Interesting article about Dusty and the Reds

[jake2bake4]

www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/2008/03/23/2008-03-23_dusty_baker_returns_with_upstart_reds.html?page=1

Pretty good article about our Reds. Talks about the hiring of Baker and what he can bring to our young team.

[Lark11]

Interesting article, though I'm not sure I'm quite on board with most of it. For one, I do find it disturbing that Castellini big-footed Krivsky into hiring a "name" manager. I'm not entirely sure Cast is qualified to make such decisions, but if this is true then I think he certainly deserves the "credit" (or more likely the blame) for Dusty.

Also, it always strikes me as funny when a big market reporter seems to discover the Reds for the first time, as if they never even existed prior to the article. As for the rest of the article, I found this paragraph to be of interest:

What Baker discovered was the same thing fellow older and successful managers Lou Piniella and Jim Leyland discovered before him. Today's new-wave, stats-consumed general managers aren't interested in hiring established high-profile managers with proven track records, preferring instead to develop their own at mostly entry level salaries. (See: John Russell in Pittsburgh, Trey Hillman in Kansas City, Bob Geren in Oakland, Manny Acta in Washington, Bud Black in San Diego). It takes special circumstances for the Piniellas, Leylands and Bakers to get hired, mainly the owner's involvement. In Baker's case, Reds owner Bob Castellini superceded his GM, Wayne Krivsky (who was of a mind to retain Pete Mackanin, who'd gone 41-39 after taking over the Reds from Jerry Narron last July) and made it clear he wanted a "name" manager.

I'm not entirely sure this is accurate. First, I don't think Sweet Lou ever had any difficulty getting work. The same can be said for Tony LaRussa and Joe Torre. As for Jim Leyland, if memory serves, he was very selective about where he wanted to manage. I don't believe it was a question of him not getting offers, but rather not getting the RIGHT offer. In actuality, Dusty is one of the few established managers that had difficulty finding work, which speaks to specific concerns about Dusty, not some broader preference for cheaper, unestablished young managers.

As for the preference for "new managers," I'm not quite sure that's fair either. Trey Hillman has years of managerial experience, first in the minors and later in Japan. Manny Acta is a good young manager and Bud Black has long been regarded as a top managerial candidate. The preference of some teams to phase in some new managerial blood, rather than bringing in an old warhorse isn't exactly new or unwise.

Quality managerial candidates are always going to emerge and with the limited number of jobs to go around, sometimes youth pushes out old. Dusty brought his employment difficulties on himself with his style of managing and his conduct at his jobs. Until now, no team has been interested in having Dusty and his tendencies at the helm of their MLB roster.