Baker Baker Baker

by cephyn on Aug 19, 2005 11:36 AM CDT

So prickly!
http://www.suntimes.com/output/cubs/cst-spt-cubnt19.html

And so full of it! Come on, no youngsters in a playoff chase - please. Comparison to LaRussa and Cox. Come on. Man he drives me nuts. Can we get a new manager please? This article is really critical of Baker's BS, which is good -- does anyone still believe him anymore?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

Tweet Comment 37 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

you read something I didn't

I guess I understand what Baker says and believe he is right. You don't like him and don't believe what he is saying.

What do you specifically disagree with?

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 11:57 AM CDT reply actions

hah

Comparisons have been made to Braves manager Bobby Cox being willing to show more confidence in young players. But Baker said his old Braves teammate Ralph Garr, who keeps close ties with that organization, gave him some insight about Atlanta's philosophy.

''He said they bring them up a year later vs. a year early,'' Baker said. ''So when they get here, they know how to play the game.''

Maybe, though it's hard to imagine that 21-year-old outfielder Jeff Francoeur got an extra year of seasoning in the minors. Francoeur was promoted from Class AA by Atlanta the same day Murton was brought up by the Cubs, but has nearly twice as many at-bats over the same period.

It's a good point.

The topic undoubtedly will be raised again today, when the Cubs make room on the roster for infielder-outfielder Jerry Hairston Jr., who comes off the disabled list. Rookie outfielder Matt Murton, despite a .339 average, or one of the Cubs' young relievers is expected to be demoted to clear space for Hairston.

Another good point.

''The only thing about teaching at the big-league level is you can't teach them until they make a mistake,'' he said.

''You don't tell a guy about the cutoff man until he misses it. You assume they know that stuff when they get here.

These are ridiculous statements. what does being at the big-league level have to do with teaching someone who made a mistake? veterans make mistakes too, btw. And if they don't know the stuff when they get to the MLB, and you think they should, maybe its time to reevaluate what they're teaching at AA and AAA. come on.

The braves put kids in all year. and they're very successful. and Francoeur is 21. Please. The bottom line here, the way i see it, is this:

Baker doesn't trust kids, and won't give them a chance. He'd rather watch a veteran make a mistake (because they do too) than a kid make a mistake (because they do) because then he has to teach the kid. god forbid he and his coaches do their job. The kids in atlanta are perfect? they don't make mistakes? maybe time to hire better scouts then. but i don't buy that bs.

Baker would rather a veteran make a mistake so that he can say "the guy's a veteran, lay off" instead of a kid because he has to say "he's a kid, and we're going to work on it. i hate working."

by cephyn on Aug 19, 2005 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions

Why....

....is is that you attribute this quote to Baker?

"I hate to work."

Did he say that somewhere? Did I miss something, or is it that you just think Baker hates to work? Do you have proof? It appears that you are suggesting that Baker is lazy and doesn't like to work--wow--that's a pretty big statement to be making.

No offense but that's getting a little carried away.

by southerncubbie on Aug 19, 2005 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions

well

''You don't tell a guy about the cutoff man until he misses it. You assume they know that stuff when they get here.'

I interpret this to mean:
Rookies make mistakes, because they don't know any better, and need teaching.
Veterans make mistakes, but they know better and don't need to be taught anything.
So, Dusty doesn't play rookies because they make mistakes and should be corrected. He plays veterans who make mistakes and don't need to be corrected.

''That's the only thing about teaching at the big-league level is that they make mistakes here. At the minor-league level, if they make mistakes, it's going to be in the Des Moines Gazette. It's not in USA Today or on ESPN, showing you getting picked off.''

and that's a nonsensical comment. they make mistakes at the big league level and at the minor league level. they need teaching at both levels dusty. no player is perfect. do your job. if they've been determined to be ready for the majors, or at least given a shot, they deserve to be given a shot. YES they will make mistakes, YES they need teaching. sometimes major league level teaching is the best thing. they don't need to be called up and sat. they are not instant veterans. but they can contribute, often better than some veterans. but they need a chance and instruction. thats the job of the coaches and manager.

by cephyn on Aug 19, 2005 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions

you are taking his comments

to the extreme.

When he is saying that the mistakes are bigger, THEY ARE. He's not specifically talking about the mistake, but rather the consequences.

If you can look at the comment for what it's worth, he's really talking about not having a kid's confidence ruined.

Dusty has done an excellent job with Murton. He has played him in small doses where he can succeed. And guess what, Murton has succeeded. Depsite being a pretty bad OF and not being able to hit RHP very well to this point. He's facing mlb-caliber pitching for the first time in his life and now probably has some real confidence.

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions

and furthermore

i recall the 2002 angels and 2003 marlins doing pretty well teaching kids while fighting for a playoff spot. i also remember the 2002 giants wishing they had a kid or two in the lineup. at least kids who could learn from their mistakes rather than veterans who can't or don't need to.

by cephyn on Aug 19, 2005 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions

you are throwing

crap at the wall with that post.

Angels '02? Totally veteran team--the only kid was K-Rod. Wrong.

Giants '02? wishing they had a kid? Where do you come up with that? They were a Robb Nen blown save or Russ Ortiz thorwing strikes away from winning the whole damn thing.

'03 Marlins--they threw Cabrera in there when Lowell got hurt and then moved him to the OF because he could mash (was hitting .365 with 20 HR's in AA in 1/2 a season). And that's it. No kids playing for McKeon.

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions

You forgot

the D-Train.

Cubbie blue always sPaRkLeS in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Aug 19, 2005 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions

he was out of the rotation

in the playoffs. That's why I left him out. He did contribute to their run to get the WC.

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions

and

beckett

by cephyn on Aug 19, 2005 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions

Beckett

wasn't a rookie either.

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions

veteran team my ass

eckstein
lackey
donnelly
shields
k-rod
and kennedy was 3rd year. a kid.

by cephyn on Aug 19, 2005 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions

Lackey and K-Rod only rookies

team was led by GA, Salmon, and Erstad. Nice try.

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions

rookies?

"i recall the 2002 angels and 2003 marlins doing pretty well teaching kids while fighting for a playoff spot. i also remember the 2002 giants wishing they had a kid or two in the lineup. at least kids who could learn from their mistakes rather than veterans who can't or don't need to."

find "rookie" in that statement.

by cephyn on Aug 19, 2005 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions

kids = rookies

that's the point you have been bashing Dusty about. When Dusty talks about kids, he is saying rookies. And you know this.

Fine. Keep playing semantics. Still doesn't change the fact that all those teams you referenced won because of a veteran presence with 1-2 young players blended in.

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions

veteran presence is good

but its better to play kids with potential over washout journeymen. Come on. This team signed Enrique Wilson for godssakes! WHY?~!

im not saying field 9 rookies and 2nd year players. Im saying play the kids instead of proven bench players who can't hold up as starters (hollandsworth) and guys who are just mediocre (macias, wilson)

kids != rookies. in this particular case, wiht dusty, yes. but if there was some 2nd year kids around, im sure macias would be in the lineup before them. why? dusty believes in proven vets, not some guy who sat on the bench most of the year as a rookie. he wasn't good enough to play more, so why should he play now? thats the dusty way!

by cephyn on Aug 19, 2005 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm with ya about our bench guys

as I have seen enough of Holly to puke. Dusty doesn't refuse to play kids over these guys. We just haven't brought up any kids worth a damn. Murton is about the best hitter I've seen come up in 20 years. And he's not quite ready. Macias or Cedeno? I'd take Macias as Cedeno has shown this year is a total fluke and he has fallen back to his numbers from the past 3 years in the minors. And Neifi did his job--shoot when he was hitting .320 for 2 months no one complained.

Enrique Wilson--well I have a fond place for him. In my first game this year after the birth of my son, my wife bought tickets for Father's Day to Petco. We flew out for the Cubs weekend series in SD and I had front row seats for the Sat. night game which Maddux won. And lo and behold Enrique hit a grounder foul just past 3rd to which I leaned over and made the play. I now have a ball in a casing for my boy.

It was the hardest hit ball of Wilson's career and I'm glad he was DFA--should have never been signed. I couldn't agree with you more.

I think Cubs faithful tends to over-hype OUR prospects. Corey was the best we had for 30 years and Choi was rated right behind him. And the other guys we've had come up are all well below those two, so what does it all mean? We haven't had a lot of talent come up.

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions

finally some common ground ;)

i didnt complain about neifi. he proved me wrong and stepped the hell up. props to him.

macias though...ick. dusty just keeps putting him everywhere on the field. yeesh.

i say play the kids over people like macias and holly and my god, wilson. because maybe a kid with potential will "click" and just GET IT and start playing out of his mind because he doesn't know any better. I swear that's what happened to frankie in the 2002 postseason on the angels. dude just didn't know any better! point is, we know that holly and macias are what they are. i say give the kid a good, fair chance to be better.

by cephyn on Aug 19, 2005 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions

here here

I'm all on board with that.

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions

Not to be picky but...

We have had a couple of good prospects in the last 30 years. Palmiero in 1986 and Grace in 1988. They were pretty good prospects, regardless of their personalities (Grace) and steroid use (Palmiero). Joe Carter could be considered another one in 1983. I will agree that it's been a long time between outstanding prospects. We have a couple now......hopefully we bring them along correctly.

by jtiet on Aug 19, 2005 9:03 PM CDT up reply actions

Bob

you need to read the article. Dusty's words

"They talk about me and kids and [stuff]. How many kids I got? Baker said. Damn near half my team is kids"

So when Dusty said "kids", he absolutely did not mean only rookies.

by Thunderclap Newman on Aug 19, 2005 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions

unproven MLB players = kids

to me that screams "rookie"--again semantics.

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions

Not semantics at all

The statement "1/2 my team is kids" is patently false if Baker meant kids to mean rookie. Can anyone who posts on this site admit when they are proved wrong?

by Thunderclap Newman on Aug 19, 2005 6:08 PM CDT up reply actions

I guess

there is no grey area, huh? You think Dusty literally meant 12.5 players on his roster are kids or rookies. Whatever Clap. You are right and I am proved wrong. Wow.

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 6:12 PM CDT up reply actions

there is absolutely no grey area

on whether the term kids meant rookies in his statement quoted in the paper.

by Thunderclap Newman on Aug 19, 2005 6:19 PM CDT up reply actions

About Francoeur...

He is doing great and everything, but he doesn't walk. That is not looked at much because he is overall doing great. I find it really strange considering it's the Braves and they teach their kids these things. 114 AB's and no walks, I think with all those, he would have a chance to draw a walk sometime.

Cubbie blue always sPaRkLeS in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Aug 19, 2005 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions

good point

on John Sickels minor league ball site, there are a few diaries discussing this point and how "Frenchy" is doomed for a fall.

He's a great athlete and is getting by on his talent right now, but that won't last. He swings at just about everything and sees about 3.2 pitches per PA which is right around the bottom in MLB. I will say Murton has a lot better approach at the plate than "Frenchy."

by socalbob on Aug 19, 2005 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions

Mistakes?

What Dusty says about teaching on the job makes sense and I can see the merits in playing the older guys down the stretch.The problem is the players on this team make more mistakes than any Cub team I have ever seen young or old.This team has talent but plays very stupid ball and I blame Dusty and his coaching staff for that.To defend Baker by saying it is all the players fault just does not sit well with me.When you are one of the highest paid managers in the game it should be reflected in the play of your team,if not hit the road.

by jimhickman on Aug 19, 2005 1:43 PM CDT reply actions

and that

would sorta support the notion that maybe he's not teaching.

by cephyn on Aug 19, 2005 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions

I have to disagree....

.....though I do think Dusty needs to take a more proactive approach.

Veteran Players or Kids or Whatever the Hell you want to call our players (not rookies) should know how to play the game of baseball when it comes to fundamentals--you can work on bunting, you can talk about situational hitting, but mental errors are a reflection of the players as much, if not more so than the manager, and I agree with Dusty that you should know how to do these things when you're on a major league team (or have been on a major league team for many years).

I mean, you can run "cut-off-man" drills and "double play" drills all day long, but the mental errors can still happen.

Get rid of Corey Patterson--he's the one who makes the most mental mistakes--they've worked their asses off with him and their have been no results. As for Nomar and Walker and Burnitz and Hollandsworth and Macias--these guys do not need to do drills--they're professionals who are having mental lapses on the field--

If you look at Baker's teams, traditionally, they have always been fundamentally sound--this team is a glaring exception.

by southerncubbie on Aug 20, 2005 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions

matt murton sent down

does anybody know how much of this decision is hendry and how much is baker? thanks.

by dc60123 @ Bleed Cubbie Blue on Aug 19, 2005 3:49 PM CDT reply actions

I'd say its about 69.9% Hendry and 40.1%

Baker. You know baseball is 50% physical and 80% mental.

Just joking, I doubt anyone would know whose decision this really is, it usually falls under the general manager's responsibility but who really knows.

The only we will find out is if Dusty, Jim, or Andy post on this site.

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 @ Bleed Cubbie Blue on Aug 19, 2005 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions

He can't possibly do everything

There comes a point in the day where you do have to say, okay, I've done everything I could do for these guys, now it's just up to them to go out there and do their thing. Whether or not you're the best paid manager makes no difference. My boss can call me into his office tommorow and tell me I'm fired to bring in complete dolts. The dolts will screw up and it'll be his fault.

Moral of the story: A fool and his money are soon parted.

I'm neither bashing nor defending him either, i too am impartial about him. I do not feel that it's all the players fault though.

A thought that has crossed my mind a few times this year is are there some faults attributed to the fact that there is no one single man wearing the "C"?

Look at the garbage those damn leafers dumped on our lawn. New York Post, New York Magazine, the New York Mets. -Peter Griffin

by priorpwnz on Aug 19, 2005 4:26 PM CDT reply actions