National grumblings about Baker's future

[wade]

Mike and Mike in the Morning on ESPN radio were talking about Dusty Baker just a little while ago. Mike Greenberg thinks Baker could be fired soon and had Buster Olney on and asked him about it. Olney agreed that if things don't turn around quickly, Hendry could fire Baker. They cited the lack of a contract beyond this year for Baker and the abysmal showing the past couple of weeks in the face of adversity.

 

Greenberg and Olney also felt Baker was a "west coast guy" and that he wasn't handling the second guessing and criticism that comes with a high profile job very well.

 

Greenberg went on to say the Cubs could be in danger of "losing the City" much the way the Mets did in New York. He said New York was a Met town in the '80's, but the Yankees started playing well when the Mets were slumping and they've never gotten the city back. Keep in mind, he (Greenberg) doesn't feel die-hard fans will turn away from the Cubs, just that the casual fan will start following the Sox if things keep going the way they are now.

 

Anyway, it's the first national talk I've heard about Baker's job being in jeopardy.

[soapy]

I really would be shocked if Dusty got fired during the season. I guess if things continue like this it could happen though.

 

Really though, much of this year's team struggle has to fall directly on Hendry. He traded (too much) for Pierre and signed Jones to play RF. Meanwhile, he overspent on Perez and Rusch so as to limit his resources to sign a quality RFer or strengthen the bench. As much as I feel Dusty's past is more then enough reason to get rid of him, I haven't witnessed a great deal of terrible decisions on Baker's part this year (although certainly there are a few). This team is just bad.

[neely crenshaw]

i don't see hendry firing dusty. he will probably not resign him at the end of the season. dusty is hendry's insulation from criticism. he takes all(or most) of the heat for this team being bad and hendry has been getting off scott free. if you fire baker and you are still horrid, people will ventaully start looking to someone else to blame...which of is hendry(and should be)

injuries where their scapegoat for a while but now we are to the point where we are seeing the blame go to the guy who put this very vulnerable team together (and for 3 years of it).

anyone else think the front office maybe second guessing resigning hendry?

they should be

[LoneStarCubFan]

Buster's wrong about one thing. The Cubs will never lose Chicago to the White Sox. Never happen.

 

I won't be shocked to see Baker get fired. As a matter of fact I wouldn't be surprised to see Baker grease the skids for his own departure if Hendry doesn't extend him by the end of the month.

 

My guess is that if Dusty doesn't have a new contract by June 1 he'll start dropping hints about getting a deal done thru the media and whining about the hand he's been dealt by all the injuries this season. Daring Hendry to extend him or let him go. At that point it's up to Jim to decide what to do.

[wade]

The team is bad, and losing Lee is a crushing blow. But, at what point does Baker not try to light a fire under the team? From what I see, his reputation as a player's manager often leads to him babying players who aren't getting the job done. Jones is not hitting that great. Fine. But, he's missing cutoff men and getting doubled off second like he's Moises Alou. That's the kind of stuff I'd like to see squashed in the midst of a streak like this.

 

Obviously I don't know what happens in the dugout and maybe he is getting on guys who are making mental mistakes (ahem, Hairston), but all we ever read is that these guys need a hug.

 

Maybe I'm just enamored with Jim Leyland calling out the Tigers (and himself) for playing a sloppy game and watching them subsequently roll off several wins.

[C.C.]

Maybe I'm just enamored with Jim Leyland calling out the Tigers (and himself) for playing a sloppy game and watching them subsequently roll off several wins.

 

I couldn't agree with you more! Since then they have played lights out and are sitting pretty at 20-12.

[Backtobanks]

Obviously, Baker can still use the injuries as an excuse. Assuming Baker is still the manager when Wood, Prior, Miller, and Lee return, he better get the team moving at about a .700 clip for a month or else he could be in trouble. There's no more excuses after those guys return.

[neely crenshaw]

there is no reason he has to do this in public or in the papers. we don't know if he is chewin' butt in the clubhouse or his office..he may....he may not...doing it publicly is not any more effective than privately, we would just know for sure he is doing it!

bottom line is this, if you are 30+ years old with 10 yeasr experience..you should not have to be chewed for playing poor baseball/ that goes double when you are playing horribly as a team or/and individually!

the tigers were playing very well and let down...so leyland ripped them, as he needed to, they got a little lazy-a little full of themselves and got a wake up call. if these guys look around and realize we haven't won in 4 weeks and haven't scored in 2 weeks...and they are hitting a buck 20. they don't need a manager to tell them they are playing crappy. if jones doesn't already know the importance of hitting a cut off man, or running the bases well, when you and your team are struggling- ripping him ain't going help him learn it!

it might make us feel better but it won't change him...if you are to his point of his career, i doubt benching him would do much..it certainly hasn't helped hairston over the last 2 years!

[wade]

I don't know, I think addressing poor fundamentals and getting on them could help. In Miles' article he puts the onus somewhat on Hendry for a wake up call, I.E., call up Theriot, Pie, etc.

 

I don't know the answer, but something needs to be done. I'm not usually a knee-jerker, but the team is playing like it's over and I myself am not ready to concede 2006! :D

[Wilson A2000]

Has Dusty always had fairly good team to manage? He has probbaly never been on a struggling team, at least managing wise. This is uncharted territory for him.

[Banedon]

You guys need to stop getting my hopes up that Baker will get fired....*sigh*

[goonys evil twin]

Has Dusty always had fairly good team to manage? He has probbaly never been on a struggling team, at least managing wise. This is uncharted territory for him.

 

3 of Baker's first 4 seasons in San Fran were sub .500 seasons. And then there were last year's Cubs. He knows what it's like to manage bad teams.

[bobbyd20]

If Dusty was getting after the players about poor fundamental play (getting doubled off repeatedly, swinging at the first pitch after a four pitch walk, etc) don't you think we would see improved fundamental play. The fact that we have seen the same garbage for 3+ years leads me to believe that Dusty doesn't get on the players about fundamental mistakes.

[J.R.]

TPTB are too dense to realize that Dusty's act expired many moons ago. He's been due for a one-way ticket out of town for far too long.

[RynoRules]

I agree with J.R. The anti-Dusty sentiment has been around for quit some time. The anti-Hendry sentiment is now seriously building for the first time, IMO.

[cheapseats]

Buster's wrong about one thing. The Cubs will never lose Chicago to the White Sox. Never happen.

 

The White Sox outdrew the Cubs as recently as 1995. What makes you think that such a thing won't happen again? It might not happen next year, but if the Sox continue to put a winning product on the field and the Cubs continue to lose, the Sox could be the dominant team ten years from now if not five.

[thedaymen]

Buster's wrong about one thing. The Cubs will never lose Chicago to the White Sox. Never happen.

 

The White Sox outdrew the Cubs as recently as 1995. What makes you think that such a thing won't happen again? It might not happen next year, but if the Sox continue to put a winning product on the field and the Cubs continue to lose, the Sox could be the dominant team ten years from now if not five.

 

What Mike and Mike don't talk about is that New York was always a Yankees town, its just that when the Mets were competative yearly and the Bombers weren't, the Mets got more interest in the papers and talk radio and such. As soon as the Bombers were dominant, their fans came back out of the woodowork. It wasn't like the city woke un in 1996 and threw out all of their orange for pinstripes.

[wade]

Buster's wrong about one thing. The Cubs will never lose Chicago to the White Sox. Never happen.

 

The White Sox outdrew the Cubs as recently as 1995. What makes you think that such a thing won't happen again? It might not happen next year, but if the Sox continue to put a winning product on the field and the Cubs continue to lose, the Sox could be the dominant team ten years from now if not five.

 

What Mike and Mike don't talk about is that New York was always a Yankees town, its just that when the Mets were competative yearly and the Bombers weren't, the Mets got more interest in the papers and talk radio and such. As soon as the Bombers were dominant, their fans came back out of the woodowork. It wasn't like the city woke un in 1996 and threw out all of their orange for pinstripes.

 

So, you're saying that ten years from now if the Cubs start to win yearly they can get their own town back? :D

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Buster's wrong about one thing. The Cubs will never lose Chicago to the White Sox. Never happen.

 

The White Sox outdrew the Cubs as recently as 1995. What makes you think that such a thing won't happen again? It might not happen next year, but if the Sox continue to put a winning product on the field and the Cubs continue to lose, the Sox could be the dominant team ten years from now if not five.

 

The Sox won the World Series last year and currently have the best record in baseball, yet they can't average more than 80% capacity and have similar attendance figures as the Padres. Olney said that they were "on the verge" of that, and in reality it's going to take quite a bit of time.

[BigbadB]

What's wrong with the Padres attendance figures? I believe they were 6th in baseball last year. The fans just haven't caught on yet to how pathetic ownership is in San Diego. They will.

[LoneStarCubFan]

Buster's wrong about one thing. The Cubs will never lose Chicago to the White Sox. Never happen.

 

The White Sox outdrew the Cubs as recently as 1995. What makes you think that such a thing won't happen again? It might not happen next year, but if the Sox continue to put a winning product on the field and the Cubs continue to lose, the Sox could be the dominant team ten years from now if not five.

 

The Sox play in a bigger park. They should outdraw the Cubs EVERY year but they don't. "Outdraw" doesn't equal "more popular".

 

Chicago is a Cubs town. Always has been always will be. As someone pointed out the Mets didn't "lose" New York because they never "had" it.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

What's wrong with the Padres attendance figures? I believe they were 6th in baseball last year. The fans just haven't caught on yet to how pathetic ownership is in San Diego. They will.

 

Nothing, both are just under 80% capacity at home, and draw a little under 60% on the road. The Cubs blow both out of the water at 94% and 72% respectively.

[goonys evil twin]

Buster's wrong about one thing. The Cubs will never lose Chicago to the White Sox. Never happen.

 

The White Sox outdrew the Cubs as recently as 1995. What makes you think that such a thing won't happen again? It might not happen next year, but if the Sox continue to put a winning product on the field and the Cubs continue to lose, the Sox could be the dominant team ten years from now if not five.

 

The Sox play in a bigger park. They should outdraw the Cubs EVERY year but they don't. "Outdraw" doesn't equal "more popular".

 

Chicago is a Cubs town. Always has been always will be. As someone pointed out the Mets didn't "lose" New York because they never "had" it.

 

Wrigley now has a larger capacity than US Cellular.

[C.C.]

Chicago is a Cubs town. Always has been always will be. As someone pointed out the Mets didn't "lose" New York because they never "had" it

 

Couldn't agree with you more. All it takes is the Cubs to sniff first place and Chicago will go crazy yet again. Cubs and Bears are the pulse of sports world in Chicago. It's just the way it is. The Sox just won a freaking WS and still only draw 20,000 for a weekday night game. Not that we should care whose more popular, but if questioned no doubt the Cubs are what Chicago craves...

[wade]

So anyway, if Baker were to get fired, who would be the interim coach? I'd have to think that such a drastic measure would call for more than promoting the triple A guy and riding out the year. In other words, if they fire Baker to try and put a charge into the team to compete this year, do they have to go outside the organization and hire an out of work manager with experience?