DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

user-pic
Mike from Bay Area on Oct 24 at 17:25
+/-

At this point, I'd go with Joe-G. Donnie is probably a safe bet from a personal/historical standpoint and won't rattle the cage with management and/or players. Joe-G on the hand has experience, expressed some interesting in-game strategies while announcing on YES, and in general, since the Yanks are going in a new direction, Joe-G just might be the guy to lead us in that new direction, whatever it will be. I think with Donnie we may see a tentative manager unwilling to think outside the box at times, while Joe I think won't have a problem with that.

Another thing we keep hearing about is how important it is to keep the media happy etc, how Torre was good at that, but these new guys are fresh, yada, yada, yada. Well, I thought about that for a second and asked myself - do I really care? It turns out, I don't. I care about the team winning. I don't care about how the manager handles the media. It doesn't reflect on the game itself. Protecting players from the media? Well, those players are big boys and should be able to take care of themselves, they are not children needing protection from bullys. Seriously, I'm not sure that the fuss about being a good media handler is all justified and really that important. I just want the Yanks to win, bottom line, black and white.

Mike,

Good points. For my money, the only thing a manager can't do with the media is use them to call out his players. No member of the media should ever get a quote from a manager (or coach) criticizing one of his players, if he has to resort to that as "motivation" he doesn't deserve the job. I don't see any of the three candidates stooping to that level, so I don't think the media is an issue at all.

Joe's best quality as a manager was keeping all the egos in check. Part of this was open communication, part of this was loyalty, to a fault, and part of this was reputation. Torre was a living legend by the time this roster became an All Star lineup, but Torre still had the biggest balls in the clubhouse because of what he'd accomplished. I think Donnie brings more of this quality to the table than Girardi, no one's bigger in NYC than Donnie.

In-game style is probably a toss up. I like a lot of what Girardi says in the booth (and what he did with the Marlins), but we don't know what kind of a manager Donnie will be. The edge has to go with Girardi here, but I wouldn't just dismiss Mattingly on lack of experience either.

I'm still leaning toward Mattingly, but not as hard. I think Pena's a nice guy, but if he gets the job it's probably only because they'll be able to replace him without a huge backlash if things don't go well in '08. Firing Donnie would be nearly impossible.

you can't dismiss mattingly on lack of experience? This is a high level job involving millions of dollars! As i see it right now, donnie baseball has one advantage: that the fans know him and people respect him more than Girardi. That factor has zero impact on winning. Also, like Brian said, hiring donnie could be boxing themselves into a corner for the media to bash them if they have to fire him.


also

I read somewhere on hardballtimes (forgive me for my lack of citation, i couldn't find the article lol) that it is historically proven that fresh new managers do better than managers who have held positions for extended periods of time. It's essentially because of the new perspective they brig. Which in theory should benefit Joe G and Donnie.

But if donnie has been "managing from the bench in his head" for 4 years, and hasn't really disagreed with torre on anything, is he bringing THAT much of a new perspective? Not really, at least compared to Girardi, IMO.


That theory is supported by a cool anecdote i read on Was Watching (the blog)--

"...before this season, there were five other times in Yankees history where a man managed the team for the full-season, had his team reach the post-season, and he was not brought back for the following season. In four of those five "following seasons," the Yankees made it to the World Series - winning two of those four Fall Classics."

So there you have my jumbled thoughts on the subject. Hope you find something valuable in there, lol.

user-pic
paxton17 on Oct 24 at 19:58
+/-

i love donnie like a brother , but he is not cut out to be coach now.. our best bet is girardi he has more knowlegde of the game from both sides.. what is donnie guna say to phil hughes in the top of the 6th ??? what does sonnie know about pitching??? ive played baseball my whole life and every coach i ever had (not counting tommy gregory) has known about pitching , and were close with the pitchers. donny may be the hit man but we need a coach who knows about pitching as wel l

As far as experience goes, Mattingly has 0 years as manager, Girardi has 1, Pena has 4. Pena's winning percentage over those 4 years was .410. He lost 104 games in 2004. Girardi won manager of the year, but his team finished under .500. (78-84). None of these guys is what you'd call a seasoned manager. Donnie knows the team, he's been here for the past 4 years, he's coached all of them. No matter who they select, he isn't going to have the experience level you'd expect a guy managing a $200M payroll to have.

Paxton,

Take a look at the last 4 teams to win the series. Now take a look at their manager:

2006 - LaRussa (played 2nd and short)
2005 - Ozzie Guillen (played short)
2004 - Francona (played outfield and first)
2003 - McKeon (never made the majors)

You don't have to be a pitcher or catcher to be an effective manager. You do have to be an effective leader, this is why I'm leaning toward Mattingly. 10 years after he retired, you still hear guys like Jeter and Bernie talking about how he instilled in them the right way to play the game. He's the guy that set the tone for the success of the late nineties, and I think as skipper he'd do the same for Melky, Cano, Hughes, Joba and Kennedy.

Sorry if the answer is obvious, but what are the asterisks on your excel sheet for? Is it some sort of minor league designation?

Adam,

Sorry, forgot to add in that key (it's there now). One asterisk means not on the active roster (minor leagues), two asterisks means he was replaced on the 40-man roster because he's on the disabled list (60-day).

Thanks for sharing, this is a fantastic post.Much thanks again. Really Great.


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif