Jump to content

Manager's Share of Success


Texsox

After the team is set, how big a factor is the manager vs. the players?  

17 members have voted

  1. 1. After the team is set, how big a factor is the manager vs. the players?

    • 100% Players - 0% Manager
      1
    • 90% Players - 10% Manager
      6
    • 75% Players - 25% Manager
      9
    • 50% - 50%
      1
    • 25% - Players - 75% Manager
      0
    • 0% Players - 100% Manager
      0
    • It's All Luck
      0


Recommended Posts

I couldn't vote Tex because I think it depends. Hawk made a nice statement last night about this very thing, he said that once a team finds its stride the manager's job is to step back and let it ride. Now when you say "the team is set" do you mean they've hit their stride or are you just saying the roster is set? IMO, JM had a set team but didn't do anything with it to help them get on a roll, get their heads in the right place, which is very much the manager's job. I'll give OG credit for getting this team where they're at but now they're on their own, until they hit an extended losing streak, at which point it's time for OG to step back in and manage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't vote Tex because I think it depends.  Hawk made a nice statement last night about this very thing, he said that once a team finds its stride the manager's job is to step back and let it ride.  Now when you say "the team is set" do you mean they've hit their stride or are you just saying the roster is set?  IMO, JM had a set team but didn't do anything with it to help them get on a roll, get their heads in the right place, which is very much the manager's job.  I'll give OG credit for getting this team where they're at but now they're on their own, until they hit an extended losing streak, at which point it's time for OG to step back in and manage.

How about from a season perspective, not a day to day thing? This was partially out of a comment yesterday about a coach I don't remember that went

 

He could take his team and beat yours, then he could take your team and beat his. That sounds like a huge difference.

 

Would a different manager have WhiteSox v2004 2 games under .500?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about from a season perspective, not a day to day thing? This was partially out of a comment yesterday about a coach I don't remember that went

 

He could take his team and beat yours, then he could take your team and beat his. That sounds like a huge difference.

 

Would a different manager have WhiteSox v2004 2 games under .500?

The quote you heard was about a basketball coach. I heard it last night on ESPN when they were talking about the guy coaching Indiana wanting revenge against 'his' old team, Detroit.

 

The problem with the poll is that the manager doesn't influence the winning of games as much as he can lose them. A good manager might win you 6 or 7 games a year, but a bad one can lose you 2 to 3 times that many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...