La Russa to stay in St. Louis

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

Tony LaRussa signed a 2 year deal with the Cards.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071022&content_id=2275736&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

[brewers19]

So whoever gets the GM job doesn't get to choose their own manager? Seems kinda odd.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

Yeah, good point, 19. Why the heck wouldn't they hire a new GM before they decided LaRussa's fate. Maybe that was their only chance to get LaRussa back. I wonder if there's anything in his new contract about keeping his Blood Alcohol Content below .15 at all times. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif

[Fatter than Joey]

My guess is that they have some one lined up to be the STL GM, and is onboard with LaRussa

[Thurston Fluff]

Either that FTJ or LaRussa has a lot more say on who the GM is than most mangers do. He's seems like the type of guy who wants more control over player personell than most guys. I'm interested in the type of team they put together. LaRussa is a good manager with veterans and seems to like that type of team. The Cards look like they need an infusion of good young core of players moe than they need more veterans. Not sure how they go about keeping a guy like him happy and rebuild. Sounds to me like they end up trying to rebuild with free agents instead of building form within. I hope that's the case. Most teams that rebuild the first way don't fare as well as those that do so the second.

[brewers19]

My guess is that they have some one lined up to be the STL GM, and is onboard with LaRussa

 

Possibly. But even if that is the case, why not wait until the new GM is officially aboard before announcing the LaRussa's deal? There may be a good reason for this course of action, but right now it just gives the impression that they care more about who their manager is than who their GM is. I don't get it.

[Klements Bratwurst]

why not wait until the new GM is officially aboard before announcing the LaRussa's deal?

I know the answer. LaRussa is going to be the manager AND the GM. Just like Mike Holmgren and Mike Sherman!!!

[Thurston Fluff]

Klem I don't think you're as far off as you might think. I know he wouldn't actually take over the job but it wouldn't surprise me if he was more or less the one making the final decisions. Barring the owner obviously.

[brettac1]

What GM wouldn't be on board with Tony LaRussa managing their team?

[Thurston Fluff]

What GM wouldn't be on board with Tony LaRussa managing their team?

 

Someone who feels he doesn't manage the game very well. Someone who feels the rest of baseball managers from all era's were right to put the pitcher in the 9 hole. One who feels a rebuilding team shouldn't be managed by someone who likes established veterans. Someone who likes to have good role models as a manager. Perhaps one who isn't arrested for drunk driving becuase he was asleep at the wheel at a stop light. Someone who felt the team underperformed this year. Someone who likes managers with an ego that can fit in the back of any ordinary sized semi-trailer. Someone who feels it sholdn't cost that much for a manager of a sub .500 baseball team. Someone who just doesn't like the guy and doesn't want to be forced to work with him. Someone who doesn't alienate former star players of the team. Ask Ozzie Smith what he thinks of LaRussa you might find him less than complimentary. At least he used to dislike him. Heard him on Rome a couple years back. He wasn't a fan.

No doubt he has a great resume but personalities do matter. Cohesivness between manager and GM matter. Sometimes situations are as important, if not more so, to success as past perfromance.

[brettac1]

One who feels a rebuilding team shouldn't be managed by someone who likes established veterans.

 

This is the guy that put Albert Pujols on his opening day roster after he had all of 14 AB's above A-Ball, and there's been lots of examples of him playing young players. IMO, no manager puts their players in a favorable situation more often than Tony La Russa, I would want him to manage a rebuilding team because of that.

Someone who likes to have good role models as a manager. Perhaps one who isn't arrested for drunk driving becuase he was asleep at the wheel at a stop light.

 

To me, this is an isolated incident. I had never heard of anything like this being a pattern in his life. All the charity work he had done, etc. outweighs one stupid mistake he made in terms of him being a role model. He correctly called it an embarrassment and apologized profusely.

 

Someone who feels the rest of baseball managers from all era's were right to put the pitcher in the 9 hole.

 

I think he's hit the pitcher 8th less than 100 times in his managerial career. I give him credit for trying something different.

[Ennder]

Someone who feels the rest of baseball managers from all era's were right to put the pitcher in the 9 hole.

 

Statistical models showed that given the talent on that team he made the smart choice so I don't see what the big deal is.

[Thurston Fluff]

This is the guy that put Albert Pujols on his opening day roster after he had all of 14 AB's above A-Ball, and there's been lots of examples of him playing young players.

 

He also bailed on Oakland when they went to rebuild mode. Albert Pujols got the opening day call because McGuire was not avialable. I don't think anyone would have stopped playing him after his start. granted he could have called up another player but he didn't have a choice of playing a veteran then. I'm also not sure he chose Pujols or if Jocketty did and he was smart enouigh to play him.

 

 

IMO, no manager puts their players in a favorable situation more often than Tony La Russa, I would want him to manage a rebuilding team because of that.

 

I bet Jason Marguis would dispute that after he was left in to get hammered several times in his contract year.

 

Statistical models showed that given the talent on that team he made the smart choice so I don't see what the big deal is.

 

Isn't that relying on something not suited to the task? Are statistical models accurate is such small samples? I find it hard to believe pitchers really are better hitters than offensive players regardless of what statistical model says a guy who gets all of 100 ab's a year are better than the alternative. Especially when the other guy gets considerably more ab's and whose job relies on it. The big deal isn't that he did it. It was that it was not putting his team in the best position to win. His arguement for doing it was weak as well. He felt it gave the team two leadoff hitters when the inning started off with the 9th man. Why that same reasoning wouldn't work better by having the same guy hitting 2nd thus having at least one inning garunteed to fall that way was not explained.

 

I do not like LaRussa so my views on him are admittedly tainted but I also think he's one of the most over rated managers in baseball. He does fine with good talent but nothing special when he doesn't. That is something most managers can do.

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

So now can we trade Ned Yost and Bill Hall to St Louis for Tony LaRussa and Albert Pujols? http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/tongue.gif

Bummer, can't say i'm thrilled to have Tony still managing against us.

 

[logan82]

Generally you gain 18 AB per season per lineup spot. So over the course of a whole season, a player batting one place out of their ideal lineup spot will make almost no impact. Add to that you are talking about a pitcher who will generally be pinch hit for after about 75% of the at bats and you are talking about maybe 13-14 AB over an entire season. Plus he generally did it when he had a pitcher with a higher BA than the position player. In general batting order makes little difference unless you are doing something crazy like batting your pitcher leadoff or your best hitter in the bottom of the lineup. Don't get me wrong, I think LaRussa is a pompus jerk, but I wouldn't fault him for batting a pitcher 8th instead of 9th.

[M Skjellyfetti]

IMO, no manager puts their players in a favorable situation more often than Tony La Russa, I would want him to manage a rebuilding team because of that.

 

One criticism I have of Tony LaRussa is how he managed the Chris Duncan situation this year. It seemed pretty obvious that Duncan was their 2nd best hitter (by far), but LaRussa constantly gave similar amounts of playing time to the other outfield scrubs on the roster. From a non-St. Louis perspective, it seemed kind of ridiculous to me. I personally feel that LaRussa had at least something to do with Duncan's prolonged slump because of his refusal to continue to give him regular at-bats. I think this would go hand-in-hand with his reputation for being a bit of an over-manager.

[crewcrazy]

IMO, no manager puts their players in a favorable situation more often than Tony La Russa, I would want him to manage a rebuilding team because of that.

 

One criticism I have of Tony LaRussa is how he managed the Chris Duncan situation this year. It seemed pretty obvious that Duncan was their 2nd best hitter (by far), but LaRussa constantly gave similar amounts of playing time to the other outfield scrubs on the roster. From a non-St. Louis perspective, it seemed kind of ridiculous to me. I personally feel that LaRussa had at least something to do with Duncan's prolonged slump because of his refusal to continue to give him regular at-bats. I think this would go hand-in-hand with his reputation for being a bit of an over-manager.

The thing about Duncan, though is that he's Jenkins-esque against LHP:

vs. RHP: .271/.371/.525

vs. LHP: .213/.289/.313

I think given Duncan's history of struggling to hit lefties, La Russa made the right decision there. It was just unfortunate for La Russa that he didn't have a suitable platoon-mate for Duncan on the roster.

[Thurston Fluff]

Generally you gain 18 AB per season per lineup spot. So over the course of a whole season, a player batting one place out of their ideal lineup spot will make almost no impact. Add to that you are talking about a pitcher who will generally be pinch hit for after about 75% of the at bats and you are talking about maybe 13-14 AB over an entire season. Plus he generally did it when he had a pitcher with a higher BA than the position player.

 

I don't think it's a big deal but if the best that can be said about it is it doesn't hurt why do it? I disagree that you could plug in some sort of computer model and say there is a benefit due to the small samples. I also think there is something to be said for the approach teams take in tight situations with the pitcehr coming up next. MAny times the pitcher works around the 8th man to get to the easier out in the pitcher. That makes the lineup turn over quicker ect.

Even if the pitcher does have a better BA there are several problems with it. Batting average is not any more worthy of a stat in this regard as it is for any other hitter. There are better things to judge hitting ability like OPS. Second even the batting average is skewed because of the relativley few ab's a pitcher gets vs most other players.

I know I've mentioned this a lot in the past but I think it's only an example of some questionable things we as outsiders don't see regularly. We see every move made by our managers through the years but only a small sampling of other managers moves. I also think the quality of his teams made up for mistakes that would have been amplified if the team wasn't good enough to overcome them. Just like a lot of managers who have teams that bail them out for questionable decisions. Put him with the Brewers circa 2003 I bet people would have thought he made a lot more mistakes than he did with the Cards.

[logan82]

He also bailed on Oakland when they went to rebuild mode.

Actually that points to intelligence and experience. If a manager has a choice of where to go, he should go to a team that has the best chance to win. Most people will not point to W/L records when talking about managers, but when you manage a winning team you get a reputation of being a good manager.

 

Edit: I have to say that I am surprised nobody brought up the all-star game where Pujols sat on the bench. Not a big deal unless you live in Colorado.

[Thurston Fluff]

Actually that points to intelligence and experience. If a manager has a choice of where to go, he should go to a team that has the best chance to win.

 

I don't blame him for leaving if he felt his reputation would take a hit by staying in a poor situation. By the same token it means his reputation should be of one who can do well with a certain type of team and unwilling to deal with certain situations. I don't believe he has proven himself to be one of the few managers who can do more than others with any type of team. He isn't in the same category as Jim Leyland IMO. He's more of a guy who does well with veteran teams and unwilling to stick it out with a small market team. Even one that helped him gain his reputation.

 

Edit: I have to say that I am surprised nobody brought up the all-star game where Pujols sat on the bench. Not a big deal unless you live in Colorado.

 

Another good example of an instance where the strategic genious of LaRussa can legitimately be questioned. He certainly didn't put the NL in the best postion to win with that decision. Which only strengthens my point that some of his mistakes go unnoticed by those of us who don't see him day in and day out.

[homer]

Jim Leyland has had great players - that's the biggest difference between managers.

[Thurston Fluff]

What did those great players do in Detroit before he got there?

[TooLiveBrew]

Buc, my guess is that Homer was referring more to Leyland's tenure in Pitt., plus his WS-champ Fla. team (the one that got all fire-sale-dy) than his crew in Det. Plus, the Tigers pre-2006 were also pre-Verlander/Zumaya/full-time Granderson. It's not like there was one group of talent that didn't get upgraded before Leyland's arrival.

[brettac1]

Didn't Jim Leyland bail on the Rockies after like one year because they sucked too much?

[homer]

"What did those great players do in Detroit before he got there? "

 

Ordonez was getting hurt (played 134 games between '04 and '05)

Kenny Rogers was playing for Texas

Verlander was in the minors

Zumaya was in the minors

Granderson was in the minors