Best manager in the game

[EagleNYC]

I dislike polls (except the late pope), so this is a fill-in the blank. Taking everything into account (strategy, aggressiveness, ability to handle egos, media savvy, motivation), who's the best manager in the show? Since managing a veteran v. young, competitive v. rebuilding team are different situations, assume that the question also contemplates the ability to manage all of these variations. For example, Joe Torre is a piss poor manager of younger team and also rans; he was an excellent manager of talented teams. As a consequence, I think he'd only be a good manager of about 6 teams, so I'd rank him pretty low.

I'm torn between LaRussa and Gardenhire. LaRussa because he always wins (even when his teams are relatively weak), strokes egos well, and has multiple titles (albeit spread out over my entire life). Gardenhire's misfortune of flaming out in the playoffs is my only criticism. The Twins were all but contracted a few years ago- now they are a playoff lock most years.

Honorable mention to Ozzie Guillen who needs to manage in Queens at some point.

[BCEagle74]

Gardenhire
Guillen
Girardi -Florida job.

[commavegarage]

Torre

[twballgame9]

Joe Torre is baseball's Al Skinner. He's hands off, operates well with an experienced and mature club, and doesn't know a god damn thing about baseball strategy.

Ron Gardenhire is hands down the best baseball mind in the game.

[apbc12]

Dusty Baker

[EagleNYC]

Joe Torre is baseball's Al Skinner. He's hands off, operates well with an experienced and mature club, and doesn't know a god damn thing about baseball strategy.

Ron Gardenhire is hands down the best baseball mind in the game.

Agreed re: Torre since I was posing a current question. The game's passed him by. 1996 was a great managerial job by him. Everything else, not so much.

[twballgame9]

Joe Torre is baseball's Al Skinner. He's hands off, operates well with an experienced and mature club, and doesn't know a god damn thing about baseball strategy.

Ron Gardenhire is hands down the best baseball mind in the game.

Agreed re: Torre since I was posing a current question. The game's passed him by. 1996 was a great managerial job by him. Everything else, not so much.

One might say that 1996 was Joe Torre's 2000-01 BC hoops team. And that the talent laden teams thereafter were the Craig Smith/Jared Dudley years. Followed by a couple of underachieving seasons with Ty Rice Derek Jeter.

[commavegarage]

Joe Torre is baseball's Al Skinner.

Joe Torre has won the world series 4 times. He has made it 6 times. He has made it to a championship series 10 times.

How many final fours has Al made? How many championships has he won?

Sweet comparison.

[commavegarage]

The game's passed him by.

He has made the NLCS the past two years.

Gardenhire has made the CS once, in 2002. He hasn't won a postseason game since 2004.

[pick6pedro]

The game's passed him by.

He has made the NLCS the past two years.

Gardenhire has made the CS once, in 2002. He hasn't won a postseason game since 2004.

Have you looked at the rosters, payrolls, and club management styles of the teams they manage?

[twballgame9]

Joe Torre is baseball's Al Skinner.

Joe Torre has won the world series 4 times. He has made it 6 times. He has made it to a championship series 10 times.

How many final fours has Al made? How many championships has he won?

Sweet comparison.

Res ipsa loquitur on the "sweet comparison" thing.

[commavegarage]

The game's passed him by.

He has made the NLCS the past two years.

Gardenhire has made the CS once, in 2002. He hasn't won a postseason game since 2004.

Have you looked at the rosters, payrolls, and club management styles of the teams they manage?

Yes.

[pick6pedro]

The game's passed him by.

He has made the NLCS the past two years.

Gardenhire has made the CS once, in 2002. He hasn't won a postseason game since 2004.

Have you looked at the rosters, payrolls, and club management styles of the teams they manage?

Yes.

Yet you're basing everything on straight results. No differentiation on whether you're overachieving, underachieving or achieving exactly what's expected based on all those factors? Or the fact that Torre sleeps 32 hours a day?

[commavegarage]

The game's passed him by.

He has made the NLCS the past two years.

Gardenhire has made the CS once, in 2002. He hasn't won a postseason game since 2004.

Have you looked at the rosters, payrolls, and club management styles of the teams they manage?

Yes.

Yet you're basing everything on straight results. No differentiation on whether you're overachieving, underachieving or achieving exactly what's expected based on all those factors? Or the fact that Torre sleeps 32 hours a day?

Gardenhire's Twins have overachieved. No doubt about it. But my thought process was: does his overachievement equal Torre's achieving exactly what he is supposed to? In my opinion, the answer is no.

[twballgame9]

The game's passed him by.

He has made the NLCS the past two years.

Gardenhire has made the CS once, in 2002. He hasn't won a postseason game since 2004.

Have you looked at the rosters, payrolls, and club management styles of the teams they manage?

Yes.

Yet you're basing everything on straight results. No differentiation on whether you're overachieving, underachieving or achieving exactly what's expected based on all those factors? Or the fact that Torre sleeps 32 hours a day?

There's no such thing as under or over achieving. Results = talent.

[EagleNYC]

CAG, Joe Torre is not the manger he was $75 million ago. He's shown an alarming inability to manage a bullpen, and despite some extremely talented teams, has not won a world series in a decade. As pointed out in my rubric, I simply don't think he has the ability to (effectively) manage anything but an extremely talented team of veterans. He wrote a fucking book throwing certain players under the bus.

[pick6pedro]

The game's passed him by.

He has made the NLCS the past two years.

Gardenhire has made the CS once, in 2002. He hasn't won a postseason game since 2004.

Have you looked at the rosters, payrolls, and club management styles of the teams they manage?

Yes.

Yet you're basing everything on straight results. No differentiation on whether you're overachieving, underachieving or achieving exactly what's expected based on all those factors? Or the fact that Torre sleeps 32 hours a day?

Gardenhire's Twins have overachieved. No doubt about it. But my thought process was: does his overachievement equal Torre's achieving exactly what he is supposed to? In my opinion, the answer is no.

The I get your thought process. But the difference is that I'm weighing the expectations of the team based on roster, payroll, and upper management first, then seeing what the manager adds to that. I don't think he's adding much to the most talented teams in baseball. Gardenhire's adding a ton. You can't ignore results, but you definitely can't use them without some context.

[b0mberMan]

CAG, Joe Torre is not the manger he was $75 million ago. He's shown an alarming inability to manage a bullpen, and despite some extremely talented teams, has not won a world series in a decade. As pointed out in my rubric, I simply don't think he has the ability to (effectively) manage anything but an extremely talented team of veterans. He wrote a fucking book throwing certain players under the bus.

Ugh. Those last few years with NY, I felt horrible for any middle reliever who showed talent because you knew his arm would be shot at by mid-August from Torre abuse. I almost think that's why they were throwing big contracts at players (one or two inning guys) who are essentially interchangeable parts in baseball: it was an insurance policy should Torre decide he trusts you.

He looked like he could do no wrong in the late 90s when he had that paint-by-numbers bullpen of Stanton-Nelson-Rivera.

[EagleNYC]

CAG, Joe Torre is not the manger he was $75 million ago. He's shown an alarming inability to manage a bullpen, and despite some extremely talented teams, has not won a world series in a decade. As pointed out in my rubric, I simply don't think he has the ability to (effectively) manage anything but an extremely talented team of veterans. He wrote a fucking book throwing certain players under the bus.

Ugh. Those last few years with NY, I felt horrible for any middle reliever who showed talent because you knew his arm would be shot at by mid-August from Torre abuse. I almost think that's why they were throwing big contracts at players (one or two inning guys) who are essentially interchangeable parts in baseball: it was an insurance policy should Torre decide he trusts you.

He looked like he could do no wrong in the late 90s when he had that paint-by-numbers bullpen of Stanton-Nelson-Rivera.

Torre's body count includes: Tanyan Sturtze, Tom Gordon, Paul Quantrill, Ron Villone and Scott Proctor (the only guy with the balls to retaliate during many a beanball fest), and others I've sublimated out of my memory.

[commavegarage]

The game's passed him by.

He has made the NLCS the past two years.

Gardenhire has made the CS once, in 2002. He hasn't won a postseason game since 2004.

Have you looked at the rosters, payrolls, and club management styles of the teams they manage?

Yes.

Yet you're basing everything on straight results. No differentiation on whether you're overachieving, underachieving or achieving exactly what's expected based on all those factors? Or the fact that Torre sleeps 32 hours a day?

Gardenhire's Twins have overachieved. No doubt about it. But my thought process was: does his overachievement equal Torre's achieving exactly what he is supposed to? In my opinion, the answer is no.

The I get your thought process. But the difference is that I'm weighing the expectations of the team based on roster, payroll, and upper management first, then seeing what the manager adds to that. I don't think he's adding much to the most talented teams in baseball. Gardenhire's adding a ton. You can't ignore results, but you definitely can't use them without some context.

I may be in the minority, but I think Gardenhire's teams are (and have been) pretty damn talented.

[pick6pedro]

I may be in the minority, but I think Gardenhire's teams are (and have been) pretty damn talented.

I agree as far as Santana, Mauer, Morneau, Hunter, and Nathan are concerned. But when you're lineup relies so heavily on the Cuddyers, Puntos, Lew Fords, Kubels, Shannon Stewarts, Jacque Joneses, Corey Koskies, and your pitching relies on extremely young question marks and gray-bearded stop gaps...I give a lot of credit to Ronny. Think about all the guys they've had who did their best work with the Twinkies and then seemed useless in comparison elsewhere - to me there are more of those guys than another club I can think of.

[EagleNYC]

The game's passed him by.

He has made the NLCS the past two years.

Gardenhire has made the CS once, in 2002. He hasn't won a postseason game since 2004.

Have you looked at the rosters, payrolls, and club management styles of the teams they manage?

Yes.

Yet you're basing everything on straight results. No differentiation on whether you're overachieving, underachieving or achieving exactly what's expected based on all those factors? Or the fact that Torre sleeps 32 hours a day?

Gardenhire's Twins have overachieved. No doubt about it. But my thought process was: does his overachievement equal Torre's achieving exactly what he is supposed to? In my opinion, the answer is no.

The I get your thought process. But the difference is that I'm weighing the expectations of the team based on roster, payroll, and upper management first, then seeing what the manager adds to that. I don't think he's adding much to the most talented teams in baseball. Gardenhire's adding a ton. You can't ignore results, but you definitely can't use them without some context.

I may be in the minority, but I think Gardenhire's teams are (and have been) pretty damn talented.

They've certainly had a few talented players, but to win consistently with that pitching staff is remarkable (especially after Johan left).

[eepstein0]

Thank God I haven't seen the name Mike Scoscia. I can't stand when people say what a good manager he is.

[bignick33]

I'm surprised to see no mention of Francona, who has 2 rings. Unlike out in Anaheim, there is always a logic to Tito's decisions (very often based on probability). As silly as it sounds, he's the first Red Sox manager I can remember who can explain rationally why he did what he did at any given time, and it always sounds sensible. There are very few WTF moments with Francona. He's very good at playing the odds, which over the course of a 162 game season, can turn a few games in his team's favor.

Mods, please move this post to the Red Sox Weridos thread.

[hansen]

i'm biased but i gotta go with la russa. 2 world series titles. his teams win and have less 100 million dollar payrolls. but more importantly he started the trend of specialization in innings 7-8-9 that now every team uses. that will be his lasting achievement.

[twballgame9]

Francona reminds me of Doc Rivers. Don't rock the boat, keep the guys focused, and let the $140 million get the Ws. He's the perfect guy for a big payroll team. He's Joe Torre without the bullpen abuse.

[flyingelvii]

Francona reminds me of Doc Rivers. Don't rock the boat, keep the guys focused, and let the $140 million get the Ws. He's the perfect guy for a big payroll team. He's Joe Torre without the bullpen abuse.

That, and the extra $60+ million. Tito is one of the best in managing his bullpen in the postseason. His work with it in 2004 was especially exemplary.

[flyingelvii]

Bobby Cox is the only manager on the field today who deserves to be mentioned in the same breath with Connie Mack or John McGraw. I would take Billy Southworth, Bill McKechnie, Joe McCarthy or Joe Cronin over most every one of these bums today with their laptops and law degrees.

Casey Stengel remains the most overrated manager in baseball history.

So they're good because they're old and relied on certain adages that have proven to be flat out wrong over by the people with laptops and law degrees. Great.

[EagleNYC]

Bobby Cox is the only manager on the field today who deserves to be mentioned in the same breath with Connie Mack or John McGraw. I would take Billy Southworth, Bill McKechnie, Joe McCarthy or Joe Cronin over most every one of these bums today with their laptops and law degrees.

Casey Stengel remains the most overrated manager in baseball history.

So they're good because they're old and relied on certain adages that have proven to be flat out wrong over by the people with laptops and law degrees. Great.

Managing a baseball team is not the same as making a mechanical drawing. The new data analysis is far more significant for general managers in evaluating a player than for in-game strategy. Are we going to re-hash the "don't bunt! EVER!!!" argument? Or the "this guy is awesome because he can walk with runners on 1st and 3rd and not drive in the run" argument? Steals? Putting on a hit and run? Hogwash!

[bignick33]

Bobby Cox is the only manager on the field today who deserves to be mentioned in the same breath with Connie Mack or John McGraw. I would take Billy Southworth, Bill McKechnie, Joe McCarthy or Joe Cronin over most every one of these bums today with their laptops and law degrees.

Casey Stengel remains the most overrated manager in baseball history.

So they're good because they're old and relied on certain adages that have proven to be flat out wrong over by the people with laptops and law degrees. Great.

Managing a baseball team is not the same as making a mechanical drawing. The new data analysis is far more significant for general managers in evaluating a player than for in-game strategy. Are we going to re-hash the "don't bunt! EVER!!!" argument? Or the "this guy is awesome because he can walk with runners on 1st and 3rd and not drive in the run" argument? Steals? Putting on a hit and run? Hogwash!

You're missing the point if you don't think managers should be knowledgeably about baseball probabilities.