What is people's fascination with Girardi about?

[Fred Hornkohl]

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

 

Gee, Vance.... who might that be ?? :wink:

Edited October 3, 2006 by Fred Hornkohl

[Rob]

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

 

And here I was thinking that when I said "just about" everybody would understand that it was in deference to you and your Dierker fetish.

[A New Era]

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

 

Gee, Vance.... who might that be ?? :wink:

 

Hahaha. Vance, you've got to pick. Give us your pick to click on Girardi, Brenly, or Lou. Because my gut tells me it's gonna be one of those guys. .

[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.

 

Gee, Vance.... who might that be ?? :wink:

 

Hahaha. Vance, you've got to pick. Give us your pick to click on Girardi, Brenly, or Lou. Because my gut tells me it's gonna be one of those guys. .

 

I gave my pick in another thread, but will do it here as well.

 

If I'm choosing those three, I reluctantly take Brenly. I don't want Lou in any capacity. I'm worried about the issues surrounding Girardi and I don't want a Showalter-esque control freak.

 

I don't think Brenly is a great choice, but I could at least be optimistic that some of Len's beliefs have rubbed off on him. I could also hope that like Dierker, he learned some from his time in the booth.

[A New Era]

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

 

Gee, Vance.... who might that be ?? :wink:

 

Hahaha. Vance, you've got to pick. Give us your pick to click on Girardi, Brenly, or Lou. Because my gut tells me it's gonna be one of those guys. .

 

I gave my pick in another thread, but will do it here as well.

 

If I'm choosing those three, I reluctantly take Brenly. I don't want Lou in any capacity. I'm worried about the issues surrounding Girardi and I don't want a Showalter-esque control freak.

 

I don't think Brenly is a great choice, but I could at least be optimistic that some of Len's beliefs have rubbed off on him. I could also hope that like Dierker, he learned some from his time in the booth.

 

I'm having a hard time choosing. Because I see all three as improvements over Baker. They all have positives.

 

Girardi - seems to work well with rookies and is a leader

Brenely - has stated his man love for murton and the importance of OBP

Sweet Lou - would be entertaining as heck to watch. :lol:

[hardcorecubfan]

 

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.

 

agree, it then becomes what you do with that leadership role with the knowledge base you have and the ability to assimilate to new situation that will keep you in a successful leadership role. I see Girardi as a man that is on that precipous.

[Laura]

Barry Rozner on Girardi:

 

The list of items on which I disagreed with Andy MacPhail was long, punctuated with the signing over and over again of Sammy Sosa to long-term contracts.

 

But one of the things MacPhail insisted on changing, upon arriving in Chicago, was that the Cubs do their homework properly — due diligence, he called it — and on that matter, no one could disagree.

 

The problem is, they didn’t always do it extensively, and Dusty Baker’s work in San Francisco is just one example. Turns out, he was not as advertised.

 

Now, the reverse may be true with Joe Girardi, who has been the target of a vicious smear campaign in Miami, as ownership has tried to pave Girardi’s way out of town.

 

The Cubs, however, will do their homework this time and find out Girardi’s side of the story.

 

Instead of hearing just from the many people he knows in Florida, GM Jim Hendry will find out himself and invite Girardi to Chicago for an interview, after he’s fired this morning by the Marlins.

 

The Cubs will need to move quickly, because Washington intends to go hard after the former Cubs catcher.

 

If Hendry ultimately decides to go a different direction, like perhaps toward a Lou Piniella or a Bob Brenly type, let’s hope it’s because he wants to win immediately, and not because he took the word of Marlins people he thinks are his friends.

 

That’s how they wound up with Baker, whose term in Chicago will be remembered for the brilliant young arms that were abused in 2003 and the sleepy postseason managing job that same October, when the Cubs gave away the NLCS.

[baseball7897]

Girardi better be managing the Cubs in 07.

[CubinNY]

Girardi better be managing the Cubs in 07.

 

Why?

[baseball7897]

Girardi better be managing the Cubs in 07.

 

Why?

 

Are you kidding me? He managed a team with a $14 million dollar payroll, and had them in contention for the wild card untill the last 2 weeks in the season. Everyone predicted the marlins to lose over 100 games this year.

[Flames24Rulz]

Girardi better be managing the Cubs in 07.

 

Girardi or Brenly, just say no to Piniella.

[CubinNY]

Girardi better be managing the Cubs in 07.

 

Why?

 

Are you kidding me? He managed a team with a $14 million dollar payroll, and had them in contention for the wild card untill the last 2 weeks in the season. Everyone predicted the marlins to lose over 100 games this year.

 

The team didn't have a winning season, had some of the best young talent in baseball and he was responsible for sending one of their best young pitchers out after a long rain delay. The pitcher then had a season ending arm injury in the same game.

 

He is infatuated with the sac bunt, made poor personnel decisions at the begining of the year and was told to make changes.

 

I don't see any reason why the cubs better pick him.

[baseball7897]

Girardi better be managing the Cubs in 07.

 

Why?

 

Are you kidding me? He managed a team with a $14 million dollar payroll, and had them in contention for the wild card untill the last 2 weeks in the season. Everyone predicted the marlins to lose over 100 games this year.

 

The team didn't have a winning season, had some of the best young talent in baseball and he was responsible for sending one of their best young pitchers out after a long rain delay. The pitcher then had a season ending arm injury in the same game.

 

He is infatuated with the sac bunt, made poor personnel decisions at the begining of the year and was told to make changes.

 

I don't see any reason why the cubs better pick him.

 

:shock:

 

The Marlins were the first team in major league baseball history to be 20 games under .500, and later whould go on to be over .500 in the same seaon. Girardi is a leader.

 

BTW, sac bunts are part of the game. Its called team baseball.

[Flames24Rulz]

Girardi better be managing the Cubs in 07.

 

Why?

 

Are you kidding me? He managed a team with a $14 million dollar payroll, and had them in contention for the wild card untill the last 2 weeks in the season. Everyone predicted the marlins to lose over 100 games this year.

 

The team didn't have a winning season, had some of the best young talent in baseball and he was responsible for sending one of their best young pitchers out after a long rain delay. The pitcher then had a season ending arm injury in the same game.

 

He is infatuated with the sac bunt, made poor personnel decisions at the begining of the year and was told to make changes.

 

I don't see any reason why the cubs better pick him.

I'll agree with you about the point about throwing a pitcher out there after a rain delay...that was a stupid decision that definitely backfired.

 

But I believe Girardi's Marlins was the first team in over 100 years to be 20 games under .500 at one point in the season and then later make it over .500 in the same season. The team was picked to win 50 games...60 would've been a miracle before the season started. Remember, this was a team with "some of the best talent in baseball" that was being picked to win only 50 games the whole season. He nearly had this team win the Wild Card this year before they faded with two weeks left. Give credit where credit is due, that is extremely impressive.

 

I didn't really want Girardi last year as I felt he was unproven, but he proved himself this year. Everything that I have heard from his players were positive things about Girardi; don't let that dumb owner fool you. The guy is a solid manager IMO.

[baseball7897]

BTW, sac bunts are part of the game. Its called team baseball.

 

In many situations, it's also called wasteful baseball.

 

Not true at all.

[Andy]

Girardi better be managing the Cubs in 07.

 

Why?

 

Are you kidding me? He managed a team with a $14 million dollar payroll, and had them in contention for the wild card untill the last 2 weeks in the season. Everyone predicted the marlins to lose over 100 games this year.

 

The team didn't have a winning season, had some of the best young talent in baseball and he was responsible for sending one of their best young pitchers out after a long rain delay. The pitcher then had a season ending arm injury in the same game.

 

He is infatuated with the sac bunt, made poor personnel decisions at the begining of the year and was told to make changes.

 

I don't see any reason why the cubs better pick him.

 

:shock:

 

The Marlins were the first team in major league baseball history to be 20 games under .500, and later whould go on to be over .500 in the same seaon. Girardi is a leader.

 

BTW, sac bunts are part of the game. Its called team baseball.

Who's to say the 20-games-under team wasn't caused by Girardi as opposed to the team that caught fire?*

 

* - I'm a proponent of Girardi as manager, just asking the tough questions.

 

Sac bunts are stupid baseball probably 90+ percent of the time they're made.

[CubinNY]

Girardi is a leader.

 

What does that mean?

[baseball7897]

Girardi is a leader.

 

What does that mean?

 

Again, are you kidding me? Not too hard to understand what that means.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

The Girardi slobber-fest is becoming sickening.

 

There are better candidates than Showalter Jr.

[Soriano12]

The pitcher then had a season ending arm injury in the same game.

 

I didn't realize forearm tightness was a season ending injury?

 

And here this whole time I though they were overly cautions since there was only 2 1/2 weeks left in the season and playoff hopes had faded.

 

:roll:

[CubinNY]

Girardi is a leader.

 

What does that mean?

 

Again, are you kidding me? Not too hard to understand what that means.

 

What does leadership have to do with winning baseball. I might add that if it does have anything to do with it, Girardi hasn't demonstrated it because his team didn't win and had more talent than the Cubs.

 

Did he will those rookie pitchers to pitch well? Or Cabrerea to put up another monster season? Did he will the Red Sox to trade him one of the best young SS in the game? Did his leadership ability lead to getting Slappy for a certian talented lefthander and two other pretty decent young pitchers?

[Mizzou]

Girardi is a leader.

 

What does that mean?

 

Again, are you kidding me? Not too hard to understand what that means.

 

What does leadership have to do with winning baseball.

You really don't think that a good leader vs. someone who is lousy at leading makes a difference?

[CubinNY]

The pitcher then had a season ending arm injury in the same game.

 

I didn't realize forearm tightness was a season ending injury?

 

And here this whole time I though they were overly cautions since there was only 2 1/2 weeks left in the season and playoff hopes had faded.

 

:roll:

 

Strained legiment in his arm, not a cramp. and there is/was no excuse for it. And at the time they we're well in the hunt.

 

I see your roll and raise you two :roll: :roll: :roll:

[RichHillIsABeast]

Girardi better be managing the Cubs in 07.

 

Why?

 

Are you kidding me? He managed a team with a $14 million dollar payroll, and had them in contention for the wild card untill the last 2 weeks in the season. Everyone predicted the marlins to lose over 100 games this year.

 

The team didn't have a winning season, had some of the best young talent in baseball and he was responsible for sending one of their best young pitchers out after a long rain delay. The pitcher then had a season ending arm injury in the same game.

 

He is infatuated with the sac bunt, made poor personnel decisions at the begining of the year and was told to make changes.

 

I don't see any reason why the cubs better pick him.

 

The Marlins' season needs to be put in context.

 

Only one team in the last 10 years has managed a winning record with a payroll less than $15M. The 2006 Marlins had the 4th best record of the smallest payroll teams in that time frame.

 

Yes, Girardi was given a team with talent, but it was largely unproven ML talent. Either it was flat out luck or Girardi (and his coaching staff) had something to do with it.

[Fred Hornkohl]

Girardi better be managing the Cubs in 07.

 

Why?

 

Are you kidding me? He managed a team with a $14 million dollar payroll, and had them in contention for the wild card untill the last 2 weeks in the season. Everyone predicted the marlins to lose over 100 games this year.

 

The team didn't have a winning season, had some of the best young talent in baseball and he was responsible for sending one of their best young pitchers out after a long rain delay. The pitcher then had a season ending arm injury in the same game.

 

He is infatuated with the sac bunt, made poor personnel decisions at the begining of the year and was told to make changes.

 

I don't see any reason why the cubs better pick him.

 

You may be overstating the case here. I don't think I would call that an infatuation.

 

 1  Colorado        119
2  Houston         100
3  Chicago Cubs     84
4  San Francisco    80
5  Atlanta          78
6  NY Mets          77
7  Washington       76
8  Florida          76
9  St. Louis        71
10  Cincinnati       66
11  LA Dodgers       66
12  Pittsburgh       62
13  Arizona          61
14  San Diego        59
15  Milwaukee        58
16  Philadelphia     57