The Brewers' Next Manager; Latest -- Valentine may have inside track to the job; Cora, Melvin, Roenicke also finalists

[PrinceEatMeat]

I could see Randolph having an advantage due to the fact that Attanasio is from the Bronx and grew up a Yankee fan. I know that's not the right way to pick someone, but it still seems like a possibility to me.

[thebruce44]

I could see Randolph having an advantage due to the fact that Attanasio is from the Bronx and grew up a Yankee fan. I know that's not the right way to pick someone, but it still seems like a possibility to me.

John Heyman said the exact same thing on his blog this morning:

 

Ken Macha is very likely out in Milwaukee, as his contract expires following two disappointing seasons there. It doesn't appear that Willie Randolph heads the Brewers' list of replacement candidates, a surprise since the owner Mark Attanasio is a Randolph fan from the Bronx. Bob Melvin, as mentioned in this space this week, could be a candidate.

 

[TooLiveBrew]

I'd dismiss Melvin as just pure speculation, but he was actually interviewed two offseasons ago. I want no part of him as manager.

[BrewCrewRising]

I'd dismiss Melvin as just pure speculation, but he was actually interviewed two offseasons ago. I want no part of him as manager.

 

I don't remember that. According to Hardicourt he was interviewed in 2002.

 

I think I'd almost like Don Money only because he's fresh and has ties with a lot of the players. But I admit that's not a solid reason overall.

 

None of the names mentioned do it for me really though.

[hawing]

Yeah, Bob Melvin was among the candidates beaten out by Ned in the 02-03 off-season.

 

The only thing that concerns me (and probably no one else, except maybe my fellow moderators) about having two Melvins in high-profile positions in the Brewers' organization is the resulting need for posters here to specify which Melvin they're talking about. Think of the extra keystrokes!

 

Also, echoing Haudricourt (gulp) and others here (perhaps better company), if Willie Randolph or Dale Sveum were considered to be credible candidates, Doug Melvin has had literally months to give either one an audition.

 

Finally, I agree with Nottso and PilprinBuddha in that the Brewers need to be able to have fun again. When the shenanigans were stopped, the Brewers' swagger/confidence seemed to stop too (or at least wasn't evident to me, and I pay a lot of attention); things have not felt the same since.

[logan82]

I am not sure it was the shenanigans so much as the fact the team has been pretty much out of it the entire year. It is hard to have fun when you are losing a lot. I admit I had little or no enthusiasm for this team right from the start this year. It was even commented on by my brother in law. They got off to a bad start and I became even less enthusiastic.

[greeg35]

I'm still partial to Frank Kremblas and have never heard a decent version of why he was let go from AAA.

Many think the manager makes no difference and I agree the best thing a manager can do is manage a good team; however there are some basic skills a manager should have that Macha doesn't that I'd like to see the next one have. Having fun, working hard, sticking together, motivating, all the things that make any job fun and worth going to is for the manager to foster and facilitate. I have to a believe that a team with x win talent would tend toward higher win totals than x if all of these things are in order. Managing the bullpen and not over-managing the offensive lineup/subs are the other major parts.

Logan: I agree that playing poorly early hurts morale; but letting that influence your (the players') attitude the rest of the season pretty much takes away and Rockies-esque comeback possibilities. A strong leader can foster a better attitude throughout that process IMO and that gives you at least a chance of bouncing back.

[And That]

I wouldn't mind seeing Sandy Guerrero get a chance to manage. He's well respected by the Brewers, and the Brewers players. He's never managed though, so he's probably a long shot.

[TooLiveBrew]

I'd dismiss Melvin as just pure speculation, but he was actually interviewed two offseasons ago. I want no part of him as manager.

 

I don't remember that. According to Hardicourt he was interviewed in 2002.

 

I think I'd almost like Don Money only because he's fresh and has ties with a lot of the players. But I admit that's not a solid reason overall.

 

None of the names mentioned do it for me really though.

Ack, I got my former Arizona Bobs mixed up. I was thinking of Brenly. I really don't know much about Bob Melvin.

[Sage]

I'd dismiss Melvin as just pure speculation, but he was actually interviewed two offseasons ago. I want no part of him as manager.

 

I don't remember that. According to Hardicourt he was interviewed in 2002.

 

I think I'd almost like Don Money only because he's fresh and has ties with a lot of the players. But I admit that's not a solid reason overall.

 

None of the names mentioned do it for me really though.

Ack, I got my former Arizona Bobs mixed up. I was thinking of Brenly. I really don't know much about Bob Melvin.

Oh, I was about to say, what's your problem with Bob Melvin? But nvm that. I would not at all mind seeing Bob Melvin as the Brewers' next manager. I like his temperament in the dugout. He's not quite Ned Yost, but he's not Ken Macha either. A happy medium, I would say. Just a little interesting that his name is suddenly popping up in almost every rumor surrounding the Brewers' next manager...

[RightFieldCoder]

Melvin (Doug) interviewed how many people in 2002? One was Ned Yost, later hired as Brewers manager. Another was Ken Macha, later hired as Brewers manager. Another was Melvin (Bob). Mevlin (Bob) is also out of coaching. It makes sense that people are connecting dots.

[davego]

I'm only half joking when I say chat with Cirillo.

[miggs721]

Tim Wallach is my final choice as manager

[logan82]

Logan: I agree that playing poorly early hurts morale; but letting that influence your (the players') attitude the rest of the season pretty much takes away and Rockies-esque comeback possibilities. A strong leader can foster a better attitude throughout that process IMO and that gives you at least a chance of bouncing back.

The Brewers have played around .500 baseball after a poor April and May. Just about how they were expected to. I don think they have played noticeably worse because of how they started. You could even say that Ken Macha's leadership regrouped them to play better after a bad start. In other words they "bounced back." I wouldn't say that because I don't believe any manager has that kind of control aver time and space.

Macha is a very very dull manager in my opinion. That doesn't make better or worse than most other managers. Just different.

[Invader3K]

I'll reiterate that while I'm ready to see Macha gone, I don't think you can blame him for the results of '09 and '10. He was saddled with terrible starting pitching.

[sveumrules]

If indeed the Brewers do need a new manager next year I really don't want another retread. I'd prefer we go the Maddon route and try to pluck a more or less unknown bench coach from a team with a long history of success. Maybe someone like Liddle from the Twins?

[greeg35]

Macha is a very very dull manager in my opinion. That doesn't make better or worse than most other managers. Just different.

Being dull and generally disliked (or at best people seem indifferent to him) makes him a worse manager than someone who has a better ability to connect with people, motivate, etc... I'm not saying that they would have won 90 games or anything, just that it would have made the team better.

[derflotr]

Macha is a very very dull manager in my opinion. That doesn't make better or worse than most other managers. Just different.

Being dull and generally disliked (or at best people seem indifferent to him) makes him a worse manager than someone who has a better ability to connect with people, motivate, etc... I'm not saying that they would have won 90 games or anything, just that it would have made the team better.

And there is absolutely no way to prove that.

[greeg35]

And there is absolutely no way to prove that.

 

 

Pick the place you would rather work:

a) You feel connected to your team leader. You can talk to him about issues you are having and feel that you will come away from the conversation having gained something, even if it isn't an answer to your problems. The people around you (coworkers and other leaders) are generally positive and on the same page about what you are doing on a daily basis and why you are doing it. You feel that it is a fun place to be and that even on bad days you are generally moving forward with your team and leader. You have more time to focus on solving issues than on being frustrated by them.

b) You know who your leader is; but do not necessarily feel connected to him. If you do talk to your leader it is uncomfortable and/or uninteresting. It took your leader a year to decide it might be a good idea to get to know you. You are told that you are a team member, not the leader and just to do the work you are given. Your coworkers are disgruntled and/or uninvolved in what is going on. The other leaders make apologies for the team lead; but don't seem to agree with or understand much of how things are handled. You feel more comfortable talking to the other leaders than to the team leader. You feel that much of your time is spent being frustrated by issues than by dealing with them

Granted, I am not in the clubhouse and baseball is different than work. Some things (like job satisfaction) do cross over between work and baseball), and based on the bits of information that come out, the brewers clubhouse is closer to B than to A (my assumption). Again, I'm not saying Braun would go 4-4 on a given night because he is more satisfied with his job or that Narveson would suddenly be a Cy Young candidate; but I am saying that it would make a difference in not just performance (arguable); but in general job satisfaction; which I don't think is even arguable. Being more satisfied=better (regardless of record); therefore a manager that is better at fostering satisfaction is better than one that can't.

[jeffy]

...based on the bits of information that come out, the brewers clubhouse is closer to B than to A (my assumption)

 

Perhaps the situation is more like A for some players and more like B for others? In fact, that is probably most likely the case and was probably the case with Yost, as well.

 

Corey Hart seemed to be pretty interested in staying with this team and there seems to be some evidence that Weeks is also. Jim Edmunds seemed reluctant to leave. Trevor Hoffman seems to be quite content here.

 

I don't really care if they change managers, the fans need a scapegoat and don't like Macha's style or at least with the team losing they have focused on that, so he is probably it. Were the team winning with Macha, we'd be probably be hearing something like: how he has been a steady, calming influence on the players during the pressure of a pennant race...maybe things such as those that have been written about another manager, who has only been thrown out of about 3 games per season in his long career (I don't know how many of those were by request, though http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif):

 

"...Torre's calm demeanor has helped limit conflict in the clubhouse and prevent dramatic collapses on the field"

 

"The steady hand behind this team, of course, was Joe Torre, a manager whose calm, self-possessed style..."

[greeg35]

maybe hart and weeks just think that not burning bridges is the best way to make the most money and/or can see that Macha is on his way out. I'm using the evidence we have gotten from player comments and media comments to make an assumption. I'm not out to scapegoat Macha, and the manager is definitely not the only factor in wins and losses. I'm just saying that for our next choice in manager, we should consider brining someone in that can actually lead effectively as well as manage the game.

[owbc]

I'll reiterate that while I'm ready to see Macha gone, I don't think

you can blame him for the results of '09 and '10. He was saddled with

terrible starting pitching.

You can, because Macha/DM have put out the worst defense in MLB behind the Brewers pitching staff, with seemingly no interest in making defensive upgrades or stressing fundamentals from the players that are currently on the team. As long as that philosophy continues, the Brewers will have below-average pitching--and I have not seen any evidence that management has even acknowledged this problem--which I believe is the #1 problem facing the Brewers.

 

Therefore, the new manager absolutely has to emphasize defense, baserunning, and other basic fundamentals. Otherwise, the Brewers will continue to lose games due to defensive blunders and the inability to get a 3-run HR at the right time.

 

Any candidate that lost to Ned Yost in an interview process should automatically be eliminated.

[BREWCREW5]

with seemingly no interest in making defensive upgrades or stressing fundamentals from the players that are currently on the team.

Clearly this is your opinion. To say the current team does not stress playing fundamental defense is pretty ludicrous. How many times have we read about how hard Weeks has worked with Randolph on his defense and that is only one example.

[kramnoj]

with seemingly no interest in making defensive upgrades or stressing fundamentals from the players that are currently on the team. As long as that philosophy continues, the Brewers will have below-average pitching--and I have not seen any evidence that management has even acknowledged this problem-

 

I think this is overstating things. Escobar and Gomez were supposed to be good defensive players. They haven't been as good as hoped, but that's some combination of bad luck, sample size and maybe scouting. It's not indicative that the Brewers don't want to be making upgrades. The moves before the 08 season clearly indicate that Melvin saw defensive issues and moved to correct them.

 

The issue is that some of the best hitters the Brewers have are not good defensively. The Brewers could easily improve defensively at those positions, but it doesn't mean the team would be better overall if the offensive drop was more than the defensive gain.

[CheezWizHed]

The only thing that concerns me (and probably no one else, except maybe my fellow moderators) about having two Melvins in high-profile positions in the Brewers' organization is the resulting need for posters here to specify which Melvin they're talking about. Think of the extra keystrokes!

 

The solution to that is simple. Take a page out of the LambeauLeap forum, where we use TT for Ted Thompson and MM for Mike McCarthy. The downside would be if Bob Melvin didn't turn out to be a good coach, there would be a lot of jokes made out of calling him "BM".