Jump to content

DumberAndLeaner

Gardenhire >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ausmus

Recommended Posts


1 hour ago, DumberAndLeaner said:

Oh come now! Surely you didn't expect to go  158-4?    :D

Well I sort of did for a few days there.  But now I know that it will be 4-158.

I'm pretty sure that I have a pitchfork and a torch out there in the shed but it's too cold to think about a march right now.  When the weather warms up though I will be joining the angry villagers who will descend upon Comerica Park.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, tiger337 said:

John Shumski?

@tiger337 is probably less than 6 degrees to Chuck Norris.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Charles Liston said:

When the weather warms up though I will be joining the angry villagers who will descend upon Comerica Park.

Don't forget to pick up a "Hot-n-ready" on your way,  gotta support the rebuild!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Dave Cameron, it's impossible to quantify one manager over another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cruzer1 said:

According to Dave Cameron, it's impossible to quantify one manager over another.

I don't care if he is more than the other guy, just if he is better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I don't care if he is more than the other guy, just if he is better.

So, if he is a better manager but doesn't add any victories you are OK with him?  I can see how that makes sense if his contribution to player development leads to more victories down the road.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Yeah, well Dave Cameron blows.

Cameron is OK, but he is overrated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

So, if he is a better manager but doesn't add any victories you are OK with him?  I can see how that makes sense if his contribution to player development leads to more victories down the road.  

it was just a poor syntax riff. You may or may not be able quantify the *effect* of a manager, which would  be relevant. But to quantify the manager himself is a non-sequitor, unless he had multiple personality disorder maybe!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Completely off topic, but I think anal cheetos is a horrible on-screen name.

But then Mr. Anal Cheetos probably looks just fine to you, doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, cruzer1 said:

According to Dave Cameron, it's impossible to quantify one manager over another.

Strenuously disagree. I could go on a long dissertation   outlining differences between complacency vs espirit de coeur, discipline vs chaos,  and seasoned "gut" vs book learned,  but instead I'll just counter with two words ...Billy Martin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DumberAndLeaner said:

Strenuously disagree. I could go on a long dissertation   outlining differences between complacency vs espirit de coeur, discipline vs chaos,  and seasoned "gut" vs book learned,  but instead I'll just counter with two words ...Billy Martin.

Then how do you quantify it?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DumberAndLeaner said:

Strenuously disagree. I could go on a long dissertation   outlining differences between complacency vs espirit de coeur, discipline vs chaos,  and seasoned "gut" vs book learned,  but instead I'll just counter with two words ...Billy Martin.

curious choice. I think Martin is pretty much a bundle of contradictions,  primarily due to his alcoholism. As is not unusual for a drunk, he was destructive to the people and environment around him. But he could manage a ballclub when he was sober enough. 

But Billy also managed 40 yrs ago and I think it was  easier then just because I imagine the players came up knowing how to play the game much better than they do today, so a manager had less low baseball IQ on his team to overcome. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cruzer1 said:

Then how do you quantify it?

 

https://www.amazon.com/Wild-High-Tight-Death-Martin/dp/0312105754

 

 

Just look at the delta in team records immediately before and after hiring him.

A good read, even if one doesn't like Billy.   His talent for seizing disparate elements and forging a team mindset are unmatched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

curious choice. I think Martin is pretty much a bundle of contradictions,  primarily due to his alcoholism. As is not unusual for a drunk, he was destructive to the people and environment around him. But he could manage a ballclub when he was sober enough. 

But Billy also managed 40 yrs ago and I think it was  easier then just because I imagine the players came up knowing how to play the game much better than they do today, so a manager had less low baseball IQ on his team to overcome. 

Yes but, todays players have biometrics and advanced analytics. {sarcasm}

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Billy also tended to lose his teams after a few seasons, FWIW.

Yes, and Gardenhire seems to have the same kind of management style that players will tune out after a few seasons as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny that the Tigers win 3 in a row against a horrible team and suddenly that's the proof we need to determine Gardenhire is wayyyyyy better than Brad. This place really is MLive now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Yoda said:

It's funny that the Tigers win 3 in a row against a horrible team and suddenly that's the proof we need to determine Gardenhire is wayyyyyy better than Brad. This place really is MLive now. 

I do not think 3 games is all people are talking about.  1072-1045 in his career, most of it with a team that had one of the lowest payrolls in the league.

Brad was 314-332 with one of the highest payrolls in the league.

I think the person who started this thread and others responding are HOPING the better manager (Garndenhire) is going to squeeze more wins out of the team because they watch everyday and would rather watch a winner.  So sample size with the Tigers sure, but I do not think there is a question (or should NOT be IMO) in anyones mind that Gardenhire>>>>>>>>Ausmus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Yoda said:

It's funny that the Tigers win 3 in a row against a horrible team and suddenly that's the proof we need to determine Gardenhire is wayyyyyy better than Brad.

I think most of the anti-Brad is due to his poor managing .. and has very little or nothing to do  yet with Gardenhire. 

But folks/fans are willing to give Gardenhire the benefit of a doubt in much the same way folks gave Brad the benefit of a doubt during his first couple seasons until he proved otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Tigrrfan said:

I think most of the anti-Brad is due to his poor managing .. and has very little or nothing to do  yet with Gardenhire. 

But folks/fans are willing to give Gardenhire the benefit of a doubt in much the same way folks gave Brad the benefit of a doubt during his first couple seasons until he proved otherwise.

Ausmus was given the benefit of a doubt for maybe a half season.  Oddly, I was one of the earliest ones to start criticizing his bullpen usage late in the first season when he kept going to Chamberlain in key spots after he had lost it.  I think he was a poor manager the first year and a half, but was an average manager after that.       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tiger337 said:

I think he was a poor manager the first year and a half, but was an average manager after that.       

So clearly someone who would have benefited by managing in the minors for a couple of years before being hired to manage in the majors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

curious choice. I think Martin is pretty much a bundle of contradictions,  primarily due to his alcoholism. As is not unusual for a drunk, he was destructive to the people and environment around him. But he could manage a ballclub when he was sober enough. 

But Billy also managed 40 yrs ago and I think it was  easier then just because I imagine the players came up knowing how to play the game much better than they do today, so a manager had less low baseball IQ on his team to overcome. 

Billy Martin used to destroy pitchers' careers in pursuit of short-term glory.  Then he would leave and go to another team.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MotownWebGuy said:

So clearly someone who would have benefited by managing in the minors for a couple of years before being hired to manage in the majors.

Probably.  It makes sense that they should all start off in the minors.  Trammell was another example, although I don't think he was cut out for managing anyway.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,083
    • Total Posts
      2,815,435
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×