Who will be the manager? Quade Fired (pg 15)

[Guest]

Pretty much any candidate seriously considered for the job is going to have a good work ethic.

Tim, I am am not going to argue that necessarily, but I would never go as far as to render it meaningless.

A good work ethic is certainly not meaningless.

 

However, if all candidates have a good work ethic, it may not be meaningful as a way to choose amongst the candidates.

[SouthSideRyan]

You don't get to be a major league managerial candidate without a good work ethic. It's a nonsense phrase.

 

Bring on Darren Bush!

[Mark Priors Calves]

It's difficult to objectively measure "work ethic" for managerial candidates, but Lou Piniella's malaise during his final two years as manager of the Cubs could be fairly identified. His attitude when he was a candidate for the position is unclear, but a guy like him at the tail of his career, it wouldn't be a surprise if he was not as dedicated as we was earlier in his career. It's hard to for us to know the quality of work he was doing behind the scenes but it seemed clear that his public persona from around June '09 through the end of his run was apathetic.

[Guest]

Magic Johnson was a great player. He was a tireless worker. Same with Michael Jordan. One was a terrible head coach and the other has been a terrible owner. Unfortunately, being a damn good player and hard worker does not equate to being a good manager.

 

Where did I say that being a great player equated to being a good manager? I said he was a good player and worked extremely hard as a player. Based upon his willingness to work his way through the minors and his supposed work ethic, I think overall that it is a positive. If you listened to Theo since he has been hired, he continually stresses work ethic and the hours that he expects those around him to put in. I can't remember his exact words but they were something to the effect that the Cubs will have one of the hardest working front offices in the league. One can only assume that he is going to want a manager that is willing to work as hard if not harder than he does.

 

And as far as the comments saying hard work does not equal success, I agree, but it is typically a factor in achieving success.

 

 

 

]2. It's great that he recognized that he needed experience before being handed a job. I have no idea how this qualifies him to be manager, though.

 

Later on you call him conceited and full of himself, and here you give him no credit for being humble enough to take a job that frankly was beneath him and work his way up through the system? And how does having minor league coaching experience disqualify him from the job? You may not value minor league experience, but it in no way detracts from his accomplishments.

 

 

I assume you mean minors. His teams had some decent runs, but I have no idea how you can say they outperformed their talent levels without anything to back that up. I could just as easily say that they underperformed without offering any proof.

 

Feel free to do so, but it still doesn't make your argument right.

 

 

Theo specifically stressed "grinding the at bats", defense and playing as one during this interviews. He absolutely does not advocate small ball, sacrificing, etc.

 

Which brings me to something I've wanted to talk about and may expand on in it's own thread at some point. When the White Sox (and others) talk about grinderball or a guy being a grinder, they mean that guy puts maximum effort into the game at all times. It denotes a guy who works really hard.

 

When Theo is talking about grinding at bats, he doesn't mean the same thing. What he's talking about is making the other team work harder. Be patient at the plate, make the opposing pitcher throw more, work harder and leave the game sooner.

 

The fact that he states that players need to learn how to bunt and hit to the left side with a runner on second, is pretty common sense. I'm pretty sure that even Theo stated that batters need to be smart and move the runners. And where does Sandberg say not to be patient at the plate? If the Cubs strategy under Hendry has been advocating swinging and not being patient, and drafting prospects accordingly, how is that Sandberg's fault?

 

You seem to believe Sandberg is a dope and incapable of adapting to new thinking. Once again, the fact that he was able to swallow his pride and ride the buses in the minors and put in the work, tells me that he is more capable of adapting to things than you give him credit for.

 

 

]Now look at Ryno's HOF speech:http://www.cubsnet.com/node/526

 

 

If this validates anything, it's that learning how to bunt and hit and run and turning two is more important than knowing where to find the little red light at the dug out camera.

Is knowing how to bunt more important than knowing where to find the camera? Sure. But is this really the first point you want the manager to make? And are you really saying this is a reason to have him be manager?

 

You missed the point entirely. This quote puts your overly exaggerated obsession with claiming he is a small ball proponent into context. As you point out, his statement is common sense, however, others interpret it as "oohh he mentioned bunting and hit and run, he must love small ball".

 

 

These guys sitting up here did not pave the way for the rest of us so that players could swing for the fences every time up and forget how to move a runner over to third, it's disrespectful to them, to you, and to the game of baseball that we all played growing up. Respect.

 

He's going to have real issues with Jaramillo, who teaches a very aggressive swing. Trying to hit home runs in those situations isn't disrespecting the players who came before. It's not disrespecting the game. It's potentially inefficient within the game, but also potentially beneficial. So is bunting and sacrificing. All the talk of "disrespect" does nothing to make me believe he's going to either be a good manager or connect to the players in the game.

 

Once again, you interpret his quote to make it look as bad as possible. If a guy strikes out going for the fences in a situation where he could get a runner to third it hurts the team. Once again, a simple fundamental that little leaguers are taught.

 

A lot of people say this honor validates my career, but I didn't work hard for validation. I didn't play the game right because I saw a reward at the end of the tunnel. I played it right because that's what you're supposed to do, play it right and with respect.

Seems a little high on himself, doesn't he? Is this the same guy you were portraying as humble because he was willing to coach in the minors?

 

But not so high on himself that he would go back to the minors and start at the ground level? This sounds like a guy that has a perfect attitude for a manager.

 

Sure it is a little over the top, but some of the areas he touched are specific problems that the Cubs constantly struggle with, i.e. moving the runner over, watching for the 3b coach, etc., stressing fundamentals...

Have the Cubs struggled with those things? Sure, at times they have. Does every team struggle with those things at times? yep.

 

To say the Cubs struggled with fundamentals "at times", is like saying Amy Winehouse struggled with addiction "at times".

I'm not really sure you answered any of my questions or refuted any of my challenges. You seem to think I'm not getting the point - I believe I am. You want Sandberg because:

 

1) He's Ryne freaking Sandberg!

2) He wants to stress "fundamentals"

3) He will enforce discipline with the players

4) He'll get them to focus on the team and "playing the game the right way"

 

However, we disagree on the importance of many of these things. And that's where you and I are simply not going to agree. I believe it is much more important for a manager to focus on the things that make big differences in wins and losses (such as controlling the strike zone). I'd prefer not to have a manager obsess over the aesthetic parts of the game such as running hard to first base on all the ground balls.

 

I definitely don't want a manager who feels that someone not running out a grounder is disrespecting the great players of the past (who considers himself one of those very players). It's a self-serving attitude that I feel will get in the way of open communication with the players he needs to lead on a daily basis.

[CUBZ99]

I'm not really sure you answered any of my questions or refuted any of my challenges. You seem to think I'm not getting the point - I believe I am. You want Sandberg because:

 

1) He's Ryne freaking Sandberg!

2) He wants to stress "fundamentals"

3) He will enforce discipline with the players

4) He'll get them to focus on the team and "playing the game the right way"

 

However, we disagree on the importance of many of these things. And that's where you and I are simply not going to agree. I believe it is much more important for a manager to focus on the things that make big differences in wins and losses (such as controlling the strike zone). I'd prefer not to have a manager obsess over the aesthetic parts of the game such as running hard to first base on all the ground balls.

 

I definitely don't want a manager who feels that someone not running out a grounder is disrespecting the great players of the past (who considers himself one of those very players). It's a self-serving attitude that I feel will get in the way of open communication with the players he needs to lead on a daily basis.

 

I guess I just misunderstood the original post that I responded to:

 

For those backing Sandberg (or at least arguing that the case against him is weak), what is the argument for Sandberg that couldn't be used for 100 other candidates out there?

 

I even started my reply with :

 

I'm not advocating for the Cubs to hire Sandberg, however, I do think that for some reason that is a certain amount of irrational dislike/criticism toward the guy.

 

Sandberg would probably not be at the top of my list, and I am no way am stating that he is the best candidate out there. You asked for why people thought that case against him was weak. I still think the case against him is over-exaggerated and fairly weak.

 

I don't think it is fair to say simply because I don't think he is a terrible choice that I merely want him because

"He's Ryne freaking Sandberg!"

If anything you seem to disregard him and write him off simply because he is Ryne Sandberg. You even go so far to call him conceited and misrepresent his quotes. I get the fact that he says some corny old school things and that those things are taboo here, but in no way do I think he is the clueless manager that you pretend he is.

 

At the end of the day, I think that if Theo hires him that we can all be confident that he is willing to buy into Theo's vision for the future.

[gus_dog]

It's difficult to objectively measure "work ethic" for managerial candidates, but Lou Piniella's malaise during his final two years as manager of the Cubs could be fairly identified. His attitude when he was a candidate for the position is unclear, but a guy like him at the tail of his career, it wouldn't be a surprise if he was not as dedicated as we was earlier in his career. It's hard to for us to know the quality of work he was doing behind the scenes but it seemed clear that his public persona from around June '09 through the end of his run was apathetic.

 

I could not agree more. But on the subject of work ethic, (I'm talking players here) there are many who subsist on skill alone, and when their skills start to decline (with age), they cannot continue at a high level, because they do not have the work ethic it takes to maintain it. I will not name specific players, however I am sure that you can think of a few where this applies.

 

Now, with managers, I would say that LaRussa, for one, has a tremendous work ethic. The guy is ALWAYS on it. Always. Others - not so much. Your example of Lou is spot on, although at that stage in his career, he can be forgiven, somewhat, but management should have acted sooner, IMO.

 

In any event, I still believe that it is an important part of the makeup of candidates, and to ignore it is not something you would want to do. Sure, most of these guys will have a strong work ethic, but some will be better than others, and I would be willing to bet that those stronger guys in that area, are generally more successful.

 

It is not meaningless. Not necessarily the most important factor, but a player nonetheless.

[RammyFanny]

Cubs manager Mike Quade met last week with team president Theo Epstein and general manager Jed Hoyer, but his status for 2012 — and that of his coaching staff — was not resolved, according to a major-league source.

 

Quade, who is under contract through next season, is scheduled to meet again with team brass this week, at which point he’s expected to learn whether he’ll be back.

 

Quade, who is 95-104 since taking over in August 2010 (71-91 in ’11), could not be reached for comment.

 

Hoyer and Jason McLeod, senior vice president for scouting and player development, are to be introduced at a news conference Tuesday at Wrigley Field. Both were hired from the San Diego Padres in a deal announced Wednesday.

 

It was not known whether Quade’s status would be clarified during that news conference.

 

If Epstein and Hoyer make a change, at least two potential targets, Padres manager Bud Black and Tampa Bay Rays manager Joe Maddon, do not appear to be available.

 

The deal with the Padres that allowed the Cubs to hire away two top executives included an agreement that the Cubs could not pursue anyone else from the organization.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/8512088-573/mike-quade-set-to-meet-with-cubs-again-this-week.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I'm going to weigh in on the Sandberg discussion....

 

and I'm pretty sure I've made these points last offseason as well.

 

 

First, Sandberg was my favorite player of all time. It's never been close for me. That being said, besides nostaglia, I'm not a fan of Sandberg being manager. Here are my thoughts....

 

1. Sandberg's published thoughts, comments, etc are enough to give me pause. It wouldn't matter if they came from Sandberg or any other player, manager, or coach. Those comments make me wary. Those alone probably aren't enough, but they are enough to make me nervouse about how he would manage.

 

2. While Sandberg has had some limited success in the minors, he still has only limited amount of experience. He has no major league coaching experience and he's done no work with an experienced, successful manager. This also makes me nervous.

 

3. I believe the Cubs, a team with the resources and storied history, should be able to find a manager with more experience at the major league level.

 

4. Finally, the success of great players as managers is limited.

 

In addition to all these points, I don't get the idea that Sandberg has paid his dues. Yes, he's managed in the minors for five years, but if he weren't Sandberg, I doubt anybody would be clamoring to hire a minor league manager with only five years experience and no experience as a major league coach, no matter how strong his playing career.

 

Sandberg may make a great manager, but I would not be willing to take that risk based on his current body of work. Now, if the next manager of the Cubs wanted to add Sandberg to his staff, I'd be in favor.

[bhogg]

Well said, Vance. You and I are on the same page -- favorite player, etc.

 

I wouldn't slit my wrists if they hire Ryno, but I do think there are better managers out there.

 

At the end of the day, I have full confidence in the new management to get whomever they feel is best for the job. If that means they hire a fan favorite like Sandberg, I would have to believe he would have full understanding of what is expected out of him from a organizational philosophy stand point. That should be the case with anyone in that position.

[17 Seconds]

every time you post, i inevitably watch your kid's swing like 10 times

[North Iowa Cub]

What makes him a managerial candidate other than the fact that he really, really wants to be one?

 

He used his HOF speech to call out a non-white Cubs player.

 

What non-white player was that?

 

http://lifeafterlebron.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/sammy-sosa-white.jpg

 

http://lifeafterlebron.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/sammy-sosa-white.jpg

[Elrhino]

Can someone explain to me what a "good manager" does that doesn't involve vague intangibles? I see an adverse reaction to all things small ball, yet overwhelming praise for Joe Madden who utilizes a lot of small ball concepts. In 2010 he was slighly below average in sac bunts, but right up there in Ozzie Guillen territory as far as stolen base attempts.

[jersey cubs fan]

In 2010 he was slighly below average in sac bunts, but right up there in Ozzie Guillen territory as far as stolen base attempts.

 

If you have prolific base stealers (Crawford and Upton) you are going to stand out in the SB category. That's not exactly manager specific. They were really successful at those SB attempts in 2010 (79%).

 

What you don't want is a lot of caught stealing.

[Sammy Sofa]

Can someone explain to me what a "good manager" does that doesn't involve vague intangibles? I see an adverse reaction to all things small ball, yet overwhelming praise for Joe Madden who utilizes a lot of small ball concepts. In 2010 he was slighly below average in sac bunts, but right up there in Ozzie Guillen territory as far as stolen base attempts.

 

I'm sure the argument could be made that this is due in no small part to those types of decisions, but look at the Rays' offense this year and last. They're right around league average when it comes to OPS. They're not a team that can just slug their way to victory.

[Guest]

In 2010 he was slighly below average in sac bunts, but right up there in Ozzie Guillen territory as far as stolen base attempts.

 

If you have prolific base stealers (Crawford and Upton) you are going to stand out in the SB category. That's not exactly manager specific. They were really successful at those SB attempts in 2010 (79%).

 

What you don't want is a lot of caught stealing.

 

Yep. Stealing is ok as long as you don't get caught.

[gus_dog]

I'm going to weigh in on the Sandberg discussion....

 

and I'm pretty sure I've made these points last offseason as well.

 

 

First, Sandberg was my favorite player of all time. It's never been close for me. That being said, besides nostaglia, I'm not a fan of Sandberg being manager. Here are my thoughts....

 

1. Sandberg's published thoughts, comments, etc are enough to give me pause. It wouldn't matter if they came from Sandberg or any other player, manager, or coach. Those comments make me wary. Those alone probably aren't enough, but they are enough to make me nervouse about how he would manage.

2. While Sandberg has had some limited success in the minors, he still has only limited amount of experience. He has no major league coaching experience and he's done no work with an experienced, successful manager. This also makes me nervous.

3. I believe the Cubs, a team with the resources and storied history, should be able to find a manager with more experience at the major league level.

4. Finally, the success of great players as managers is limited.

In addition to all these points, I don't get the idea that Sandberg has paid his dues. Yes, he's managed in the minors for five years, but if he weren't Sandberg, I doubt anybody would be clamoring to hire a minor league manager with only five years experience and no experience as a major league coach, no matter how strong his playing career.

 

Sandberg may make a great manager, but I would not be willing to take that risk based on his current body of work. Now, if the next manager of the Cubs wanted to add Sandberg to his staff, I'd be in favor.

 

Very well put Vance. Sandberg is not my favourite Cubs player, but I do really like him. I agree completely with what you wrote - it makes perfect sense.

[Omar]

ESPN CHICAGO -- Chicago Cubs president of baseball operations Theo Epstein met with manager Mike Quade in a seven-hour meeting on Thursday to discuss his status with the team, according to sources familiar with the situation.

 

In a get-to-know-you meeting, Quade met with Epstein and general manager Jed Hoyer in Chicago, according to sources. ESPNChicago.com originally reported the meeting took place in Bradenton, Fla.

Edited October 31, 2011 by Omar

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I still think there's a very decent chance Quade stays. He's cheap, and presumably he knows he won't be getting another managing shot, so he'll listen to whatever Epstein tells him to do.

 

Fits in with Theo's Theme of using the resources the Cubs already have in place.

[Omar]

How does a "get-to-know-you meeting" last 7 hours?

[inari]

I do too, honestly. I think he's going to be the manager next year.

[Brian]

How does a "get-to-know-you meeting" last 7 hours?

 

 

From what was said in the press conference that is about how long the first Theo/Tom meeting was. I guess Theo is a talker... Though seven hours seems a little more reasonable for a meeting with a guy you want to give 20 million dollars to run your billion dollar business.

[Rob]

How does a "get-to-know-you meeting" last 7 hours?

 

Maybe they played 36 and went to dinner?

[17 Seconds]

ESPN CHICAGO -- Chicago Cubs president of baseball operations Theo Epstein met with manager Mike Quade in a seven-hour meeting on Thursday to discuss his status with the team, according to sources familiar with the situation.

 

In a get-to-know-you meeting, Quade met with Epstein and general manager Jed Hoyer in Chicago, according to sources. ESPNChicago.com originally reported the meeting took place in Bradenton, Fla.

 

i live in bradenton. brb time to do some recon

[Guest]

ESPN CHICAGO -- Chicago Cubs president of baseball operations Theo Epstein met with manager Mike Quade in a seven-hour meeting on Thursday to discuss his status with the team, according to sources familiar with the situation.

 

In a get-to-know-you meeting, Quade met with Epstein and general manager Jed Hoyer in Chicago, according to sources. ESPNChicago.com originally reported the meeting took place in Bradenton, Fla.

 

i live in bradenton. brb time to do some recon

 

 

Except the report about Bradenton was wrong. :wink:

[17 Seconds]

figures. most of bradenton is trash.