8/16 Phil Rogers: Dusty's Ticket Back?

[Laura]

Phil Rogers / The Trib[/url]"]

The Cubs certainly didn't play the Houston Astros this week like they were 16 games below .500 and in their developmental, get-it-over-with mode. Manager Dusty Baker pushed his players as if they were in the middle of a playoff race, and they responded with compelling baseball, particularly in the 18-inning, all-hands-on-deck victory Tuesday night.

 

It's enough to make you wonder—and I've wondered before—whether getting rid of the well-credentialed Baker would be a step in the right direction. A new manager for 2007 won't fix the organization's greatest institutional failing, which is a lack of stability. But it indeed does appear that the Cubs will get their fifth new manager since Don Baylor left in 2002 and 22nd (including fill-ins) since Leo Durocher had the job from 1966-72.

 

The only thing I agree with is that Dusty is far from the only problem with the Cubs. I'd like to see Hendry & MacPhail hit the road, too, but that seems unlikely this off-season.

[dvdd127]

Personally, I would like to see them get a chance to put a team on the field like the '03 team... that has limited injuries. Or has injuries to guys who can easily be replaced.

 

In all seriousness, I am willing to give Baker another shot. One thing I will never do is blame him for the injuries. What I will do though, is blame the poor play over the last 3 seasons (2004. 2005, and 2006) on injuries to key players. Prior, Wood, Garciaparra, Lee. I think that had these guys not went down as they did... we would have seen the Cubs in the playoffs at least one time since 2003.

[Balsa]

Bakers isn't all of the problem, but extending him is no kind of solution.

 

If he's back, I'll be pissed. He has no idea how to fill out a lineup card, and if you disagree, only go back to when Neifi batted second.

[Banedon]

How many times has Rogers waffled back and forth on this issue this season?

 

One could argue that there were situations in the 18 inning game where Baker made it harder for the Cubs to win, and they still managed, albeit in 18 innings.

[CuseCubFan69]

How old is Rogers.....3? One game and he changes his mind. As Baker says, you have to look at the whole picture which is 4 years of terrible decisions while in Chicago. Seriously, this team HAS to replace all the people in charge and if Hendry/MacPhail extend Baker they are more baseball ignorant than I think they already are.

[Backtobanks]

Actually in the article, he hinted that Baker is as good as gone for next year.

[mul21]

Phil Rogers / The Trib[/url]"]

The Cubs certainly didn't play the Houston Astros this week like they were 16 games below .500 and in their developmental, get-it-over-with mode. Manager Dusty Baker pushed his players as if they were in the middle of a playoff race, and they responded with compelling baseball, particularly in the 18-inning, all-hands-on-deck victory Tuesday night.

 

It's enough to make you wonder—and I've wondered before—whether getting rid of the well-credentialed Baker would be a step in the right direction. A new manager for 2007 won't fix the organization's greatest institutional failing, which is a lack of stability. But it indeed does appear that the Cubs will get their fifth new manager since Don Baylor left in 2002 and 22nd (including fill-ins) since Leo Durocher had the job from 1966-72.

 

The only thing I agree with is that Dusty is far from the only problem with the Cubs. I'd like to see Hendry & MacPhail hit the road, too, but that seems unlikely this off-season.

 

Apparently he's unable to do basic research either.

[RynoRules]

I don't think he's waffling - his personal opinion (no matter how much we disgaree with it) has always been that Baker should be brought back, but he always qualified that opinion by stating that all signs point to him hitting the road (today's column is no exception). I really don't see the big deal here, other than Hendry's comments sure make it sound like Baker is as good as gone, which is something to be happy about, IMO.

[soapy]

Baker may not be the biggest problem the Cubs have, but he's certainly one of them (and a major one at that). Bringing him back would be completely idiotic (and not surprising).

 

Also, I love how people get all over Ramirez, Prior, Wood, etc. for not being there when the Cubs "needed them most". However, once Baker (in the eyes of some) starts getting guys to play well while the team is 20 games under, he deserves another shot!?!?

[Productive Outs]

Personally, I would like to see them get a chance to put a team on the field like the '03 team... that has limited injuries. Or has injuries to guys who can easily be replaced.

 

In all seriousness, I am willing to give Baker another shot. One thing I will never do is blame him for the injuries. What I will do though, is blame the poor play over the last 3 seasons (2004. 2005, and 2006) on injuries to key players. Prior, Wood, Garciaparra, Lee. I think that had these guys not went down as they did... we would have seen the Cubs in the playoffs at least one time since 2003.

 

i'm not sure you can simply write off baker as not having a part in the injuries of prior and wood.

[goonys evil twin]

Baker should be gone, that's not even debatable at this point. It's worthless to even discuss the merits of such a move.

 

 

 

My biggest problem is Roger's moronic belief that the Cubs biggest problem has been a lack of stability. Ownership has been steady for a few decades now. Andy MacPhail and his regime has been in charge for over a dozen years. The GM has been a major part of this organization for nearly as long. The Hendry/Baker combo has been working together for 4 years now. Yes, they had two interim managers after Baylor was booted, but that has nothing to do with the big picture idea of stability. They've had basically 3 managers over the past 12 years and have been much more stable than Boston. As stable as the White Sox or Anaheim. They've been more stable than the Dodgers and Mets.

 

Stability is not what this organization lacks. That's just an ignorant claim that can only be made by completely ignoring the facts.

[Soriano12]

can someone please shut Phil Rodgers up.

 

Thanks

[Laura]

How old is Rogers.....3? One game and he changes his mind. As Baker says, you have to look at the whole picture which is 4 years of terrible decisions while in Chicago. Seriously, this team HAS to replace all the people in charge and if Hendry/MacPhail extend Baker they are more baseball ignorant than I think they already are.

 

Phil Rogers seems to be doing the beat reporting as well as his usual columns while Paul Sullivan is off doing whatever he's doing right now.

[YearofDaCubs]

If he's back, I'm boycotting. The only ticket Baker deserves is one with a destination out of Chicago.

[Jehrico]

This team has not played fundamentally competent baseball since Baker arrived. Period. That in and of itself should be enough to move him out. I've seen too many teams run by him that don't play fundamentally sound baseball. Nor do they always seem prepared on any given day to put out 100%.

 

I won't go so far as to hold Dusty 100% accountable for injuries to our stars, but he certainly has not acted prudently when handling the workload of pitchers. Wood is the case in point. Wood was injury-prone before Baker got here. Not Dusty's fault. However, Wood has been amongst the top of all of baseball in pitcher abuse points when healthy. If you have a guy with a history of shoulder and elbow problems, you don't regularly run him out there to throw 120 pitches a game. It's not just imprudent, it's downright stupid.

 

I blame Dusty for not adapting to the game over the last 20 years. Granted, in his day, guys would throw 15-20 complete games a year while throwing in 4-man rotations, and alot of guys were successful. However, alot of guys fizzled out prematurely too. Some guys have the frame to handle the workload like that (Randy Johnson, maybe Zambrano, time will tell), some guys don't. There's a reason the game has evolved to include closers and 5 man rotations, which you just didn't find when Dusty was making his debut in the majors. The field of statistical analysis and prediction has also come incredibly far within just the last 10 years. I don't think anyone really know what IsoD was in the mid-90s for example. There are now more and better objective statistical tools available at a managers discretion than ever before. Dusty simply refuses to accept and use them, putting him at an huge disadvantage over his peers who do. I'm in no way advocating that statistical analysis should rule 100% of what a manager does, but Dusty doesn't even bother looking at hardly any of the advanced metrics that have come forth in the last several years at all. I'd be amazed if he could even begin to explain what isolated power or patience, or BABIP signifies.

 

My other beef with Baker is that he was supposed to draw all of these big name free agents that would want to sign up to play for him. Name me one big-name FA that has come to Chicago to play for him?

 

That doesn't even begin to address his absolute ineptness at making in-game decisions, or how he plays favorites with certain players (i.e. the bullpen and the bench, see Williamson's comments on the way out, and Neifi in general). Dusty needs to go. Yesterday.

[badger1679666666]

I really wish I could run into Phil Rogers some time. I really wish I could. He's the only one I've seen dumber than Dusty.

[NCCubFan]

In all seriousness, I am willing to give Baker another shot.

I'm not. After last year's losing season, this year was his "one more shot." He failed. Bye-bye.

[A New Era]

In all seriousness, I am willing to give Baker another shot.

I'm not. After last year's losing season, this year was his "one more shot." He failed. Bye-bye.

 

I'm willing to give Baker a shot. . . . . A shot in the ass.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

with a shotgun.

[Wes Mantooth]

Bakers one more chance to improve on a bad season (2005) is almost over. Didn't do any better in 2006, it is time to pack up and get out.

The team playing better the last few weeks, should have nothing to do with Dusty staying.