Who should be the next Manager?

[WVRedsFan]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeRedleg

I'm on the Mackanin bandwagon.

I don't know why. Just a vibe.

I'll stick with him for now.

Man, how history repeats itself. Miley took over the club and we started winning for awhile. Same with Narron. How many times did I hear about "he was doing all he could with what he had", or "best record in severl years", and so forth.

I said both times that both were nice guys, but didn't have what it took to lead this club to a championship. Unfortunately, it took nearly 300 games for the FO to realize that.

I'm saying today that Pete isn't who we need for the future if we're going to contend.

[RedlegJake]

I guess I'll disagree with you WVRedsFan. I like MacKinan and remember when he was a hot prospective manager until he dissed Marge and - this is the game of the "owner's club" - he promptly became persona non grata for a few years to all owners. He has an impressive resume, too, as WK alluded, for a 'new' manager. I'm arguing that simply because the last 2 in house candidates were the wrong choice doesn't mean that Pete is. That said, I don't want him rubber stamped but want an all out search and interview process with Pete included as one of the candidates. Don't dismiss him out of hand, don't extend him just because he's a "company man" either. If WK and Cast hear all the interviewees and compare, and conclude that baseball-wise, not dollar-wise, that MacKanin is the best man for the job then I'm all for it. Just to rhetorically remark he's not the right guy is just as blind as all the love for Girardi, which frankly, I'm at a loss to comprehend. Davey Johnson intrigues me,as does Valentine, but I have to wonder if either would be interested. I think the LaRussa-Jocketty thing is a smokescreen, but Ozzie might be a kick in the seat of the pants for a few players- he'd sure be fun anyway.

[Edskin]

Bobby V would be my first choice as well.

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Originally Posted by WVRedsFan

Man, how history repeats itself. Miley took over the club and we started winning for awhile. Same with Narron. How many times did I hear about "he was doing all he could with what he had", or "best record in severl years", and so forth.

I said both times that both were nice guys, but didn't have what it took to lead this club to a championship. Unfortunately, it took nearly 300 games for the FO to realize that.

I'm saying today that Pete isn't who we need for the future if we're going to contend.

I felt the vibe about Mackanin after his presser. It has nothing to do with his start as manager.

[camisadelgolf]

I'm torn between Tony LaRussa and Davey Johnson. I guess I'd rather have Johnson due to all of the unintelligible rambling I'd have to read about LaRussa on RedsZone if he came to Cincinnati.

[Unassisted]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeRedleg

I'm on the Mackanin bandwagon.

I don't know why. Just a vibe.

I'll stick with him for now.

I like what he's doing, but I think the bar was lowered so far by Narron that his salvage operation can't help but put the Reds on a better course. Because this situation reminds me too much of '03 and '05, I don't want Mackanin to be any more than a placeholder for a better replacement - like Davey Johnson.

[jmcclain19]

Originally Posted by WVRedsFan

Man, how history repeats itself. Miley took over the club and we started winning for awhile. Same with Narron. How many times did I hear about "he was doing all he could with what he had", or "best record in severl years", and so forth.

I said both times that both were nice guys, but didn't have what it took to lead this club to a championship. Unfortunately, it took nearly 300 games for the FO to realize that.

I'm saying today that Pete isn't who we need for the future if we're going to contend.

It's called a Dead Cat Bounce. Smart GMs know this and account for that when considering a future manager.

[Mario-Rijo]

Almost dead on IMO. It's nearly as I have felt from the very beginning, Wheeler is just able to put it more elequently. Don't jump to conclusions on the title, it must be read to be appreciated for what it really means.

Remember, even Sparky was a no-name

Column by The Post's Lonnie Wheeler


Pete Mackanin doesn't have a bandwagon, and if he did I wouldn't be on it yet. I do believe, though, that our attention to history in the matter of a Reds manager - magnified by the recent failures of those not preceded by reputations - might be expanded a bit.

Recognizing that times and certainly circumstances change, let's go back, say, 38 years. October 1969.

There's a young boy with a letter in his hands. His name is Rick Heflin, he's 9 years old, and he's having a hard time with the concept of why his favorite baseball team had to fire his favorite manager.

"I was just the biggest Reds fan in the world and didn't understand the inhumanity of man to fire a manager when his players weren't playing well," Heflin recalls now, his memories freshened by the latest spin of the cycle. "It was not Dave Bristol's fault that Jim Maloney's arm fell off and Alex Johnson wasn't all that he was cracked up to be. It made a lot of sense to a 9-year-old that you didn't blame the manager because players paid to do well didn't."

So, on Oct. 14 - five days after the Reds had hired a manager whom no 9-year-old had ever heard of - Heflin sent a letter to Bob Howsam, the Cincinnati general manager. And on Oct. 27, on Reds letterhead stamped at the top with the emblem of the club's 100th anniversary, Howsam answered it.

Dear Rick, wrote the mastermind of the Big Red Machine, which didn't yet exist,

Thank you for your letter of October 14 telling me how you felt about the change in field manager for the Reds.

Everyone does not always share the same opinions in baseball or any other sport. Making a decision to change the manager is part of my job and not a very easy part. Such a decision is made only after much thought and consideration.

We are looking forward to the 1970 baseball season and I am sure you will like our new manager, Sparky Anderson.

Kindest regards,

Bob Howsam

"It turned out," acknowledges Heflin, "that the fellow they found to replace Bristol did a pretty fine job."

Of course, Sparky Who was slightly abetted by a roster that, by 1970, included Pete Rose, Johnny Bench, Tony Perez, Lee May, Dave Concepcion, Bernie Carbo, Bobby Tolan, Gary Nolan, Jim Merritt, Wayne Simpson, Wayne Granger, Clay Carroll and Don Gullett. As the Reds' interim skipper, circa 2007, Mackanin has at his disposal only one player who might compare to the first three of those.

And yet, from a managerial standpoint - collective talent aside - Ken Griffey Jr. is perhaps the biggest difference in the circumstances surrounding the teams inherited, nearly four decades apart, by Anderson and Mackanin. There are two reasons for that.

One, because Griffey's accomplishments in the game are so profoundly superior to those of any teammate. And two, because he's rich, famous and 37 years old.

By contrast, on the '70 Reds - who won 102 games and lost to Baltimore in the World Series - no player over the age of 29 had more than 105 at-bats, four wins or one save. An amazing nine guys - Bench, Concepcion, Carbo, Darrel Chaney, Nolan, Simpson, Gullett, Milt Wilcox and Mel Behney - were 22 or younger.

As a result, Anderson was dealt a clubhouse in which the most vested veterans were Rose, Perez and May at 29, 28 and 27, respectively. Rose's example was one of diehard hustle, Perez's of playful camaraderie, May's of quiet humor.

In his own manner, Griffey sets an admirable standard. His skills are complete, his values and integrity beyond reproach. But Junior's very greatness has enabled him to master the game with an economy of energy and motion that simply doesn't translate for the likes of Adam Dunn and Edwin Encarnacion. They just can't do what he does.

Inevitably, though, and unconsciously, they try. Inevitably, unconsciously, Griffey leads. By mere virtue of his standing in the sport, he's the most powerful figure in the Cincinnati clubhouse.

And as long as that remains the case, the Reds will require a manager with the cachet to break through the infatuation. That's where the names come in.

Because of the stature he has attained, Tony La Russa could do it. Davey Johnson could do it. Joe Torre could do it. Bob Brenly and Joe Girardi would qualify as maybes. Pete Mackanin, in spite of his spirited start, is a not-yet.

But that's not to write him off. Should Griffey be traded, the clubhouse dynamic would change dramatically. Should Mackanin rally the Reds into second-half contention, same thing.

If both those items occur, the bandwagon will begin to roll and the relevance of Rick Heflin's letter will be provocatively renewed, 38 years after he first held it in his hands.

Should Griffey (and perhaps Dunn also qualifies IMO) stay, then a Big name guy (Davey Johnson) is almost neccessary. If they don't a lesser name will do (Girardi and the like). I know Girardi is widely considered a big name but just because you have a name that is known doesn't make it a name that is widely respected (by the players alike).

Bottom line we shouldn't really make a decision on the manager until we know what type of team he will be working with now and in the future.

[Eric_Davis]

Originally Posted by icehole3

I like Bazooka Joe Girardi

I'm with you.

I want a former catcher.

[redsmetz]

Originally Posted by Eric_Davis

I'm with you.

I want a former catcher.

Wasn't Jerry Narron a former catcher?

[pedro]

Originally Posted by redsmetz

Wasn't Jerry Narron a former catcher?

as were Boone & Miley.

[KronoRed]

If at first you don't succeed try try try again

[redsrule2500]

Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo

Almost dead on IMO. It's nearly as I have felt from the very beginning, Wheeler is just able to put it more elequently. Don't jump to conclusions on the title, it must be read to be appreciated for what it really means.



Should Griffey (and perhaps Dunn also qualifies IMO) stay, then a Big name guy (Davey Johnson) is almost neccessary. If they don't a lesser name will do (Girardi and the like). I know Girardi is widely considered a big name but just because you have a name that is known doesn't make it a name that is widely respected (by the players alike).

Bottom line we shouldn't really make a decision on the manager until we know what type of team he will be working with now and in the future.

Thank You, Thank You, Thank You for posting this.

I've always felt that having Griff in the clubhouse wasn't helping the Reds in any way, and that it often hurt the club overall. This kinda explains why, and it really makes sense.

[bucksfan2]

I would love to see Ozzie here. I would love to see how he reacts to both the media and fans. I think the reds need a manager like him in cincinnati. For too long the reds have gone with good guys who let the players run the team. Ozzie sure as hell wouldn't let that happen.

[Strikes Out Looking]

I voted other because I just don't know. I believe if WK had fired Naroon during the offseason and brought in Lou, the Reds would be playing at the 500 level and in the race--but I'm not sure who is the right answer after the 1/2 season the former manager brought to us because I don't know where the team is going in look and feel. So, until we know where WK is going, I'm voting other.