What is people's fascination with Girardi about?

[USSoccer]

Girardi should be judged on his skills as a manager, not on where he happened to play and go to college. That kind of stuff is a meaningless strawman used to appease an uninformed fanbase.

 

From what I can tell, he's an old school, move runners along, play your gut kind of manager, which I'd rather not see.

 

Judging his managing skills on just one year of managing with the Marlins isn't that great an idea either. You're probably not going to get a complete picture.

 

It's better than basing your call on the fact that he went to NU 20 years ago, and was a pretty below average Cub for 7 seasons. If you're hiring him to be a bench coach, whatever. If he's your manager, you judge him on his management experience, no matter how short it may be.

[RichHillIsABeast]

Girardi should be judged on his skills as a manager, not on where he happened to play and go to college. That kind of stuff is a meaningless strawman used to appease an uninformed fanbase.

 

From what I can tell, he's an old school, move runners along, play your gut kind of manager, which I'd rather not see.

 

Well, that's what you're going to see b/c the people doing the hiring subscribe to that baseball philosophy. No Dierker. Maybe a Francona, but he's seemingly not available anymore.

 

Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers.

 

We need his fire and discipline in this clubhouse. A fat lefty setup man who complains about the fans needs to get his priorities straight. Winning is what matters, not keeping the media, fans, or the Front Office happy. Girardi made that clear in Florida.

[USSoccer]

Girardi should be judged on his skills as a manager, not on where he happened to play and go to college. That kind of stuff is a meaningless strawman used to appease an uninformed fanbase.

 

From what I can tell, he's an old school, move runners along, play your gut kind of manager, which I'd rather not see.

 

Well, that's what you're going to see b/c the people doing the hiring subscribe to that baseball philosophy. No Dierker. Maybe a Francona, but he's seemingly not available anymore.

 

Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers.

 

We need his fire and discipline in this clubhouse. A fat lefty setup man who complains about the fans needs to get his priorities straight. Winning is what matters, not keeping the media, fans, or the Front Office happy. Girardi made that clear in Florida.

 

Are we really back to the "fire and discipline" argument? Those are not the 2 traits that kept us from winning this season. Those are not traits than really ever make a difference between a winning team and a losing team. Those are not important traits in a manager of a baseball team.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Well, if we're going for fire and discipline, might as well choose Piniella over Girardi. Hell, get Lloyd McClendon in here!

[A New Era]

What's your beef with Joe Girardi. You speak as if you honestly loathe the guy.

 

I fear that he's an old school sac bunter. But I don't know that. And I don't loathe him.

 

My beef is with people who try to use his Chicagoness as a reason why he'd be a good manager.

 

Has he done that alot in Florida this year? What would you think about Bob Brenly as cubs skipper? He's atleast gone on record stating the importance of OBP in a good line-up.

[wastra]

My biggest reason for wanting Girardi (or someone of his stature) is that it wouldn't cost much to get him. We see what happens when you sign a big-name manager to a long contract for sizeable managerial bucks...it's tougher (for spineless GMs like Hendry) to financially justify letting him go early.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Girardi should be judged on his skills as a manager, not on where he happened to play and go to college. That kind of stuff is a meaningless strawman used to appease an uninformed fanbase.

 

From what I can tell, he's an old school, move runners along, play your gut kind of manager, which I'd rather not see.

 

Judging his managing skills on just one year of managing with the Marlins isn't that great an idea either. You're probably not going to get a complete picture.

 

It's better than basing your call on the fact that he went to NU 20 years ago, and was a pretty below average Cub for 7 seasons. If you're hiring him to be a bench coach, whatever. If he's your manager, you judge him on his management experience, no matter how short it may be.

 

You don't judge him just based on his management experience. And his solid education might be nice addition, but yes, you can't determine whether he'll be a good manager or not based on that either.

[USSoccer]

Well, if we're going for fire and discipline, might as well choose Piniella over Girardi. Hell, get Lloyd McClendon in here!

 

Piniella: Manager

Girardi: Bench Coach

McLendon: Pitching Coach

Hugh Douglas: Hitting Coach

Mike Ditka: Bullpen Coach

 

World Series, here we come!

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Well, if we're going for fire and discipline, might as well choose Piniella over Girardi. Hell, get Lloyd McClendon in here!

 

Piniella: Manager

Girardi: Bench Coach

McLendon: Pitching Coach

Hugh Douglas: Hitting Coach

Mike Ditka: Bullpen Coach

 

World Series, here we come!

 

No. You must find room for Lee Elia in there somewhere. And Larry Bowa too!

[USSoccer]

Girardi should be judged on his skills as a manager, not on where he happened to play and go to college. That kind of stuff is a meaningless strawman used to appease an uninformed fanbase.

 

From what I can tell, he's an old school, move runners along, play your gut kind of manager, which I'd rather not see.

 

Judging his managing skills on just one year of managing with the Marlins isn't that great an idea either. You're probably not going to get a complete picture.

 

It's better than basing your call on the fact that he went to NU 20 years ago, and was a pretty below average Cub for 7 seasons. If you're hiring him to be a bench coach, whatever. If he's your manager, you judge him on his management experience, no matter how short it may be.

 

You don't judge him just based on his management experience. And his solid education might be nice addition, but yes, you can't determine whether he'll be a good manager or not based on that either.

 

I'd say his management experience should be heavily weighted. It's direct experience. It's more relevant than any other factor.

[RynoRules]

People seem to be putting a lot of emphasis on being an ex-Cub, when talking about potential candidates for different leadership positions. A broadcaster, okay, I can see the point. But the Cubs have a history of losing, and every single ex-Cubs' ties to the Cubs revolve around losing. Not to mention, the vast majority of them have very little, or no, managerial/coaching/personel history, even though people think they should get those jobs.

 

If you want to introduce one of these guys to a role on the coaching staff, go right ahead. But there is absolutely no point in fielding a front office headed by Stone, with Giradi managing, Sandberg, Grace, Banks and Jenkins coaching.

 

The next manager doesn't need to know Chicago to get the job done. He doesn't need to know how to win with the Cubs, because nobody has won with the Cubs. He doesn't need to know how much the fans care. He just needs to be a good manager, regardless of past affiliation.

 

I completely agree with this. The reasons I am interested in him have more to do with his rep. for holding players accountable and the fact that he sat next to Torre for all those years as a player and coach. Plus I like catchers as managers in general (with some exceptions).

[CubinNY]

My biggest reason for wanting Girardi (or someone of his stature) is that it wouldn't cost much to get him. We see what happens when you sign a big-name manager to a long contract for sizeable managerial bucks...it's tougher (for spineless GMs like Hendry) to financially justify letting him go early.

 

That is about the best reason I've heard yet. Especially if Hendry is fired at the end of the 2007 season or if the Cubs are sold.

[goonys evil twin]

My biggest reason for wanting Girardi (or someone of his stature) is that it wouldn't cost much to get him. We see what happens when you sign a big-name manager to a long contract for sizeable managerial bucks...it's tougher (for spineless GMs like Hendry) to financially justify letting him go early.

 

That is about the best reason I've heard yet. Especially if Hendry is fired at the end of the 2007 season or if the Cubs are sold.

 

It's pretty cool that we're thinking about how easy it will be to fire the next guy when discussing who should be hired.

[CubinNY]

My biggest reason for wanting Girardi (or someone of his stature) is that it wouldn't cost much to get him. We see what happens when you sign a big-name manager to a long contract for sizeable managerial bucks...it's tougher (for spineless GMs like Hendry) to financially justify letting him go early.

 

That is about the best reason I've heard yet. Especially if Hendry is fired at the end of the 2007 season or if the Cubs are sold.

 

It's pretty cool that we're thinking about how easy it will be to fire the next guy when discussing who should be hired.

 

I know. It's terrible to think that way, but my optimism about this club is shot.

[RichHillIsABeast]

Girardi should be judged on his skills as a manager, not on where he happened to play and go to college. That kind of stuff is a meaningless strawman used to appease an uninformed fanbase.

 

From what I can tell, he's an old school, move runners along, play your gut kind of manager, which I'd rather not see.

 

Well, that's what you're going to see b/c the people doing the hiring subscribe to that baseball philosophy. No Dierker. Maybe a Francona, but he's seemingly not available anymore.

 

Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers.

 

We need his fire and discipline in this clubhouse. A fat lefty setup man who complains about the fans needs to get his priorities straight. Winning is what matters, not keeping the media, fans, or the Front Office happy. Girardi made that clear in Florida.

 

Are we really back to the "fire and discipline" argument? Those are not the 2 traits that kept us from winning this season. Those are not traits than really ever make a difference between a winning team and a losing team. Those are not important traits in a manager of a baseball team.

 

Yeah, we do need discipline, but that wasn't the main part of my post.

 

"Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers."

[CubinNY]

Girardi should be judged on his skills as a manager, not on where he happened to play and go to college. That kind of stuff is a meaningless strawman used to appease an uninformed fanbase.

 

From what I can tell, he's an old school, move runners along, play your gut kind of manager, which I'd rather not see.

 

Well, that's what you're going to see b/c the people doing the hiring subscribe to that baseball philosophy. No Dierker. Maybe a Francona, but he's seemingly not available anymore.

 

Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers.

 

We need his fire and discipline in this clubhouse. A fat lefty setup man who complains about the fans needs to get his priorities straight. Winning is what matters, not keeping the media, fans, or the Front Office happy. Girardi made that clear in Florida.

 

Are we really back to the "fire and discipline" argument? Those are not the 2 traits that kept us from winning this season. Those are not traits than really ever make a difference between a winning team and a losing team. Those are not important traits in a manager of a baseball team.

 

Yeah, we do need discipline, but that wasn't the main part of my post.

 

"Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers."

What does that mean?

 

Girardi isn't planning a battle or running for governor.

 

To me what matters is:

 

(a) what are his in game strategies

(b) what is his track record

© how does he handle a pitching staff

 

I can't say that I don't want Giardi, but one of the reasons to want or not want him has nothing to do with his rah, rahness.

[USSoccer]

Girardi should be judged on his skills as a manager, not on where he happened to play and go to college. That kind of stuff is a meaningless strawman used to appease an uninformed fanbase.

 

From what I can tell, he's an old school, move runners along, play your gut kind of manager, which I'd rather not see.

 

Well, that's what you're going to see b/c the people doing the hiring subscribe to that baseball philosophy. No Dierker. Maybe a Francona, but he's seemingly not available anymore.

 

Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers.

 

We need his fire and discipline in this clubhouse. A fat lefty setup man who complains about the fans needs to get his priorities straight. Winning is what matters, not keeping the media, fans, or the Front Office happy. Girardi made that clear in Florida.

 

Are we really back to the "fire and discipline" argument? Those are not the 2 traits that kept us from winning this season. Those are not traits than really ever make a difference between a winning team and a losing team. Those are not important traits in a manager of a baseball team.

 

Yeah, we do need discipline, but that wasn't the main part of my post.

 

"Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers."

 

We need discipline less than we need better players. Much less. Furthermore, Baker is a bad manager. His bad managing has nothing to do with leadership. I have no idea what kind of manager Girardi is, but leadership is something you earn over time. No manager is going to walk into a situation and be considered a leader. It's impossible to say whether or not Girardi would accomplish this better than anyone else.

 

Finally, how is Girardi going to lead this team by example? He wasn't a very good baseball player; is he going to show his players how to take pitches?

[RichHillIsABeast]

Girardi should be judged on his skills as a manager, not on where he happened to play and go to college. That kind of stuff is a meaningless strawman used to appease an uninformed fanbase.

 

From what I can tell, he's an old school, move runners along, play your gut kind of manager, which I'd rather not see.

 

Well, that's what you're going to see b/c the people doing the hiring subscribe to that baseball philosophy. No Dierker. Maybe a Francona, but he's seemingly not available anymore.

 

Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers.

 

We need his fire and discipline in this clubhouse. A fat lefty setup man who complains about the fans needs to get his priorities straight. Winning is what matters, not keeping the media, fans, or the Front Office happy. Girardi made that clear in Florida.

 

Are we really back to the "fire and discipline" argument? Those are not the 2 traits that kept us from winning this season. Those are not traits than really ever make a difference between a winning team and a losing team. Those are not important traits in a manager of a baseball team.

 

Yeah, we do need discipline, but that wasn't the main part of my post.

 

"Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers."

 

We need discipline less than we need better players. Much less. Furthermore, Baker is a bad manager. His bad managing has nothing to do with leadership. I have no idea what kind of manager Girardi is, but leadership is something you earn over time. No manager is going to walk into a situation and be considered a leader. It's impossible to say whether or not Girardi would accomplish this better than anyone else.

 

Finally, how is Girardi going to lead this team by example? He wasn't a very good baseball player; is he going to show his players how to take pitches?

 

More discipline isn't a bad thing on this team. That should be obvious if you've watched Baker the last 4 years.

 

Girardi made his players run in ST (hard) and got out there with them. He lifts weights with them, etc. Leading by example.

 

It's not "go on guys, go get it done." It's "follow me." Managers don't do anything but put players in positions where they can potentially succeed based on natural ability. Leaders push players to do more with their God given talents. Leaders make the whole function better, not just the whole function.

 

No one is going to walk into a situation and be a leader? Leaders just are. They'll assert themselves sooner rather than later (like Girardi did in ST with the Marlins). I guess you've never run into a real leader. It's pretty obvious you're not one yourself from your confusion on this issue (no offense).

 

You're down on Girardi b/c you don't know what his philosophies are in certain areas. Fair enough. I'd imagine we'll hear more in the interview process.

[USSoccer]

 

No one is going to walk into a situation and be a leader? Leaders just are. They'll assert themselves sooner rather than later (like Girardi did in ST with the Marlins). I guess you've never run into a real leader. It's pretty obvious you're not one yourself from your confusion on this issue (no offense).

You're down on Girardi b/c you don't know what his philosophies are in certain areas. Fair enough. I'd imagine we'll hear more in the interview process.

 

That's one of the more insulting things to be directed at me on this site in a long time. As someone who does lead people day in and day out, I'm aware of what leadership is, and it is something that's earned. It just doesn't happen because you attempt to assert leadership-type qualities.

[RichHillIsABeast]

"Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type.

 

Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers."

What does that mean?

 

Girardi isn't planning a battle or running for governor.

 

To me what matters is:

 

(a) what are his in game strategies

(b) what is his track record

© how does he handle a pitching staff

 

I can't say that I don't want Giardi, but one of the reasons to want or not want him has nothing to do with his rah, rahness.

 

What does that mean? It's called leadership.

 

(a) Girardi's in game strategies are old school, just like anyone else we'll see in a Cubs management position with Hendry doing the hiring. That's a given.

 

(b) Girardi's track record is as good as can be expected for his age. It's ability that matters, not age or experience. Experience can be a good indicator of an older person's ability, but lack of experience shouldn't be mistaken for inability.

 

© Willis and a bunch of rookies (many from AA) winning 10+ games apiece is a good sign. Those rookies weren't considered by many to be ML ready and it took the right coaching (mostly pitching coach who was chosen by Girardi I believe) to get that success. A lot of rawish talent developed quickly under Girardi's watch.

 

With the amount of young Cub pitching coming up in the next couple of years, I'd like someone with some success overseeing the development of young arms successfully.

 

* I don't cite Girardi's fire as the main reason for his hire, but it certainly doesn't hurt. Same with discipline.

[RichHillIsABeast]

 

No one is going to walk into a situation and be a leader? Leaders just are. They'll assert themselves sooner rather than later (like Girardi did in ST with the Marlins). I guess you've never run into a real leader. It's pretty obvious you're not one yourself from your confusion on this issue (no offense).

You're down on Girardi b/c you don't know what his philosophies are in certain areas. Fair enough. I'd imagine we'll hear more in the interview process.

 

That's one of the more insulting things to be directed at me on this site in a long time. As someone who does lead people day in and day out, I'm aware of what leadership is, and it is something that's earned. It just doesn't happen because you attempt to assert leadership-type qualities.

 

I explictly stated that "leaders just are." How you get that leadership can simply be asserted out of that is amazing.

[USSoccer]

 

No one is going to walk into a situation and be a leader? Leaders just are. They'll assert themselves sooner rather than later (like Girardi did in ST with the Marlins). I guess you've never run into a real leader. It's pretty obvious you're not one yourself from your confusion on this issue (no offense).

You're down on Girardi b/c you don't know what his philosophies are in certain areas. Fair enough. I'd imagine we'll hear more in the interview process.

 

That's one of the more insulting things to be directed at me on this site in a long time. As someone who does lead people day in and day out, I'm aware of what leadership is, and it is something that's earned. It just doesn't happen because you attempt to assert leadership-type qualities.

 

I explictly stated that "leaders just are." How you get that leadership can simply be asserted out of that is amazing.

 

They'll assert themselves sooner rather than later (like Girardi did in ST with the Marlins).

[RichHillIsABeast]

 

No one is going to walk into a situation and be a leader? Leaders just are. They'll assert themselves sooner rather than later (like Girardi did in ST with the Marlins). I guess you've never run into a real leader. It's pretty obvious you're not one yourself from your confusion on this issue (no offense).

You're down on Girardi b/c you don't know what his philosophies are in certain areas. Fair enough. I'd imagine we'll hear more in the interview process.

 

That's one of the more insulting things to be directed at me on this site in a long time. As someone who does lead people day in and day out, I'm aware of what leadership is, and it is something that's earned. It just doesn't happen because you attempt to assert leadership-type qualities.

 

I explictly stated that "leaders just are." How you get that leadership can simply be asserted out of that is amazing.

 

They'll assert themselves sooner rather than later (like Girardi did in ST with the Marlins).

 

I still don't get exactly where our miscommunication is coming from.

 

I believe that leadership is more innate than taught. It can be improved, but never instilled in someone that doesn't have it. You can learn how to be a manager, but not a leader. That's what I mean by "leaders just are."

 

If you put a leader in a group of people, guess what they tend to do? Lead. I haven't met a leader yet who didn't quickly insert himself/herself into that role (where the "sooner rather than later" comes in). The trust and other factors that come with leading a group of individuals at peak performance (who may be leaders themselves) does come with time. Is that what you were saying? I definitely would agree with that. Leading is definitely a process, but guys who are true leaders tend to grab the reins rather quickly.

 

Sorry for offending you earlier, US.

[Rob]

While I'm fairly fantatical in my analytical approach to baseball, a manager's job is extremely hard to divine from the numbers.

 

Even taking all the right tactics doesn't necessarily make for a great manager. Motivation and player control in general are just as much a part of the job, if not moreso nowadays.

 

Sure, I'd love a motivator that doesn't abuse the hit-and-run, but there's nobody on the market like that right now (unless Earl Weaver decides retirement sucks).

 

Given the choices out there right now, Girardi is near the top of the list. He doesn't do the infuriating things as much as guys like Frank and Sweet Lou, and he seems like he'll get the most out of these guys.

 

Is he the ideal manager? No. I don't think anybody's saying that.

 

But he is just about the best available, and that counts for something.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Girardi is not the best available. He may the best among the ones the Cubs will interview, but there are better ones available.