I don’t know what to make of this, but I thought it might trigger some interesting discussion. From a Hal McCoy Q&A over at DDN:

Q Isn’t the problem with the Reds the manager (Dusty Baker), as it has been since Jack McKeon was dropped? — Will, Dayton

A Let’s see, since McKeon they’ve had Bob Boone, Dave Miley, Jerry Narron, Pete Mackanin (interim) and Baker. See a pattern here? Without players, no manager wins. And while McKeon is my all-time favorite, how many times did the Reds make the playoffs during his four years? Answer: zero. And he wasn’t dropped, he quit when they wouldn’t give him a meaningful raise. This team needs stability and CEO Bob Castellini is still mad at me for asking him after he fired GM Wayne Krivsky, “When will we see some stability?” His answer: “We just aren’t going to lose any more.” How’s that working out?

Your thoughts?

One Response

  1. Furniture City Red

    “This team needs stability…” Is he saying stick with Baker (contract extension) just fot the sake of stability? or is he referring to stability at GM? It seems he kinda wandered with his answer just so he could take a shot at Castellini.

    I can see where stability at GM is important as it relates to an organizations long term plan.

    Stability at manager is less important. It’s all about the players. I bet the Yankees could name a new manager on the 1st day of every month from April to October and they would still win….Having said that I will add that some managers are suited for certain types of teams/players more than others and I’m still not convinced that this Reds team is the type of team Dusty can manage successfully.