Richard Justice: Buck Showalter Is The Best Manager In Baseball

[TINSTAAPP]

I guess Earl Weaver shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame, probably didn't add anything more than a few wins to the overall records for his teams. I guess there's no reason to recognize any managers for that matter.

Actually, Weaver is one of the few managers who actually did have a profound impact on his team's win-loss record.

Nearly every other manager of the last 30 years ? 172 overall ? was, statistically speaking, indistinguishable from average. They either didn?t manage for long enough or didn?t separate themselves from the pack while they were still filling out lineup cards. Cox is one of only six managers since 1986 ? Russ Nixon, Tony LaRussa, Davey Johnson, Billy Martin and Earl Weaver ? who we can say with confidence actually affected the performance of the players he was managing more than the average manager.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/most-managers-are-headed-to-the-hall-of-mediocrity/

[weams]

Amen!

Joe Madden, Bruce Bochy & Girardi are all very good however.

Girardi is probably getting fired... Maybe they will try to promote Buck to Executive Dugout Manager.

[SilentJames]

I couldn't disagree more with this statement. Managers generally have very little positive impact on the overall win-loss record. A good manager won't add anything more than a few wins to a team's overall record. All of the teams from 2000-2009 wouldn't have come close to contention no matter who their manager was. And just look at the top teams in baseball at the moment. Pretty much every single one of them have really good executives in charge of baseball operations from Sandy Alderson with the Mets to Theo with the Cubs to Brian Sabean, Dayton Moore, Jon Daniels, Andrew Friedman, Mozeliak, Huntington, etc... Now look at the managers on those teams. How many of them really wow you with their decision making and baseball acumen? I would say Maddon and Bochy and that's basically it.

While good managers don't turn the Richmond Spiders into the Yankees it is just insane to think that managers don't have significant impact on the culture of a team and how that team carries itself over the course of the long season. These are human beings here, not robots, not numbers on a spreadsheet. Emotions need to be managed, personalities balanced, egos stroked and at the same time kept in check. A good manager puts his players in the best possible position to allow his players' talents to shine. Managers mean a lot to those dreaded "intangibles." Jees look at the Nationals last year - just look at them.

[SilentJames]

And of course average managers don't have a remarkable impact. Neither do average teachers, or average lawyers, average musicians, nor average anybody. Because the world is remarkably average. The average manager might not ADD to wins, but bad managers subtract them. Average managers keep their teams together so the players can shine, great managers (like Buck) find way to actively make the team better.

[weams]

While good managers don't turn the Richmond Spiders into the Yankees it is just insane to think that managers don't have significant impact on the culture of a team and how that team carries itself over the course of the long season. These are human beings here, not robots, not numbers on a spreadsheet. Emotions need to be managed, personalities balanced, egos stroked and at the same time kept in check. A good manager puts his players in the best possible position to allow his players' talents to shine. Managers mean a lot to those dreaded "intangibles." Jees look at the Nationals last year - just look at them.

The Spiders may be better than the Boogie Down crew.

[pastorfan]

I couldn't disagree more with this statement. Managers generally have very little positive impact on the overall win-loss record. A good manager won't add anything more than a few wins to a team's overall record. All of the teams from 2000-2009 wouldn't have come close to contention no matter who their manager was. And just look at the top teams in baseball at the moment. Pretty much every single one of them have really good executives in charge of baseball operations from Sandy Alderson with the Mets to Theo with the Cubs to Brian Sabean, Dayton Moore, Jon Daniels, Andrew Friedman, Mozeliak, Huntington, etc... Now look at the managers on those teams. How many of them really wow you with their decision making and baseball acumen? I would say Maddon and Bochy and that's basically it.

Culture is a bit different than mere wins and losses. Whether it is football or baseball, or just about any other sport, the manager/head coach sets the culture. But a GM, like say, Jerry Jones, can mess it up. I think we are just understanding "culture" a bit differently. I agree with your overall win-loss comments.

[pastorfan]

Good point....I don't think baseball acumen is the key, but rather people skills. For instance, Joe Torre learned from previous experience and when he was with the Yanks he clearly set a "culture" and it was he, not the GM who did that.

[OFFNY]

pastorfan said:

 

Culture is a bit different than mere wins and losses. Whether it is football or baseball, or just about any other sport, the manager/head coach sets the culture. But a GM, like say, Jerry Jones, can mess it up. I think we are just understanding "culture" a bit differently. I agree with your overall win-loss comments.

 

o

 

In my rat's ass of an opinion, Torre walked in on the coattails of what Gene Michael and Buck Showalter had built prior to him getting there. And the Yankees' exorbitant payroll, which topped the Major Leagues throughout the first decade of the new century played a large part in allowing them to remain perennial contenders after they stopped winning World Series in 2000.

After Gabe Paul (the Yankees' G.M from 1973-1977) rebuilt the Yankees back into a power (2 World championships, 4 pennants, and 5 division titles from 1976-1981), George Steinbrenner's insane temper and compulsiveness with BOTH his managers AND his players drove the Yankees back into a pretty good but no longer great franchise from 1982-1988 (7 out of 8 winning seasons, but no playoff appearances), and finally a bad franchise (4 straight losing seasons from 1989-1992.) It wasn't until Fay Vincent gave Steinbrenner the boot for 2 years in July of 1990 that the Yankees were able to rebuild themselves back into a power again under the guidance of General Manager Gene Michael (1991-1995) and Manager Buck Showalter (1992-1995.) And then along came Torre in 1996, who was a good enough manager not to screw up the great thing that he had in front of him.

 

o

[Larry18]

In my rat's ass of an opinion, Torre walked in on the coattails of what Gene Michael and Buck Showlater had built prior to him getting there. And the Yankees' exorbitant payroll, which topped the Major Leagues throughout the first decade of the new century played a large part in allowing them to remain perennial contenders after they stopped winning World Series in 2000.

After Gabe Paul (the Yankees' G.M from 1973-1977) rebuilt the Yankees back into a power (2 World championships, 4 pennants, and 5 division titles from 1976-1981), George Steinbrenner's insane temper and compulsiveness with BOTH his managers AND his players drove the Yankees back into a pretty good but no longer great franchise from 1982-1988 (7 out of 8 winning seasons, but no playoff appearances), and finally a bad franchise (4 straight losing seasons from 1989-1992.) It wasn't until Fay Vincent gave Steinbrenner the boot for 2 years in July of 1990 that the Yankees were able to rebuild themselves back into a power again under the guidance of General Manager Gene Michael (1991-1995) and Manager Buck Showalter (1992-1995.) And then along came Torre in 1996, who was a good enough manager not to screw up the great thing that he had in front of him.

This is pretty much the way I remember those years.

[Number5]

Actually, Weaver is one of the few managers who actually did have a profound impact on his team's win-loss record.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/most-managers-are-headed-to-the-hall-of-mediocrity/

The article you are quoting is a bit off as to time. Since 1986? 1986 was Weaver's last season. (Also his worst.) Billy Martin also managed only one season in that time frame (1988).

[atomic]

I couldn't disagree more with this statement. Managers generally have very little positive impact on the overall win-loss record. A good manager won't add anything more than a few wins to a team's overall record. All of the teams from 2000-2009 wouldn't have come close to contention no matter who their manager was. And just look at the top teams in baseball at the moment. Pretty much every single one of them have really good executives in charge of baseball operations from Sandy Alderson with the Mets to Theo with the Cubs to Brian Sabean, Dayton Moore, Jon Daniels, Andrew Friedman, Mozeliak, Huntington, etc... Now look at the managers on those teams. How many of them really wow you with their decision making and baseball acumen? I would say Maddon and Bochy and that's basically it.

Decision making once the game begins is not what you judge a manager on. Look at the teams before Buck got here. The players would frequently throw to the wrong base, make base running blunders, walk too many guys. Make a ton of errors. Buck doesn't stand for players who don't play the game the right way and works on the fundamentals.

[DrungoHazewood]

I guess Earl Weaver shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame, probably didn't add anything more than a few wins to the overall records for his teams. I guess there's no reason to recognize any managers for that matter.

I think managers can have substantial impact in a variety of ways, but probably shouldn't be thought of like players in wins and runs. Buck's career W/L record is just a few games a year above .500, his average team wins 84 games a year. In 2011 the Orioles won 69 games with Buck in charge. Joe Torre and Casey Stengel were awful managers until they got the jobs that put them in Cooperstown.

All I'm saying is we should exercise restraint in giving credit. I'm glad Buck is in charge of the Orioles, but I wouldn't want to say he's worth any number of wins. I don't think it works that way.

[DrungoHazewood]

Actually, Weaver is one of the few managers who actually did have a profound impact on his team's win-loss record.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/most-managers-are-headed-to-the-hall-of-mediocrity/

I'm skeptical of attempts to tease out managerial influence on win loss records. There's very little signal and a lot of noise, so I'd expect wide error bars.

[Larry18]

Warren Spahn - "I played for Casey (Stengel) before and after he was a genius"

[brianod]

While good managers don't turn the Richmond Spiders into the Yankees it is just insane to think that managers don't have significant impact on the culture of a team and how that team carries itself over the course of the long season. These are human beings here, not robots, not numbers on a spreadsheet. Emotions need to be managed, personalities balanced, egos stroked and at the same time kept in check. A good manager puts his players in the best possible position to allow his players' talents to shine. Managers mean a lot to those dreaded "intangibles." Jees look at the Nationals last year - just look at them.

Great post, I agree