Showing posts with label Bud Black. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bud Black. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 4, 2015

Gardy, Black and Baker

A few days ago, the Washington Nationals had settled on Bud Black as their manager. On Tuesday, they officially announced the hiring of Dusty Baker.

In between came an apparently contentious contract negotiation with Black, who found both the length of contract and salary too small. The Nats have gotten a reputation for low-balling managers, and that is apparently by design, Their initial offer to Black was a one-year contract; meanwhile, Don Mattingly got four years from the Miami Marlins, and the Fish have made a habit of paying people not to manage them.

The Black fiasco should be an embarrassment for the Nationals, but I suspect Baker's actually a better choice for Washington. For all his sabermetric and tactical shortcomings, Baker's well-established as a handler of egos, and that might be the biggest specific task for the manager of that squad.

And while he was justly criticized for his mishandling of a talented set of young pitchers during his tenure with the Cubs, Baker appears to have learned from that experience. He was the manager of the Cincinnati Reds when Johnny Cueto emerged as a star. In 2012 the Reds led the National League in run prevention; in 2013 they were fourth, this in an extreme hitter's park. in those two years, nine Reds made at least 30 starts. That's not a record that fits his reputation as a pitcher-killer, but that reputation ought to be outdated by now.

The Nationals had high expectations entered 2015, and failed to come close. There will be a good bit of roster churn there this winter, but they will still have Bryce Harper and Max Scherzer, and they will continue to have high expectations, perhaps higher than they ought to be.

---

Meanwhile, in San Diego, the Padres have reportedly offered Ron Gardenhire the bench coach job. That provoked this tweet (from a reporter who confidently informed the world that Rick Sofield would be the Padres skipper less than 24 hours before Andy Green was hired):




Assuming that Gardenhire doesn't need the job financially, I would think it's a question of: What's the best route for gaining the managerial job he really wants? My guess is that he (and his agent) will figure that he's better off remaining a free agent and waiting for somebody to get canned in midseason.

To be specific, there was a widespread expectation that Detroit would fire Brad Ausmus after their disappointing 2015, and that Gardenhire was his most likely successor. Ausmus has been retained for 2016, but the leash is probably short. There's a genuine logic to Gardenhire deciding to decline any coaching jobs to keep himself available for a managerial post.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Bud Black and the vagaries of award voting

Awards voting -- MVP, Cy Young, ROY, Gold Gloves, even the Hall of Fame and All-Star teams -- is inherently subjective, and unlike some of my internet-based brethren, I'm fine with that. I don't think we're anywhere near the point of being able to definitively declare off the stats alone that this center fielder saved his team more runs than that shortstop, and this relief pitcher's 70 innings were more important than that starter's 210.

Bud Black is a managerial rarity:
He was a pitcher in his playing days.
What we're getting is a series of historical snapshots of opinion, some gathered in a well-designed way (the BBWAA votes) and some in a haphazard, even idiotic way (All-Star selections). You'd probably have to work really hard to come up with a worse voting system than the Gold Gloves, which is why Rafael Palmeiro once got a Gold Glove for 28 games at first base. The Hall of Fame selection system was broken from the start of the institution, which is why they keep tinkering with it.

Anyway, the manager of the year voting is even more subjective than most. What the heck are voters judging the candidates on, anyway? Won-loss record, sure, but in that case Joe Maddon would have won the AL award, and he finished a distant third.

Expectations are always big to the voters, but ...whose expectations? Answer: those of the voters. The Padres were bad in 2009; they made no major offseason acquisitions and actually offloaded one of their better power hitters; they wound up contending for the NL West to the final weekend. And Bud Black won MOY.

He wasn't the only better-than-expected candidate. Cincinnati was expected to be an also ran in the NL Central, behind the Cardinals and Cubs at least; the Reds won the division. San Francisco was supposed to be better than the Padres but not better than the Dodgers or Rockies; the Giants won the division, which is all the voters know when the ballots are cast.

Two possibilities here:


  • The expectations were right, and the Padres contended on the force of Black's managerial brilliance; or
  • The writers underestimated the Padres at the start of the year.


Since none of us enjoys declaring that we were wrong, the writers picked the first possibility.