Larry Dierker is better than Bob Brenly

[The Cat]

As much as I hated Dierker, Bob Brenly has got to be the biggest idiot in the majors. Schilling got hit like crazy in the 7th. The Yanks scored 1 run, but the Diamondbacks got very lucky and made a couple of good plays to only keep it tied. It was obvious he was tired, he was losing his stuff, and with him leading off the next inning, it was the perfect opportunity for a pinch hitter. Nope. Brenly keeps an obviously fatigued Schilling in here, and in the 8th Soriano probably wins it with a homer. (considering Rivera)

If the Yanks win this game and series, they should give the MVP trophy to Brenly... they sure couldn't have won it without him.

[Drewdog]

And why he kept going to Kim as his closer boggles my mind. I mean it was obvious that the dude was rattled after the Jeter bomb in Game 5.

[Rocketman95]

He's made 4 huge mistakes in this series, IMO.

1. Pulling Schilling in game 4.

2. Letting Kim throw 62 pitches in game 4.

3. Putting in a reliever who threw 62 pitches the night before, never mind the mental disadvantage after the night before.

4. Not pinch hitting for Schilling tonight.

Had he not done 1 of those things, save the last one, the Diamondbacks would've ended the Yankees reign atop the league (or should I say, atop the richest 10 teams).

[Clutch]

hey guys.... the "biggest idiot in the majors" just won the World Series.

[Rocketman95]

No help from him...woulda won it in 5 if not for that dumbass.

[The Cat]

Originally posted by Clutch
hey guys.... the "biggest idiot in the majors" just won the World Series.

And he tried his best to lose it it seemed like. His players bailed him out of this one-- Brenly did not manage a good Series, even with the win.

Anyway, who cares...

LUIS GONZALEZ WINS THE WORLD SERIES!

YANKEES LOSE!

[mfclark]

DOWN WITH THE YANKS!

RANDY JOHNSON IS GOD! MVP MVP MVP!

THE MYSTIQUE IS BROKEN!

[Timing]

Let's play question the World Series winning manager. :rolleyes: Better yet, let's compare him to a manager who's never won a single playoff series. Alrighty...

[The Cat]

I don't suppose that could have anything to do with having two of the best pitchers ever, could it? When Larry has that combo, then tell me who's the better manager...

[RocksMillenium]

Amazing how the guy made a ton of great moves, he makes a few mistakes and the guy is an idiot. Idiots don't take an offensively challenged team and beat a dynasty for a world championship. Houston is a much more rounded and balanced team then Arizona and hasn't done jack squat. They have a better record then Arizona, yet Arizona wins the championship. If Dierker was the better manager, why is he sitting at home without a job while Brenly is celebrating a championship. You act like this is a talent laden team, this team has freaking Reggie Sanders, an aging Matt Williams, Counsel, Kim and MIKE MORGAN on their team! Their bullpen is bad. By the way Cat, Arizona had the 2 best pitchers in baseball last year, not only did they not make the playoffs, I think they finished 3rd or 4th, so give the guy some credit. If it was just about having dominant pitchers, Atlanta would make the World Series every year, and New York would have won another championship. Seattle was the most balanced team in baseball, and New York steamrolled them, yet Arizona beat them. Brenly is a pretty good manager.

[haven]

I've always liked the adage that Managers can't win games, but they sure as hell can lose them.

Managers, at their best, do exactly what they're supposed to. In fact, I think in baseball (not basketball/football/soccer, etc) almost any idiot could manage a team for a day during the game and do just about as well as most managers.

To me, the key to being a successful manager is all about making the clubhouse a good place to be, identifying problems with players, and delegating authority to good coaches, etc. Roster decisions are also important.

At game time, the manager just has to avoid screwing up. Brenly screwed up a little too much for my taste.

That's the good thing about Joe Torre. He seldom makes does anything stupid.

[Major]

Brenly started an amazing number of secondary players who came through with clutch hits throughout the playoffs and world series. If we're going to criticize managers for starting young players / rookies / odd-choices (ie, Lugo), then we have to give a manager credit when those moves work out.

It's silly to say managers can only make mistakes. If it were that easy, there are a ton of people who can make the "textbook" move each time. The problem is that "good moves" get credited to good plays by the players while "bad moves" get blamed on the manager. Who keeps track of all the bunts, hit & runs, run & hits, defensive alignments, pitchouts, etc that can make or break a team? I certainly don't, but they all contribute to winning & losing.

Brenly & his team won a world series -- that's all that matters. The fact that he did it with an offensively inept team (they scored 13 runs in their first 7 postseason games) and no real bullpen to speak of against a team that was on an amazing run makes it that much more spectacular.

[Clutch]

Originally posted by The Cat
I don't suppose that could have anything to do with having two of the best pitchers ever, could it? When Larry has that combo, then tell me who's the better manager...

Uh The Cat, Dierker had one of those very same "best pitchers ever" in 1998 and couldn't squeeze a playoff win out of him in 2 attempts.

However, if you're saying you can only compare the two when Dierker has Johnson <I>and</I> Schilling on his roster, well then that's not going to happen. Why? Because Brenly has a job and a world series ring and <B>Larry's been fired</B>.

[Rocketman95]

Originally posted by shanna
If we're going to criticize managers for starting young players / rookies / odd-choices (ie, Lugo), then we have to give a manager credit when those moves work out.

No, we criticized Dierker for starting players when we felt it was obvious that they weren't getting the job done, not just because they were no names.

The fact that he did it with an offensively inept team (they scored 13 runs in their first 7 postseason games) and no real bullpen to speak of against a team that was on an amazing run makes it that much more spectacular.

He had nothing to do with the fact that Schilling and Johnson are amazing pitchers. The Astros can't score in the playoffs, but they didn't have the luxury of having Schilling and Johnson this year.

His team won a world series -- that's all that matters.

His team won a world series -- despite him doing his best to give it to the Yankees.

[haven]

It's silly to say managers can only make mistakes. If it were that easy, there are a ton of people who can make the "textbook" move each time. The problem is that "good moves" get credited to good plays by the players while "bad moves" get blamed on the manager. Who keeps track of all the bunts, hit & runs, run & hits, defensive alignments, pitchouts, etc that can make or break a team? I certainly don't, but they all contribute to winning & losing

The "text book" move is such because it pays off more often than not. Other moves are labelled brilliant if they pay off, and lousy if they don't. I prefer to think they're mostly lousy, given the fact that the odds are against them. There's nothing more annoying than an annoucer who tells the tv audience how horrible a move is... until it pays off. The truth is, that bad moves pay off sometimes... that doesn't make them good retroactively.

I was watching the Saints game, not the World Series tonight, and Jim Haslett decided to accept a 5 yard penalty after the Jets failed to convert a 3rd and 7. The Jets were in easy field goal range in either case, so I thought it was retarded to exchange a down for 5 yards when they were only down by 4. Well, after an off-sides penalty, the 5 yards were revoked. But the Jets missed the FG eventually anyway. The announcers said Haslett made the right call. No he didn't... he was lucky (and I even like Haslett, generally).

I don't think Brenly necessarily gets credit for playing who he did; it's not like there was a lot of choice in the matter, as far as I could tell.

I've said it once, I'll say it again... everything is recorded in baseball. From the first pitch to the last, and everything in between. You can quantify any given situation, and probably find thousands others exactly like it that took place before. What paid off more than anything else over the course of the past situations? Well, that's what the manager should probably do.

Who knows? It could be that I'm wrong, and certain people have a miraculous ability to shake their crystal balls, take a quick glimpse at the clouds, look deep intoe their players eyes, and put in that PH who's only hitting .198, but the manager just has a "feeling" about them. That could be true. But I rather doubt it.

I'd rather have someone who doesnt' screw up than a live-by-the-gut, shake up the roster type of manager anyway.

Which is why I despise Jimy Williams.

[Timing]

Originally posted by The Cat
I don't suppose that could have anything to do with having two of the best pitchers ever, could it? When Larry has that combo, then tell me who's the better manager...

Well if it's that simple then why didn't you just call it before the playoffs. DBacks are going to take the Series because they have two of the best pitchers ever... just like last year when they didn't even make the playoffs under Bucky Schowalter. BTW, Clemens and Maddux both have more Cy Youngs by themselves than Randy and Schilling combined so there are some pretty damn good pitchers out there not named Johnson and Schilling.

With the exception of 1997, Dierker has never been at a talent disadvantage in the playoffs. Let's not forget the Astros, despite all of the injuries, actually had a better regular season record than the World Series champs.

[Major]

<B>He had nothing to do with the fact that Schilling and Johnson are amazing pitchers. The Astros can't score in the playoffs, but they didn't have the luxury of having Schilling and Johnson this year. </B>

OK, so to you, what makes a good manager? If everything good is player-based, then how does a manager become "not bad"? Every manager will make non-normal calls. Some eventually won't work out, so it seems to me that makes them all "bad managers" according to you guys.

Of all the managers out there, who do you think is a good one?

<B>Who knows? It could be that I'm wrong, and certain people have a miraculous ability to shake their crystal balls, take a quick glimpse at the clouds, look deep intoe their players eyes, and put in that PH who's only hitting .198, but the manager just has a "feeling" about them. That could be true. But I rather doubt it. </B>

I simply don't believe baseball is all about statistics. Statistics break down overall situations, but every situation is unique, every batter/pitcher combination is different, and every play can be broken down far more than any recorded stat. Stats don't tell us whether a particular pitcher was ignoring runners on a given night, leading to a likelier possibility of a stolen base. Stats don't tell us whether a particular pitcher is leaving his pitches high creating a good situation for a high-ball hitting. Stats don't tell us whether a pitcher is ripe for a hit & run because his breaking ball isn't breaking quite so much making contact more likely. Stats provide general trends. The nuances of specific situations can only be analyzed by people smarter than me, and that's the job of the manager.

I refuse to believe it was random luck that two nights in a row, on the biggest stage in baseball, the Yankees hit two-out, two-run game-saving home runs. There's simply more to baseball than luck and stats, in my opinion.

[Raven Lunatic]

Originally posted by haven


I don't think Brenly necessarily gets credit for playing who he did; it's not like there was a lot of choice in the matter, as far as I could tell.


I don't think anyone is suggesting that the DBacks get credit for <b>playing</b> the Yankees, but for <b>beating</b> them.

[haven]

I refuse to believe it was random luck that two nights in a row, on the biggest stage in baseball, the Yankees hit two-out, two-run game-saving home runs. There's simply more to baseball than luck and stats, in my opinion.

And is there some mandate that Jeter suck before hitting that home run? Jeter was actually atrocious in that series, something like 4/27.

Is he "clutch" and magical because he managed that homerun? or did he get dominated because he hit under .200.

And yes, Curt Schilling and RJ had something to do with that. But the Yankees didn't exactly jump all over the other Arizona pitchers. And Kim ain't exactly a bad pitcher himself.

You don't have to be "clutch" if you take care of business in the 4th inning.

[DVauthrin]

Rocksmill,

I agree that arizonas bullpen is weak, but byung hyun kim isnt, he is flat out nasty in terms of stuff, he just had a bad series.

Anyways, im sooo happy


ARIZONA(GONZO,FINLEY,RJ,CURT) WINS THE SERIES

THE WE BUY OUR CHAMPIONSHIP YANKEES GET A TASTE OF THEIR OWN MEDICINE.

AND NOW MAYBE NOW, THE MEDIA WILL STOP KISSING JETERS *** AND RIVERAS POSTSEASON CLOSER MYTH CRAP IS OVER!!!!!!!

Great Night, thats all i have to say

[Rocketman95]

I really couldn't tell you who I thought was a good manager. For one, I don't watch enough baseball to make that call, and I'm not going to let ESPN or SI tell me. Two, I honestly don't think that managing a baseball team is that hard. The hardest thing, IMO, is keeping control of the clubhouse...something most managers are capable of doing. The game to game calling of plays, to me, could be done by most people with half a baseball mind. It doesn't take a genius to read a stat page that says so and so hits .140 against this pitcher, let's pinch hit him. Most baseball fans know when it's a good time to shift the infield or put a hit and run in play. Most baseball fans know that you shouldn't let your closer throw 62 pitches, and then throw him out there the next night...especially when each pitch is pressure packed.

Coaching, especially in baseball, has and always will be the position that takes the blame. If it wasn't, we wouldn't have coaching in the first place. Their job is to call plays, make sure those plays are executed, and motivate players, among other things. People always say that the coaches called the right game, but the players didn't execute. Well, who's fault is that? A coaches job is to ensure that players are prepared physically and mentally. Players do deserve criticism as well, but coaching, by nature, will always be the one to blame when things go wrong. And things nearly went disastrously wrong for the Diamondbacks because of Brenly.

[Major]

<B>I really couldn't tell you who I thought was a good manager. For one, I don't watch enough baseball to make that call, and I'm not going to let ESPN or SI tell me. </B>

Hmm... I'm guessing if we watched enough teams, we'd find mistakes by every manager, meaning every manager in the majors is bad.

<B>People always say that the coaches called the right game, but the players didn't execute. Well, who's fault is that? A coaches job is to ensure that players are prepared physically and mentally. </B>

Well, then when the players DO execute, that means the coaches/manager did a good job, right? Given that Brenly's team obviously executed the necessary plays (playing good defense, etc) over the course of the playoffs, it seems to me that would make him a good manager.

<B>And things nearly went disastrously wrong for the Diamondbacks because of Brenly.</B>

Seems to me this is mostly hindsight.

1. Pulling Schilling in game 4.

If he didn't pull him and they lost that game or Game #6, then Shilling wouldn't have been available for Game #7. Then people would have criticized that move. Why wouldn't you trust your star closer -- who had also pitched 6 innings of 1-hit baseball in the postseason and was very fresh? He also got 5 strikeouts in 2 innings in that game.

2. Letting Kim throw 62 pitches in game 4.

Kim is not your "normal" closer. He routinely works 2+ innings, and often throws 50+ pitches. He pitched over 100 innings this year, near the top of the relief pitching charts.

3. Putting in a reliever who threw 62 pitches the night before, never mind the mental disadvantage after the night before.

Kim has also come in several nights in a row this season, with no problems. Randy Johnson pitched a night after throwing 100 pitches with no problems. Rivera pitched in 3 straight games. Kim has pitched 4 days in a row at least twice this season.

As for the mental disadvantage, if there was a Game #8, do you think Joe Torre shouldn't have pitched Mariano Rivera? If the Astros had a 1-run lead in Game #2, would you have preferred bringing in a mediocre pitcher (Jackson, Villone) over Wagner since he got bombed in Game #1? It seems to me you pitch your best players if they are capable.

4. Not pinch hitting for Schilling tonight.

Why? Shilling had one bad inning. He also had one in the 6th inning in his last start and went on to pitch well after that. Why should he have clearly been pulled here but not be pulled in Game #4? Is it better to go with the guy who dominated all night except for one inning, or take a chance on a pitcher who threw 100+ pitches the night before?

These are all easy to say they were bad decisions after the fact, but unless we know what would have happened otherwise, the answers aren't quite so clear.

If you don't pull Shilling in Game #4 and he gives up runs, people will say he was obviously tiring and should have been pulled. If Kim gets one more out in Game #5, everyone is saying it was a great move to bring him right back into the mix. If Shilling is pinch hit for and RJ sucks, everyone would say "Shilling shouldn't have been pulled".

Bottom line, to me, is that all the decisions as a whole worked out for the DBacks and Brenly has to get some of the credit.

EDIT: PS - I'm not saying these were all good decisions, but they are made far worse by the fact that they didn't work out, and I don't think they were as clearcut as they are being made out to be. Lots of people -- myself included -- thought pitching Shilling in Game #4 was a bad idea, but that worked out very well by making him available for Game #7. Sure, they might have won regardless, but they also might not have. It seems we quickly forget the "good" decisions when criticizing managers.

[The Cat]

Originally posted by Clutch


Uh The Cat, Dierker had one of those very same "best pitchers ever" in 1998 and couldn't squeeze a playoff win out of him in 2 attempts.

However, if you're saying you can only compare the two when Dierker has Johnson <I>and</I> Schilling on his roster, well then that's not going to happen. Why? Because Brenly has a job and a world series ring and <B>Larry's been fired</B>.

If Bob Brenly didn't have those two pitchers, he'd be fired as well.

And by the way, Gregg Popovich has a championship ring in the NBA. Do you guys think he's a good coach? I hope not.

[Desert Scar]

Brenly did 2 things great all postseason: 1) picking the starting players game by game, and 2), most importantly, setting the tone for his players by being consistently positive and relaxed. I think Joe Torre does all these things, and is an even better game tactician (another debate).

Brenly made quite a few bad tactical moves with his pitchers however, and not just in the WS. But specifically in the WS, I think there were a number of boneheaded moves. I would have let Schilling start the 8th in game 4 like he did in game 7. One, he might finish it, or two even if he only gets an extra out or two Kim would come in against fewer batters-- both reducing his pitches and reducing the Yankee's chances to read his unorthodox delivery. Nonetheless, though I would have kept Schilling in a little longer in game 4, I think it was defensable to go with Kim in the 8th and 9th--the guy was having a good post season run except for some shaky pitching against the Cards early in that series, so you still have a great chance for a win and give Schilling a better chance to recover for game 7. However, once Kim had blown the save it would seem to be a nobrainer to take him out of that game however. Further, in Game 5 there is no way I would have gone back to Kim again-he had given up 2 gopher balls in his last two innings and pitched more the previous night than he had all year. Dumb move. Personally, I would have had the Unit out there to secure the 3-2 series lead then worry about getting 1 more victory, but that me. Regardless, it should have been someone other than Kim relieving Batista, or perhaps relief by committee (Morgan, Swindell, eveyone else). I also agree it was pretty stupid not to pinch hit for Schilling in the 7th inining because he had already given up the lead and had been giving up multiple hard hit balls--some when for hits and some went for almost hits. You are basically given up a chance to get a head in a tie game by having him lead off as well. Also, I watched the tape and Schilling did not have the command he had early, many of the hard hit balls had moved on the plate from where Miller was setting up--that was not happening earlier in the game. That said, the pitch Soriano hit was a very good pitch. It is remarkable that Soriano stayed alive that at bat (one pitch he fouled off with 2 strikes hit the ground and bat at about the same time) and golfed a splitter just BELOW the knees over the fence. You just have to credit Soriano for that at bat. Given Brely was open to the idea of pitching the Unit in game 7 as well, it also didn't make sense for him to be in there about the 6th inning for sure. Albie Lopez (who isn't good but who isn't as bad as his record indicates) wouldn't even had given up that lead.

So Yes, Brenly made a number of boneheaded moves with his pitchers. You would think as a former catcher he would know better, maybe he was just a little too close to his pitchers. But I can't fault too much else. Most important was that he played aggressively on the bases and set the tone by being positive and relaxed. Those are things Dirker never has done for his players and IMO why they have been such EASY teams to beat in the playoffs. Interestingly, the #1 team the DBacks feared this season was the Stros (they said this in the Pheonix paper). Just goes to show you they never had to play the Stros in the playoffs where their players and their manager are tighter than a frogs kiester.

And BTW the Stros RJ team was far better on paper than this Dbacks team. The only advantage this Dbacks team on paper had was the #2 starter. They probably had equal #1's and equal (good) defense, with the strong having far superior offensive players (hitters and speed), far better bullpen and more solid 3rd and 4th starters. The difference in results has a lot to do with the managers, it is not like RJ and Stros pitching staff didn't pitch well that year. They blew it on offense and the manager set the tone for how they would play offensively.