a different direction. Dusty's loyalty to vets, emphasis on speed rather than OBP, and mismanagement of pitching substitutions has frustrated me.
I know some people disagree, but to me there is no way you start Mike Leake against the Giants in game 4. They owned him all year and we saw in game one that Latos can pitch effectively on short rest. He only pitched four innings and I would have started him vs. Zito and Arroyo against Cain if we lost game four. Arroyo does not throw hard and I think he can be effective on short rest as well. Bottom line, I think we had a better chance winning one of Latos v. Zito/Arroyo v. Cain than we had Leake v. Zito/Latos v. Cain. Starting Leake just about put all of our eggs in the basket of trying to beat Matt Cain twice in one series. That is a tall order.
Game four also showed you how effective a manager is who gives a pitcher the hook early enough when there are indications of a big inning, fatigue, etc. Giants pitching struggled in game 4, but the substitutions created good matchups to limit the damage. Meanwhile, Dusty's substitutions were always one batter too late. That was the difference in the game. Dusty would not have pulled Zito after 2 2/3. If Dusty was managing the Giants, he would have let him stay long enough to give up the big inning. I've seen too many Reds games to think otherwise.
Having Cairo make this roster was absurd. While I do not support Leake starting, I think he would have been better as a 25th player. He is a better hitter than Cairo, a better pinch runner, and could actually eat several innings (like 6 or 7) if there was a blowout on either side. Fraizer was available to backup Rolen or Votto and Valdez could backup Cozart or Phillips. We knew Cairo would not see the field defensively and he brings no bat and no pinch running ability. Leaving him on the roster was blind loyalty to a vet. Not having Leake on the roster may have ended up costing the Reds the NLCS if they would have made it given the decision to DL Cueto (if Cueto could have come back to pitch a game or two in that series). Having Cairo on the roster did not cost the Reds the series, but it very well could have and I don't trust Dusty to make good roster decisions when it comes to replacing a vet with a better performing younger player.
I think Dusty's record in big postseason games (elimination games) speaks for itself. Realistically, we have 2-3 more seasons of this group together in their prime. After that, guys like Latos, Homer, and Cueto likely will hit the FA market and we have a ton of money tied up in Votto, Bruce, and Phillips. You can't expect Arroyo or Ludwick (if he re-signs) to be effective for any more than 2 or 3 more years. If the Reds are going to win a world series with this group, it will need to be within this window. I don't want Dusty making the clutch decisions. It is too important.
I like Dusty as a person and appreciate his effort. I just think it is best if the Reds go in a different direction.
No question he should be back. Decisions have worked out more often than not. I don't think any manager all of a sudden forgets how to manage in the post season. Nor do I think there's a different skill needed to manage in the post season.
Dusty may retire, after his recent health scare, I would. He doesn't need this anymore, it's an aggravating job.
This team won 97 games. I see no reason to fire the manager, unless his demands are unreasonable.
If they want to do better they need to have a better balanced offense not so dependent on long balls. They need to have a bench that adds more to the offense. And they need to have more pitching depth because the luck of 2012 can't go on forever.
Dusty is a lightening rod, but at the end of the day the team scored 8 runs in three home games with Cueto on the DL.
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |