Who's gonna manage this team next year?

[PissedPrincess]

Thoughts?

I'm gonna go now. I'll be back later. Let's get a list together.

I know Theo likes Bruce Bocche(sp?) from San Diego.

[cxlx]

I heard that on the radio this morning. I think Theo use to work for San Diego, and has alot of ties with them. I dont know much about Bocche, so maybe he will be a good fit.

[metsfan001]

How about Bobby Valentine!!:D :bolt:

[cxlx]

Originally posted by metsfan001
How about Bobby Valentine!!:D :bolt:

Why not?? :notme:

He wasnt bad...he did take the Mets to the WS.

[Blue56]

I would have like Felipe Alou with the SOX!!

[rockin500]

isnt bochy still signed on with the Padres? If so, he's not going anywhere, since they will probably be competing for the division this year.

[Cyberlibrarian]

I don't know how long BV's contract with ESPN is, but he's the first guy to get a clause in his contract that if he leaves to go back to baseball, he pays something to ESPN to make up for it. I can't remember all the details, but that's the gist.

But, if Grady's moves confused you, then BV just might not be the man for the Sox.

[rockin500]

Originally posted by LeiterFan
I don't know how long BV's contract with ESPN is, but he's the first guy to get a clause in his contract that if he leaves to go back to baseball, he pays something to ESPN to make up for it. I can't remember all the details, but that's the gist.

But, if Grady's moves confused you, then BV just might not be the man for the Sox.

i think that was only for this year. he might have a penalty for next year too, but its a lot less substantial.

[barzilla]

I hate Bobby Valentine. Bruce Bochy is a good manager, but I don't think you're getting him. Right now, I would put Grady's chances of coming back at about 50%. The longer we go from Game 7 the better he will look in their eyes. Getting to Game 7 of the ALCS is not an easy task. That being said, my money is going on a candidate that has never managed before at the big league level.

Now, why would I say that? Primarily, sabermetricians don't respect the good ol' boy system. We are more interested in a manager's philosophy than his track record. Unfortunately, you don't get a lot of old time managers that would compare with the John McGraws and Earl Weavers.

Off the top of my head I can think of the following candidates

1) Mike Hargrove- Grover took the Indians to two World Series and coached an offense similar to the one Boston has. He does not fall in love with speed, his bench, or any other thing that gets managers with an offense like the Red Sox in trouble. I remember him being middle of the road as far as pitching staff management is concerned. Unfortunately, middle of the road is about as good as you will get in this day and age. The next group of great managers will be the ones who figure that out.

2) Willie Randolph- this comes under the "stick it to the Yankees" school. Randolph seems very similar in style and temperment to Joe Torre. His style seems to fit Boston perfectly and I would hope they take a look at him.

3) Buddy Bell- he's got experience and he's managed before. Beyond that I would not give him much consideration.

4) Eddie Murray- if the Orioles don't hire him he might be a guy to look at, but I don't know enough about his managerial style to form an opinion.

5) Phil Garner- see Buddy Bell. Seriously, he would not work for Boston at all, but he has experience, so some people will mention his name.

6) Wildcard- I would honestly put this position as the most likely. I really believe Theo and James have their eye on someone in the minors or on someone's coaching staff that fits the managerial profile they're looking for. They key here is philosophy and not name recognition.

The Sox need a manager that will send the best nine hitters out there 95% of the time. Stop messing around with Gabe Kapler and Damian Jackson. They can start every couple of weeks to give a guy a rest, but beyond that they are hurting your team every time they take a good hitter out of the lineup.

As far as pitching staff management goes, I have always thought managers should have two approaches: the close game approach and the blowout approach.

Close Game Approach- micromanage the juice right out of it if you want to. More importantly, make sure you have your best guys in the game as much as possible. For example, if the game is close, you usually don't want your starter in there after he gets to 100 pitches. At that point he is usually not your best pitcher.

Blowout Approach- throw your starter at least 100 pitches if not push him to the 110-115 range. REST THE BULLPEN. (Sorry, had a little Jimy flashback). If you have to use relievers, use your mop up guys to preserve the top three or four relievers for the close games.

[PissedPrincess]

Mike Hargrove is definetly on their list. But I would be horrified. It was HIS stupidity that cost the Indians the 99 ALDS. He lost his job over it.

Boston would NOT put up with hiring him.

I know they like Buddy Black too.

[Liter22]

Originally posted by pedro's princess
Mike Hargrove is definetly on their list. But I would be horrified. It was HIS stupidity that cost the Indians the 99 ALDS. He lost his job over it.

Boston would NOT put up with hiring him.

I know they like Buddy Black too.

They have put up with good ol Grady so you never know
:hmm:

[barzilla]

The more I watch baseball the more I realize that a great manager is like a great umpire. You don't notice them or their decisions during the game. The so called great managers (Dusty Baker, Tony La Russa) are great in their own minds. I have no doubt that both are good managers (their track record says so) but you give Mark Prior, Kerry Wood, Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, and Albert Pujols to most managers and they will be pretty good too.

What made Earl Weaver great and what makes guys like Bobby Cox, Felipe Alou, and Joe Torre great is that they don't subscribe to the myth of their own genius. Being a great manager is not about you. It is about putting the best team on the field as often as humanly possible. Does that require some strategic acumen (or as George Bush would say 'strategery')? Absolutely. However, there are many times when you strategize yourself into a corner.

What Bobby Cox does best is put his best nine players on the diamond. He sits back, makes pitching changes when he needs to, but wakes up at the end of the season with at least 100 victories. I don't think he has won one manager of the year award, but his team has been the best team in the NL in twelve out of the last thirteen seasons (regular season).

What I have never understood is why baseball all of the sudden becomes a "different game" in the post-season. Did we add a fielder somewhere? Did they reduce the number of strikes to two? Don't tell me that you have to manage differently in the post-season. Everyone does to a certain extent because there is no marathon like in the regular season, but if you had a style that got you 100-105 wins then stick with that style in the post-season. Switching to "small ball" will get you eliminated faster than playing for the three run home run (if that is the way you won in the regular season)

Do I have an explanation for teams like the As and Braves continuing to struggle in the postseason? Actually I do.

Psychological Effects

Okay, okay I'm not talking about curses per se. I don't give a hoot about Billy Goats or the dead Babe Ruth. However, I have played enough sports and coached enough sports to get a handle of the mental aspects of playing. In short, if you believe something good will happen to you it usually will. If you believe something bad will happen to you it usually will. This is how the Cubs and As can blow leads in the post-season. It becomes the "here we go again" syndrome. It is also how the Yankees can overcome obstacles and deficits with ease. Mystique? Give me a break. It is simply the power of positive thinking. I'm no Dr. Phil, but I am a few hours shy of a counseling masters and I have spent a few hours on the negative side of that equation on the golf course. Cursed? No. It's more like karma.

Look at the Regular Season records

How could team A lose in the first round when they went 102-60 in the regular season? Well, a lot of factors could go into it, but the first thing you must do is take a look at their record against below .500 teams and above .500 teams. Did they beat everyone consistently or simply mop up on the bad teams and tread water agains the above .500 teams. If you tread water in the regular season then you will tread water in the post-season. Treading water can become difficult if you have the "karma" going against you.

Sorry I rambled on. I am getting sick and tired of listening to pundits tell us about good/bad managing and the "difference" between playoff baseball and regular season baseball.

[RamsAndAngels]

Joe Torre!

I know that I'd be sick of Steinbrenner and wanna join up forces with the enemy!

[Blue56]

Joe torre would be good, but would they get along!

I'd get Torre, if he wasn't signed, imagine the yankees fans!!

[PissedPrincess]

*BUMP*

How about Jerry Remy?:D

[cxlx]

Originally posted by pedro's princess
*BUMP*

How about Jerry Remy?:D

If that was every the case, I would seriously buy season tickets. I would LOVE to have Remdawg as a manager.

[PissedPrincess]

:wavey2: I know he's been asked before, but he wouldn't do it. His life is perfect. Why would he want to screw that up?:D

[cxlx]

Originally posted by pedro's princess
:wavey2: I know he's been asked before, but he wouldn't do it. His life is perfect. Why would he want to screw that up?:D

True. hehe Then who would we listen to in the booth during the games right? Cant listen to Shawn....he makes me :sleep: