Article: So, What Exactly Makes Craig Counsell So Much Better Than David Ross?

[Bertz]

2 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

How many of the guys who were under 1.4fWAR were any good anywhere else? Not like they come to the brewers with great numbers before getting there and then suck? All I am saying is, IMO, he gets the most out of a very ordinary group of players he is given. And, generally pitchers seem to thrive in Milw. Of all those pitchers with those great era’s none of them were big names prior to Milw. So they either got results from journeyman pen arms or system guys. I expect the Cubs pen will be better next year, even if they acquire journeyman arms, as they have done in the past. 

It's very weird to me that you're giving this credit to Counsell and not the front office and/or pitching coach?

[Rcal10]

7 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

To be clear, I'm crediting Counsell for getting 9 more wins out of a team that was measurably worse than the Cubs.

Everyone wants to talk about the Cubs RD and how close the team is to being a contender. The Cubs and Brewers had the exact same expected W/L of 90-72. The Brewers won 92 games and the Cubs won 83 games. Which team would you say was managed better?

Exactly. The fact is I didn’t hate Ross. I thought he was ok. But to me, for whatever reason or reasons, Counsell somehow gets better results with lesser talent. Will be nice to see if the Cubs give him actual talent and see how he does. 

[squally1313]

2 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

How many of the guys who were under 1.4fWAR were any good anywhere else? Not like they come to the brewers with great numbers before getting there and then suck? All I am saying is, IMO, he gets the most out of a very ordinary group of players he is given. And, generally pitchers seem to thrive in Milw. Of all those pitchers with those great era’s none of them were big names prior to Milw. So they either got results from journeyman pen arms or system guys. I expect the Cubs pen will be better next year, even if they acquire journeyman arms, as they have done in the past. 

I don't even know where the goalposts are anymore. You started by saying they play their home grown prospects, theoretically their relievers. Absent Devin Williams (wow, impressive that Counsell recognized that talent), that isn't true. Then I point to how the offensive prospects haven't turned into anything under Counsell, and it turns out those were just bad players regardless. I get it, all the players suck without Counsell, so any player that doesn't suck is because of Counsell. 

[Rcal10]

Just now, Bertz said:

It's very weird to me that you're giving this credit to Counsell and not the front office and/or pitching coach?

I actually give credit to Counsell AND his coaching staff. As for the front  they seem to provide a lot of journeyman players who then somekne win enough games to win the division. So is that the manager and coaches or the FO. 
 

I just think he is an upgrade over Ross. Not sure why there is so much push back on that statement. How many teams wanted Counsell when he became available? How many now want Ross? And, again, I didn’t hate Ross. I just think Counsell is better and he has a track record to prove it. 

[squally1313]

11 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

To be clear, I'm crediting Counsell for getting 9 more wins out of a team that was measurably worse than the Cubs.

Everyone wants to talk about the Cubs RD and how close the team is to being a contender. The Cubs and Brewers had the exact same expected W/L of 90-72. The Brewers won 92 games and the Cubs won 83 games. Which team would you say was managed better?

Can we talk about how FG projected the Brewers to win 84 games and the Cubs to win 75 games? Under that metric, seems like the performance was pretty even? 

You're not going to be able to point to any substantial evidence that one run records are at all sustainable or predictable going forward. Anecdotally, the Cubs had a disproportionate amount of blowout wins. That's what drives the advanced statistics being so favorable for the Cubs. There's an argument that you should discount those extra runs against position players or the back of the bullpen. Fine, but there goes your argument that the Cubs are better/equal to Milwaukee. Otherwise you're just dinging David Ross for the players grouping their runs in a very suboptimal way over the course of a season. 

[Rcal10]

5 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

I don't even know where the goalposts are anymore. You started by saying they play their home grown prospects, theoretically their relievers. Absent Devin Williams (wow, impressive that Counsell recognized that talent), that isn't true. Then I point to how the offensive prospects haven't turned into anything under Counsell, and it turns out those were just bad players regardless. I get it, all the players suck without Counsell, so any player that doesn't suck is because of Counsell. 

So what point are you trying to make? Did the Cubs make a mistake signing Counsell? Was Ross just as good. Honestly what is your point? 

I expect a manager (and coaches) who will get better production from his pitching staff. I expect a manager who will play some of the kids a little more. I expect the FO to be more aggressive now that Counsell is on board. My guess is we will see less bunting. I am sure there will still be second guessing, but at the end of the day, IMO, the Cubs will win a few more games with Counsell then they would have with Ross. Feel free to disagree if you want. Frankly I couldn’t care less. 

[squally1313]

1 minute ago, Rcal10 said:

So what point are you trying to make? Did the Cubs make a mistake signing Counsell? Was Ross just as good. Honestly what is your point? 

I expect a manager (and coaches) who will get better production from his pitching staff. I expect a manager who will play some of the kids a little more. I expect the FO to be more aggressive now that Counsell is on board. My guess is we will see less bunting. I am sure there will still be second guessing, but at the end of the day, IMO, the Cubs will win a few more games with Counsell then they would have with Ross. Feel free to disagree if you want. Frankly I couldn’t care less. 

My overall opinion about this move is that it implies an exciting short term future of signings/trades/decisions/etc that will actually move the needle towards a more competitive team. I don't think this move by itself does much of anything. And my frustration here (and, candidly, boredom at work) is people attributing credit to Counsell and blame to Ross for things that largely have nothing to do with them. It's much easier to 'press the right button' when going to your bullpen when you have 5 buttons that are all right, whereas David Ross had an 'Albert Azlolay' button and then like 6 interchangeably bad ones. And people here spent the last month of the season blaming Ross for picking a bad option out of a set of bad options, as if Counsell's presence would have just magically imparted the ability to throw strikes. 

I hope the team does great with him as manager. I just can't imagine a situation where people in the game threads next year are going to be like 'wow, what an inspired reliever decision, genius'. It's just misallocating blame to Ross and patting each other on the back for the hypothetical moves people here would have made that would have saved the season. 

[CubinNY]

When Counsell continues to throw the corps of Eric Hosmer to play every day or even at all, I’ll be the first to criticize him. 
 

 

[Jason Ross]

1 minute ago, CubinNY said:

When Counsell continues to throw the corps of Eric Hosmer to play every day or even at all, I’ll be the first to criticize him. 
 

 

Obviously just an accidental typo, but an entire corps of Eric Hosmer is literally terrifying.

[Rcal10]

13 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

My overall opinion about this move is that it implies an exciting short term future of signings/trades/decisions/etc that will actually move the needle towards a more competitive team. I don't think this move by itself does much of anything. And my frustration here (and, candidly, boredom at work) is people attributing credit to Counsell and blame to Ross for things that largely have nothing to do with them. It's much easier to 'press the right button' when going to your bullpen when you have 5 buttons that are all right, whereas David Ross had an 'Albert Azlolay' button and then like 6 interchangeably bad ones. And people here spent the last month of the season blaming Ross for picking a bad option out of a set of bad options, as if Counsell's presence would have just magically imparted the ability to throw strikes. 

I hope the team does great with him as manager. I just can't imagine a situation where people in the game threads next year are going to be like 'wow, what an inspired reliever decision, genius'. It's just misallocating blame to Ross and patting each other on the back for the hypothetical moves people here would have made that would have saved the season. 

I do get this. Yes, Ross was not given great options. But I do believe the brewers (Counsell and coaches) did work some magic with some of the pen arms they had. I am not crediting  Counsell himself for this. I am saying it is him and coaches. I am hoping some come our way. Especially whoever teaches pitch framing. IMO that would be a start to the staff performing better. I also think, for whatever reason, Counsell got a lot out of the limited talent he was given. 
 

I do agree that we will still see the armchair managers criticizing Counsell when he makes a move that doesn’t work. I also agree Ross has that happen to him all the time. As I said, IMO, Ross was ok. They didn’t lose because of him. But I do believe Counsell is a step above for whatever reason. Plus, I feel this is a sign the Cubs will be aggressive this year and they are targeting winning in 24’. 
 

[Brock Beauchamp]

5 hours ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

Saying the difference in Ross and Counsell is a ten win (!) gap is a sensational claim, and were it close to true I think you'd have seen a lot different behavior from otherwise educated front offices across the league in how they treat managers(firing them quicker, paying them much more, etc).

While it's probably sensationalistic, if you break down small differences, it's not impossible. Matt clearly believes Ross is a below-average manager. He also clearly believes Counsell is an above-average manager.

So let's say Counsell is +2 wins over average and Ross is -2 wins below average. That's a pretty reasonable place to start, right?

So if you swap the managers, as Matt suggested in this article, you'd have a four-win swing from each team. It's not that the difference between the two managers is eight games; it's that if you swapped them between two competing teams, you stack those four wins twice, all in favor of a single team.

Would reality play out that way? Probably not. It'd likely be a much smaller difference but given how the Cubs collapsed, maybe it's even larger. It's just so damned hard to determine how much of a collapse/streak is due to a manager's steadying/unpredictable presence.

In any case, I think most of us can agree that Counsell is a net positive over Ross.

[Soul]

There's a reason a Bruce Bochy goes from WS titles in SF to another WS title in his first year managing a team that had won 60 games in 2021 and 68 in 2022.

Not all of that is going to be on the field tactical decisions.  But there's got to be much more to it than that, whether that's because it signals a team is ready to "go for it," or the manager is able to bring in better people around him, or whatever else.

I can't come up with a definitive list, but it obviously matters.  This is a freaking great hire and I'm stoked about it.

[squally1313]

16 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

When Counsell continues to throw the corps of Eric Hosmer to play every day or even at all, I’ll be the first to criticize him. 
 

 

• Hosmer: 100 PAs, .234/.280/.330, -0.4 fWAR
• Mancini (to help your argument): 263 PAs, .234/.299/.336, -0.8 fWAR

No one else besides Mervis turned in a negative fWAR performance in over 50 PAs

• Rowdy Tellez: 351 PAs, .215/.291/.376, -0.9 fWAR
• Jesse Winker: 197 PAs, .199/.320/.247, -0.8 fWAR
• Luke Voit: 74 PAs, .221/.284/.265, -0.4 fWAR
• Josh Donaldson: 69 PAs, .169/.290/.390, -0.1 fWAR

That's not to mention giving .585 OPS Brice Turang 448 PAs. Teams have bad players. 

 

[squally1313]

8 minutes ago, Soul said:

There's a reason a Bruce Bochy goes from WS titles in SF to another WS title in his first year managing a team that had won 60 games in 2021 and 68 in 2022.

 

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, squally1313 said:

• Hosmer: 100 PAs, .234/.280/.330, -0.4 fWAR
• Mancini (to help your argument): 263 PAs, .234/.299/.336, -0.8 fWAR

No one else besides Mervis turned in a negative fWAR performance in over 50 PAs

• Rowdy Tellez: 351 PAs, .215/.291/.376, -0.9 fWAR
• Jesse Winker: 197 PAs, .199/.320/.247, -0.8 fWAR
• Luke Voit: 74 PAs, .221/.284/.265, -0.4 fWAR
• Josh Donaldson: 69 PAs, .169/.290/.390, -0.1 fWAR

That's not to mention giving .585 OPS Brice Turang 448 PAs. Teams have bad players. 

 

And her he won 92 games. That is pretty impressive. 

I agree it might not make a huge difference. I also agree at times Ross was unfairly criticized. People will be bitching about Counsel too. But to me Counsell is a better manager. So I a happy they signed him. 

[Guest234]

Bruce Bochy was not available?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

9 hours ago, Cuzi said:

To be clear, I'm crediting Counsell for getting 9 more wins out of a team that was measurably worse than the Cubs.

Everyone wants to talk about the Cubs RD and how close the team is to being a contender. The Cubs and Brewers had the exact same expected W/L of 90-72. The Brewers won 92 games and the Cubs won 83 games. Which team would you say was managed better?

There is absolutely zero evidence that managers have an intrinsic ability to distribute runs better such that a team outperforms or underperforms their Pythagorean record

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If there is any difference among managers, it's not in in-game strategy, which is basically a non-factor in baseball.

There might be something in their ability to help players prepare to perform better overall 

But given that the league is overrun with ivy League analysts trying to squeeze every last win per dollar advantage they can find, and we just made counsell the highest paid manager in the league with a salary that will buy you a decent veteran utility infielder, I feel confident that the actual impact of a manager is measured in fractions of a win.

[Cuzi]

I could not care less about a Pythagorean record.

It was simply another way of wording the difference between the Cubs and Brewers, because saying the Brewers won 9 more games with a team that was worth less WAR with position players and pitching wasn't getting the point across.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

8 hours ago, Soul said:

There's a reason a Bruce Bochy goes from WS titles in SF to another WS title in his first year managing a team that had won 60 games in 2021 and 68 in 2022.

Not all of that is going to be on the field tactical decisions.  But there's got to be much more to it than that, whether that's because it signals a team is ready to "go for it," or the manager is able to bring in better people around him, or whatever else.

I can't come up with a definitive list, but it obviously matters.  This is a freaking great hire and I'm stoked about it.

You kinda skipped a few years between bochy's titles in SF and his title with Texas.  A few years where his teams were terrible and then no one wanted him to manage.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

2 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

I could not care less about a Pythagorean record.

It was simply another way of wording the difference between the Cubs and Brewers, because saying the Brewers won 9 more games with a team that was worth less WAR with position players and pitching wasn't getting the point across.

You can say it as many different ways as you want, you're still attributing it to a managerial prowess when there's no historical correlation between managers and those deviations.

If managers had the ability to make that happen, we could measure it pretty easily and they'd be paid closer to 9 figures per year than 7.

Edited November 8, 2023 by Hairyducked Idiot

[Cuzi]

How about this then... The Cubs made Counsell the highest paid manager by a wide margin and fired a guy they said was safe a few weeks ago without blinking.

Does that not paint a picture for who baseball lifers believe is magnitudes better at his job?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

3 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

How about this then... The Cubs made Counsell the highest paid manager by a wide margin and fired a guy they said was safe a few weeks ago without blinking.

Does that not paint a picture for who baseball lifers believe is magnitudes better at his job?

The size of their salary difference tells you exactly how tiny those magnitudes are.

[Cuzi]

3 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

The size of their salary difference tells you exactly how tiny those magnitudes are.

I don't know how much Ross made, but Francona at $4.5M was the highest paid manager in the sport.

So with that in mind, it's safe to assume the Cubs are paying Counsell at least 200% of what Ross was getting. That's not tiny.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

3 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

I don't know how much Ross made, but Francona at $4.5M was the highest paid manager in the sport.

So with that in mind, it's safe to assume the Cubs are paying Counsell at least 200% of what Ross was getting. That's not tiny.

And nobody was willing to swoop in and offer $9m or $10m for this person who can give you more wins than any player?