What's wrong with Lou?

[Laura]

The Score has been playing soundbites all day of talks this morning with Peter Gammons and Steve Stone.

 

Gammons believe Piniella would be the best hire for the Cubs.

 

Stone thought Piniella was the best available manager, but wasn't sure of his fit with the Cubs in terms of the Cubs being able to turn it around soon. There's some speculation that Piniella wouldn't be interested absent a significant boost in payroll.

[Laura]

This is for anyone who was worried about agreeing with Phil Rogers the last few times out.

 

Phil Rogers / The Trib[/url]"] While Hendry goes through the formality of interviewing internal candidates Mike Quade and Pat Listach, there's little doubt - none, really - that he was leaning toward Girardi after spending Monday with him at Wrigley Field. The Peoria, Ill., native and two-term Cub would have been an almost automatic choice after going 78-84 with a Florida team that seemed certain to lose 100. There's no doubt he "gets" the Cubs, which interim team President John McDonough said would be a handy attribute for a new manager.

 

But is Girardi the best choice when Piniella is an option?

 

Long term, yes. But this isn't a long term, rebuilding sort of assignment, no matter what the 2006 standings suggest it should be. The Cubs have this crazy idea about being the Detroit Tigers of 2007. That's why Hendry needs to make the toughest of decisions - breaking Girardi's heart and doing everything he can to persuade Piniella that Chicago is the place to assure himself of a spot as a Hall of Fame manager.

 

As long as Piniella is looking for a place to manage, Hendry must do everything possible to get him. His dilemma is that he cannot lose Girardi while going after Piniella, who might believe that even he could not succeed with a pitching staff built around Carlos Zambrano and a bunch of promises to get better. There's your nightmare scenario right there.

 

I sometimes wonder if the last guy who interviews will get the job.

 

 

On the flip side, maybe that's Henry being secretive.

[rocket]

This is for anyone who was worried about agreeing with Phil Rogers the last few times out.

 

Phil Rogers / The Trib[/url]"] While Hendry goes through the formality of interviewing internal candidates Mike Quade and Pat Listach, there's little doubt - none, really - that he was leaning toward Girardi after spending Monday with him at Wrigley Field. The Peoria, Ill., native and two-term Cub would have been an almost automatic choice after going 78-84 with a Florida team that seemed certain to lose 100. There's no doubt he "gets" the Cubs, which interim team President John McDonough said would be a handy attribute for a new manager.

 

But is Girardi the best choice when Piniella is an option?

 

Long term, yes. But this isn't a long term, rebuilding sort of assignment, no matter what the 2006 standings suggest it should be. The Cubs have this crazy idea about being the Detroit Tigers of 2007. That's why Hendry needs to make the toughest of decisions - breaking Girardi's heart and doing everything he can to persuade Piniella that Chicago is the place to assure himself of a spot as a Hall of Fame manager.

 

As long as Piniella is looking for a place to manage, Hendry must do everything possible to get him. His dilemma is that he cannot lose Girardi while going after Piniella, who might believe that even he could not succeed with a pitching staff built around Carlos Zambrano and a bunch of promises to get better. There's your nightmare scenario right there.

 

I sometimes wonder if the last guy who interviews will get the job.

 

 

On the flip side, maybe that's Henry being secretive.

 

so hendry's already decided to emulate the tigers strategy of "old manager to fire up team"?

 

let's hope they lose the world series so he reconsiders.

[CuseCubFan69]

I wonder what the chances are of Hendry trying to copy the World Series winner is? Maybe 100%? This would simply prove he has no plan if it's true and has no idea on how to run a team.

[Laura]

John Shea / San Francisco Chronicle[/url]"] Lou Piniella, who was interviewed by Giants general manager Brian Sabean on Tuesday, has three possibilities to manage next year. He wants to work for a team that'll win, and it's anyone's guess if the Giants will be better than the Cubs or Rangers. His dream job would have been with the Yankees, and one option is to remain with Fox for another year and wait for Joe Torre to complete his contract -- or get canned if the Yankees start slowly. ...

 

It's believed Piniella's first choice is the Cubs, whose GM, Jim Hendry, wants Piniella. But higher management prefers Joe Girardi, the fans' choice.

[J.R.]

Who is a manager all the geniuses on here would like to see? All I see is people cutting to shreds all the choices that are out there. All this stuff on here people say about all the badness of Dusty's managing, he had a piss poor team to deal with in the first place. It always amazes me how Dusty goes from hero in 2003 to navel lint three years later. There are not many managers that wouldn't have rode Prior and Wood like a bad horse during that stretch. And the Cubs chances are far more dependent on the players they have than the guy that's managing them.

 

I'm entertained by all the negativity on here actually.

 

Have you moved out of Gary yet?

[Iceblink]

On Mike & Mike this morning, Jason Stark said that Piniella's choice is the Cubs, and that the Cubs are "very intrigued" by him.

 

He said Piniella has said the Cubs aren't that far away and that they could be next year's Tigers.

 

What worries me about that is:

1) It would seem to vastly overestimate the quality of the club and might lead to plugging in so-so veterans because "we're not that far away." Who'll be next year's Todd Hollandsworth in LF? Maybe Todd Hollandsworth.

 

2) Sucking up to Hendry like that might just work.

[goonys evil twin]

Who is a manager all the geniuses on here would like to see? All I see is people cutting to shreds all the choices that are out there. All this stuff on here people say about all the badness of Dusty's managing, he had a piss poor team to deal with in the first place. It always amazes me how Dusty goes from hero in 2003 to navel lint three years later. There are not many managers that wouldn't have rode Prior and Wood like a bad horse during that stretch. And the Cubs chances are far more dependent on the players they have than the guy that's managing them.

 

I'm entertained by all the negativity on here actually.

 

Have you moved out of Gary yet?

 

Only the short-sighted thought of Dusty as a hero in 2003. He had nothing to do with the limited success of that team, other than putting his own limits on how successful they could be down the road.

[RynoRules]

I guess if its a choice between Joe and Lou, I'll take Joe, but I'd rather have Bochy.

[C.C.]

I guess if its a choice between Joe and Lou, I'll take Joe, but I'd rather have Bochy.

 

I'd rather have him sign ARAM before anything...

[The Voice of Reason]

You want some choices, I've made plenty.

 

1. Larry Dierker. See my thread on Dierker if you want reasons. Or better yet, buy his book, This Ain't Brain Surgery. You can get if for under 10 bucks on Amazon.

 

2. Davey Johnson. He's currently employed by the Nats as a consultant. He may be done managing. I don't know. If he desires a spot and can be released from his contract with the Nationals, I'd take him second.

 

3. Bobby Valentine.

 

I'd be interested to hear some of what Ron Washington has to say about the game. If I liked what I heard, he could be a good choice.

 

I'm not opposed to Brenly. I'd hope that he had learned some since his stint in Arizona.

 

There's probably some other guys that I'd liketo have as well. Since I want a manager who understands run expectancy, there's just not an abundance of those in the managerial pool.

 

 

Vance - Why do you think Dierker is not under consideration by any of the teams with openings?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

You want some choices, I've made plenty.

 

1. Larry Dierker. See my thread on Dierker if you want reasons. Or better yet, buy his book, This Ain't Brain Surgery. You can get if for under 10 bucks on Amazon.

 

2. Davey Johnson. He's currently employed by the Nats as a consultant. He may be done managing. I don't know. If he desires a spot and can be released from his contract with the Nationals, I'd take him second.

 

3. Bobby Valentine.

 

I'd be interested to hear some of what Ron Washington has to say about the game. If I liked what I heard, he could be a good choice.

 

I'm not opposed to Brenly. I'd hope that he had learned some since his stint in Arizona.

 

There's probably some other guys that I'd liketo have as well. Since I want a manager who understands run expectancy, there's just not an abundance of those in the managerial pool.

 

 

Vance - Why do you think Dierker is not under consideration by any of the teams with openings?

 

I don't really know. Maybe he isn't interested. Maybe teams think he is so connected with the Houston franchise that he wouldn't work anywhere else. Maybe he's made some enemies in the industry. To be honest, I don't know. All I know is if I were GM, I'd make a call. See what his interest is. If he declined, sobeit.

[Derwood]

Hendry should emulate the Tigers. Really good young pitching and...ah nuts.

[Pinktermite]

If we were going to emulate the Tigers, we'd include a fiery manager along with that young pitching...like Lou Piniella?

 

Just thought I'd stoke the coals of controversy on this cold thursday morn.