While watching the WS tonight, a commentator said he spoke with the manager of the KC Royals. He said, the manager said, ‘I have given the bunt sign, maybe 5 times this year’. ‘I just let them (the players) play their game’. And the commentator said that is why they (the players) love working with him.
I was really surprised at hearing this. Is this common in MLB? You can’t argue with the Royal’s success. But, I always believed the manager was making a majority of the decisions, i,e lineup, batting order, pinch runners, pinch hitters, pitching changes, etc.
So what exactly is this manager doing? He just gives his players the ball, and says, “Have fun, and win the game”. And do many other managers do the same?
[QUOTE=harmonicamoon]
So what exactly is this manager doing? He just gives his players the ball, and says, “Have fun, and win the game”. And do many other managers do the same?
[/QUOTE]
Ned Yost’s statement was something of an exaggeration, of course. He’s just giving credit to his players. Kansas City executed 34 sacrifice bunts this year, not five. I assure you most of those were the manager’s call.
A manager makes all decisions regarding sac bunts, many decisions regarding stolen bases, and of course all decisions regarding pinch hitters, relief pitchers (this year Kansas City’s starting pitcher completed an entire game just twice) and the like. Of course, prior to the game, he has also worked with his coaching staff on determining who will start and who will sit, and over the long run determines what roles players will play on his team and such. He also has to manage the team from the perspective of dealing with his personnel as employees.
If the American League had bad fundamentals, they wouldn’t win most of the interleague games - but they do. the American League has beaten the National League in interleague play twelve years in a row, by margins far exceeding any explanation by random chance. This year the AL’s winning percentage in 300 interleague games was .557, which is a 90-72 team.
The AL is rather indisputably BETTER at the fundamentals of baseball.
Managers can choose to micro-manage the game, or let the players make the majority of minor in-game decisions. A manager can be positioning players, calling pitches, calling for stolen bases, bunts, etc. or let the players do many of those things themselves, only inserting himself at key points.
Alcides Escobar and Jarrod Dyson laid down half of KC’s SAC bunts. Escobar in particular may very well have done most of those on his own. I’m with RickJay, though. Ned Yost is exaggerating how rarely he calls for them. The Royals are not a big power team that you just let them swing away in obvious bunt situations.
It makes sense that Yost was exaggerating and giving credit to his team. Never thought about it. Come to think of it, during all interviews with players and managers, the constantly won’t take credit themselves. They always say it is their team that is accomplishing these things. And they always say the opposing team is great.
I didn’t hear his interview, but if he says the players are making the decisions, isn’t there a chance that he’s telling the truth? Maybe he has a different approach than other managers. You seem quite certain about this.
It wasn’t an interview. The commentator said he spoke with Yost, and Yost said this. But the commentator did add, “That is why the players enjoy working with him.” So, maybe there is a little truth in it.
An AL manager has very little to do because of the DH. If a game gets tight New York we’ll find out how good he is at managing. When to change pitchers is a tough decision in the NL because it affects the lineup, in the AL it doesn’t matter until they start running out pitchers like in game 1.
For the question in the OP, there are differing management styles but letting the players play the game means not giving them batting and running signals, but not anything to do with the lineup or replacing pitchers.
I think the Royals players are pretty aware of their power - and extremely aware of when an appropriate time to bunt it. There’s no reason to think they can’t make that decision on their own.
I doubt it. Lorenzo Cain attempted the ugliest two bunts in Game 1 I’ve ever seen. Afterwards, he reiterated that the Royals have free rein on when they bunt, and that he’ll never be attempting to do so in the future. He’s laid down 1 successful sac bunt in his career - in last year’s postseason.
[QUOTE=TriPolar]
An AL manager has very little to do because of the DH. If a game gets tight New York we’ll find out how good he is at managing. When to change pitchers is a tough decision in the NL because it affects the lineup, in the AL it doesn’t matter until they start running out pitchers like in game 1.
[/QUOTE]
I have always found this claim absolutely mystifying.
Again, I must point to the fact that the AL regularly beats the shit out of the NL year after year after year in interleague play, including in NL parks. If it’s so tough to manage in the NL why is that?
Does anyone really think figuring out how to work around the pitcher’s spot in the order is hard? Don’t most fans know how a double switch works? I had this stuff figured out when I was maybe twelve years old. They have lineup cards. It’s not that difficult.
The idea that a manager as “little to do” because he doesn’t have to do a double switch is ludicrous. Pulling double switches is maybe one fifth of one percent of a manager’s job. The manager’s job is to MANAGE, which is why he’s called that.
I agree KC’s players would usually make the right decision. But if you’re Ned Yost, why let them? Especially in the WS, the manager needs to be accountable for in-game decisions. Ned Yost is obviously a very good manager and whatever he’s doing, it’s working.
Conceivably… because the marginal value of the difference–even assuming that Yost correctly identifies all cases in which the player’s decision would have been wrong–is smaller than the psychological benefit of letting guys feel that it’s up to them.
I’ll concede your point after the way the NL manager blew it last night. The one big decision an NL manager has to make in a game is when to remove a pitcher, and that guy couldn’t handle an obvious situation.
It looks as if old school managers are gradually being phased out. No longer are teams hiring popular hometown ex-players as GM and then letting that GM hire an old roommate or drinking buddy as field manager. Today’s GMs are MBAs and number crunchers, and are increasingly hiring managers who share their philosophies.
Not in lots of places. But whereas many fans and reporters share the attitude that “anybody can manage” and that managers really don’t do much, I think the more number-oriented front office people see things differently. I think they take decision-making more seriously, and are far less likely to hire old-timers who manage by gut instinct or by the seat of their pants.
Not so long ago, many teams handed over the managing job to a popular player with no experience. I don’t think we’ll see that happen often in the future. Too much money at stake now.
