Is there a list at all? Frank Robinson was one of the greatest players of all time, but didn’t seem to do much as a manager. It’s hard to tell, though. You gotta have the talent on the field first, no matter how good you are.
I’m not sure why Pujols wants to manage. This is a guy who grossed $350+million as a player. Surely managing would be a radical step down in lifestyle. I’ve heard that Arod is hoping to manage one day. Same problem.
Yeah, that’s fair.
Joe Torre, maybe? A 17-year playing career is nothing to scoff at. 2300 hits, 250 HRs. 120 OPS+ and an MVP. Not a Hall-of-Fame player, but pretty damn great.
Can we mention Pete Rose?
Apparently Walter Johnson was decently regarded as a manager, and had a pretty good record.
How so? It’s not like he can only spend what he earns in each year. More money is more money.
Jeez. As a Yankees fan, I’m ashamed that I didn’t come up wth Torre. Sure, he qualifies. He had 14 seasons of not much before making it to the Bronx, but you can’t argue with what came next. I remember being annoyed when he was hired. Another retread, I grumbled, Most of that stemmed from me thinking that Showalter deserved another year or more after digging the Yankees out of a deep hole.
I find it really hard to evaluate managers. Wins and losses don’t really tell a story if one team has a $300 million dollar payroll, while another has to make the most of a mere $80 million. I’ve always thought Keven Cash must be a very good manager considering the results he gets despite the low payroll and high turnover of talent.
Mostly because of the grind. The travel, the stress, the aggravation. It’s a tough job, with very limited power.
Gotcha. Presumably he loves that lifestyle or he wouldn’t seek it out.
Why would you blame managing stats here? Saving the closer is a pretty traditional move. The “spreadsheets” tend to be pro using your best pitcher in your highest leverage situation. I think sometimes people just want to blame sabermetrics for any decision they disagree with (while often siting stats as to why)
I think I’d probably warmed up Munoz in the 7th once people got on, but I think it was defensible. There is a cost to Munoz early (tiring him out early on a day you want length from him, putting him a situation he isn’t used to) that it could have made sense to use another very good reliver.
Very true. I’m looking at this Wiki list of MLB managers with 1,000 or more wins. Bruce Bochy, who I consider a good manager, is 6th on the list with 2,252 wins (right behind Torre), but he has more losses (2,266) than wins.
BTW, Bochy did have a 10-year career in the majors. But not exactly a great career: .239 BA, 26 HR, 93 RBI.
He’s already managing baseball teams.
The 45-year-old Pujols has no Major League or Minor League managing or coaching experience, but he did lead Leones del Escogido to the Dominican Republic Professional Baseball League (LIDOM) championship and the Caribbean Series title last winter. He’s also slated to manage his native Dominican Republic in next year’s World Baseball Classic.
It would rather mean a step up in his career as a baseball manager.
John McGraw was a great player, of course. Lou Boudreau. Frankie Frisch. Red Schoendienst. Some “pretty darned good” ones too like Felipe Alou, Jim Fregosi, or Mike Scioscia.
No one like Pujols though.
What statistics best identify a great manager? As mentioned by @BlankSlate above, they should probably be handicapped somehow based on how much payroll they were swinging each year.
Beyond that is it total wins? Win/loss ratio (after some minimum number of games as manager)? Total scoring? Total net scoring? Years in the saddle? etc.
An interesting question IMO and, at least for me, one worthy of a bit more thought before I stick my oar in the water.
Historically, win-loss record, and pennants and championships won, have been the main metrics. The Manager of the Year award often goes to a guy whose team improves dramatically over the prior season and/or outperforms expectations (especially with a first-year skipper), so it’s probably not a great metric of ongoing success.
But, as you note, over the last decades, with the ever-widening disparity in revenues and salary between the teams, that’d seem to be a factor. And, yet, on the gripping hand, there’s not a perfect correlation between team salary and success: if there were, Mike Scioscia would have more than one WS ring (and the Angels wouldn’t be in an 11-year playoff drought), Mattingly would have won pennants and rings with the Dodgers, etc.
There’s also Sweet Lou Piniella, who in addition to his achievements added to the entertainment when he would argue with the umpires.
Dusty Baker was a very good player and manager.
Yogi Berra seems to have had a decent career as a manager, and a great career as a player.
One possible way to measure manager performance would be taking team WAR and compare it to actual record. That could help balance for team quality. Of course that would mask any ability a manager might have to improve player performance..
The other approach I’ve seen used is comparing actual W-L record to pythagorean W-L. That could map to some tactical ability to squeak out more close wins than losses. Of course it also maps to having an amazing bullpen - perhaps it’s not too surprising that one study using that system has Joe Torre as #1. Having Mo Rivera as your closer can make any manager look amazing in close games.
The Giants have picked Tennessee coach Tony Vitello as their new manager, marking the first time a manager was hired directly from a college program without any experience as a professional coach.
That makes more sense than hiring out of a broadcast booth.
Here is a fun fact. One person will get a World Series Ring no matter who wins.
Minor Leaguer Bobby Kennedy who has been bouncing around all year played two games for the Blue Jays in August and later a week for the Dodgers (and the Phillies at some point) is entitled to a ring since he played in the bigs for the winning team.
Not really.
Best practices for World Series rings vary by team. Owners make the final call on who gets rings. Save for rare exceptions, active roster players and coaches are guaranteed rings. Former players who participated in the bulk of the season but were traded/relocated may also receive rings, in addition to injured players. Front office staff members and executives often receive rings. Support staff such as trainers and groundskeepers may also take home rings, upon the owner’s discretion.
It will be up to the team owner who gets a ring. There is no rule saying that if you played a couple of games, you’re entitled to a ring. The team gets to decide that.
The best you can say is that he could get a ring no matter who wins.