What would the Tigers record be without Leyland?

[MIguy]

The Tigers are 60-52 with Leyland at the helm and since I see so many complaints on this board about him making bad moves, I'm wondering what their record would be with a manager who made what you consider to be the right decisions in crucial situations.

[Juck Verllo]

I have this rash-like ring on my right forearm. It iches. It might be posion ivy but Ive had that before and it doesnt look anything like it. My coworker says its a spider bite. Anyways, i love beer.

[sabretooth]

60-0. Another manager would have figured out a way to make all of our losses rainout PPDs.

[Motor City Sonics]

Probably 62-50. I don't think the manager blows as many games as people think, but I think there have been a few games where pitchers were horribly mismanaged.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

58-54

[TigersSlappy]

Another manager would have fought to keep Inge, even used him in the setup/closer role when needed. We'd have been 110-2 if that had happened.

[JAYB]

111-1

[MIguy]

Probably 62-50. I don't think the manager blows as many games as people think, but I think there have been a few games where pitchers were horribly mismanaged.

Fair answer.

Now let me ask you this. If Leyland is responsible for 2 losses, how many of the Tigers 60 wins does he get credit for?

[TigerNation]

Fair answer.

Now let me ask you this. If Leyland is responsible for 2 losses, how many of the Tigers 60 wins does he get credit for?

I don't think he's saying that Leyland is solely responsible for 2 losses.

No player or coach is ever solely responsible for a win or a loss.

So he doesn't get credit for any wins, nor does he get the full blame for any loss.

[sagnam]

I think it's unfair to only count the decisions you disagreed with that didn't work. Imagine how often you disagreed with a decision that actually worked out in the end. Some of those would have went against you.

A manager who made the decision I wanted? He'd probably have less than 20 wins. There are times I disagree with specific decisions Leyland makes, but there are literally hundreds more he makes correctly that I don't know if I would have known to do.

It's easy to sit back and nitpick someone else's decisions, it's infinitely harder to make those decisions.

[OhioTiger]

Tigers fans should simply be VERY glad that Leyland is the manager.

[tiger337]

59-53

[jaymo]

59-53

61-51.

[TigerNation]

Tigers fans should simply be VERY glad that Leyland is the manager.

Why?

[tater6]

with Leyland's history of poor player choices, bad lineups and poor handling of the BP, he could easily be responsible for 2-4 losses.

[tiger337]

61-51.

hater.

[ScrubBeaterUpper]

I have this rash-like ring on my right forearm. It iches. It might be posion ivy but Ive had that before and it doesnt look anything like it. My coworker says its a spider bite. Anyways, i love beer.

Yeah, that is a ringworm fungus. Get that cleared up, it's gross.

[Screwtape]

Tigers fans should simply be VERY glad that Leyland is the manager.

This.

Every team's fans can gripe about their manager and his decisions. The fact is that it's easy to criticize when we sit in our homes and watch on TV. Some wins and losses are perhaps attributable to managerial decisions, but not an extreme amount. Rather, I see the manager's importance as setting the tone of the clubhouse and getting the players ready to play. Leyland has been part of this franchise's resurgence, and I am eternally thankful to him for that.

[NeedMoreLike84]

A billion-0

[Nastradamus]

Without commenting on Leyland directly, people need to realize that every fanbase in baseball, from Arizona to Tampa, gripes about their managers use of the bullpen, lineup choices etc. Its all conjecture for the most part. Poor player choices? Who was he supposed to play instead of guys like Kelly,Raburn and Worth? Should he have stopped using Valverde as closer when he was struggling early on? Should he use Dotel every day? Should he pitch Verlander for more pitches or for less, I can't keep up? Should Jackson still be dropped from the leadoff spot? Was he still stupid for liking Laird at backup C?

[Antrat]

Are you people never serious!?!

[john doe]

What would the Tigers record be without Leyland?

Good question actually, although, there is no "real" answer, purely speculation. That being said, Mr. Grouchie's mishandling of the #5 spot in the batting order and his insistence on following his "set-up-closer" strategy could arguably have cost a few wins, again, purely hypothetical.

[theroundsquare]

It can't be just "without Leyland." Its "without Leyland and with [insert substitute manager's name] instead." And that substitute manager might have done some dumb stuff too.

[A.J.K.]

in this hypothetical situation, is Gene Lamont still coaching third? Because I heard he's blown at least 5 games himself.

[tiger337]

There are lots of variables to consider. McClendon lost 10 games in the first half by himself, but Harrah has now won 3 or 4 of them back.

[sagnam]

There are lots of variables to consider. McClendon lost 10 games in the first half by himself, but Harrah has now won 3 or 4 of them back.

You are on a whole other level lately.

[IdahoBert]

60-52. It would probably be a wash. Someone else would do different dumb stuff and it would even out.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Are you people never serious!?!

just wanted to frame this one

[DaYooperASBDT]

Error.jpg

[will the thrill]

Let me start off by saying I think Jim sucks as a manager. Never figured out why professional sports teams will keep hiring the same guy after he loses at stop after stop just because he's a "baseball guy" or a "football guy". The Pirates love Clint Hurdle after he was ran out of Colorado and he's the same guy who won an NL Pennant in Colorado. I get it.

And watching "The Franchise" this year, I've like the way Ozzie got it out there that being the manager is more about dealing with all the different guys and their personalities than it is lineups and pitching changes, that being said, to say the manager can't be held responsible for a loss is crazy, take thursday against the Yankees, a rain filled game where the team battled back (behind a fiarly packed house considering the weather we sat through) and then Jim made the correct move and put Benoit in with a 3-2 lead, he gave up back to back homes (not jims fault) and then the team was poised to battle back in the bottom of the 9th and got a leadoff double from Alex, Jim then pinch ran Gerald Laird? with Baker and Young still on the bench (and a few pitchers who could run IMO) and then infante singles and Laird gets held at 3rd. So we've still got 1st and 3rd and nobody out, he then proceeds to let Santiago and Berry both hit in spots when all we need is a fly ball to win the game, while Baker and Delmon sit on the bench still. Baker can play second and outfield, so no excuse for Santiago to hit, and no excuse for Delmon to no pinch hit for Berry in that spot. He might not have directly lost the game (Benoit did) but I can't see how you can't put the blame directly on him.

That being said, I think the Tigers would be 2-3 games better with a different manager for a full season.

[john doe]

Let me start off by saying I think Jim sucks as a manager. Never figured out why professional sports teams will keep hiring the same guy after he loses at stop after stop just because he's a "baseball guy" or a "football guy". The Pirates love Clint Hurdle after he was ran out of Colorado and he's the same guy who won an NL Pennant in Colorado. I get it.

And watching "The Franchise" this year, I've like the way Ozzie got it out there that being the manager is more about dealing with all the different guys and their personalities than it is lineups and pitching changes, that being said, to say the manager can't be held responsible for a loss is crazy, take thursday against the Yankees, a rain filled game where the team battled back (behind a fiarly packed house considering the weather we sat through) and then Jim made the correct move and put Benoit in with a 3-2 lead, he gave up back to back homes (not jims fault) and then the team was poised to battle back in the bottom of the 9th and got a leadoff double from Alex, Jim then pinch ran Gerald Laird? with Baker and Young still on the bench (and a few pitchers who could run IMO) and then infante singles and Laird gets held at 3rd. So we've still got 1st and 3rd and nobody out, he then proceeds to let Santiago and Berry both hit in spots when all we need is a fly ball to win the game, while Baker and Delmon sit on the bench still. Baker can play second and outfield, so no excuse for Santiago to hit, and no excuse for Delmon to no pinch hit for Berry in that spot. He might not have directly lost the game (Benoit did) but I can't see how you can't put the blame directly on him.

That being said, I think the Tigers would be 2-3 games better with a different manager for a full season.

Imagine if his managing in 2009 may have cost just one win.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

... take thursday against the Yankees, a rain filled game where the team battled back (behind a fiarly packed house considering the weather we sat through) and then Jim made the correct move and put Benoit in with a 3-2 lead, he gave up back to back homes (not jims fault) and then the team was poised to battle back in the bottom of the 9th and got a leadoff double from Alex, Jim then pinch ran Gerald Laird? with Baker and Young still on the bench (and a few pitchers who could run IMO) and then infante singles and Laird gets held at 3rd. So we've still got 1st and 3rd and nobody out, he then proceeds to let Santiago and Berry both hit in spots when all we need is a fly ball to win the game, while Baker and Delmon sit on the bench still. Baker can play second and outfield, so no excuse for Santiago to hit, and no excuse for Delmon to no pinch hit for Berry in that spot. He might not have directly lost the game (Benoit did) but I can't see how you can't put the blame directly on him.

I thought Jim's moves were quite poorly considered on Thursday, but there is no guarantee Baker / Young deliver a sac. fly or hit, so it is hard to put the blame entirely on him. In fact, the run expectancy in that situation is less than 2 runs, so given that situation, I'd expect a tie, but a tie after 9 innings basically means you have a 50/50 shot to win.

So I view Jim's managing to cost them a fairly large percentage of half a win.

[Jason_R]

Let me start off by saying I think Jim sucks as a manager. Never figured out why professional sports teams will keep hiring the same guy after he loses at stop after stop just because he's a "baseball guy" or a "football guy". The Pirates love Clint Hurdle after he was ran out of Colorado and he's the same guy who won an NL Pennant in Colorado. I get it.

And watching "The Franchise" this year, I've like the way Ozzie got it out there that being the manager is more about dealing with all the different guys and their personalities than it is lineups and pitching changes, that being said, to say the manager can't be held responsible for a loss is crazy, take thursday against the Yankees, a rain filled game where the team battled back (behind a fiarly packed house considering the weather we sat through) and then Jim made the correct move and put Benoit in with a 3-2 lead, he gave up back to back homes (not jims fault) and then the team was poised to battle back in the bottom of the 9th and got a leadoff double from Alex, Jim then pinch ran Gerald Laird? with Baker and Young still on the bench (and a few pitchers who could run IMO) and then infante singles and Laird gets held at 3rd. So we've still got 1st and 3rd and nobody out, he then proceeds to let Santiago and Berry both hit in spots when all we need is a fly ball to win the game, while Baker and Delmon sit on the bench still. Baker can play second and outfield, so no excuse for Santiago to hit, and no excuse for Delmon to no pinch hit for Berry in that spot. He might not have directly lost the game (Benoit did) but I can't see how you can't put the blame directly on him.

That being said, I think the Tigers would be 2-3 games better with a different manager for a full season.

What person with no MLB managerial experience would you choose to preside over a Tigers clubhouse with three $20+ million a year players? That kind of money can stoke egos capable of turning a clubhouse upside down.

[will the thrill]

I thought Jim's moves were quite poorly considered on Thursday, but there is no guarantee Baker / Young deliver a sac. fly or hit, so it is hard to put the blame entirely on him. In fact, the run expectancy in that situation is less than 2 runs, so given that situation, I'd expect a tie, but a tie after 9 innings basically means you have a 50/50 shot to win.

So I view Jim's managing to cost them a fairly large percentage of half a win.

Fair assessment, there's never a guarantee that the moves will work, but it's any coaches job to put his team in the best position to win

[will the thrill]

What person with no MLB managerial experience would you choose to preside over a Tigers clubhouse with three $20+ million a year players? That kind of money can stoke egos capable of turning a clubhouse upside down.

Without any real knowledge of this, i'm of the opinion that we place way too much into the idea that these guys are hard to deal with because they have high salaries. Justin pitches every 5 days and throws as many pitches as he wants, Prince plays first and bats 4th, Miggy plays 3rd and bats 3rd. There's nothing that these 3 guys have to complain or "turn the clubhouse upside down" for. The manager makes almost no decisions that directly effect these 3 guys. Not to mention we're not talking about Brandon inge here, these 3 have impeccable resumes when it comes to dealing with ego.

[DTroppens]

Without commenting on Leyland directly, people need to realize that every fanbase in baseball, from Arizona to Tampa, gripes about their managers use of the bullpen, lineup choices etc.

This +1

[tiger337]

I think if a fan suddenly got a chance to be a manager for a year, he would find himself in a situation where he was facing a set of circumstances which he didn't even know existed. I think the on the field stuff fans always complain about is a very small part of a managers job. I also believe most managers handle those things similarly anyway. I feel the same way about the GM position, although it's still fun to complain.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Fair assessment, there's never a guarantee that the moves will work, but it's any coaches job to put his team in the best position to win

No argument

[will the thrill]

I think if a fan suddenly got a chance to be a manager for a year, he would find himself in a situation where he was facing a set of circumstances which he didn't even know existed. I think the on the field stuff fans always complain about is a very small part of a managers job. I also believe most managers handle those things similarly anyway. I feel the same way about the GM position, although it's still fun to complain.

very true i believe. Although I think there are fans out there that could handle the job and wouldn't find it to be all that difficult.

Watching the franchise and caught the Marlins GM telling Ozzie to put Zambrano in the pen, and when they traded Infante, Ozzie said "who's second" and the GM responded "Bonny" to mean play Bonafacio there. So in Florida at least it seems the front office has a bit more control over who plays than I expected them to

[Jason_R]

Without any real knowledge of this, i'm of the opinion that we place way too much into the idea that these guys are hard to deal with because they have high salaries. Justin pitches every 5 days and throws as many pitches as he wants, Prince plays first and bats 4th, Miggy plays 3rd and bats 3rd. There's nothing that these 3 guys have to complain or "turn the clubhouse upside down" for. The manager makes almost no decisions that directly effect these 3 guys. Not to mention we're not talking about Brandon inge here, these 3 have impeccable resumes when it comes to dealing with ego.

Look what happened in Boston when Bobby V made a questionable comment about Youkilis. He lost the locker room immediately and they had to send Youkilis packing. There is still talk in the press about whether Bobby V needs to go.

If it is fair to look at the NBA, then look at what Dwight Howard has done. Got his coach fired, then forced his team to trade him.

Maybe JV, Prince, and Cabrera behave because they respect Jim Leyland. Maybe they wouldn't respect a different manager as much.