No surprises here. Two obvious choices.

AL Ballot was closer than it should have been. No way Girardi should have gotten a first place vote, let alone four.

is this a fluke or is tracy actually turning into a good manager? he doesn't get a lot of respect around here.

Rats, these accurate ballots are no fun!

is this a fluke or is tracy actually turning into a good manager?

Wait until next year. If he starts lobbying to bring in players who played for him on the Dodgers, then he probably hasn't learned anything. If not, then he may be developing.

is this a fluke or is tracy actually turning into a good manager?

I think it's a fluke myself, and that the Rockies will regret hiring Tracy by some point next summer.

-- MWE

Washington and Wakematsu should have gotten more support than they did. I understand the support for Girardi - there were any number of people who thought that the Yankees might implode under the weight of the expectations, and they didn't.

-- MWE

Can't argue with either winner, at least not in a way that changes the result.

I understand the support for Girardi - there were any number of people who thought that the Yankees might implode under the weight of the expectations, and they didn't.

Well, sure, I can see giving him a third place vote. *Maybe* a second place vote. But IMO, the AL Managers this year were:

1) Scioscia
2) Gardenhire

BIG GAP

Everyone else

Anyone that didn't win this year can still bid on Tony Pena's 2003 Manager of the Year Award on sale at Ebay.

No way Girardi should have gotten a first place vote, let alone four.

Why not?

is this a fluke or is tracy actually turning into a good manager? he doesn't get a lot of respect around here.

People have been criticizing him around here ever since he turned widely-touted young starter Eric Gagne and made him a closer.

His last season in LA was a mess and his Pittsburgh sojourn was a disaster. He got his team to produce as well as possible most of his time in LA and certainly last year.

Can't argue with either winner, at least not in a way that changes the result.

Agree. That said, it was another year of the Twins winning the division when they were widely expected to be no better than middle of the pack.

1) Scioscia
2) Gardenhire

BIG GAP

Everyone else

This makes sense.

Hmm why did they put the manager awards in between the Cy Youngs? Never seen that before, and here I was thinking I'd see the announcement of the latter when I was rushing home for lunch...

I would have voted for TLR. He just keeps chugging along.

He just keeps chugging along.

Are you referring to chugging booze?

I was rooting for Wakamatsu just for batting Branyan 2nd most of the year.

Are you referring to chugging booze?

I mean whatever you want me to mean, big fella!

1) Scioscia
2) Gardenhire

BIG GAP

Everyone else

This makes sense.

Is Terry Francona no longer any good? Jim Leyland?

Why Scioscia?

I ask that earnestly.

I was rooting for Wakamatsu just for batting Branyan 2nd most of the year.

Wow, that's awesome. I didn't realize he'd been doing that.

Why Scioscia?

I ask that earnestly.

I think it's mostly because of how the team rebounded from the Adenhart tragedy in April. They got off to a rough start, and I don't think it's a stretch to assume that the Adenhart accident caused a lot of that struggle (in addition to a slew of injuries--IIRC, Darren Oliver was getting starts), or that Scioscia helped the team get through it together.

Is Terry Francona no longer any good? Jim Leyland?

This is the Manager of the Year Award. Scioscia and Gardenhire are the only two managers who deserved serious consideration for their performance this season.

I think this is runner-up number five for Gardenhire. He's the Paul Tergat of AL managers.

This is the Manager of the Year Award. Scioscia and Gardenhire are the only two managers who deserved serious consideration for their performance this season.

I thought they meant managers in general, though I'm not sure why Gardenhire is so far ahead of Leyland.

Why Scioscia?

I ask that earnestly.

For me, it's a few things. First, I should note that I don't follow the Angels, and have a hazy impression of what he's done. That said, from the research I've done over the last few years on managers, I do think I that he's one of the best out there. My general opinion is that managers are primarily managers of men and only secondarily of the game, and Scioscia's teams consistently play as well as they can be reasonably hoped to, year-in, year-out. This year, they ran away with the division, even though two of the three other teams also exceeded expectations (or at worst lived up to the ceiling of their expectations). Everyone in the starting lineup posted an OPS+ of at least 100. While the playes obviously deserve the lion's share of credit (and the hitting coach surely earned his pay check), it's just another example of how a team does as well as possible under Scioscia.

More than that, this team succeeded despite confounding the typical construction of a Mike Scioscia team. Scioscia has generally relied heavily on his bullpen and this year the bullpen was a big disappointment. On offense, Scioscia has always heavily prioritized contact hitting. His Angels routinely have their offense centered on batting average, without many walks, and league average or worse power. This year, his teams struck out at a fairly average clip.

Again, I'm talking ballplayer inclinations and abilities, but what's interesting are how the abilities of his players this year cut against the sort of tendencies Scioscia clearly prefers. (I know GMs are in charge of the roster, but managers have some input. The more prestige the manager has, the more authority. And Scioscia, with his 10-year contract, has considerable leverage. Plus, he got along with the previous GM, who assembled all the low-K, low-W, less-power, high-AVG teams with Scioscia's input. This tangent is going on too long - but the point is the teams the Angels have had over the last decade strongly reveal Scioscia's stamp on them).

This year, he didn't have the sort of team he wanted, so he made the most of the team he had. That sounds simple, but a lot of managers (or anyone in any sort of authority position, really) botch it up. Sometimes those who have had the most success with doing things their ways (such as Scioscia) are the ones most resistant to any sort of fluid change. The Angels drew more walks than they normally did (almost exactly league average), and struck out more. (Then again, they were still heavily AVG-centric, so I'm probably overstating things). Meanwhile, the Angels had the league's 11th best bullpen ERA. Result: 97 wins. Yeah, I'll give him credit for that.

Again, this is all looking from afar, and by someone who hardly saw the Angels play at all this year.

Girardi has a really hard job. Spelling Teixeira correctly each and every night takes a lot of work. And the 'u' in Rodriguez is silent, which could trip a lot of managers up.

Between the Angels out performing their Pythagorean record again and the way they recovered from Adenhart's death, Scoscia would have my vote too.

I thought they meant managers in general, though I'm not sure why Gardenhire is so far ahead of Leyland.

Did you watch the AL Central one-game playoff?

But seriously, the Twins came back despite only having two exceptional players on the team, and then losing one of them. The Tigers fell apart down the stretch.

But seriously, the Twins came back despite only having two exceptional players on the team, and then losing one of them. The Tigers fell apart down the stretch.

But Leyland got good work out of Edwin Jackson and worked Porcello into the rotation. He also had to deal with a team of older players turning to rust before his eyes and a crappy bullpen. Also, I prefer Leyland's facial hair to Gardenhire's. Leyland's 'stache makes him look like a cowboy and Gardenhire's makes him look like a lazy shop teacher.

Also, I prefer Leyland's facial hair to Gardenhire's. Leyland's 'stache makes him look like a cowboy and Gardenhire's makes him look like a lazy shop teacher.

I don't see how anyone could possibly argue with the logic here.

But Leyland got good work out of Edwin Jackson and worked Porcello into the rotation. He also had to deal with a team of older players turning to rust before his eyes and a crappy bullpen.

These are arguments for Leyland being a better manager than Gardenhire. But they do not mean that Leyland did a better job than Gardenhire.

Leyland's team blew a big lead when there was no reason they should have. Gardenhire's team came back from a big deficit when there was no reason to believe that they should have even gotten back into it. You can't necessarily blame Leyland for that, but when you're giving out the hardware at the end of the year, those are some of the first things you consider.

"I think it's a fluke myself, and that the Rockies will regret hiring Tracy by some point next summer."

+1, Insightful

1) Scioscia
2) Gardenhire

BIG GAP

Everyone else

I probably would have flipped Gardenhire and Scioscia, but I agree with the "BIG GAP" and think the top two were so close that I can't really sweat Scioscia coming out on top.

"I think it's a fluke myself, and that the Rockies will regret hiring Tracy by some point next summer."

+1, Insightful

Next year doesn't really matter though for this year's award. I am a Pirates fan that despised Tracy. This year though his record with the Rockies was what it was regardless of what I think of his managerial ability. No way he wasn't winning the award.

I was rooting for Wakamatsu just for batting Branyan 2nd most of the year.

This impressed me, too. I don't want to make too big a deal a bout batting order or protection, but when my team played the M's I sure looked at Ichiro at-bats differently knowing their biggest power source was batting directly after him rather than 3 or 4 batters behind.

Jim Tracy sucks.

I'm still puzzled why Tracy was so awful in Pittsburgh. He was excellent in the minor leagues, was highly respected as a bench coach under Felipe Alou in Montreal, did an excellent job in LA when he was first hired (then things soured a bit in his last year), and was outstanding this year at the helm of the Rockies. But Pittsburgh was an unmitigated disaster. Wrong man for the wrong situation perhaps ?

Anyway, I'm not sure things will go bad with the Rockies immediately. Tracy's track record is a lot of positive and one really awful experience that's completely out of line.

In the AL, let's be honest. Everybody's bullpen sucked. Persevering on that point doesn't distinguish anybody. They all had to do it. I mean, the guys who are being considered (in this discussion) as MoY candidates. Except Girardi. Oh, well, never mind then.

I don't see Scioscia. I mean, you can construct a case for anybody. The vote for Scioscia was constructed because his team won, same as Girardi's. They bounced back from the Adenhart thing. Well, they had a lot of veteran talent to bounce back with. The veteran talent being the distinguishing characteristic, not the Adenhart thing.

The guys who did more with less and/or where success is not a given were indeed Washington and Wakamatsu. But at awards time it's just, Who won? Oh, LA, NY and whatever. End of thinking.

Michael Kay, on why Girardi should've won AL Manager of the Year award

"Girardi brilliantly flipped Jeter and Damon in the lineup"
"Girardi was a genius to put Phil Hughes in the bullpen"
"Girardi managed multiple big egos in the clubhouse"
"Girardi won despite managing huge expectations"

Don La Greca was bringing up good points for Scioscia and Gardenhire.
Michael Kay was having none of it and kept whining and complaining.

I know Kay is about the biggest Yankees homer in the planet.
Didn't know his head was firmly stuck in Girardi's behind.

That said, from the research I've done over the last few years on managers, I do think I that he's one of the best out there.

What research on managers have you done? Just curious.

What research on managers have you done? Just curious.

Evaluating Baseball's Managers

You can also check THT for some of his work.

I know Kay is about the biggest Yankees homer in the planet.
Didn't know his head was firmly stuck in Girardi's behind.

Michael Kay's head is firmly stuck in his own behind.

what's interesting are how the abilities of his players this year cut against the sort of tendencies Scioscia clearly prefers.

Those tendencies are changing. Beginning at least by the start of 2008 Spring Training, the Angels were making noise up and down the organization about working better counts, drawing more walks, and getting more power from the power positions on the defensive spectrum. I think they began to realize they were overdoing it with the Johnny-Contact types, and not coming into the playoffs with enough firepower. Also, Teixeira seemed to impress everyone during his stay.

Besides altering organizational philosophy somewhat, they also are in mid-harvest of a fairly offensive-oriented crop of infielders.

"I'm still puzzled why Tracy was so awful in Pittsburgh."

He was a selfish ####### and a blowhard. Whenever the team won, it was because of him, and whenever they lost, it was because the players didn't execute his plan property. He also displayed extreme favoritism to players from his LA days, rather than choosing the best players. And he was a lousy motivator because none of the players trusted him or listened to him after they realized that he was a snake who'd throw them under the bus for a nickel.

He was very, very popular for a couple of months... and then the worm turned.

"This year though his record with the Rockies was what it was regardless of what I think of his managerial ability."

Yes, but that record didn't have much to do with his actual managing work. As such, why honor him for lucking into a good situation?

Leyland's team blew a big lead when there was no reason they should have. Gardenhire's team came back from a big deficit when there was no reason to believe that they should have even gotten back into it.

Leyland's team blew a big lead because they were not very good. Gardenhire's team came back from a big deficit because the team ahead of them turned back into the pumpkin they always really were.

I wonder how many votes Gardenhire would have gotten if the Twins were in the West and the Rangers in the Central.

Yes, but that record didn't have much to do with his actual managing work.

What's the basis of this statement? From the comments I've read from Tom Nawrocki and other Rockies fans, he's done a damn good job since taking over.

He was a selfish ####### and a blowhard. Whenever the team won, it was because of him, and whenever they lost, it was because the players didn't execute his plan property.

It's worth pointing out that Tracy certainly didn't do this with the 2009 Rockies. Whenever asked about the success of the team, he would point out that they were good two years ago, and took very little credit for their success.

I think guiding the Angels through the Adenhart tragedy is a big part of Scioscia winning, but there were other factors. Vlad missed two months due to injury, and was not himself for most the time in between the two DL stints. John Lackey missed a month due to injury. Ervin Santana missed a month due to injury, sucked as hell, then missed another month to injury. Scot Shields sucked as hell and then was lost for the year due to injury. Jose Arredondo, coming off a great debut, sucked, was demoted, got injured, and was never a factor when he finally came back up. Torii Hunter led the team for most of the season, and then got injured for something close to a month.

That's a lot of adversity, yet the team still won 97 games and handily won a division that had two other teams above .500 and another only six games below. A manager who gets his team through all these injuries and a significant tragedy and puts up a record as outstanding as the Angels is going to get recognition when it comes to this award, and I don't find it mysterious or objectionable, no matter how many more starts Jeff Mathis got than he should have.

#36 Michael Kay has been a good friend of Joe Girardi for years. About 6 years ago when both were analyzing the 2003 playoffs for YES, Danny Aiello's nephew would rave about how smart Girardi is, that he saw things other people didn't. As he was with Buck Showalter. Didn't get along with Joe Torre, though. Maybe Kay promotes Girardi to compensate for writers last year saying Joe Torre deserved the award.

I have no serious objection to either winner but in 1985 the Dallas Cowboys researched how many Coach of the Year awards Tom Landry won in 25 years. The answer was zero. Too consistent. These awards reward big season/half season improvement.

I think guiding the Angels through the Adenhart tragedy is a big part of Scioscia winning, but there were other factors. Vlad missed two months due to injury, and was not himself for most the time in between the two DL stints. John Lackey missed a month due to injury. Ervin Santana missed a month due to injury, sucked as hell, then missed another month to injury. Scot Shields sucked as hell and then was lost for the year due to injury. Jose Arredondo, coming off a great debut, sucked, was demoted, got injured, and was never a factor when he finally came back up. Torii Hunter led the team for most of the season, and then got injured for something close to a month.

That's a lot of adversity, yet the team still won 97 games and handily won a division that had two other teams above .500 and another only six games below. A manager who gets his team through all these injuries and a significant tragedy and puts up a record as outstanding as the Angels is going to get recognition when it comes to this award, and I don't find it mysterious or objectionable, no matter how many more starts Jeff Mathis got than he should have.

This.

Understandably, the media's focus on the Adenhart tragedy overshadowed all of the other issues the Angels had during the year, particularly at the beginning, given the loss of Lackey and Santana.

I have no serious objection to either winner but in 1985 the Dallas Cowboys researched how many Coach of the Year awards Tom Landry won in 25 years. The answer was zero. Too consistent. These awards reward big season/half season improvement.

Then how do you explain Scioscia winning it? They played better in the second half, but it's a stretch to say they had a big second half improvement - they were on pace for 92 wins at the 81-game marker, and they won 97. It's certainly not an improvement over where they were last year, as they won more in '08.

Then how do you explain Scioscia winning it?

Nick Adenhart.

I'm with #49, Scioscia just had the best talent not in pinstripes, that's all. Call it the Didn't Screw Up Award.

Leyland's team blew a big lead because they were not very good. Gardenhire's team came back from a big deficit because the team ahead of them turned back into the pumpkin they always really were.

Also worth noting: Gardenhire's team stunk up the joint for most of the season. If he was a good enough manager to lead his team on a great late-season charge, why wasn't he good enough for them to have a winning record from April-mid September?

No way Girardi should have gotten a first place vote, let alone four.

Winning the most games almost always gets the mananger some votes, sometimes enough to win. Given how many Thinking Fans picked against the Yankees for both the regular season and playoffs, Girardi probably got a lot of support for exceeding expectations.

Also worth noting: Gardenhire's team stunk up the joint for most of the season. If he was a good enough manager to lead his team on a great late-season charge, why wasn't he good enough for them to have a winning record from April-mid September?

?

At their worst, they were six games under .500 at 56-62. If a .475 winning percentage is "stinking up the joint" then lord only knows what you'd do if the Twins actually had a truly bad season.

Also, I don't think Gardenhire's vote came from the big end charge but from the unexpected first place finish. Forget what people thought of their postseason odds on Labor Day - they weren't expected to compete on Opening Day. At THT they were the consensus pick for fourth place and that was more a typical pick than an unusual one. Doing better than expected plus a postseason birth will get notice, late season stretch or not.

#49 If you want me to change it to "these awards usually reward one year/second half improvements", I will.
But the "overcoming a tragic death" helped him too.

#55. Fair enough.

#49 / 51 - love the hindsight because that opinion you state so casually would have been snarked and snickered to death here even thru mid-September.

#49 / 51 - love the hindsight because that opinion you state so casually would have been snarked and snickered to death here even thru mid-September.

Whose opinion are you talking about that would get snarked? Dag's not really offering one, just challenging GG's assertion with a pretty indisputable fact that Scioscia doesn't fit the theory.

#49 / 51 - love the hindsight because that opinion you state so casually would have been snarked and snickered to death here even thru mid-September.

??

What am I snickering at in post #49? What opinion am I even stating so casually? Hell - earlier in this thread (post #10) I agreed that you can't argue with either winner. Should I take it that you're upset that I have no problem with the Halos manager winning, Halofan?

1) Scioscia
2) Gardenhire

BIG GAP

Everyone else

Boy, I am against the grain on this one big time.

How can Ron Washington be getting so little discussion here? He jockeyed a team to 87 wins despite catching almost no breaks at all. Neither of their young catchers came close to touching what the Rangers had hoped to get from them offensively (or health-wise), Chris Davis was a disappointment, Kinsler disappeared in the second half, and they sustained substantial injuries to Saltalamacchia, Kinsler, Josh Hamilton, Francisco, and Eddie Guardado (just off the top of my head). Their rotation was topped by Kevin Millwood, the miracle of Scott Feldman and a bunch of rookies. The Rangers were a miracle to me, from what I saw, and Washington has to get more credit for that than he seems to be here.

Likewise, Don Wakamatsu pulled off 85 wins with smoke and mirrors -- no offense to speak of and a MacGyvered pitching staff.

And the Yankees had a losing record in mid-May. They lost their starting right fielder for the year eight games into the season. At one point their two catchers were Francisco Cervelli and Kevin Cash. Outside Rivera, the only guys in the bullpen who made more than league minimum -- Marte and Bruney -- were a disaster. Their megabuck free agents were getting one no-decision after another as legendary names as Aceves, Robinson, Coke, Veras,and Albaladejo were given baptisms by fire. Wang provided a guaranteed disaster every fifth day when he wasn't on the DL or in the minors. Girardi had some major lapses in the post-season, but he overcame a lot to get his club on track and he did a really good job to ensure his club was ready for the post-season.

I think the right guys came in the top two, but I totally disagree about the big gap mentioned, and I have no issue with any of these three getting a handful of first place votes.

He was a selfish ####### and a blowhard. Whenever the team won, it was because of him, and whenever they lost, it was because the players didn't execute his plan property.

Didn't Tracy suck in Pittsburgh because the Pirates sucked, and not vice-versa?

It's worth pointing out that Tracy certainly didn't do this with the 2009 Rockies. Whenever asked about the success of the team, he would point out that they were good two years ago, and took very little credit for their success.

I was going to say, Vlad's description didn't sound like Tracy this year. Maybe Tracy will hit a frustrating stretch next season and start pulling this stuff, or maybe he's learned, I dunno.

after they realized that he was a snake who'd throw them under the bus for a nickel.

This didn't seem to happen, either. He didn't even really yank guys in and out of the lineup. He stuck with Barmes despite his .205 /.259 /.394 2nd half line. He did eventually bury Iannetta, but Torrealba somehow kept hitting. He stuck with Hawpe and only started pulling him at the very end (sat him against the Phillies lefties).

I think it's a fluke myself, and that the Rockies will regret hiring Tracy by some point next summer.

What do you mean by this...do you mean he'll start pulling the stuff Vlad talked about (grabbing the spotlight, throwing players under the bus)?

Or just that their record will decline? That's likely even if he's a good manager, right? It's hard to improve your record by 18 games, have a team stay very healthy, and then do it again the following season.

This didn't seem to happen, either. He didn't even really yank guys in and out of the lineup. He stuck with Barmes despite his .205 /.259 /.394 2nd half line. He did eventually bury Iannetta, but Torrealba somehow kept hitting. He stuck with Hawpe and only started pulling him at the very end (sat him against the Phillies lefties).

Garrett Atkins.

I'm with #49, Scioscia just had the best talent not in pinstripes, that's all. Call it the Didn't Screw Up Award.

Have you read the posts the rest of us have written? There were a lot of injuries on the team, and a death, and they ended up winning 97 games in a surprisingly tough division. Had they won those games without the obstacles, I doubt Scioscia would have won. But they did happen, and they won the games. People credit the manager for getting the team through the hardships. I don't think that's surprising or distressing.

He was a selfish ####### and a blowhard. Whenever the team won, it was because of him, and whenever they lost, it was because the players didn't execute his plan property.


This was exactly Tracy's M.O. in Los Angeles as well.

At their worst, they were six games under .500 at 56-62. If a .475 winning percentage is "stinking up the joint" then lord only knows what you'd do if the Twins actually had a truly bad season.

Also, I don't think Gardenhire's vote came from the big end charge but from the unexpected first place finish. Forget what people thought of their postseason odds on Labor Day - they weren't expected to compete on Opening Day. At THT they were the consensus pick for fourth place and that was more a typical pick than an unusual one. Doing better than expected plus a postseason birth will get notice, late season stretch or not.

Well, "stinking up the joint" was a bit of hyperbole. But they were never more than a couple games over .500 until mid-Sept, and they weren't even really in the playoff race. It's not that the Twins were really notably better than anyone thought....it's just that Chicago, Cleveland & Detroit were worse than people thought. I don't think Gardy would have gotten a single first or second place vote if this vote was held Sept 10, and maybe a couple of thirds. If Detroit had scrounged out 2 or 3 more victories, he wouldn't have finished nearly as high. He did well because he did an ok job in a division with teams that didn't do ok.

Well, "stinking up the joint" was a bit of hyperbole. But they were never more than a couple games over .500 until mid-Sept, and they weren't even really in the playoff race.

Well, eyeballing it - they were only 2-3 games out of first for most of July. Until August, they only had three days all season where they were more than five games out of first. IF they weren't really in the playoff race until mid-September, they were also never really out of it.

It's not that the Twins were really notably better than anyone thought

I disagree.

it's just that Chicago, Cleveland & Detroit were worse than people thought.

This I can see - up to a point. Chicago wasn't supposed to be that good this year, and Detroit rebounded pretty well this year. It's more that there was no single really impressive team. That said, only Cleveland really screwed the year up.

I don't think Gardy would have gotten a single first or second place vote if this vote was held Sept 10

I completely agree, but so what? The season didn't end on September 10.

He didn't even really yank guys in and out of the lineup.

Indeed, one of his major decisions upon taking over was to make Ian Stewart the everyday third baseman. Hurdle had been spotting him at third, at second, and in leftfield, and Stewart was hitting .187 when Hurdle got fired. Tracy told him he was going to be the third baseman, and Stewart started hitting.

The consensus around here when Tracy was hired was that he would be disaster. The consensus still seems to be, after a performance beyond even the dreams of Rockies fans, that Tracy will still be a disaster. I guess that's not so surprising.

The consensus still seems to be, after a performance beyond even the dreams of Rockies fans, that Tracy will still be a disaster.

I'm not sure it's right to call it a consensus. It's mostly Pirates fans like Emeigh and Vlad.

What do you mean by this...

In both LA and Pittsburgh, Tracy lost the clubhouse. He had success in Colorado, I think, primarily because he was very different from Hurdle (more decisive, as Tom notes in #69), but eventually I think he'll wear on the players and they'll start tuning him out.

-- MWE

The consensus around here when Tracy was hired was that he would be disaster. The consensus still seems to be, after a performance beyond even the dreams of Rockies fans, that Tracy will still be a disaster. I guess that's not so surprising.

Well, it IS true, after all.

Well, it IS true, after all.

It's possible that Tracy just had a really bad stint in Pittsburgh. Or that it was just a terribly bad fit. It's also possible he learned something from his failures there.

If his Colorado gig is going to be a disaster, he's got a tremendous amount
of catching up to do.

Well, eyeballing it - they were only 2-3 games out of first for most of July. Until August, they only had three days all season where they were more than five games out of first. IF they weren't really in the playoff race until mid-September, they were also never really out of it.

They were also in third place most of that time, behind two teams that seemed to be better. Actually they were better...the Twins were a competent starter, a couple of competent relievers, and a competent shortstop away from overtaking them, and even then it required Detroit and Chicago to fade dramatically. Then they acquired just enough talent so that they were still standing when Chicago and Detroit faded. If the Twins were, what, a 75 win team to start the season, Gardy keeping them around .500 isn't remarkable. I think the reinforcements and other factors should get much more credit for their improvement beyond that the last few weeks than Gardy should.


I don't think Gardy would have gotten a single first or second place vote if this vote was held Sept 10

I completely agree, but so what? The season didn't end on September 10.

For the same reason that Bobby Keppel & Alexi Casilla didn't get considered for the Cy Young award or MVP for being the instrumental players in the Twins winning their division in game 163. It is a season long award...how they do in one game or 2 weeks shouldn't sway the voting that dramatically. It means something if you aren't close to being a leader for the award after 90% of the season. The other 10% of the season could just as easily be luck, or new talent producing, or taking advantage of opponents playing their September call ups, etc.

A classic example of Tracy being a self-centered jackass:

Tracy demonstrated how seriously he is taking these final few games with his orders for reliever Salomon Torres and shortstop Jack Wilson to return to the team within two days of their wives giving birth.

Torres' wife, Belkis, gave birth to a boy -- Jordan -- yesterday in Pittsburgh after having a Caesarian section. Torres was told to fly cross-country to San Diego this afternoon in time for the final two games with the Padres.

"I'm being a good soldier," Torres said yesterday.

Wilson's wife, Julie, is having induced labor Friday for their third child. He was told to join the team Sunday in Chicago for the series finale with the Cubs. The Pirates are off the following day.

"I have a plane ticket for Saturday," Wilson said when asked how he will approach it. "If everything's all right on the home front, I should be there for Sunday's game."

Players generally get three days for paternity leave. Torres and Wilson were told the games are meaningful because the San Diego Padres and Cubs are contenders, and the Pirates owe it to the pennant races to field their best lineups. - Dejan Kovacevic, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 19, 2007

So, at the time this was written, it was after the roster expansion, and the Pirates had several shortstop options on hand (including Cesar Izturis, for whom Tracy had insisted they trade two months earlier, with the intention of making him the starter in place of Jack), as well as umpty kajillion relievers. Letting Jack and Sully have the usual amount of paternity leave would've inconvenienced the team not a whit.

Unfortunately for them, the Pirates were one game out of last place, and Tracy was trying to position himself as well as possible for his next job, since he was pretty much a dead man walking at that point as far as Pittsburgh was concerned. Hence, the emergency call for aid.

(Anyone who's enough of a sucker to think that Tracy might have actually felt a genuine respect for the integrity of pennant races should note that in June and July of the prior year, Tracy had nailed Craig Wilson to the bench against numerous contenders in order to fulfill a petty personal grudge - going so far as to start Jose Hernandez out of position at 1B, and force Ryan Doumit to try and learn the position on the fly, in order to have alternatives of any sort during the time in which Sean Casey was injured.)

If the Twins were, what, a 75 win team to start the season, Gardy keeping them around .500 isn't remarkable.

Disagree substantially. I think you're massively overstating the impact of a manager if you think keeping a team 5 games over its head for most of the year isn't a sign that a manager is doing a helluva job.

For the same reason that Bobby Keppel & Alexi Casilla didn't get considered for the Cy Young award or MVP for being the instrumental players in the Twins winning their division in game 163. It is a season long award

Exactly my point -- it's a season long award. You want to argue against Gardenhire by pretending the last chunk of it didn't happen. The Twins played better than they should've for most of the year and then finished with a great stretch run.

There's also a huge difference between the last 3-4 weeks of the season and one game. Keppel and Casilla came up big in 1/163 of the season, not 1/8th, and as you yourself argue, the Twins were playing better than they should've even before that eighth of a season.

Hearing Pirate fans whine about Jim Tracy must be what it's like to hear Cub fans whine about Dusty Baker.

Another classic Tracy moment: This game, on May 19, 2007.

A good manager puts his players in position to succeed, and then supports them, right? Check out the game recap on that one, and the way Tracy hung Marty McLeary out to dry.

Hearing Pirate fans whine about Jim Tracy must be what it's like to hear Cub fans whine about Dusty Baker.

As an outsider to both those discussions, I also noticed the similarities.

"Hearing Pirate fans whine about Jim Tracy must be what it's like to hear Cub fans whine about Dusty Baker."

There are certain similarities. Outsiders' bizarre reluctance to recognize him as the complete and utter tool that he is, in the teeth of the evidence, can be pretty frustrating.

Garrett Atkins.

If that's your idea of a bad manager practice of yanking a guy in and out of the lineup, I can live with that. Atkins's PA's/month under Tracy were 61, 48, 57, 48. Both third basemen had pretty bad seasons (I personally would have left Stewart alone, but he did go through some prolonged slumps with lots of watched strikes).

If I had to pick a guy who didn't get a fair shake, I'd probably go with Seth Smith first or maybe Iannetta.

"I'd probably go with Seth Smith first"

Ding ding ding!

Outsiders' bizarre reluctance to recognize him as the complete and utter tool that he is, in the teeth of the evidence, can be pretty frustrating.

Part of it is that he hasn't done that kind of thing...yet. Mike states above that Tracy lost the clubhouse, and that Rockies players eventually will start tuning him out...I can see how that could happen.

He micromanages, and not just with trying to get every platoon matchup possible (assuming it doesn't involve removing a starting pitcher). Last season, that probably worked because of the contrast to Hurdle, as Mike notes. Hurdle's a blustery, thick jawed, in your face type - not necessarily a yeller but a very strong personality. Players (Tulo, I think) complained about that. Tracy was more like a grandpa. When the young players would make notable plays, good or bad, Tracy could often be seen putting him arm around him and quietly talking to him. I could see how that could work in the short-term, but then drive players nuts after a while.

Maybe the the real problems start when the players start tuning him out and he doesn't know how to cope.

"When the young players would make notable plays, good or bad, Tracy could often be seen putting him arm around him and quietly talking to him."

If you could read lips, you'd probably see him saying that Hawpe's secretly been slipping poison into the oatmeal of the player in question for months now.

The strangest (and creepiest) part of the Tracy experience:

Quite curiously, the shortcomings that Tracy had in personnel or instructional matters seemed to originate from his never-ending emotional tie with the 2004 Los Angeles Dodgers, the $100 million team he managed to the West Division title.

He spoke about them incessantly, to the media and to the players. He even tried to recreate them, it seemed.

Before Tracy had donned a Pirates uniform, in the winter of 2006, he met with center fielder Chris Duffy and told Duffy he should play like Dave Roberts, the Dodgers' leadoff man, even though all Duffy and Roberts had in common was being fast. Among the instructions: Duffy, a line-drive hitter, was told to pound the ball into the ground. He failed miserably, quit baseball for a month and has yet to recover.

Tracy told shortstop Jack Wilson, a three-time runner-up for the Gold Glove, that he did not like his approach to ground balls, that it should be more like Cesar Izturis of the 2004 Dodgers. Wilson had his worst defensive year in 2006 and, at Tracy's behest, Izturis was acquired from the Chicago Cubs this past July. It was at Tracy's urging that Wilson nearly was traded to Detroit in late July, after which Wilson batted .401 in the season's final two months.

There was more: Jose Castillo was told to be like Adrian Beltre. Bench players were told to be versatile like Jose Hernandez, who also was acquired. Even Tracy's batting orders were modeled based on profiles of the 2004 Dodgers. -Dejan Kovacevic, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, October 6, 2007

Lots, lots more detail on why Tracy failed with the Pirates at the link.

One thing possibly worth pointing out is that (as usual) few of the formula-based prediction systems had the Angels winning 90 games, let alone 97. So if you think those systems are particularly accurate, I suppose you might want to give Scioscia extra credit for exceeding expectations (even while overcoming adversity, churning through 14 starting pitchers, and so on).

If the Twins were, what, a 75 win team to start the season, Gardy keeping them around .500 isn't remarkable.

Disagree substantially. I think you're massively overstating the impact of a manager if you think keeping a team 5 games over its head for most of the year isn't a sign that a manager is doing a helluva job.

Actually, I agree that a manager getting his team 5 extra wins would be unimaginably good. But I think I phrased my last response poorly. Gardy didn't necessarily keep them around .500. The team stayed around .500, and Gardy was present. I have no idea how much of that he was responsible for. That is sort of an inherent problem in the whole manager award though. And I actually didn't think the Twins were a 75 win team. I think conventional wisdom said they were....I would have said they were about an 80 win team. Which is probably why I don't find his managing the first 90% of the season to be anything notable.


Exactly my point -- it's a season long award. You want to argue against Gardenhire by pretending the last chunk of it didn't happen. The Twins played better than they should've for most of the year and then finished with a great stretch run.

There's also a huge difference between the last 3-4 weeks of the season and one game. Keppel and Casilla came up big in 1/163 of the season, not 1/8th, and as you yourself argue, the Twins were playing better than they should've even before that eighth of a season.



I'm fine with acknowledging that the last few weeks were great, but they were great because the GM brought in some new players, the players played well, the opposing teams played poorly, Detroit and Chicago imploded, and Gardy managed the team well. All 5 of those things had to go right in order for anyone to think that Gardenhire had a notable year, and he wasn't responsible for most of them. I don't want to make it sound like I think Gardenhire did a poor job. He was fine, probably even above average, but I don't think he deserves extra credit for carrying his team to the playoffs when the GM and the other teams did most of the work to make that happen.

That paternity leave story is interesting. You could interpret it a couple of different ways. You could say it was Tracy telling the team, "We have a job to do here. Yes, family is important, but so is winning ballgames, and that wasn't important enough to the Pirates teams of the past. We're here to change that attitude."

Or you could think it's just Jim Tracy being an ogre.

At any rate, I don't doubt that he did a bad job in Pittsburgh. I think that's somewhat relevant to his performance in Colorado, but not dispositive. I'd rather judge his tenure with the Rockies based on how the Rockies perform, as opposed to how the Pirates performed.

"That paternity leave story is interesting. You could interpret it a couple of different ways. You could say it was Tracy telling the team, 'We have a job to do here. Yes, family is important, but so is winning ballgames, and that wasn't important enough to the Pirates teams of the past. We're here to change that attitude.'"

The latter is unlikely, insofar as team discipline was notoriously lax under his watch. Look at the link in #85 for (many) more examples.

And the front office apparently thought he was being an ogre - they countermanded his orders regarding the paternity leave almost immediately.