Managerial Impact--Leyland

[Bruno7481]

Has been a lot of talk about the relative impact a manager has, or may not have on a ballclub.

 

What about Leyland? Did he have an impact on the Tigers?

 

From 71-91 to 95-67? They really didin't add a whole lot to that club outside of Rogers. Guys like Verlander, Zumaya came up to produce.

 

Does Leyland get any credit?

[Jazz]

Has been a lot of talk about the relative impact a manager has, or may not have on a ballclub.

 

What about Leyland? Did he have an impact on the Tigers?

 

From 71-91 to 95-67? They really didin't add a whole lot to that club outside of Rogers. Guys like Verlander, Zumaya came up to produce.

 

Does Leyland get any credit?

 

I think leyland alone deserves maybe 6 or 7 of those wins, but most of it came from those young guys improving so much.

[Guest]

leyland may be a worse manager than dusty. I would say the tigers won despite him not because of him. keeping jones as closer may have cost them the division by itself.

[Bruno7481]

Has been a lot of talk about the relative impact a manager has, or may not have on a ballclub.

 

What about Leyland? Did he have an impact on the Tigers?

 

From 71-91 to 95-67? They really didin't add a whole lot to that club outside of Rogers. Guys like Verlander, Zumaya came up to produce.

 

Does Leyland get any credit?

 

I think Leyland alone deserves maybe 6 or 7 of those wins, but most of it came from those young guys improving so much.

 

In general, I just believe many are quick to blame the manager when things go bad, yet simply point to other factors or refuse to give any significant credit to managers when things go well.

 

I think it is hard to put an exact number of how many wins a manager can contribute, it is an arbitrary number.

 

I do think there is some value in the Tigres organization bringing in a guy like Leyland who was won before. Especially to an organization like the Tigers who have had a pretty brutal recent history. It is more of a mindset, that he would be willing to go there because he thinks they can win. That isn't anything that can be measured, but has to have an impact.

[RonnieWooWooSanto]

Has been a lot of talk about the relative impact a manager has, or may not have on a ballclub.

 

What about Leyland? Did he have an impact on the Tigers?

 

From 71-91 to 95-67? They really didin't add a whole lot to that club outside of Rogers. Guys like Verlander, Zumaya came up to produce.

 

Does Leyland get any credit?

 

How many games did the Tigers lose with Neifi Perez as leadoff hitter?

 

I would attribute those losses to him.

 

Actually, I'm kidding. At least he did recognize that putting Perez at leadoff was not going to work out.

 

I think he inherited a team that just seemed to come in to it's own. That being said, he was the right person at the right time for the Tigers in my opinion.

[third eye]

There probably is something to the notion of setting the tone for a team. Remember when he chewed out his team early in the season for playing like garbage? They tore off a long winning streak right after that. It may be that the team needed that kind of kick in the pants. They really never looked back after that (besides the last week of the season). We never saw anything like that, at least not publicly, out of our manager this year. Not saying that that made the difference in the season, but setting those expectations from someone who was a proven winner in the past might have had some impact.

[Fro]

You guys are seriously underestimating the value of a guy who can push the right buttons for a team. There's more to managing than just filling up a lineup card or making a pitching change at the right time.

[SouthSideRyan]

Has been a lot of talk about the relative impact a manager has, or may not have on a ballclub.

 

What about Baker? Did he have an impact on the Cubs?

 

From 67-95 to 88-74? They really didn't add a whole lot to that club outside of Ramirez. Guys like Prior, Zambrano came up to produce.

 

Does Baker get any credit?

[Magnetic Curses]

You guys are seriously underestimating the value of a guy who can push the right buttons for a team. There's more to managing than just filling up a lineup card or making a pitching change at the right time.

 

detroit led the AL in era this year. i doubt that leyland had much to do with that button.

 

"push the right buttons", what the heck does that even mean?

[Magnetic Curses]

what was the pythagorean win expectancy for detroit this year?

[SouthSideRyan]

95-67, but I don't think that has much of anything to do with a manager's skill.

[Bruno7481]

Has been a lot of talk about the relative impact a manager has, or may not have on a ballclub.

 

What about Baker? Did he have an impact on the Cubs?

 

From 67-95 to 88-74? They really didn't add a whole lot to that club outside of Ramirez. Guys like Prior, Zambrano came up to produce.

 

Does Baker get any credit?

 

Gee, how did you come up with that post? :wink:

 

I'll give DB credit for 2003. I think it is a similar situation to what happened with DET this year. Both teams were coming off of terrrible years. Both teams got a new manager with a history of winning. We'll see how it turns out for the Tigers in the next few years.

 

I think there is something to that. Bringing in a guy who has had success to a team that hasn't tasted much of it. Again, there is no way to accurately measure that, but I think it does exist.

[Magnetic Curses]

95-67, but I don't think that has much of anything to do with a manager's skill.

 

i generally attribute any deviation to manager's skill or ineptness. i don't know why, but i do. i'd say leyland did a pretty good job staying out of the way.

[SouthSideRyan]

I don't really think Baker managed that poorly in '03. He made a few glaring mistakes, but didn't do horrendously. My main point is you can't judge a manager based on one season. (Baker, Piniella, Pena, Girardi, etc.) That's not to say put no stock ever in how a manager does in his first season, but it takes the need to look deeper into the maanger's duties than simply looking at the record the year before and the amount of roster turnover.

[MPrior]

I don't really think Baker managed that poorly in '03.

 

I'd argue that Baker's most egregious and condemnable errors took place in 2003 - running Mark Prior and Kerry Wood into the ground. For all of our ranting about Baker's abuse of Zambrano, Zambrano has never sustained the type of abuse Prior did in 2003. And while all of Baker's moronic in-game decisions may cost the Cubs a few wins over the course of a season, abusing Prior and Wood may have cost the Cubs their entire window of opportunity, to say nothing of potentially ruining two oustandingly promising careers.

[Mephistopheles]

I don't know why Leyland thought he could max his runs scored by batting Carlos Guillen fifth most of the season. Derek Jeter batted second and got about 70 PAs more than Guillen because of it.

[Tracer Bullet]

leyland may be a worse manager than dusty. I would say the tigers won despite him not because of him. keeping jones as closer may have cost them the division by itself.

 

Agreed.

[RynoRules]

I think like most other things, the manager gets too much credit and too much blame. Its most often a combo of several factors. Grain of salt.

[Big Fergie J]

I would say that a manager impacts the outcome of 10% of the regular season games. So thats 16 games. Is he great if that is 14-2 and terrible if that is 2-14 ?? So be it. The majority of that impact, IMO, is the use of the bullpen and starting pitching.

 

In the post-season the impact is bigger.

 

I liked how Leyland used his pitching staff, particulary Kenny Rogers. He didn't pitch him in Yankee Stadium (good move) and he rode him very well in game 3 when a lot of managers would have pulled him before the 8th.

 

I didn't like how Torre "tinkered" with his line-up. Using Sheffield at 1st base was just plain dumb. Then again, when your season is hanging in the balance and the best you can muster up is Jaret Wright you have a bit of a pitching problem.

[soapy]

I don't really think Baker managed that poorly in '03.

 

I'd argue that Baker's most egregious and condemnable errors took place in 2003 - running Mark Prior and Kerry Wood into the ground. For all of our ranting about Baker's abuse of Zambrano, Zambrano has never sustained the type of abuse Prior did in 2003. And while all of Baker's moronic in-game decisions may cost the Cubs a few wins over the course of a season, abusing Prior and Wood may have cost the Cubs their entire window of opportunity, to say nothing of potentially ruining two oustandingly promising careers.

Not to mention getting out-managed by old man river in the 2003 NLDS. Don't want to have to face Lenny Harris, dude.