Rick Renteria Named New Cubs Manager

[ConstableRabbit]

Because no owner in the history of sports has *ever* foolishly thought he could improve on his front office's decisions with just a little input?

 

There's a chasm between "just a little input" and "forcing your GM to send a top prospect and several million dollars of a slashed payroll to get a specific manager that most of the bleacher crowd doesn't know by name". Even more so when half the reason that GM left his old job was due to similar power struggles getting in the way of his job.

 

Yeah - I would say a great majority of average Cubs fans couldn't even tell you who the Rays manager was and wouldn't be much more impressed by his hire than any from the Acta, Hinch, Renteria grab bag. Girardi was probably the only one they could hire and possibly get a big reaction due to his being a popular former Cubs player and originally being from the area.

 

I haven't looked into the metrics so it might just be a small sample size from the games I have watched but when I take my kid to the games Maddon seems to sacrifice a lot for my liking and doesn't seem to an overly sabermetric guy. He is not "old school" when it comes to player discipline and general attitude but does not strike me as overly progressive regarding strategy. He did spend a lot of years with Scioscia so maybe he has a hard time letting go of some of those philosophies.

 

I get the feeling he really doesn't want to leave Tampa. I think his laid back attitude fits well in a low pressure market like Tampa and he wouldn't really like going to New York, Chicago, etc where he is under more pressure. Also, the Rays management pretty much gives him freedom to do whatever he wants and I think he likes the arrangement quite a bit.

What does that even mean? The majority of Cubs fans know who Joe Maddon is.

[KingCubsFan]

Because no owner in the history of sports has *ever* foolishly thought he could improve on his front office's decisions with just a little input?

 

There's a chasm between "just a little input" and "forcing your GM to send a top prospect and several million dollars of a slashed payroll to get a specific manager that most of the bleacher crowd doesn't know by name". Even more so when half the reason that GM left his old job was due to similar power struggles getting in the way of his job.

 

Yeah - I would say a great majority of average Cubs fans couldn't even tell you who the Rays manager was and wouldn't be much more impressed by his hire than any from the Acta, Hinch, Renteria grab bag. Girardi was probably the only one they could hire and possibly get a big reaction due to his being a popular former Cubs player and originally being from the area.

 

I haven't looked into the metrics so it might just be a small sample size from the games I have watched but when I take my kid to the games Maddon seems to sacrifice a lot for my liking and doesn't seem to an overly sabermetric guy. He is not "old school" when it comes to player discipline and general attitude but does not strike me as overly progressive regarding strategy. He did spend a lot of years with Scioscia so maybe he has a hard time letting go of some of those philosophies.

 

I get the feeling he really doesn't want to leave Tampa. I think his laid back attitude fits well in a low pressure market like Tampa and he wouldn't really like going to New York, Chicago, etc where he is under more pressure. Also, the Rays management pretty much gives him freedom to do whatever he wants and I think he likes the arrangement quite a bit.

What does that even mean? The majority of Cubs fans know who Joe Maddon is.

But they wouldn't care that much if he was hired. He's not a Cubs icon, never won a World Series, and isn't known as a fiery manager. If Ricketts wanted to hire a manager purely to try and bring excitement, he'd be better off hiring Ozzie.

[Guest]

Because no owner in the history of sports has *ever* foolishly thought he could improve on his front office's decisions with just a little input?

 

There's a chasm between "just a little input" and "forcing your GM to send a top prospect and several million dollars of a slashed payroll to get a specific manager that most of the bleacher crowd doesn't know by name". Even more so when half the reason that GM left his old job was due to similar power struggles getting in the way of his job.

 

Yeah - I would say a great majority of average Cubs fans couldn't even tell you who the Rays manager was and wouldn't be much more impressed by his hire than any from the Acta, Hinch, Renteria grab bag. Girardi was probably the only one they could hire and possibly get a big reaction due to his being a popular former Cubs player and originally being from the area.

 

I haven't looked into the metrics so it might just be a small sample size from the games I have watched but when I take my kid to the games Maddon seems to sacrifice a lot for my liking and doesn't seem to an overly sabermetric guy. He is not "old school" when it comes to player discipline and general attitude but does not strike me as overly progressive regarding strategy. He did spend a lot of years with Scioscia so maybe he has a hard time letting go of some of those philosophies.

 

I get the feeling he really doesn't want to leave Tampa. I think his laid back attitude fits well in a low pressure market like Tampa and he wouldn't really like going to New York, Chicago, etc where he is under more pressure. Also, the Rays management pretty much gives him freedom to do whatever he wants and I think he likes the arrangement quite a bit.

What does that even mean? The majority of Cubs fans know who Joe Maddon is.

 

You really underestimate the meatballery of the average sports fan (of any team). DIS JOE MADDON FROM TAMPA...WHO IS DIS GUY?

 

Seriously, though... I wouldn't say vast majority but I wouldn't be surprised if over half of people identifying themselves as Cubs fans wouldn't have a clue if you asked them who the manager of the Rays is.

[Guest]

I mean I've had conversations with people who seemed to really care while watching a game who thought that Brian Bogusevic was an actual prospect.

[Illini Iceman]

Because no owner in the history of sports has *ever* foolishly thought he could improve on his front office's decisions with just a little input?

 

There's a chasm between "just a little input" and "forcing your GM to send a top prospect and several million dollars of a slashed payroll to get a specific manager that most of the bleacher crowd doesn't know by name". Even more so when half the reason that GM left his old job was due to similar power struggles getting in the way of his job.

 

Yeah - I would say a great majority of average Cubs fans couldn't even tell you who the Rays manager was and wouldn't be much more impressed by his hire than any from the Acta, Hinch, Renteria grab bag. Girardi was probably the only one they could hire and possibly get a big reaction due to his being a popular former Cubs player and originally being from the area.

 

I haven't looked into the metrics so it might just be a small sample size from the games I have watched but when I take my kid to the games Maddon seems to sacrifice a lot for my liking and doesn't seem to an overly sabermetric guy. He is not "old school" when it comes to player discipline and general attitude but does not strike me as overly progressive regarding strategy. He did spend a lot of years with Scioscia so maybe he has a hard time letting go of some of those philosophies.

 

I get the feeling he really doesn't want to leave Tampa. I think his laid back attitude fits well in a low pressure market like Tampa and he wouldn't really like going to New York, Chicago, etc where he is under more pressure. Also, the Rays management pretty much gives him freedom to do whatever he wants and I think he likes the arrangement quite a bit.

What does that even mean? The majority of Cubs fans know who Joe Maddon is.

 

I am not so sure. You might be giving average fans a bit too much credit.

[SouthSideRyan]

I mean I've had conversations with people who seemed to really care while watching a game who thought that Brian Bogusevic was an actual prospect.

 

That's different. That's a guy showing up from the minors in the middle of the season. Anyone who doesn't follow the minors(or noticed his cups of coffee with Houston) is going to assume he's a prospect. Maddon is one of the most visible managers out there, and he's continuously led a team of kids to the playoffs, so he knows how to win the right way (by not spending any money)

 

Nevermind that the morons will do as their sportswriter overlords tell them to, and dumb as those guys may be, they know Maddon

[Guest]

I mean I've had conversations with people who seemed to really care while watching a game who thought that Brian Bogusevic was an actual prospect.

 

That's different. That's a guy showing up from the minors in the middle of the season. Anyone who doesn't follow the minors(or noticed his cups of coffee with Houston) is going to assume he's a prospect. Maddon is one of the most visible managers out there, and he's continuously led a team of kids to the playoffs, so he knows how to win the right way (by not spending any money)

 

I mean he is pretty visible, but being that I follow baseball generally pretty closely and there are still teams whose managers I couldn't name, I could totally see the casual fans who aren't lunatics like us not knowing who Maddon, even being one of the more visible managers, is.

[jersey cubs fan]

I mean I've had conversations with people who seemed to really care while watching a game who thought that Brian Bogusevic was an actual prospect.

 

That's different. That's a guy showing up from the minors in the middle of the season. Anyone who doesn't follow the minors(or noticed his cups of coffee with Houston) is going to assume he's a prospect. Maddon is one of the most visible managers out there, and he's continuously led a team of kids to the playoffs, so he knows how to win the right way (by not spending any money)

 

I mean he is pretty visible, but being that I follow baseball generally pretty closely and there are still teams whose managers I couldn't name, I could totally see the casual fans who aren't lunatics like us not knowing who Maddon, even being one of the more visible managers, is.

 

As SSR pointed out, the media would [expletive] over the idea of these guys paying up for a manager. They are going to knock just about any "cheap" option and talk about such a manager as a pawn of the front office. So a media friendly manager with a career winning record, 2 manager of the year awards, several 90 win seasons, 4 playoff appearances and a pennant is going to be portrayed as an aggressive "win now" move. Trading a prospect for him would be portrayed as the recent strategy finally paying off.

 

The message sent to the masses will be Cubs finally move away from acquiring prospects to using their prospects in an effort to start winning at the major league level.

[Guest]

I mean I've had conversations with people who seemed to really care while watching a game who thought that Brian Bogusevic was an actual prospect.

 

That's different. That's a guy showing up from the minors in the middle of the season. Anyone who doesn't follow the minors(or noticed his cups of coffee with Houston) is going to assume he's a prospect. Maddon is one of the most visible managers out there, and he's continuously led a team of kids to the playoffs, so he knows how to win the right way (by not spending any money)

 

I mean he is pretty visible, but being that I follow baseball generally pretty closely and there are still teams whose managers I couldn't name, I could totally see the casual fans who aren't lunatics like us not knowing who Maddon, even being one of the more visible managers, is.

 

As SSR pointed out, the media would [expletive] over the idea of these guys paying up for a manager. They are going to knock just about any "cheap" option and talk about such a manager as a pawn of the front office. So a media friendly manager with a career winning record, 2 manager of the year awards, several 90 win seasons, 4 playoff appearances and a pennant is going to be portrayed as an aggressive "win now" move. Trading a prospect for him would be portrayed as the recent strategy finally paying off.

 

The message sent to the masses will be Cubs finally move away from acquiring prospects to using their prospects in an effort to start winning at the major league level.

 

 

I really don't see this message reaching much less bringing back cub fans that stopped paying attention. Joe Maddon does not carry that name recognition outside those that are still paying attention. If you post a headline that says Cubs hire Joe Maddon, average fan will say who? If this was there strategy, they should go for a Jim Leyland.

[jersey cubs fan]

I really don't see this message reaching much less bringing back cub fans that stopped paying attention. Joe Maddon does not carry that name recognition outside those that are still paying attention. If you post a headline that says Cubs hire Joe Maddon, average fan will say who? If this was there strategy, they should go for a Jim Leyland.

 

Two things:

 

1) I don't think any manager is going to actually bring back fans. I just think that paying $5m for a manager is a cheap way to make positive headlines in the offseason.

 

2) They aren't just going to post a headline and leave it there. It would be the storyline of the offseason. Kaplan would be talking about it every day. That show formerly known as Chicago Tribune Live will repeat that the Cubs finally stepped it up and are now serious about trying. He will be paraded around at the convention. Every average fan will read/hear/see his resume at every opportunity.

[SouthSideRyan]

2) They aren't just going to post a headline and leave it there. It would be the storyline of the offseason. Kaplan would be talking about it every day. That show formerly known as Chicago Tribune Live will repeat that the Cubs finally stepped it up and are now serious about trying. He will be paraded around at the convention. Every average fan will read/hear/see his resume at every opportunity.

 

Yep. Freakin Sveum was put on the cover of the schedule his first season. (There was the whole Castro rapey thing, moving him off of it, but still.

[Illini Iceman]

2) They aren't just going to post a headline and leave it there. It would be the storyline of the offseason. Kaplan would be talking about it every day. That show formerly known as Chicago Tribune Live will repeat that the Cubs finally stepped it up and are now serious about trying. He will be paraded around at the convention. Every average fan will read/hear/see his resume at every opportunity.

 

Yep. Freakin Sveum was put on the cover of the schedule his first season. (There was the whole Castro rapey thing, moving him off of it, but still.

 

And the tickets were really flying off the shelf.

[SouthSideRyan]

2) They aren't just going to post a headline and leave it there. It would be the storyline of the offseason. Kaplan would be talking about it every day. That show formerly known as Chicago Tribune Live will repeat that the Cubs finally stepped it up and are now serious about trying. He will be paraded around at the convention. Every average fan will read/hear/see his resume at every opportunity.

 

Yep. Freakin Sveum was put on the cover of the schedule his first season. (There was the whole Castro rapey thing, moving him off of it, but still.

 

And the tickets were really flying off the shelf.

 

Oh, no, it would be a spectacular failure, hence the continued loss of revenue and payroll

[davell]

Lets say we're 45-55, Fans have certainly given up on the season, attendance is dropping.....How much of an effect(if any) would bringing up Javy and Bryant for the rest of the year have? Lets say they play averagish, putting up mid .700 type OPS's? Is it enough to stop the apathy and cycle back enough to make a difference in spending the following year?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Lets say we're 45-55, Fans have certainly given up on the season, attendance is dropping.....How much of an effect(if any) would bringing up Javy and Bryant for the rest of the year have? Lets say they play averagish, putting up mid .700 type OPS's? Is it enough to stop the apathy and cycle back enough to make a difference in spending the following year?

 

It's a risk-reward thing, because if they Vitters, then you've got an even bigger problem for next year.

[SouthSideRyan]

I think any increase would be negligible. Corey Patterson, Felix Pie, Josh Vitters argle bargle.

[Sammy Sofa]

Lets say we're 45-55, Fans have certainly given up on the season, attendance is dropping.....How much of an effect(if any) would bringing up Javy and Bryant for the rest of the year have? Lets say they play averagish, putting up mid .700 type OPS's? Is it enough to stop the apathy and cycle back enough to make a difference in spending the following year?

 

It's a risk-reward thing, because if they Vitters, then you've got an even bigger problem for next year.

 

Might as well never bring them up.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Lets say we're 45-55, Fans have certainly given up on the season, attendance is dropping.....How much of an effect(if any) would bringing up Javy and Bryant for the rest of the year have? Lets say they play averagish, putting up mid .700 type OPS's? Is it enough to stop the apathy and cycle back enough to make a difference in spending the following year?

 

It's a risk-reward thing, because if they Vitters, then you've got an even bigger problem for next year.

 

Might as well never bring them up.

 

Or just do it when you think so for baseball reasons and not for a cheap boost.

[Guest]

ABTY says the Cubs have interviewed Tony Pena.

[Sammy Sofa]

Lets say we're 45-55, Fans have certainly given up on the season, attendance is dropping.....How much of an effect(if any) would bringing up Javy and Bryant for the rest of the year have? Lets say they play averagish, putting up mid .700 type OPS's? Is it enough to stop the apathy and cycle back enough to make a difference in spending the following year?

 

It's a risk-reward thing, because if they Vitters, then you've got an even bigger problem for next year.

 

Might as well never bring them up.

 

Or just do it when you think so for baseball reasons and not for a cheap boost.

 

Yeah, but they could always "Vitters" regardless of how ready they may seem.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Lets say we're 45-55, Fans have certainly given up on the season, attendance is dropping.....How much of an effect(if any) would bringing up Javy and Bryant for the rest of the year have? Lets say they play averagish, putting up mid .700 type OPS's? Is it enough to stop the apathy and cycle back enough to make a difference in spending the following year?

 

It's a risk-reward thing, because if they Vitters, then you've got an even bigger problem for next year.

 

Might as well never bring them up.

 

Or just do it when you think so for baseball reasons and not for a cheap boost.

 

Yeah, but they could always "Vitters" regardless of how ready they may seem.

 

Never mind.

[Sammy Sofa]

I appreciate that you saw the folly of your ways.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I appreciate that you saw the folly of your ways.

I cannot stop staring at that damn signature! I don't even want to know how many times I've watched it loop.

[SouthSideRyan]

ABTY says the Cubs have interviewed Tony Pena.

 

Why?

[treebird]

ABTY says the Cubs have interviewed Tony Pena.

 

Why?

 

hoyer lost a bet so theo made him hang out with this moron for a whole afternoon