What Makes A Good Coach?
Sandberg? Sutcliffe? Grace? Maddux?
As the Cubs search for a new manager (again), and fans begin to project who would make good coaches in the new regime, something continues to baffle me: Why do fans continue to throw out the names of former Cubs' favorites as prospective coaches?
I mean, come on, who doesn't love Ryno? The Red Barron? Gracie? Sarge? Right? They are Cub icons, and all-of-them, fan favorites. However, it seems borderline ridiculous, or at least yet-to-be-justified to be throwing these guys names out there as coaches for the new regime. What is it that will make Ryne Sandberg a great coach? What is it that will make Greg Maddux a great coach?
I can't say what it is that makes a good coach, but I think that we all agree that from the manager on down, what the Cubs need are excellent, hungry, devoted teachers of the game. We've all complained, and all agree, no-matter-our-differences, that the Cubs' coaches as of late have plain-sucked. It showed on the field everday. The best teachers of the game -- or the best teachers in general, in life -- are not necessarily the Hall of Famers or best players. That is one thing I have always observed about baseball--or any sport for that matter--it's usually the mediocre former players or no-namers that make the best managers and coaches. Excelling as a coach utilizes a different set of skills than succeeding as a player.
So, do people really want these former stars to be coaching our players? I just want to know what other people seem to suggest: What is it that will make Ryne Sanberg a great coach? Maddux? Grace? Me, personally, I always feel more comfortable with the manager making the choice. I mean, it's not a popularity contest.
What does it take to be a great coach? Who are the best candidates? Why would former star players make good coaches?
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.
0 recs |
24 comments
Comments
I like to call it the "Ozzie effect"
That being said, I do believe Greg Maddux would be an excellent pitching coach. He's not called "the professor" for nothing. Because his success has been based more on knowledge and preparation than being able to throw a 100 mph fastball, he has a lot more to impart to young pitchers than would, say, a Roger Clemens. His personality just seems well-suited to coaching, as well.
You are right on the money about former role-players being better coaches than super-stars. Nowhere is this more in evidence than the NBA. If you follow pro basketball at all, these three names should be sufficient to show that stardom as a player does not make a successful coach, while being a solid roleplayer does: Avery Johnson, Isaiah Thomas, and the Bulls' own Scott Skiles.
by SuperContext on Oct 5, 2006 11:54 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Jinx
The NFL:
Herm Edwards
Bill Cowher
Lovie Smith
Kirk Ferentz
MOST NFL coaches were former average players either in the NFL or college.
by tyger1147 on Oct 5, 2006 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really don't think
by tal1286 on Oct 5, 2006 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Joe Girardi...
So far, great coach.
I agree. What makes so-called average players good to great coaches is that more than likely they didn't have all the physical skills of the game. They had to rely on the mental aspect of it, the repetiveness of doing the same exact fundamental things every day.
Incredibly "gifted" athletes usually do one of two things (so it seems):
a) fade out of baseball with a ton of "potential" because they never put in the work to become perfect in their mechanics and everything else and be consistent day-in, day-out --or--
b) they work hard and become great--what happens here, though, like with Michael Jordan, is that they don't understand how, if they are teaching someone the right way to do something and see this person working hard at it all the time, why this player isn't great. The usually get frustrated and thus don't seem to maximize the abilities of those they are teaching.
"Average" players, on the other hand, have a number of qualities: consistent work ethic, ability to be patient with superstars (as they may have had to do while playing), and an understanding of where the lesser-gifted athletes they are teaching are coming from, and recognizing their roles and how it would fit on a team.
These are generalities and are only my opinion. But they seem to work to me. Certainly, not every average player is a great coach (duh) and some great players could be great coaches.
I don't know how, though, "greats" like Maddux and Grace, who seem to have become great with technical skill and a great work ethic (from my limited view of baseball the past 10+ years, but I wouldn't be surprised if at least those two could do it. But who knows?
by tyger1147 on Oct 5, 2006 12:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Consider...
Joe Torre
Bobby Cox
Tony LaRussa
Torre was a very good player, a borderline Hall of Famer even as a player. He had over 2300 hits, won a batting title and an MVP award and was a pretty good defensive catcher.
But until he managed the Yankees, he was considered mediocre as a manager. In 14 years he finished first only once. So his success may be in part, because he now has a good team behind him.
Cox and LaRussa were both fringe players, but learned the game well, apparently, from whoever they played for, whether it was in the minors or the majors.
I don't necessarily think there is any pattern here. Great players often don't make good managers for the reason that you state -- that they don't have the patience for players who aren't as good as they were. Ted Williams was a good example of that. Frank Robinson, a Hall of Fame player, managed for a long time, but never had any success.
In some ways, it's a crapshoot, and dependent on the players the GM gives the manager.
That said, I don't necessarily want Ryne Sandberg or Mark Grace as Cub coaches UNLESS their skills in coaching would make them qualified to impart their knowledge to current players. Example: Gary Matthews was a very good player, and had one of the better years in recent Cub history in 1984. He was quite popular as a Cub player. But he was a lousy coach.
by Al on Oct 5, 2006 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're not saying that Torre and LaRussa
by VS on Oct 5, 2006 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is there a metric for luck?
by CubFaninCA on Oct 5, 2006 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is
by Faith plus 1 on Oct 5, 2006 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
formula
by CubFaninCA on Oct 5, 2006 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LaRussa..
That's a little more than "luck". Go read "3 Nights in August".
by Al on Oct 5, 2006 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
being in the same
by Santos Sorrow on Oct 5, 2006 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also....
by ctcoff99 on Oct 5, 2006 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Touche, but...
by Al on Oct 5, 2006 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Devil's Advocate
Look, I like Girardi. Heck, I even hope he is the candidate among the names bandied about that gets the Cub job. But I refuse to ignore the "Florida incident" and look at him through rose-colored glasses. Cub fans fell into this same damned trap with Dusty Baker four years ago. Girardi has some growing up to do. He also needs to respect leadership and learn how to play nice.
by BlueBooHoo on Oct 5, 2006 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here we go.....
- Fire Hendry
- Sign Zito and Schmidt
- Sign Soriano
- Trade for Willis or Cabrera
- Find takers for Dempster and Rusch's deal.
- Trade Cedeno for a real prospect.
- Sell the team
by rlpete on Oct 5, 2006 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some Science lots of Art....
I don't know enough about any of the 5 to give an answer.
by CubFaninCA on Oct 5, 2006 12:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Addendum
by CubFaninCA on Oct 5, 2006 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's coaches and then there's coaches
I think where you get into the most trouble with star players coming back as coaches is the hitting coach and the pitching coach. No Fergies and Billies, please.
Among former Cubs who weren't stars, one possibility is Gary Varsho for bench coach. He was let go by the Phillies, and has talked about wanting to come back to Chicago.
There's also a diversity side of the coaching staff. If you hire a white, straightlaced, former catcher as manager, chances are he'll hire a couple of minority, fun-loving, former outfielders to the staff. It helps for each player to have someone on the coaching staff to relate to, since a ball team is much like a family. That's not to say there have to be clear ethnic, religious, or other divisions in teams, but that the coaching staff usually reflects the makeup of the team, for good reasons. And, yes, at least one of them usually speaks Spanish.
by zambranofan on Oct 5, 2006 12:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Girardi and Varsho...
That'd be a good choice for Girardi if he's hired.
by Al on Oct 5, 2006 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For another reference on Varsho....
"Varsho is one of those guys who would make a great major league manager someday because he is very dedicated to the game and he studies it. No matter what team he is on, he sits near the manager and tries to learn as much as he can. He's one of those guys who had to struggle to get to the big leagues and stay there, and usually those players make the best managers." --Ryne Sandberg
A pretty good endorsement from a pretty good source. Varsho is probably not ready to manage, but I like the idea of him as a coach.
by ctcoff99 on Oct 5, 2006 1:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Good manager
Coaches develop talent, players execute. But managers can look at the team they have available, work with coaches and players, and make the best team possible WITH WHAT THEY HAVE (cough, Dusty!). Without working together and having the managerial skills to motivate players to work together and to play on their weaknesses and strengths, a manager is Dusty
Baker.
Thus concludes my argument on why good baseball players do not necessarily make good managers.
by Sarah Hope on Oct 5, 2006 1:56 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
i think
but seriously, i think it might matter less how good the player was, but rather how hard they had to work to get there. somebody like ted williams might not have been a good coach because he was the most natural basebeall player in the history of the game, and probably didn't have to spend much time figuring out why he was good or what it would take to get better.
perhaps the fringe players often make good coaches because they are the people in baseball who have to work the hardest to keep their job, and have to use every ounce of talent they have or they'd be out of a job. therefore, they might have a better shot at telling someone else what it takes to win or improve.
by tomas21 on Oct 5, 2006 7:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 




















