Loading ...John Fay says that Pete Mackanin will be the Reds manager in 2008. Let the discussion begin.
I don’t know whether Mackanin is the best available manager for this team. If he is, then he should be hired. Period. If he isn’t the best candidate available, then why would you keep him around just because he was manager when the team reverted to the mean in the second half? Hire the best candidate!
I do know this: the Reds have had spectacularly bad results in removing the “interim” tag from their managers. I also know that Mackanin’s record looks pretty good right now.
I just hope the Reds aren’t bullied into hiring Mackanin by articles like this one and by pressure from fans, if another (better) candidate for the job is available. (And I don’t mean LaRussa; I’ll vomit if they hire him.)
Don’t like to say it but I pretty much agree with everything Fay says in the article.
IF Mackanin finishes strong to compliment the strong start,
IF (God forbid) LaRussa doesn’t want it,
IF it’s obvious the players are responding.
Also agree with having some parts to deal with the lot of Keppinger, Freel, Hopper, Gonzalez and Encarnacion. What worries me is making room for Bruce because he doesn’t seem like he’s going to be waiting patiently in AAA next year. Something tells me he’ll be earning a job coming out of spring training with no where to put him
I heard Marty and I think it was Hal (got into the conversation in the middle) chortling about how good Mackanin is with the media. So that is part of their love/interest with him–he “plays ball” with the reporters and makes them feel good.
But having said that, results this year speak for themselves and I have no problem with the Enquirer article and its premise of hiring Mackanin for a full year. Take the money saved from hiring a LaRussa (and I would barf too with him at the helm) and use it to eat some contracts, like Stanton’s, etc.
Set aside the won/loss record and look deeper:
1) Does Mackanin truly have the respect of the team?
2) Are they improving fundamentally?
3) Does he make his own decisions on the field without front-office interference?
4) Does he go the extra mile (practice) to get this team to execute?
5) Is he fearless in his decision making? Do the decisions make sense? Is he afraid to make a decision?
To this point, he passes the test. Let’s wait until October 1st though to make the final evaluation.
No one is more surprised or pleased with PM than me. What impresses me is how- not what- the players speak about him. It’s clear that for this team, PM has the right approach. Look at how his change in approach to pitchers has changed the bullpen. It’s remarkable. He’s not afraid to do things his way, and at this point, I think he deserves strong consideration. Not a done deal, but very strong consideration.
I seem to agree too. Like crypticphrasing said, I’d rather the Reds hiring Pete and eat contracts of Stanton, etc than pay big bucks for a “big name” manager.
Plus, at least right now, you can’t fault the way PM has the team playing…and talking to the media… The team is exuding a confidence that I haven’t seen in a long time!
I agree with Chad. If he is the best candidate for the job then hire him. But if there is a better candidate then hire that person.
I want Joe Giradi. I’m not willing to put my faith in an older guy who has had no track record of success. Giradi helped developed young talent and was an amazing manager for the Marlins. If the Reds again decide to keep another interim manager (see: Miley, Narron), I will cry.
I agree with you Matt on Girardi, but I don’t think PM is a bad choice. I mean we all want to pull out our hair the way the Reds develop their talent, but PM seems like a guy who knows how to get the most out of his players rather than plug them into a favorable numbers situation (see Narron).
I’m neither for nor against hiring Girardi, but he had one season as manager. It’s not like he’s got a long track record himself.