It is time for Cito to return to managing, it is silly that he has not been seriously approached sooner.

Despite all the "Cito-bashing" that occured during his managerial tenure with Toronto, no one can say that he was not a very sucessful manager. It looks like the White Sox may be it, although Boston would be an even better fit, in my humble opinion.

Good luck Cito!

Coliver,

I agree. Cito has essentially the same talents as Grady Little. He is very good at handling established players, and creating a harmonious and productive atmosphere for them. He is not a great tactician (although perhaps better than Little), and definitely is weak in helping young players along (his relationship with Shawn Green being a prime example).

In light of what happened this year, the Sox may simply need to make a change, and given their established talent base, Cito may be a good fit.

and definitely is weak in helping young players along (his relationship with Shawn Green being a prime example).

He didn't handle Green well. No question. But this is another case of people pointing to a solitary instance of something and calling it a trend. Name another young player who wilted under Cito only to blossom once out from under him?

Gaston played a LOT of young guys. Generally, he didn't shy away from playing them as he did inexpicably with Green. Nelson Liriano, Manny Lee, Junior Felix, John Olerud, Ed Sprague, Carlos Delgado, Alex Gonzalez...all were given full time jobs at various points under Cito's care.

Cito may or may not be a great manager. I don't believe it to be true but it is possible that anyone could have managed those early 90s teams. But certainly his accomplishments are such that he deserves a chance to prove that to be false and has deserved his chance for some time.

I agree. Cito has essentially the same talents as Grady Little. He is very good at handling established players, and creating a harmonious and productive atmosphere for them.

I think this is right

He is not a great tactician (although perhaps better than Little),

He's terrific at managing a bullpen, one of the most important jobs a manager has.

and definitely is weak in helping young players along (his relationship with Shawn Green being a prime example).

And probably the only example... even there, I still take Gaston's side in the Shawn Green thing. Green got lots of playing time under Gaston (over 450 PA in his last two years) considering his production, which was well below average for a corner outfielder. Green didn't think his talent merited any pine time on what was a bad team, which may be correctbut clashed with Gaston's view, which was that a major league manager's first job is to win ballgames.

John Olerud came to Toronto without any professional experience and Gaston was very demanding with him... the result was the consummate professional we know now. Olerud is one of the most naturally talented players in the game, but in order to become a great player he had to be pushed very hard. I always thought the way Gaston pushed Olerud to be a better player was a good thing, not a negative.

Other young players who blossomed under Gaston? Aside from Olerud, there was David Wells, there was Greg Myers, there was Duane Ward, there was Juan Guzman, there was Mike Timlin, there was Robby Alomar who caught fire under Gaston, there was Pat Hentgen, there was Carlos Delgado, there was Woody Williams. Even Alex Gonzalez got better under Cito, and ground to a majestic halt when he left. Paul Quantrill didn't come on until he played under Gaston.

Cito gave lots of opportunities to young players. I think a lot of us like to remember him as an old guys' manager, not just because of his stable lineups (which limited a guys' ability to break into the lineup until he was really ready) but also because someone had to take the blame for the bland, boring, teams laden with mediocre veterans that the team fielded in Gaston's last four years. But i don't think it's a fair characterization.

"Only time will tell," Little said, when asked how he thought the club would perform under a new man. "But if they think it's going to get better, they'd better watch out. I know how it was when I got there, and I know how it is when I'm leaving."

Ominous stuff. Little is almost certainly done. He may think it unfair that he's fired after two great seasons because of one decision in one game, and at some level maybe it is. But it was the wrong decision, and it may well have cost the Sox a trip to the World Series, and in this context, that's a firing error. Even so, it sounds like Grady might not have come back next season anyway; he does not appear to enjoy that ballclub.

I think Craig hit the nail on the head when he described this Red Sox team as one of the least likable in the past several years (reminiscent of the mid-'90s Indians, home to both Grady Little and Manny Ramirez). Outside of Nomar, there's probably no one on the club I particularly feel like rooting for. The degree of ego, arrogance and money in that clubhouse could well be a nightmare for any new manager to cope with. These Red Sox may not be too far from being the recent Mets or Orioles, $100 million basket cases.

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the Yankees find themselves in a similar position next season. I can't shake the feeling that win or lose this Series, Joe Torre is going to retire, and his coaches are all going to go with him. The rift between the coaching staff and the front office is apparently huge, and Zimmer's outburst a few days ago revealed some of that bitterness. I have a feeling Torre is going to walk away and, in effect, say to George: "You think you can run this $150 million ballcub without me? Give it a shot." Steinbrenner may be unpleasantly startled how fast this "classy" ballclub of his becomes a problem child.

Hey, here's a funny, interesting thought. Joe Torre, Manager, Toronto Blue Jays, 2005.

Alex Gonzalez' first full year was his best as a hitter. He went backwards DURING Gaston's tenure, not after it.

No question Green should have been playing more. The situation is analogous to Josh Phelps' now, except that those late Gaston teams were worse than the 2003 Jays and were going in the other direction.

Craig B,

David Wells blossomed under Cito? Wells couldn't stand him after a game, against Detroit IIRC, in which he didn't have any stuff, and Cito made him stay in until the opponents had scored 11 runs. While Wells was difficult to manage, of course, in this case he was in the right.

Wells blossomed after he left Toronto.

What it comes down to is this. Cito's work from 89-93, making the most of essentially established talent, was excellent. In 1989, he took over from Jimy Williams, who had managed the team to a 12-24 record, and without significant changes in personnel led them to a division title.

In 94-95, the Jays had 3 of the top prospects in baseball in Alex Gonzalez, Carlos Delgado and Shawn Green, and some existing talent from their World Series winning clubs. To say that any of the prospects prospered under Cito would be untrue. Carlos performed as could reasonably be expected and Green and Gonzalez underperformed their expectations based on their minor league record; in particular Gonzalez had fair plate discipline as a minor leaguer, and with a former hitting coach as a manager, one would have thought that he could have maintained or slightly improved his discipline as he grew older. It's a real stretch to describe Cito's work after 93 as excellent.

Still, that Jimy Williams had a job in 03 and Cito did not, shows that some GMs are at best fools and at worst racist.

I've been thinking about the following... How amny playoff games have the Yankees won because they have Mariano Rivera and their opponents don't? What would have happened series by series, if you exchanged Rivera with the opponent's closer?

Mariano Rivera could make a lot of managers look good. For example game 7 ALCS - even Grady Little would have pulled Pedro after 7, handed the ball to Mariano for two innings and presto Red Sox go to the World Series.

Cito has essentially the same talents as Grady Little. He is very good at handling established players, and creating a harmonious and productive atmosphere for them.

This seems to be true from Gaston's time with the Jays. As does Craig's point about Gaston's ability to handle a bullpen. Because of these things, I think a better place than Chicago for Gaston to land would be Boston. However, that's only a passing fancy because I'm pretty sure that Epstein and Gaston might have incompatible views of how a ball club should be managed.

If Gaston does end up in Chicago, it'll be interesting to see what kind of results he gets from Carlos Lee, Paul Konerko, Carl Everett and Robbie Alomar (will those last two be with Chicago next season -- I can't remember their contract status). Alomar's handling will be particularly interesting, as he's no longer anywhere near the player he was when Gaston was last his manager. I think Thomas and Ordonez will produce under any manager.

Lots of questions to be dealt with for whomever ends up managing the White Sox. Those mentioned above, plus who plays CF, 2B and SS? Is Crede the answer at 3B?

Robert, that's true -- but not all managers would have the confidence or creativity to repeatedly use their closer for more than one inning. In the 9th-inning-only, post-Eckersley closer era, Torre was always questioned about bringing in Rivera too soon, but he hardly ever did. Call it a combination of a tremendous athlete with a manager who knew how to maximize his talents.

I'm with Jordan; I think that, very soon, there is going to be a major tectonic shift in the power structure of the AL East. Even if Torre stays with NY, Clemens is retiring, and the rest of the pitching staff is old and getting older. If the Yanks lose the WS, everyone seems to think that Steinbrenner is going to go ballistic, and clean house. I think that without Torre, and with a meddling Steibrenner, the Yanks may lose their stranglehold on first in the East. Especially if, as rumoured, Cashman leaves as well.

It's one reason why, as much as I loathe Loria, I'm sort of rooting for the Marlins.

Boston's pitching staff has equal question marks - after Pedro (who seems to be increasingly fragile each year), and maybe Lowe, what have they got? Their minor league is, as far as I know, bereft of any significant talent. And I highly doubt they'll repeat their offensive output next year, even with the same personnel.

Of course, the thing about both these clubs is, they've got enough cash that they could conceivably simply buy their way out of these problems.

If Gaston does end up in Chicago, it'll be interesting to see what kind of results he gets from Carlos Lee, Paul Konerko, Carl Everett and Robbie Alomar (will those last two be with Chicago next season -- I can't remember their contract status). Alomar's handling will be particularly interesting, as he's no longer anywhere near the player he was when Gaston was last his manager. I think Thomas and Ordonez will produce under any manager


Alomar and Everett are both free agents in 2004.


Lots of questions to be dealt with for whomever ends up managing the White Sox. Those mentioned above, plus who plays CF, 2B and SS? Is Crede the answer at 3B?


Crede is the man at 3B. He has a pretty good defensive reputation (though he's middle of the pack statistically) and he really played well in in the second half after his disastrous start. Kudos to the White Sox for leaving him out there and letting him work out his hitting problems.

Willie Harris will be given another shot at a fulltime job at 2B or CF. Tim Hummel (SS/3B) and Aaron Miles (2B) both look like decent hitters as well.

Joe Borchard is supposed to be the heir apparent in CF, but he's nowhere near being ready. Maybe they'll sign Mike Cameron or something.

Robert,

There is a simple reason that a dominant closer, such as Rivera, is more valuable in the post-season than in a regular season. Days off. It is very unusual for a team to have 2 days off among 7 games during the regular season. These days off in the playoffs allow a manager to use the closer for 2 innings without blowing him for 2 games. And in Game 7s, there are often 2 or 3 days off following, so 3 innings for the closer is often a realistic option.

I expect that the Sox have been learning from experience, and that they will have a big-time closer next year.

Incidentally, if Doc proves that he can be effective consistently on 3 days rest, his value, and salary, will have be increased because of his playoff potential.

As a side note: isn't it interesting that there's far more speculation right now about where the front-office personnel will end up, rather than the players? In past years, speculation about Vlad Guerrero's destination would have excited far more interest than where Minaya, Beane, DePodesta et al will end up. I wonder if this is just a blip, or if more people are recognizing that the truly important free-agent signings are increasingly the guys who wear suits for a living, not uniforms.

Also, I wonder if some of the bloom hasn't come off Billy Beane's rose. In the wake of Moneyball, but more importantly after the Athletics' latest flop in the playoffs and Billy's knee-jerk blaming of his payroll problems, he's probably no longer the super-attractive candidate he was even last year. Beane may be no more or less competent or insightful than he ever was, but he's no longer considered either a novelty item or a miracle worker.

Maybe they'll sign Mike Cameron or something.

Or trade Paul Konerko to get him. :-)

Alomar and Everett are both free agents in 2004.

Thanks, Jack. I thought that might be the case.

He may think it unfair that he's fired after two great seasons because of one decision in one game, and at some level maybe it is.

I don't think Little is being fired for one decision. There were many complaints about his decision making before the playoffs. There was all those strike em out, throw em out double plays to remember as well.

On a semi-related note, Shawn Green's shoulder surgery was not good. He now has some bone on bone areas in his shoulder. He is looking at a move to first base.

Also, I wonder if some of the bloom hasn't come off Billy Beane's rose. In the wake of Moneyball, but more importantly after the Athletics' latest flop in the playoffs and Billy's knee-jerk blaming of his payroll problems, he's probably no longer the super-attractive candidate he was even last year.

Gammons had a rumour that Beane was headed to LA, to work for the new owner there. Gammons also had a rumour that Rick Peterson, the pitching coach might head to the Mets.

In other news, the $4 million option for Jose Cruz was not exercised by the Giants making him a free agent for 2004.

Or trade Paul Konerko to get him. :-)

Interesting thought. I wouldn't do it if I were the Mariners, though they will need someone to replace both Edgar and, before much longer, Olerud. If I were the Mariners, I'd be trying to trade Cameron on the side of Chicago for Hee Seop Choi.

Here are Konerko's career numbers in 22 games at Safeco:

OBP SLG OPS
.313 .455 .768

And Cameron's in 167 games at Comiskey:

OBP SLG OPS
.371 .494 .864

Why wouldn't the WSox want Cameron back?

Hijack, from USA Today..

Bobble-heads at 69 major league baseball games produced an average attendance jump of 15.3%, SportsBusiness Journal says, ahead of the 9.9% increases from teams' cultural celebrations but trailing 31.4% jumps from beach towel giveaways.

Look for the Blue Jay beach towel day next year, or maybe the Carlos Delgado beach towel. Think of the promo for the female fans "Ladies, why not have Carlos Delgado wrapped around you?".

Maybe we could persuade the Jays to have a Shania Twain beach towel giveaway; Shania Twain wrapped around me, yeah thats the ticket.

Craig B

Myers did really well under Gaston, when he got the playing time, which was only because Borders was hurt for a large part of the '91 season. '92 comes around and he got very little, and was traded at the deadline. Delgado was jerked around his first two years as well, starts the season off hot, then hits a slump, then loses playing time to Mike Huff. Williams was an average pitcher in Toronto, and didn't really blossomed until he was traded to St. Louis. Gonzalez put up a line of .243/.322/.398 his first full year in the majors. Aside from his injured '99 season, he didn't better that until last year in Chicago.

A number of young pitchers did well under Gaston, but is that because of how well he handled a pitching staff, or because he had a very good pitching coach who handled most aspects of the pitchers. I can't remember, but was Mel Queen the pitching coach for Gaston from his hiring?

Even if Torre stays with NY, Clemens is retiring, and the rest of the pitching staff is old and getting older.

Umm ... OK, I hear this argument a lot. Say Clemens retires and Wells goes away. But consider how many teams in baseball would love to have the following front five heading into next spring training (my off-the-top-of-my-head estimate is about 27):

- Andy Pettitte, not yet 32, coming off a 21-win season.
- Mike Mussina, a healthy 35, with at least 18 wins in five of the last six seasons.
- Jon Lieber, 33, a 20-game winner just two years ago, fully recovered from TJ surgery -- a gamble, but hey!
- Jose Contreras, age undetermined, starting to settle into the U.S. game, finally.
- Jeff Weaver, age 27, All-Star talent trying to harness a nickel (or dime bag?) head.

Sure, I'd love to have Brandon Claussen back, but Aaron Boone paid his keep with the walkoff. And this rotation could easily hold up through 2006, when Mussina at 38 would be the oldest.

Consider Pettitte gone. He's a FA. The only given on that staff for 04 is Mussina, with major question marks on Leiber, Contreras and Weaver.

Reports have indicated Weaver's velocity is down. Don't be surprised if surgery is in his short term future.

This is a team on the decline. Yes, they have the ability to buy their way out. But, sooner or later, players are going to tire of New York just as many fans have. Aren't they? They did in the late 60's and early 70's. They did again in the 80's and early 90's. It's all cyclical.

Wow! I was ready to defend Cito on his handling of young players, but you guys beat me to it. Excellent! I think Green was the exception, rather than the rule. Despite all the early 1994 homers, Delgado was not ready.

During the later tenure as manager, Gaston was very impressed with Tomas Perez, and played him as often as he could. I am convinced upper management wanted Alex Gonzalez to succeed rather than Perez or
Domingo Cedeno. My point is that Cito worked well with young players, but you can't work well with everyone!

Just to straighten up the Pitching Coach stuff, Al Widmar was the first pitching coach under Gaston followed by Galen Cisco during the World Series years. Mel Queen was the head of Player Development during this time.

Consider Pettitte gone. He's a FA. The only given on that staff for 04 is Mussina, with major question marks on Leiber, Contreras and Weaver.

I don't see why Pettite would be gone. The Yankees are, I'm sure, going to make every effort to resign him. The only way he leaves is if he REALLY wants to go back to his home state, and is willing to sign with the Rangers (or maybe, but not likely, Houston) for a LOT less money. I'm betting he stays in NY.

I don't think Weaver is back with the Yanks. They really seem to have soured on him, considering they buried him in their bullpen for over a month, before last night. I can see him released, which might make him an interesting, cheap option for the Jays (assuming his arm is healthy). The Yanks would be paying his salary, and if he can get his head together, he could be valuable. JP's gambled on bargain pitchers before (see Sturtze, Tanyon).

I am sure the Yankees will be able to fill their rotation holes. I expect one (possibly two) of Vazquez, Schilling, Millwood or Colon to be in their rotation next year. The Yankees always have the luxury of going out and getting high priced pitchers. They might even make a pitch for Miguel Batista, considering how well he did against him in the 2001 Series. And they have the capability to pay him the $5 million Arizona was on the hook for before he was bought out.

Yeah the Yanks are getting old, but their big budget always allows them to make changes. The only players left over from their 96 Series win are Jeter, Williams, Rivera and Pettitte. They have used their money to turn over their roster before and will do it again.

Consider Pettitte gone. He's a FA.

Yeah, the Yankees never re-sign their own good players.

With respect to Greens handling and developement? I don't think you would hear much complaint from the player today. He developed just fine. Parlayed that into one of the richest contracts in either league. I remember Gaston's comments from the day going something like this.

"We think Shawn's a special talent and we want to put him in situations where he will succeed and develope those talents"

Gaston followed the same formula with Delgado to much derision. Yeah I think he did just fine during his days with the Jays. I could hardly imagine what more he could have done during his tenure.

I kind of hope that one day soon he would be the Jays manager again but, you can never go back. Can you? He would be crucified if he didn't manage the team to at least an ALC.

Quickly on another note I too am in the camp predicting a drop off in the Yanks and Redsox as I mentioned in the thread, what would you do if you were JP. As mentioned there, the Jays should watch closely this offseason what those respective teams do to patch their sores.

I don't see why Pettite would be gone. The Yankees are, I'm sure, going to make every effort to resign him.

I'm sure they will make every effort. We were talking in "what if" though. Consider the scenario that Pettitte will sign elsewhere though and it's a very questionable starting rotation.

There is a chance Andy will re-sign, which would leave the rotation as questionable, as opposed to very questionable.

"Call it a combination of a tremendous athlete with a manager who knew how to maximize his talents."

Maximize? I don't think so. Where was Rivera in yesterday's ballgame?

http://economics.about.com
I'm sure they will make every effort. We were talking in "what if" though. Consider the scenario that Pettitte will sign elsewhere though and it's a very questionable starting rotation.

Of course, if they can't resign Pettitte they'll just go out and resign some other stud FA pitcher with the money they would have spent on Pettitte, so it shouldn't make too much of a difference.

Mike

Mike Green,

I am perfectly aware of the increased value of an ace reliever in the playoffs.

The Sox had pretty good relievers. Timlin was Rivera-esque in the playoffs; Williamson and Embree were pretty good. It's just that they didn't have the aura of invincibility that Mariano has, an aura which virtually compels a manager (no matter how obtuse) to put him in in the 8th or later when your team has a lead.

There's maybe 2 other guys who have that aura right now - a healthy Smoltz and Gagne. I don't know where the Sox are going to get one of those.

I think Weaver will get the Hitchcock treatment next year. It's not in the Yankees style to just release a player making that much cash.

He'll pitch mop-up, making spot starts as necessary. In mid-season they'll try to trade him, pick up the rest of his salary and get a prospect or a spare part or two back.

Pettitte will be back. Unless he gets bombed in game 6, the Yankees lose the series, and George has a fit and refuses to sign him.

I can see [Weaver] released, which might make him an interesting, cheap option for the Jays (assuming his arm is healthy).

If that happens, there will be an opening for a new Batter's Box contributor, cause I'm outta here. I don't care about his numbers, his stuff or his potential; I'd rather watch Tanyon Sturtze for another year than see that jerk in a Toronto uniform. J.P. is conscious enough about character that we don't have to worry, but the very thought made me shiver.

Remarks by Little, Zimmer and many others seem to portray the Red Sox and Yankees as wealthy, dysfunctional families, so one of the subtle advantages the Jays can gain, despite their payroll limitations, is to have everyone pulling in the same direction. A stoned Weaver, still remorseless about his crude behaviour and sexual harrassment, would be a complete misfit in the Fighting Jays clubhouse, but I hope he stays in the AL -- he's a great opponent.

Pettitte in my view remains a time bomb for significant arm trouble. Every season he has niggling arm problems. He has been worked pretty hard over the yrs. with all the post season action. He is also more or less a strikeout pitcher which I believe puts extra strain on him.
Don't get me wrong I love Pettitte. Perhaps my favorite roto aquisition virutally every yr. But I'm always on pins and needles with him.

Robert,

Well, Gagne is worth more to the Red Sox than the Dodgers, who do not look ready to compete next year. What would the Sox have to give up?

I know, I know, Manny and Nomar.

How about giving this guy a shot in the bullpen next [could be had for peanuts]: Joe Roa, just outrighted by the Padres and seeking free agency. 10 homers in 50 innings is a problem, but could be construed as flukey due to sample size. Nearly a k an inning with 3 teams in 2003, and a k:bb ratio of roughly 4:1. Sounds like Scott Service now that I see it on the screen, but a low risk gamble nonetheless.

I confess I don't understand how anyone would suggest that the Yankee pitching is likely to be worse next year. If Clemens and Pettitte are gone, the Boss acquires Schilling and Batista, say. The cost is less; the performance better.

The real issue with the Yankees is the aging of their core position players. It doesn't look like Jason Giambi is going to sustain his performance into his 30s the way that Paul O'Neill did. While Alfonso Soriano is a good (albeit out of position) ballplayer, it is unlikely that he will be great in his late 20s as one might have hoped for. Bernie Williams' defensive shortcomings have become patent.

Can all of this be managed, bearing in mind the amount of money the Boss is willing to spend? Yes. But, it will take skill. To start, they will have to deal with the defence up the middle.

Maximize? I don't think so. Where was Rivera in yesterday's ballgame?

Mariano's been in 21 post-season series in his career. Only once in those series has he averaged just one inning per game, and that was last year's first-round defeat to Anaheim. His record over those 21 series is 7-1, 0.77, 30 saves (60 G, 94 IP). This post-season, he's made 7 appearances totalling 14 innings. If that's not Torre maximizing his best pitcher, I don't know what is. Second-guessing Torre's decision last night doesn't change the fact that these two work extremely well together.

"Bernie Williams' defensive shortcomings have become patent."

When Bernie Williams was injured this year, Matsui was shifted to centerfield and apparently handled the position well. Of course I have nothing to back that up other than the praise of Yankee announcers. However, if Williams keeps on slowing down, it's possible that he can be shifted to a corner outfield position and Matsui can be given centerfield.

As well, there are the rumours that Soriano will be moved to centerfield. This of course would mean that Bernie moves to right and Matsui stays where he is. This isn't a problem unless you are Karim Garcia's mom.

The sickest rumour I've heard lately was the Yankees getting frustrated with Soriano to the point where they trade him to KC for Beltran. Beltran is a better player but this makes sense because Beltran makes a ton and KC would receive a 40/40 threat that is under contract cheaply for the next 3 years. If the Yankees pull this off they can easily get a Luis Castillo to fill in at second.

As far as I see it, the Yankees aren't falling off the edge of the earth anytime soon. There are too many permutations where the Yankees end up better, not worse. When the Jays are ready to contend they better be prepared to knock the Yankees out of the way because I don't think New York is going to give Toronto a division crown any time soon.

"If that's not Torre maximizing his best pitcher, I don't know what is. Second-guessing Torre's decision last night doesn't change the fact that these two work extremely well together."

I don't second guess, I first guess. It's not maximizing Rivera because Torre will rarely bring him in in a tie game unless the team is at home and a save situation is no longer possible. Theory tells us that the tie games are the highest leverage situations. On the other hand, he'll let him work a second inning even if the game is well in hand (e.g. Game 3). Please explain how this is maximizing Rivera's value.

My big problem was all the warming up Rivera did in the pen. He probably did the equivalent of an actual inning pitched in addition to the minimum warm-up required to enter a game. Yet, he wasn't used. The day before he pitched an extra unnecessary inning.

You can't have it both ways: Rivera can't work both the tie games and the leads. Where do you want him? If he's pitching the 6th, 7th or 8th innings of tie ballgames, who's going to close up the 9th at Fenway with a one-run lead and the crowd going crazy? It's easy to say Rivera should be lifted from games "well in hand" when those games are safely in the books; who do you want with a three-run lead in the 9th of a playoff game, inning #2 of Mariano Rivera or inning #1 of Steve Karsay? I don't want to be the manager when Karsay blows the safe lead and Rivera's out of the game. And if those "unnecessary" innings have hurt the Yankees in the past 5 years, it's not evident.

Rivera can be either a great setup guy (as he was in the Wetteland era) or a great closer (as he's been for the last several years), but he can't be both. Torre had to decide where he works best, and the evidence is that he's constantly made the right call. Torre figured years ago that the likes of Jeff Nelson and Mike Stanton worked best in setup, and even then, Torre has always gone to Rivera at the first sign of trouble. Unless you propose that Rivera pitch the 6th through 9th innings, I'd like to know how much more value Torre could possibly wring from Rivera, how many more victories he could ensure, than he has already delivered.

I never said the 6th or 7th of tie games - ninth and later - yes.

"... who do you want with a three-run lead in the 9th of a playoff game, inning #2 of Mariano Rivera or inning #1 of Steve Karsay?"

With a five run lead and knowing I have 2 games the next 2 days (the precise sitaution on Tuesday) - no way do I let Mariano continue. That's a place to pitch Weaver if you have no other option.

I don't want Rivera to work more than 2 innings, except in very unusual cases such as Game 7 of the ALCS, where I thought it was perfectly justifiable to go more than 2. Even in that game, I felt that Torre brought Rivera in too late in the game.

Yesterday, Torre brought Contreras in in the 9th of a tie game. That's okay in my book because he's a hell of a pitcher. But then he brought WEAVER in in the 11th - a vastly inferior pitcher to Rivera in a TIE GAME where the difference between going up 3-1 (and a virtually certain Series victory) and being tied 2-2 was at stake.

"Rivera can be either a great setup guy (as he was in the Wetteland era) or a great closer (as he's been for the last several years), but he can't be both."

Jordon, honestly, I don't understand this from you. Are you not familiar with Bill James' study of relief patterns in the NHBA or Tangotigre's Leveraged Index work? I want Rivera to be neither a set up man nor a closer. I want him to be an ACE RELIEVER. The job description calls for pitching in the 9th and later in tie games and NOT pitching in the 9th when your club has a 6 to 1 lead.

I could go back and look at how Rivera has been handled in the playoffs 1996 to 2002, but my focus right now is the just concluded Games 3 and 4, where I feel Rivera was most definitely NOT used optimally. Not even close.

" I don't want to be the manager when Karsay blows the safe lead and Rivera's out of the game.

Why not? Isn't that what the manager is paid for, to make the decisions he feels are right regardless of how the press and public will view them?

But apparently, you DO want to be the manager when Jeff Weaver gives up a walk-off homerun in the 12th with one of the best relievers in baseball history sitting in your bullpen.

Not to mediate one of the Dudek Wars, but last night Robert said that Alex Gonzalez was the worst-hitting regular for either team. Assuming that's true, then why waste the best reliever in baseball on him?

I checked back on the 2002 ALDS between Anaheim and New York. In Game 1, Mariano worked the ninth with his club up 8-5 at home (so the Yankees still had the last at-bat just in case). The next day, with the score tied 5-5, El Duque faces two batters in the 8th, and then Karsay and Stanton come in to give up 3 runs in total. Each team scores a run in the ninth and the Yankees lose.

After a day off, Game 3 takes place in Anaheim. The Angels tie the game 6-6 in the 7th. In the 8th Stanton and Karsay give up 3 runs and the Yankees lose 9 to 6. The Angels blow game 4 open in the 5th and knock out the defending league champions.

Twice, Torre could have brought in Rivera in the 8th inning of a tie game. He didn't do it because he was waiting for a save situation. I can't recall Torre ever using Rivera in a tie game unless a save situation was no longer a possibility (i.e. in a tie game at home from the 9th inning on).

If Rivera doesn't pitch in game 1 (safe lead) and instead enters Games 2 and 3 in the 8th, maybe the Yankees win one of those two games. Maybe.

All I know is that the deployment of Rivera in that series was very very far from optimal.

To pre-empt any of the "When did Eric Gagne start pitching for the Yankees" questions, in response to my "best reliever in baseball" reference to Rivera, I meant ONE of the best relievers in baseball.

EOM.

Robert, I'm not going to defend Rivera's usage pattern in the last game, number one because I also think it wasn't great, and number two because that's not my point. My point was and is that over the course of their post-season careers together (90 games), Torre has maximized the value he could get from Rivera: loathe as I am to invoke the "just look at the rings" argument, I don't see how anyone could look at New York's post-season record over the last several years and remotely expect (a) that it could reasonably be expected to have been better and (b) how a different usage pattern for Mariano Rivera could have brought about that improvement. In real life, nine times out of ten, Torre calling on Rivera for multi-inning post-season appearances, regardless of the inning, has been a smashingly successful combination. That is all I'm saying.

I am familiar with Jamesian reliever usage theory, and I agree that you use your best reliever at the time of most critical need, not according to artificially defined roles (the Troy Percival experience taught Mike Scioscia that last year). But again I say, this is what Torre has consistently done with Rivera. No other manager that I can think of has been willing to forego the traditional "one-inning-closer" mentality in the playoffs. Torre has gambled time and again that Rivera can deliver multiple high-leverage relief innings, and Rivera has virtually always delivered. Is this because only Torre had the guts to take those gambles, or because he had a gifted pitcher who could do it? It's both, and that is why they're a tremendous combination. Torre-Rivera is the closest thing baseball has ever seen to an actual, successful real-world implementation of Jamesian relief patterns, and apart from one poor decision last night, I can't see any way to believe otherwise.

Gitz,

Though Weaver got through the 11th - I would have brought in Rivera to start the 11th.

But apparently, you DO want to be the manager when Jeff Weaver gives up a walk-off homerun in the 12th with one of the best relievers in baseball history sitting in your bullpen.

That's not what I'm saying, and you know it. And if you're down to baiting me in order to continue the argument, I have better things to do.

Jordan,

With respect to points (a) and (b), consider the post above WRT the 2002 ALDS.

Additionally, the Yankees may lose this series, and then one would have to consider Torre's actions in Game 4.

Yes, Torre should be commended for his 2-inning Mariano stints in the playoffs. But he ought to be critisized for the one blind spot - not bringing Mariano in in tie games until a save sitaution is no longer possible.

A real-life Jamesian relief ace scenario was commonplace in the 70s and most of the 80s, with Gossage, Fingers, Quisenberry and Sutter the prime examples of its use during the regular season and the playoffs.

Jordan and Robert,

I think you're both right. Torre has been one of the best, perhaps the best, manager in terms of use of his bullpen ace in the last 15 years. Most managers have responded almost exclusively to the player incentives which flow from the "save" stat. On the other hand, Torre could do better, and his failings have been sometimes costly, as Robert points out.

To put Torre's failings in context and to contradict what Craig said in another thread about Cito's brilliant use of his bullpen, I remember Cito not pitching the closer (was it Ward or Henke?) for days on end in a homestand, even when the game was tied going into the ninth (saving him for extra innings?).

Speaking of managerial deficiencies, Jimy Williams was rewarded today for his performance this year leading the Astros with a 1 year contract extension.

Undoubtedly, the GM took a close look at the Astros missing their Pythagorean projection by 8 games despite having fine relief, and thought, "hmmm, Jimy Williams, nice guy who spells his name funny, I think we could use him for another year".

I think Torre is as under the spell of the almighty SAVE as almost every other manager in baseball is. I've checked on most of Rivera's post-season wins and they occur when Rivera enters the game in the 9th or later in a tie game when the Yankees are at home (i.e. a save is no longer possible). Rivera will of course always be in there in the ninth when his club has a 3-run lead so he can pick up the "cheap" save.

It will be interesting to see how McKeon responds to the clear visual evidence that Urbina doesn't trust his stuff against lefties and can't locate it right now, while Looper was lights out yesterday. Will he now go to Looper first in a key situation?

Despite all the early 1994 homers, Delgado was not ready.

And he didn't have a position: he couldn't really play left field, and 1B and DH were blocked by Olerud and Molitor. The Jays sent him down and stuck him in the outfield, hoping that he could be at least passable there; if he had been, he would have been right back up.

When Molitor's contract ran out, Delgado became the DH; when Olerud was traded, Delgado became the first baseman.

With respect to Greens handling and developement? I don't think you would hear much complaint from the player today.

Perhaps I'm not remembering this exactly correctly, but when Gaston returned to the Jays as a batting coach, I believe he apologized to Green for their rocky past. I can only speculate that this was a condition of employment.

If Shawn Green (or John Olerud, for that matter) is carrying a grudge against Cito, he'd be the last person in the world to come out and say it.

Yes, Torre should be commended for his 2-inning Mariano stints in the playoffs. But he ought to be critisized for the one blind spot - not bringing Mariano in in tie games until a save sitaution is no longer possible.


Well, not always.

When Torre's back is against the wall he has no problem bringing in Mo for a few innings in the hope that the Yanks can score some runs. Like in game 7 of the ALCS this year, for example...

Jacko...

In that situation, the save was no longer possible (they were at home).

Gaston left Wells in against the Brewers to allow more than 10 ER; it was one of those games where someone had to take a licking for the rest of the staff. Everybody seemed to understand it at the time. It was Gaston of course who moved Wells from the bullpen to the rotation in 1990 (11-6, 3.14 ERA); Wells went 15-10 in 1992.

As for Shawn Green, as I recall they kept trying to give him a full-time job and he'd then go out and hit .220 through the first half. At which point, Gaston would go back to platooning him. Green would always get hot in the second half and end up with halfway respectable final numbers. Which after a few years did seem to become a kind of self-fulfilling vicious cycle sort of thing...

Platooning used to be a kind of Jays organization philosophy, especially with young players who had yet to establish themselves. Jesse Barfield was platooned (by Cox). So was Fred McGriff (by Williams). Gaston was the hitting coach at the time. The thinking was give a young player the platoon advantage while he establishes himself as a major league hitter and once he's done that, then see if he can handle the whole job.

Source: rotoworld, I thought I would stick this in here. I don't know if Quiroz is rocking Arizona but he was worth a mention.

Guillermo Quiroz - C - Toronto Blue Jays Oct 23

Guillermo Quiroz went 3-for-4 with a double and an RBI in yesterday's Venezuelan Winter League action.
Quiroz missed the end of the minor league season with a collapsed lung, but it appears that he's fine now. The native of Venezuela is considered the Blue Jays' catcher of the future, but he'll spend 2004 in Triple-A.

I'm amazed nobody is talking about Billy going to L.A.

Billy Beane would turn that club into Giant killers virtually overnight. If the Dodgers had merely had league average players at 1B, 3B, SS, 2B, LF, CF--no superstars, but guys who can hit a little, get on base a little, and field a little--they'd have clobbered the Giants this year with that pitching staff.

And they can easily do it next year provided they hire a smart GM who knows how to find value in the seemingly most unlikely players.

It wouldn't even take signing Guerrero (although they could probably still afford that, too, if Beane finds the right low cost solutions elsewhere).

This makes so much more sense than Boston given what Beane would be expected to fix and what he would have to work with is very similar to what he's already proven he can do in Oakland. I have no doubt Beane and his new assistant wouldn't have a difficult time making those necessary changes.

Jacko

In that situation, the save was no longer possible (they were at home).


Exactly.

The point I was trying to make is that Torre is not a complete slave to the save, as others have claimed here. He will bring in Mo in non-save situations when he feels it's absolutely necessary.

He should probably be a little more flexible, and go to him in that situation earlier in the series, but maybe he feels like he's saving his bullets.

Unfortunately for Torre, this philospophy failed him in game 4 (using Weaver instead of Mo) and contributed to his team going back to New York down 3-2 instead of possibly being up 3-2.

I'm amazed nobody is talking about Billy going to L.A.

There's a school of thought that Beane is going to interview for the Dodgers job, only to turn it down and recommend DePodesta. The guys at Elephants In Oakland point out that Billy likes more of a challenge, and that he has unfinished business where he is.

In order for Beane to be respected in baseball, or regain the respect of all of baseball, even the slack-jawed ‘baseball men’, he needs to put a stamp on Oakland before he can move on.

Personally, I'd love to see him in the other league. The A's don't have to slip very much to improve the Jays' chances of making the playoffs.

Meanwhile, Bob McCown is telling the FAN morning show guys that Pat Gillick is denying, quite unconvincingly, that he's interested in running the Dodgers.

"The point I was trying to make is that Torre is not a complete slave to the save, as others have claimed here. He will bring in Mo in non-save situations when he feels it's absolutely necessary."

When there is no save to be had anymore, he will bring in Rivera in a tie game. I suppose that that suggests he isn't completely in the thrall of the SAVE, but he still makes his decisions concerning Rivera in the context of the SAVE.

As I said, his blind spot is not bringing in Rivera in the 8th or 9th in a tie game where a save is still a possibility (on the road, or at home in the 8th). These are extremely high leverage situations. On the other hand, he'll routinely bring Rivera in to pitch the 9th with his team up by 3 or 4 runs in the playoffs.

When there is no save to be had anymore, he will bring in Rivera in a tie game. I suppose that that suggests he isn't completely in the thrall of the SAVE, but he still makes his decisions concerning Rivera in the context of the SAVE.


Ah, I see what you are saying. And the evidence is right there in Game 4. Rivera was warm and ready, but it appears that Torre refused to go to him because of the chance of a save situation developing.

If that is in fact true, then Torre is an idiot. Maybe that's a little harsh, but managing your bullpen based on getting an "S" beside your star reliever's name is pretty dumb. it also means that in tie games on at home, Torre will bring in Rivera (to preserve the tie) while on the road, he'll wait until the yankees get a lead.

BTW, I still believe that leaving Rivera in to pitch the 9th in game 3 is completely defensible. Mo was already warm, and he wasn't overly taxed in finishing things off. And the game was pretty close in the 8th (2-1) when he came in.

It's defensible only insofar as does not in any way decrease the number of innings Rivera could potentially throw in Games 4 and 5. I suppose it's possible, but a lot of people on Primer were arguing that the reason Rivera wasn't used in Game 4 was because he could only go ONE inning because he went TWO in Game 3. I don't think that's the case, but the number of pitches thrown in Game 3 probably has some impact on the number he can throw the next day.

With an off-day following, allowing Rivera to pitch with his team leading by 5 runs is defensible; with 2 more games the next 2 days I think it is not.

If Gillick ends up in Los Angeles, chances are Shannon Stewart might end up there too. If there's one thing Gillick has proven, if you give him the pitching (which the Dodgers have) and the payroll room, he can improve an offence in a hurry.

Personally, I'm already sick of Beane rumours. I don't blame the first-round losses on him, unless he's ordered Eric Chavez to make outs all the time, but while I maintain a healthy respect for what he's done in Oakland, the bloom is gone for me. Seeing Terrence Long make the final out against Boston clinched it. There's simply no excuse for him to still be on the team, and I don't care about long-term contracts and small market te ams not being able to afford bench depth and yadda, yadda, yadda. Maybe at this point the best thing for the A's would be to give the GM job to Depodesta and let Beane head south, rather than what Coach has suggested. Save for a few blind spots when it comes to the bullpen, J.P. seems to know what he is doing; my hunch is that Depodesta can do the same sans the hype surrounding Beane.

If Depodesta ever does get the A's job, let's hope he isn't friends with Michael Lewis.

People, stop feeding Robert Dudek! Let's just all admit he's right about this one and move on. Thank you.

Coach:

There's a school of thought that Beane is going to interview for the Dodgers job, only to turn it down and recommend DePodesta.

I read that too and thought to myself, "Is DePodesta really that socially awkward that he needs someone else to go to the interview in his place?"

DePodesta is obviously an amazingly bright person, but that sort of thing makes me question whether he has the interpersonal and leadership skills to helm a baseball franchise. I think DePodesta taking over Oakland, where Beane's sheer force of will has already transformed the organization at almost all levels to being statistical analysis friendly, is a better option.

Billy can always find a new assistant in L.A. on the credits page of the latest issue of BP.

Gitz:

You make a good point about Terrence Long.

I mostly agree with Beane when he attributes the A's postseason woes to bad luck, saying, "My s*** doesn't work in the postseason". But it's not totally true: Beane's (and presumably DePodesta's) bizarre obsession with Terrence Long cost them this time in the end. Yes, Macha mismanaged his pinch hitters. But Long should not even have been there as an option on the bench. As Neyer writes, "The trick isn't playing the right guys. It's getting them."

If Gillick ends up in Los Angeles, chances are Shannon Stewart might end up there too. If there's one thing Gillick has proven, if you give him the pitching (which the Dodgers have) and the payroll room, he can improve an offence in a hurry.

If you replace "Gillick" with "Beane", I agree with you 100%. I think Gillick's a good GM, and that the U.S.S. Mariner crew are way too hard on him, but when I think of "improve an offence in a hurry" I don't think of Gillick. (Not that I think he's incapable of it. I just wouldn't say it's his specialty, especially if he's working under a tight budget.)

Beane, on the other hand, has had to deal with the departures of Giambi, Durham, Damon (and catastrophic injury to Dye), and still managed to field a good offensive club (and this year, a great defensive club) on the cheap year after year.

The Dodgers are like the A's on crack: better pitching, better pitcher's park, and even more money for a bargain hunting GM to find just enough offense and defense to make the club a consistent division winner.

Billy can always find a new assistant in L.A. on the credits page of the latest issue of BP.

Given the often unfiltered love BP shows for the A's, it's pretty obvious most of the BP people agree with you, Jurgen.

According to Kevin Yamamura of the Sacramento Bee, The A's have denied permission to the Mariners to speak with Beane.

Elsewhere, John Fay of the Cincinnati Enquirer says the Reds have made their GM choice:

The Reds are set to name Texas assistant general manager Dan O'Brien as the new general manager.

O'Brien was one of three finalists brought in for a second interview Wednesday. Minnesota assistant general manager Wayne Krivsky and Montreal GM Omar Minaya were also brought in for follow-up interviews.

espn.com reports that Grady Little will be fired by Boston this afternoon- surprise, surprise. Leading candidates to replace him are Charlie Manuel, Jerry Remy, Willie Randolph, Lee Mazilli, Glenn Hoffman and Terry Francona. All former ballplayers with significant ML time.

In one sense, I'm hoping that the Sox pass on Randolph, so that he will be available when the Jays go looking for a successor to Tosca. On the other, Randolph played the game with a rare intelligence and I hope for him that his brains and perseverance lands him a managerial job somewhere.

Willie ... managing the Red Sox? Gaaah! Say it ain't so.

Counting on Randolph to succeed Torre in 2005.

Mick, gut reaction -- Torre back next year or no?

Yeah, I think so. You?