Possible Ausmus replacements

[Rebbiv]

Earl Weaver quotes:

[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]You win pennants in the off season when you build your teams with trades and free agents.

[/FONT]A manager's job is simple. For one hundred sixty-two games you try not to screw up all that smart stuff your organization did last December.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [FONT=&quot]Coaches are an integral part of any manager's team, especially if they are good pinochle players.
[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [FONT=&quot]A manager should stay as far away as possible from his players. I don't know if I said ten words to Frank Robinson while he played for me.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] [FONT=&quot]The job of arguing with the umpire belongs to the manager, because it won't hurt the team if he gets thrown out of the game.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][/FONT]
[/FONT][SIZE=-1]And just because....[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]"We're so bad right now that for us back-to-back home runs means one today and another one tomorrow."[/SIZE]

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/e/earl_weaver.html

 

[byco42]

I get that weaver was ahead of his time but analytics can show that managers don't make nearly as much of an impact as people think. The effect Ausmus has on outcomes is completely out of proportion with much tiger fans talk about him.

I wonder if you even realize the core issue here. Brad Ausmus is incapable of managing baseball at the major league level. And that's because he has no "significant" prior managerial experience. His stint as the manager of the Isreali National Team does not count.

 

[Sbee]

I wonder if you even realize the core issue here. Brad Ausmus is incapable of managing baseball at the major league level. And that's because he has no "significant" prior managerial experience. His stint as the manager of the Isreali National Team does not count.

That's all speculation, he's had two seasons as the tigers manager, one where they won the American League pennant and another where they came in last in an injury filled season where we threw in the towel halfway through the year. If anything, analysis of him as a manager is incomplete. He had a career of close to 20 years as a catcher, we all know that being a catcher helps to prepare a coach to be a manager. Mike Matheny followed almost the exact same career path as Ausmus, I don't think not managing in the majors has hurt him.

My point isn't that he's a good or manager, it's simply that it hardly matters at all.

 

[kingofdetroit57]

That's all speculation, he's had two seasons as the tigers manager, one where they won the American League pennant and another where they came in last in an injury filled season where we threw in the towel halfway through the year. If anything, analysis of him as a manager is incomplete. He had a career of close to 20 years as a catcher, we all know that being a catcher helps to prepare a coach to be a manager. Mike Matheny followed almost the exact same career path as Ausmus, I don't think not managing in the majors has hurt him.

My point isn't that he's a good or manager, it's simply that it hardly matters at all.

I don't disagree with most of what you said here, Sbee, but I would say in the instances where Brad could impact things, he's mostly done so negatively.

 

[byco42]

That's all speculation, he's had two seasons as the tigers manager, one where they won the American League pennant and another where they came in last in an injury filled season where we threw in the towel halfway through the year. If anything, analysis of him as a manager is incomplete. He had a career of close to 20 years as a catcher, we all know that being a catcher helps to prepare a coach to be a manager. Mike Matheny followed almost the exact same career path as Ausmus, I don't think not managing in the majors has hurt him.

My point isn't that he's a good or manager, it's simply that it hardly matters at all.

They did not win a pennant; they lost a playoff series and Ausmus was a critical cog of that enterprise. As for Matheny, well, the Tigers attempted to model the Cardinals and it is not quite working out the same way ... but, hey (after all) Matheny ... Ausmus ... interchangeable.

 

[Rebbiv]

That's all speculation, he's had two seasons as the tigers manager, one where they won the American League pennant and another where they came in last in an injury filled season where we threw in the towel halfway through the year. If anything, analysis of him as a manager is incomplete. He had a career of close to 20 years as a catcher, we all know that being a catcher helps to prepare a coach to be a manager. Mike Matheny followed almost the exact same career path as Ausmus, I don't think not managing in the majors has hurt him.

My point isn't that he's a good or manager, it's simply that it hardly matters at all.

Did I miss something? We threw is the towel halfway through last season? And don't all teams have injuries?

Some of the best managers of all time, didn't play in MLB and if they did, they had less than 750 ABs. What does that say?


In a conversation I had with Tommy John, he said that Walter Alston was the worst manager he ever played for. Does Walter Alston have a good record managing? Yes. Why was he the worst? Because he mismanaged talented teams. John said that the Dodgers probably would have won more had Alston not been their manager. The players themselves did not respect Alston. In a closed player only meeting in 1974, they decided to focus on winning, despite Alston. And so they did. I trust what Tommy told me was true.

 

[Sbee]

Did I miss something? We threw is the towel halfway through last season? And don't all teams have injuries?

Some of the best managers of all time, didn't play in MLB and if they did, they had less than 750 ABs. What does that say?


In a conversation I had with Tommy John, he said that Walter Alston was the worst manager he ever played for. Does Walter Alston have a good record managing? Yes. Why was he the worst? Because he mismanaged talented teams. John said that the Dodgers probably would have won more had Alston not been their manager. The players themselves did not respect Alston. In a closed player only meeting in 1974, they decided to focus on winning, despite Alston. And so they did. I trust what Tommy told me was true.

Trading price, cespedes, and Soria is throwing the towel in, it was the right move. Saying all teams have injuries is a weak attempt at an equivalence. We were without JV for a good part of the season, Miggy missed a big part of the year, Sanchez pitched poorly through and injury, and Victor was never close to 100% if you look at a post mortem of last year I'd have to say managing was the least of their issues.

 

[Rebbiv]

Trading price, cespedes, and Soria is throwing the towel in, it was the right move. Saying all teams have injuries is a weak attempt at an equivalence. We were without JV for a good part of the season, Miggy missed a big part of the year, Sanchez pitched poorly through and injury, and Victor was never close to 100% if you look at a post mortem of last year I'd have to say managing was the least of their issues.

But you are willing to give him a bye because of all of this. Which to me, is just willing to make the excuses for him. We were playing poorly with Cespedes, Soriaand Price than without them.

June+July = 22-29 .431 WPCT

August+September = 23-32 .418 WPCT

Exactly how much did those trade deadline deals cost us? No one knows, but it really didn't change the winning or lack there of. Why? Because aside from Price during the 1st half and Verlander during the 2nd half, we had no starting pitching above average. The team composition is on the GM. Recognizing what you have and employing them properly is on the manager. Ausmus sucks at running a starter out at the top of an inning, letting a couple men on, and rather than let them try to pitch out of it, bring in a reliever who promptly allows the runners to score. And it happened again last night to Sanchez.

How many wins would have been different if the exact players don't get injured? Know clue. And it would be an exercise in futility.

 

[Sbee]

But you are willing to give him a bye because of all of this. Which to me, is just willing to make the excuses for him. We were playing poorly with Cespedes, Soriaand Price than without them.

June+July = 22-29 .431 WPCT

August+September = 23-32 .418 WPCT

Exactly how much did those trade deadline deals cost us? No one knows, but it really didn't change the winning or lack there of. Why? Because aside from Price during the 1st half and Verlander during the 2nd half, we had no starting pitching above average. The team composition is on the GM. Recognizing what you have and employing them properly is on the manager. Ausmus sucks at running a starter out at the top of an inning, letting a couple men on, and rather than let them try to pitch out of it, bring in a reliever who promptly allows the runners to score. And it happened again last night to Sanchez.

How many wins would have been different if the exact players don't get injured? Know clue. And it would be an exercise in futility.

Soria, cespedes, and price are only part of the equation. Cabrera missed a significant amount of time, Victor rushed back from and injury and had a horrible year. JV missed a significant portion of the year and Sanchez tried to pitch through and injurry and gave up a ton of home runs before finally being shut down. My point is that Ausmus was the least of our problems and another manager wouldn't have even sniffed contention or even respectability.

Funny point you bring up about Sanchez, so Ausmus is going to trust the guy with the 1.59 WHIP to pitch out of jams late in games? How about blaming Sanchez for being a 20 million dollar pitcher who just sucks?

 

[Rebbiv]

Soria, cespedes, and price are only part of the equation. Cabrera missed a significant amount of time, Victor rushed back from and injury and had a horrible year. JV missed a significant portion of the year and Sanchez tried to pitch through and injurry and gave up a ton of home runs before finally being shut down. My point is that Ausmus was the least of our problems and another manager wouldn't have even sniffed contention or even respectability.

Funny point you bring up about Sanchez, so Ausmus is going to trust the guy with the 1.59 WHIP to pitch out of jams late in games? How about blaming Sanchez for being a 20 million dollar pitcher who just sucks?

Once again I will concede that a manager, any manager, is not going to change the win total that much given the same talent level. What he does influence is the climate of the team. He isn't going to win more games, but he certainly can lose them.

And why did Freddy Gonzalez get fired? I am sure the next Braves manager will win more, right? It isn't about wins and loses sometimes.

My point is that something has got to change and you cannot trade all the players. If you take away all the lame excuses, you end up with a manager that has difficulties making in game decisions. He doesn't put his players into a position to succeed. But he will put them in a position to fail. He cannot alter a lineup based on who is hitting and who isn't. He tends to leave his starters in too long and tends to like bringing in relievers with runners on, rather than at the top of the inning. Any one of these things is statistically verifiable against the rest of the league or MLB as a whole. The list goes on. The Tigers tend to play "bad tactical baseball" and that is a reflection on their manager. Leyland had his quirks, but the team did not make consistent mental mistakes under him.

This team will stop making mental (baserunning, fiedling, etc) mistakes when they change leadership. Not until. They don't win games because they play the game right and make smart plays. They win because of the occasional good pitching and the "3-run homer". I am not sure this team is capable of playing for 1-run late in the game.

Changing Ausmus with McClendon or Lamont probably isn't changing that culture. IMHO, this team needs to be gutted from the GM on down. All the coaches need to be gone. Whether it happens during the year or at the end of the year, I don't care. Ausmus would be a start.

 

[Sbee]

Once again I will concede that a manager, any manager, is not going to change the win total that much given the same talent level. What he does influence is the climate of the team. He isn't going to win more games, but he certainly can lose them.

And why did Freddy Gonzalez get fired? I am sure the next Braves manager will win more, right? It isn't about wins and loses sometimes.

My point is that something has got to change and you cannot trade all the players. If you take away all the lame excuses, you end up with a manager that has difficulties making in game decisions. He doesn't put his players into a position to succeed. But he will put them in a position to fail. He cannot alter a lineup based on who is hitting and who isn't. He tends to leave his starters in too long and tends to like bringing in relievers with runners on, rather than at the top of the inning. Any one of these things is statistically verifiable against the rest of the league or MLB as a whole. The list goes on. The Tigers tend to play "bad tactical baseball" and that is a reflection on their manager. Leyland had his quirks, but the team did not make consistent mental mistakes under him.

This team will stop making mental (baserunning, fiedling, etc) mistakes when they change leadership. Not until. They don't win games because they play the game right and make smart plays. They win because of the occasional good pitching and the "3-run homer". I am not sure this team is capable of playing for 1-run late in the game.

Changing Ausmus with McClendon or Lamont probably isn't changing that culture. IMHO, this team needs to be gutted from the GM on down. All the coaches need to be gone. Whether it happens during the year or at the end of the year, I don't care. Ausmus would be a start.

I couldn't disagree with this statement more, the same players who are making these misttakes were doing to the same things under Leyland, I don't think you're really going to change a player much with a different manager. If you think Miggy is going to somehow become a smart baserunner under a new manager, good luck with that.

This team has stunk for the last few years due to pitching, plain and simple. As long as you're trotting Sanchez and Pelfrey out there you're going to lose a lot of games. The bullpen will always suck if starters don't go deeper in games. An assessment of this team should begin and end with that. I can't think of any way to put those starting pitchers in a position to succeed, having a WHIP of 1.59 and 1.80 respectively has nothing to do with the manager. Arguing about when to pull the said shitty pitcher is really pointless.

We're going in circles here, so you can have the last word and I won't comment anymore. I disagree with the premise and it's the least of the teams concerns but it dominates discussion, which is just stupid in my opinion. You obviously think differently, that's fine, we disagree.

 

[byco42]

I couldn't disagree with this statement more, the same players who are making these misttakes were doing to the same things under Leyland, I don't think you're really going to change a player much with a different manager. If you think Miggy is going to somehow become a smart baserunner under a new manager, good luck with that.

This team has stunk for the last few years due to pitching, plain and simple. As long as you're trotting Sanchez and Pelfrey out there you're going to lose a lot of games. The bullpen will always suck if starters don't go deeper in games. An assessment of this team should begin and end with that. I can't think of any way to put those starting pitchers in a position to succeed, having a WHIP of 1.59 and 1.80 respectively has nothing to do with the manager. Arguing about when to pull the said shitty pitcher is really pointless.

We're going in circles here, so you can have the last word and I won't comment anymore. I disagree with the premise and it's the least of the teams concerns but it dominates discussion, which is just stupid in my opinion. You obviously think differently, that's fine, we disagree.

Tigers SP has only "stunk" since 2015. RP as well. It was not good in '14 and '13, but did "stink" in '15. Certainly you'd want to short-leash a bad SP.

 

[Sbee]

Tigers SP has only "stunk" since 2015. RP as well. It was not good in '14 and '13, but did "stink" in '15. Certainly you'd want to short-leash a bad SP.

Do you think Ausmus is responsible for our poor starting pitching? What would you suggest he should do with Sanchez?

 

[byco42]

Do you think Ausmus is responsible for our poor starting pitching? What would you suggest he should do with Sanchez?

1. No. 2. Send him out there every fifth start. The guy makes 16MM a season. He's going to stay in the rotation unless he's injured.

 

[Sbee]

1. No. 2. Send him out there every fifth start. The guy makes 16MM a season. He's going to stay in the rotation unless he's injured.

That's all that you can do, it seems like you were implying that the pitching was in part due to Ausmus since you mentioned a change in the year he took over. When a guy making that kind of cash goes from AL ERA leader to the guy giving up the most homers and sporting a 1.59 whip and 6+ ERA there's not much you can do. As long as we keep trotting Sanchez and Pelfrey out there we're going to struggle and that's going to tax the bullpen as well. Nothing you can do with these guys due to the contract situation but Matt Boyd couldn't be much worse than either of them.