SB Nation User Blog: billy pilgrim

I can't let it go: fire dusty

billy pilgrim — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 19:42:35 -0000

I'm not sure exactly why I'm bugging out so much about firing him. I guess I just want the bad movie to be over.

So the possible reasons for keeping Dusty for the rest of the season include...

*    "The guys we might want to manage next year aren't available, so we might as well keep him."
*    "We're not sure if any of the guys `in-house' would do any better, so we might as well keep him."
*    "There's not much time left in the season and he can't screw them up any more than he has, so we might as well keep him."
*    "He's going to continue to be manager next season and beyond."

Although I see some merit to each of these, and while I believe that Hendry will wait until the season is over to "not re-sign" Dusty, I don't think choosing him to be the manager for the remainder of the season (and it is a choice) contributes to the development of any of the guys who will be on the roster next year, which in turn, means that we're not taking any steps closer to winning a world series.

From where I'm typing, which is a long way from the clubhouse, if we're not getting closer to the world series, than we're wasting our time. Even if we have a major overhaul of the roster (12-14 players or so) that still leaves a core group of guys on the big league roster who will be with us next year. And, currently there are players here in September who won't be on the big league roster, but who will remain in the organization in Iowa or West Tennessee. These two groups of players and their individual and collective development are what really matter to me.

The questions for the next few weeks then are "How are we going to help them improve so that we're going to get closer to our goal, a world championship?" and "Is the guy we have leading them helping or hindering their development?"

To me, dusty clearly is hindering them.

So, if we look at the first two reasons, "the long-term guy isn't available" and "the in-house guys might not do any better", I would respond, "In Dusty, we currently don't have a long-term answer," and "We don't know for sure if in-house guys would do better, but we know they won't do worse." These arguments seem to be rooted in, as well as placing a value, on stability and predictability. That is, "we might as well stick with the poison we got, because we know how it'll kill us. We're prepared for it."

That just seems like non-sense and a waste of time to me. If we agree that the focus of the last few weeks of this horrendous season are about helping a core group of guys get better and we identify those guys as players who have jumped back and forth from the minor league and big league roster all year, then why not give one of the minor league managers some big league experience for a few weeks, and, at the same time, continue his guidance and tutelage that many of our core guys have had this season in West Tennessee or Iowa? And, really does the way dusty manage provide any sort of stability or predictability that would enable some of these core group of guys to learn and get better?

The third possible reason, "there's not much time left in the season, so why bother," is exactly the kind of attitude you don't want your players or organization to develop. No day should be a waste toward the ultimate goal. In firing dusty now, Hendry could send the message that even though this season is the absolute worst one the organization has endured in many, many ways, the organization still has the goal and commitment to work toward excellence - to improve each and every day - in small and large ways. It's been obvious that under dusty's guidance, the players - individually and collectively - haven't taken steps toward excellence. He's not leading him there.

As for the fourth reason, "he's going to manage next year," god help us if that's true.

Like I said, I'm resigned to the fact that dusty will finish out the season, but I still haven't heard a good reason why that should be. And, I know that many of you we're calling for his firing long ago, but I'm a patient man and I guess it took awhile for my frustration to boil over. But, man, I'm just tired of the team I root for doing things in such an unprincipled, surface-deep, and ad-hoc way. Fire dusty now and set the tone that excellence and improvement are demanded in this organization, because if they are not, why bother?

Why Wait?: Fire Dusty Now

billy pilgrim — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 20:05:47 -0000

Update [2006-9-5 19:44:58 by billy pilgrim]:I changed the title of this diary because I really want to hear some reasons for keeping him around any longer. As a long-time lurker of BCB it's about time I contribute and I simply need to rant. It is time to fire baker. Not in the off-season. Not moments after the final game. Today.

In today's Tribune, Maddux gives us two reasons...

I'm a first time poster, so be kind, or rant along...
see Louis Salazar's diary for more on the Maddux article...
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/story/2006/9/4/212428/7700

Here's the link to the trib
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-060904gregmaddux,1,7236812.story?col l=cs-home-headlines

1.When speaking about his new clubhouse...
"That's the way it should be," Maddux said. "You can actually get ready for the game. It's easier to talk, it's just ... quieter."

2. When speaking about the guys playing behind him, he said...
"I've seen more plays here in a month than I've seen in the last three months." And, "Turning double plays, I don't know how many we've turned here, but there have been some you can't believe."

I was excited when the Cubs signed Maddux, because he simply embodies professionalism, and I hoped it would rub off on the others. As he correctly noted, though, during that first press conference for his second trip with the Cubs, it wasn't his job to "mentor" the younger pitchers. That is, it's not one player's job to teach other players how to go about their professional careers. Nope. You need a leader, and in the world of baseball that leader has the official job title of "manager." Although I've never been in a major league clubhouse, I would imagine it's the job of the manager to set the standards for what is or is not acceptable in the clubhouse. And, while some big league teams have veterans to help cultivate and sustain professionalism, when teams do not, it is the manager's j.o.b. If the manager doesn't like that role or doesn't feel as though that's the way to run a clubhouse, then he's got to teach a player or a group of players to take on that role. That is, he's either got to be a leader, allow leaders to do what they do best, or cultivate the leadership qualities in some player(s) in order to get a leader. From the outside looking in and from making inferences through Maddux's comments, we have a leadership vacuum in the clubhouse. And it's simply unacceptable.

Not only does a manager have to provide leadership, but he's got to emphasize some part of the game, something his team can create an identity around, some sort of style that provides some sort of structure for his players (and fans) to grasp on to. For Maddux and his new team, it seems like it is defense. For other teams it is power hitting or lights-out starting pitching or "small ball." I'm not sure what the style of the Cubs is this year. [Insert snark here about swinging at first pitches, lack of clutch hitting, or extending middle relievers]. If a team doesn't have an identity, the manager is supposed to shape or form one.

And, while Hendry is complicit in providing particular kinds of players, the manager still has a responsibility to take what he has and work with it. Coach them. Teach them. Scold them behind closed doors. There seems to be a lack of accountability or, at the very least, no boundaries for what is considered the kind of baseball Dusty wants his team and his players to play.

To be sure, this is also an organizational problem. Maybe the organization has a bunch of guys who don't want to learn. Maybe we just have lousy teachers up and down the system. Maybe the general manager, the one I've been giving a pass to for years because he stole two good players for Todd Hundley, isn't sure what kind of baseball he wants his teams to play. But Dusty has done a seemingly lousy job of leading and teaching his players.

And, we have a ton of young players on the roster, including, I would argue, D. Lee. We can debate all winter long about the kind of organization, team, and manager we wish our Cubs would embody, but for now, I would just like any sort of clarity and a few boundaries. Personally, I'm for a roster filled with guys who aren't afraid to have two strikes on them, who know how to hit to right field with a guy on and less than two out, and a staff of groundball pitchers who trust their fielders -for good reasons - to do their jobs. But if we can't have that, then I'd settle for simply having a manager who actually helps his players improve. And, really, who has improved under Dusty's tutelage? Does he really get the most out of what he has? What's the point of having him here if no one is going to get better? Is just the experience of being in the big leagues enough? I think not. Players need to learn and managers are the ones who help create situations for that learning to take place. Don't waste anyone else's time. Dusty isn't teaching the youngsters or any of the guys who will be on the roster next year.

On his new manager, Maddux said, "I trust Grady's judgment. Whatever he thinks is best for team is best for me." I wish I could say the same for Dusty.

Be gone.

Today.