Do you think Tony LaRussa is "overrated" as a ML m

[Joe Shlabotnik]

How many managers would bench an all-star, gold glove 3B in the NLCS? Don't tell me a manager can't help a team.

Yup - how many managers today would have the balls to do that? About the same number as would sit Ozzie Smith in St. Louis in his first year managing there. Must be somebody with a pretty big will to win and confidence in his abilities. Someone like that is going to either be gone real quick because he pisses the wrong people off and hasnt got the wins to back him up or someone who wins consistently enough that the people who are pissed will go along because that is the ultimate measure of the managers effectiveness.

nuff said.

[Richie Allen]

And I think the bigger reason is Walt Jocketty providing Tony with players such as Edmonds, Rolen, Walker, Sanders, Renteria, Williams, Kile, Isringhausen, Tavarez, Kline, Carpenter, Mulder, Calero, Suppan, Matheny, McGwire, Marquis, King, Wainwright...

If I replaced those smattering of 19 players acquired via trade or free agency with lesser players, would the Cardinals have been the class of the NL Central since 2000?

What you'll notice, however, with the exception of Ozzie there were no big name players playing for us before Walt and Tony came. We were spending money and trying to get good players, but to no avail.

Whether it was Big Mac's year in '98 or LaRussa being here, in the last ten years it is widely known that St. Louis is a great place to play. Top notch stars want to come here and play. That was not the case before Tony came here.

[clement]

If managers could only hurt teams, but not help them, then I think there is an obvious solution: Don't hire a manager.

[maddash]

If managers could only hurt teams, but not help them, then I think there is an obvious solution: Don't hire a manager.

Yeah, plug a laptop into the dugout, run the odds for every in-game situation, and have it run things.

[ToughGuy_BlueShirt]

No.

[ndistops]

How many managers would bench an all-star, gold glove 3B in the NLCS? Don't tell me a manager can't help a team.

If you're talking about last year's Game 2 (and you must be because Rolen played every other NLCS game that year), plugging in Spiezio and having him go 2-4 with 3 ribbies is a thing called dumb luck.

Analogy (not comparing Spiezio to him, just an analogy): Giving Neifi Perez at-bats for the Cubs is just as stupid when he strikes out or grounds into a double play as it is when he hits a home run. An idea succeeding doesn't mean it wasn't a dumb move.

And I guess I should add that I mean that any one of us could know that you should play Pujols and bat him 3rd in any given lineup, and any one of us could know that Chris Carpenter should be kept in the rotation, and any one of us could know that you probably shouldn't send Jason Isringhausen for 50 consecutive games to close. As long as the manager makes the sensible move, he should be fine. It's when he starts trying to win games with things like the aforementioned hit and runs and squeeze plays that he gets into trouble, and TLR does it a lot. Now, it sure seems to work out a lot, and maybe a part of that is due to him knowing when to deploy said plays. But still, most of the time, hit and runs, squeeze plays, etc. are statistically not a good idea.

[haltz]

I'm inclined to agree with you ND, even though I think Tony is a good manager, in principle I think I'm pretty close to where you are at. I give Tony a lot of credit as there are some unquantifiable things that go along with managing a ballclub, certainly some guys decided to play for St. Louis, for less money, for whatever reason in the past few years and I kind of doubt it was in spite of Tony. It's all relative though, if most managers "hurt" their team then one that consistently breaks even should be "rated" pretty well. Other than looking at pthyag vs. actual records I wouldn't know where to begin to look at something like that.

I'd be really curious to know the statistics on just how often judgment calls work out for managers. I know that statistically hit and runs and the like aren't really the wisest plays, but I wonder if someone has ever tried to quantify if certain managers are better at employing these tactics than others. There is definitely the dumb luck aspect, but you should be able to get a decent read over the course of a few seasons. Maybe not, never thought about it, but I'd be interested in looking at something like that. If this kind of thing has been looked at then I've missed it.

[greenback44]

If managers could only hurt teams, but not help them, then I think there is an obvious solution: Don't hire a manager.

Yeah, plug a laptop into the dugout, run the odds for every in-game situation, and have it run things.

Make sure you program it to blame sample sizes if it loses a game.

[greenback44]

I know that statistically hit and runs and the like aren't really the wisest plays, but I wonder if someone has ever tried to quantify if certain managers are better at employing these tactics than others. There is definitely the dumb luck aspect, but you should be able to get a decent read over the course of a few seasons. Maybe not, never thought about it, but I'd be interested in looking at something like that. If this kind of thing has been looked at then I've missed it.

The Bill James Handbook has this, I think. I'll try to scan the 2006 table into a picture file during the game tonight.

Well, it wasn't I had remembered. Here it is anyway:

PL stands for platoons, LO for long outing, RCD for relievers used on consecutive days, LS for long saves, REL for relievers used and RM for runners moving.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

How many managers would bench an all-star, gold glove 3B in the NLCS? Don't tell me a manager can't help a team.

If you're talking about last year's Game 2 (and you must be because Rolen played every other NLCS game that year), plugging in Spiezio and having him go 2-4 with 3 ribbies is a thing called dumb luck.

No, no - you missed the point. It's not Spezio's performance that matters, its the fire it lit under Rolen. Which was Tony's whole objective. And it worked.

Again, not many managers would have the balls to do that and take the heat from the player and the press. But Tony did because he is all about winning and he thought that grief would be worth it if Rolen responded as Tony must have thought he would.

Rolen performance the rest of the way in the playoffs and WS I lay squarely on the shoulders of Tony LaRussa.