2003-2006. I can't rightfully blame Dusty for this year, but I do hold him responsible for the past 3 years. From playing Lenny Harris, Tom Goodwin, Neifi,etc...to the way his teams have constantly been ib turmoil. I made up my mind about Baker in the 2003 play-offs when the Cubs had a 7 or 8 run lead and Baker left Prior in to throw 100+ pitches again. Would things have ended up differently? Who knows, but Prior may have been a little stronger in his next start. We know how that ended up. We knew he didn't have a clue about in game decisions or making out a line-up card, but he was supposed to be a player's manager. I have seen nothing but dissension and conflict surrounding this team. Baker's offensive philosophy is obviously not the answer. In SF, he had Barry Bonds and Jeff Kent, who both were on base machines. The Cubs seem to have adopted Baker's "swing first, ask questions later" philosophy. So, no I wouldn't fire Baker for this year. I'd fire him for the job he has done since he was hired. It's time to admit that he's just not a very good manager.

team has gotten worse every year since he's been here (i know we had a better record in 04 than 03, but it was a worse team).

you call it wisdom/sage/patience, i call it indifference/apathy/inaction.

baker being here means his coaching staff will be here. since baker has been here, the cubs have (with almost complete turnoever of the roster) been one of the most fundamentally unsound teams in baseball. they have a terrible approach at the plate (swinging at everything, not working the count), and a terrible approach on the mound (not throwing first pitch strikes, and if you do get ahead 0-2, wasting 3 pitches to try to get the k).

he makes an order for the players he wants, and hendry fills it. unfortunately, those players are high strikeout, low obp guys. thus, he makes hendry worse at his job.

the team has played with zippo energy since 03.

and, as mentioned, the bonehead lineup/pitching changes/bullpen use.

is  hard to argue with your point that Dusty will get an extension.

However, the rest of your diary is shocking.

First, I would take the Yankees "bad years" if I could have their 26 World Championships and their 39 ALCs!  Part of the reason they have been so successful is that they (fans, ownership, ect.) have failed to accept mediocrity.  The Cubs ownership and to a large extent, their fans, have accepted it.

Second, as you know, I believe Dusty is a "horrible" manager.  IMHO, I believe his recent team's exhibit poor fundamentals and have quit on him.  A perfect example of that was that 4 pitch ninth inning awhile back when the Cubs were getting blown out.  All one needs to do is look at what the CWS did Sunday night trailing 10-2 on ESPN.  Now I know the Cubs are not the CWS, but look at the differences in how the team responded.  The Cubs quit that day:  Plain and simple.  The CWS did not.  That is a direct reflection of how the players feel about the manager.  

Using your NYY example, do you feel, given Dusty's track record, that George Steinbrenner would allow him to continue to manage his team?  Do you think the fans would stand for his team's mental lapses and poor play?

Now you can say that we should get rid of the players.  As you know, that can not happen.  The only logical step left is to get rid of Dusty.  It needs to be done now.   This is not a knee jerk reaction.  His teams have failed to live up to their promise and recently, have failed to resemble an MLB team.  Injuries have cost him, but, if he is a "sage", like you say, could he not do a better job of motivating his players?

I know we will agree to disagree, but as someone who loves the Cubs, I am saddened to see baseball being played the "Dusty way".  

BTW, I too believe Joey Cora would make an excellent manager.  I have been saying this for sometime now.  

Sure if they get to the elusive .500 give Bake the extension, but if they continue to flounder and lose90+ games I see no reason for him to be brought back. None. They need a housecleaning--it won't involve Stoney but maybe Brenley or another outsider (how can we wangle Girardi away from Marlins didn't he sign multiyear deal)?

Well, all this handwringing over Dusty is pointless...you've got to perform on the field which the Cubs haven't done this year. I think they need to shake up the coaching staff just as much as the mgr, to change their approach to hitting especially.

Please do not complain about high strike out players, poor fundamentals, mind numbing in game decisions, the future destruction of Felix Pie at the leadoff spot, the past destruction of Corey Patterson at the leadoff spot, racist comments, calls up to the press box, and unlikeable teams.  This is what Dusty brings, and he is apparentl yor guy.  4 months with an interim manager and Von Joshua as hitting coah would pay divedends in the next few years, if only to undo the damage.

Cubs fans definitely responded with passion to your excellent post on the HGH and steroids problem, but my gosh you are like Paul Revere rallying the troops when you post about Dusty Baker.  The posters will be grabbing their Mountain Dew, coffee, etc...and taking pot-shots from the hinterlands, as well as slinging praises from afar for the on-field leader of our Cubs.

Let the controversy begin!

After reading your post on the case for Dusty, I agree, to a degree, that firing the manager right now is of little help to this team.  I don't think it's as necessary as trying to change the way all 3 McPhail, Hendry and Baker think about the game.  So, if Dusty were fired, which I expected to happen last season but now I understand how much Hendry is an old-school loyalist, then I fully expected Grady Little to be the Cubs Manager...this would not be good...

So now I advocate a total house cleaning, but I do get pissed many times at Dusty for his idiotic decisions and commentary that I vent periodically through the season by calling for his dismissal, it's more for punishment than for improvement of the team, lol...

But the post implicitly raises an excellent point:  How should a manager be evaluated?  I'll post more on this later but essentially this is the issue to me...of course I think Dusty rates at the bottom of what I think is important, but firing the guy now serves no purpose.

I think there could have been a "wake-up call" served on the team by firing him a month ago, but that's gone.  The only way I'd dismiss him now is that if he said something like Guillen did regarding HGH and steroid users, essentially praising the cover-up and the hidden cheaters of the game, or some other off-field embarassment, or he started playing Neifi for Cedeno.

One of the things that strikes me as so disturbing about Baker, and unfortunately this goes to partial personal attack, is that I have never seen a manager so blatantly make decisions or influence the roster based on apparent nepotism.  If the Cubs think that this gives them an advantage because every player "loves playing" for Dusty, then think again--Players love money.  They takes the money and they play the game (I am writing the way the Nihilists speak from the Big Lebowsky with "takes", and you can throw in a German accent as well, lol).  And if the Manager is somewhat impaired in evaluating what constitutes a quality bench player or or other spot on the roster, then it does us little good to have Dusty's cronies sitting on the bench stinking the place up.  Boy, we really lucked out that Dusty and Neifi are so tight, think of what would have happened otherwise?  He might be playing for the Mexican All-Star team this year?

Dusty is seriously flawed in his approach to the game, but I am now convinced that so are Hendry and McPhail and that launching Dusty will only result in the existing management hire another guy from the same school of bad baseball managing.

In the end, players win games for sure, and I think Barry Bonds has proved this more so with Dusty than anyone....Managers should be evaluated based on what they get out of their players, managing the pitchign staff, situational moves, etc...There isn't one correct way for all of these but from a series of chocies, you'd like to select ones that are better rather than worse and the put players and team in position to succeed, from there it is up to the players...But I think Dusty fails mightiliy in putting guys and the team in the best position to succeed.

went from excellent color commentator to fantastic GM.  Maybe that's the job for Stone.

WHY DOES GOD HATE THE CUBS ?

would be better than this POS we have now.

Defending this boob should be a crime against humanity.  It's NOT his job top teach?  REALLY?

The team has quit on him the last three years, and you want this clown around.   Enjoy the next hundred years of loseing with your good old boy Dusty at the helm.  I jumped ship on him when the Cubs were more concerned with what was said in the TV booth than trying to secure a playoff spot.

I began a thread on a message board at the beginning of the season calling for Dusty Baker to be given an extention. I pointed toward stability and the fact that Dusty has had good success with the Cubs. It seems the Tribune Co. fires mangers at around the 3 year mark and doesn't give them a chance to do the job. I say give him the 5 years (total) and see what happens. I see the burden on Hendry's shoulders. He brought in and resigned people that he shouldn't have. Hendry needs to begin to get creative and figure out just what this OBP really means.

 

but Al is right, he's going to be extended, so what should be done with that in mind?  First, get rid of the coaches.  

The first order of business would be to get rid of Clines/Matthews, whether Dusty likes it or not.  If Dusty want's a contract he has to accept that his buddies aren't going to be here with him.  

Second, get rid of Rothschild.  Great reputation or not he hasn't gotten results and has presided over what can only be described as disaster.  Tons of talent, nothing to show for it.  Maybe that's part Dustys fault but Rothschild takes the fall.  

Then, hire new, young blood who aren't afraid of new ideas and information.  Force Dusty to take Cora, or Freddy Gonzalez or whoever fits the description of a coach who can teach patience at the plate, fundamental baseball on the field and throwing stikes on the mound.

Next, dump the players who aren't helping.  That includes all of Dustys favorites, like Neifi! and Womack.  Do NOT let Dusty have any input on the roster in the future.  He's made it clear that he has no credibility when it comes to deciding who should be on a major league roster and who shouldn't.  When the old players are gone, start replacing them with guys who have an understanding of the fundamental part of the game, who have value outside of being a veteran has-been.  Focus on guys who have high obp's, then slugging, then defense, then speed.  Not the other way around as we apparently do it now.  For pitchers, start focusing on guys who can find the plate, and are durable and have some idea of how to pitch.  Glendon should be help up as an example of the type of pitcher we don't need, and the type of contract that should never be given out again.

When all that is said and done, maybe we'll be a better team.  Dusty will be the manager, but he'll be forced to manage a team not of his own making but one that's put together with a plan.  Give Dusty the right players/coaches and he very well could be a good manager.  That's my $.02.

1.  Name a manager that went from 20 years in the broadcast booth to being an effective manager:  How about Larry Dierker?  He won 4 divisions in 5 years with the Astros.  (not that I'm advocating Steve Stone, but Dierker's a perfect example of a case when it worked.)  Yes, he never won a world series, but the four divisions he won is more than the Cubs have won since I've been alive. (I'm 30)
2.  How is getting better players going to make Dusty a better manager?  Look at 2004.  Look at 2005.  Look at 2003 even (88 underachieving wins lucky to make the postseason).  
3. How many games has his Wisdom won?  Poor fundamentals, universally poor approach at the plate, poor lineup construction, poor double switches, zero respect for rookies...Not to mention his "calming influence in the locker room".  He really did a bangup job with Sammy and Corey, didn't he?  Latroy Hawkins loved it here!  Merker and Alou were happy campers, too, they weren't bothered by TV booth criticism at all.  I could go on.
4. How do you know Dusty's going to be extended?  Show me proof.  I want proof.

an extension in the first place??? The only words I've heard come out of Jim Hendry's mouth is that Dusty will have an opportunity to manage the team at full health.  

 Does John McDonough dictate these posts over the phone to you, or simply fax them over?

but I was not serious since Maddux has no interest
in managing while he is still playing.
I do have to say Al that being disappointed that
Dusty finished behind Stone is like being
"shocked , shocked" that there is gambling at Rick's
BCB like most of Cubdom has grown increasingly
anti- Dusty.
Unlike nearly all other issues Cub and otherwise, I am on
the fence. Dusty has been hampered by nearly catastrophic
injuries for going on 3 years but to continue to play
Neffi regularly and allow Clines to stay is pretty
mind boggling. However I do see enormous value
in Dusty's relationship with players. I do NOT support
an extension before the season is played out anymore
than I support firing him now.
So I will take a moderate wait and see approach

because they'll still be the flubs.....

loveable losers YES ! GO FLUBBIES GO !

I don't know why we're "debating" this. It seems to me that you're either on the "Fire Dusty" side or the "It's not his fault" side, and both sides are covering their ears and shouting their talking points, with nobody on either side gaining anything from it.

Dusty's here. He does not appear to be going anywhere any time soon. And signs indicate that he'll not be going anywhere any time later, either.

One point that I haven't seen above is: while it's true Dusty's been saddled with pretty significant injuries to the top two starters in his rotation the last couple of years, it should also be noted that those two guys were among the very highest in all of baseball as far as pitches-per-start before they were hurt.

And who routinely left them in for 130, 140 pitches?

Dusty Baker.

It looks to me like there's a correlation there. But maybe that's just me.

I agree with you 100 percent!

the feelings of 89% of Cub fans. It's been proven time and again that the fans often have a better sense of what's good for a team than those in control. They come not from a position of maintaining the appearance of stability. Frankly, I don't give a damn with appearances. I care about results. And for the past 3+ years this team has underperformed in the long term and the short term.

You want to change the coaches but keep the manager. Well, since the manager hires the coaches, just what type would Dusty hire to replace those that are fired. All you're doing is extending the period of suffering.

You have called for patience. Ok. What has that gotten us? Are we any closer to being a contender? Now what? Shall we be expected to be patient another 2 years with the same tired excuses rather than victories? Just what would cause you to think that 89% of the fans aren't smart enough to see one of the most glaring problems is Baker? If after 3+ years the trend is still downward, that's proof enough for me that he's unfit to continue. My patience is worn out.

I love Flubbies baseball !

I stand by my vote.

I'm with Al - I voted for Dusty. I've been watching the Cubs for 30 years, and they must have had 20 managers in that time. None has been able to get the team all the way, but Dusty has come the closest. Unlike many of you, I like the way he handled his starting staff in 2003. He had a weak bullpen, so he played his strongest hand, letting Wood and Prior and Zambrano throw a lot of innings. In case you hadn't noticed, it's a winning formula to let your best pitchers throw the most innings. Dusty understands this.

I definitely have my problems with the way he handles the bullpen. All the lefty/righty switches are nonsense. And he does seem to be pretty weak on getting his players to play good fundamental baseball. Some of his in-game decisions are questionable. He falls in love with guys like Neifi Perez and Tony Womack. All true.

But like Al, I appreciate Dusty's personality - the fact that he knows that a season is a marathon, not a sprint. His players seem to like him. I've seen the managers who scream and yell (Lee Elia was one), and aside from maybe Billy Martin, few are effective in the long run. I like how Dusty has given Cedeno and Murton plenty of playing time this year- a sign that he is willing to give young guys a chance. He had a lot of success in San Francisco, and he led the Cubs to their first back-to-back winning seasons since the early 1970s. Yes, 2005 was lousy, and this year has been too. But I say give him the benefit of the doubt.

The only guy out there who might be a good replacement is Brenly. He did a very good job in Arizona and I feel he got fired way too early. Stone is way too self centered and opinionated to be a good manager - he doesn't seem to get along well with others. I do love the guy, don't get me wrong. But where I'd love him to be is back in the broadcast booth, not in the dugout.

Since I rarely post here I'll preface my comment with the fact that I normally agree with Al, and thoroughly enjoy reading his posts and many of the comments on this site.  However, if any third grader could run this team if you blow up the coaching staff and bring in a bunch of new players, why pay Dusty $5 million per year to make such basic blunders as inappropriate lineups, poor pitcher management and overuse of untalented "good old boys?"

The idea that Dusty's extension is a foregone conclusion in the middle of such a horrible season is pathetic.  If Hendry is that out of touch with baseball reality, Tribune should be glad to pay out his new contract and replace him, too (which is unrealistic, I admit).

Tonight's lineup against a lefty has Pierre #1 and Perez #2. Tell me one other manager or would be manager that would have them at the top of the lineup?

You argument seems to be that Dusty has done a poor job, but we should keep him because:

a.) a bunch of fans think Steve Stone would be better;
b.) a bunch of fans can't come up with suggestions you consider to be realistic and an improvement; and
c.) Dusty is going to come back anyways, so we should live with it and not complain about him anymore...

None of these arguments hold water for me.
Regardless of who the replacement is, Dusty has done a poor job and doesn't deserve to keep it. As another commenter noted above, his weaknesses have all shown up and his strenghts have not been apparent the last 3 seasons. The guy had one good season, and in retrospect i attribute the "leadership" of that team to Kerry Wood, Mark Prior, Damian Miller, and Eric Karros. So at least we agree that Dusty's done a poor job...

As to a.) and b.), its akin to someone doing a poll of who should "replace" John Kerry as the Democratic nominee for president, including Jeb Bush as a choice, and then claiming Kerry should keep the job because Jeb Bush was the most popular choice and as a Republican wound be both unrealistic and ineffective in the position. Just because J.Bush isn't a good choice, and just because those polled couldn't come up with a perfect candidate, doesn't mean Kerry should keep the job! One thing has nothing to do with the other!

In other words, firing Dusty is step 1. Replacing him is step 2. Who knows which people are interested in managing? Who knows how they'd do in an interview? I certainly don't. However, i'm absolutely positively convinced that there are better managers out there than Dusty Baker - and i hope Jim Hendry can find them. After all, if he can't then one has to question how effective he is at his own job.

As far as the "live with it" line of reasoning, that's just a illogical counter-argument to requests for Dusty's dismissal. Do i think Dusty will stay around? Yes. Do i think he'll keep batting the fastest guys on the team at the top of the order? Yes! Will the inevitability of either of these things keep me from complaining about them? NO!!! I may be "wasting my breath" (or, in this case, my fingers), but that's all we do here, strategy-wise. I don't think i'm going to change Hendry's mind about Dusty, Neifi, Clines, or anyone else that's a member of the Chicago Cubs. However, that's not why i post complaints... i post them to share my thoughts with the rest of the Chicago Cubs blogging community - for the visitors of your site and others. And i think that when a manager is doing a poor job, we should continue to discuss that as a community, regardless of his chances of keeping said position. Even if its ineffective, it'll help us blow some steam and we may all have a good baseball discussion or two in the meantime.

Oh, and for my specific recommendation? I'm still going with Davey Johnson, who is back in baseball these days as an assistant to GM Jim Bowden of the Washington Nationals. If i remember right, he took a respite from managing for a while for health reasons and is now looking to get back into the MLB game (thus the Nationals position). He may be looking to do so as a GM, but its like you often say: why not ask and find out?

Al, why not do a poll where the incumbent is pitted up against ONE other candidate? That would provide a better reflection of the quality of candidates to replace Baker.  In a poll with 18 choices, name recognition is going to weigh heavily.

Only 80 of 697 people voted for Baker. I'm guessing he's going to lose to any of the names you posted, if it's a head-to-head race.

To me, this does not indicate that unreasonable fans want somebody they've seen speak well on TV, they want ANYONE else because they feel Baker is doing more harm than good.  

That's my reasoning for wanting him fired. Neifi in the No. 2 hole, the lineup's highest SLG percentage hitting seventh at times, damaging double switches and "walks clog up the bases" -- these are symptoms of an unscientific, old school thinker who's time has passed.

If he's such a great manager of people, then why did his people blame broadcasters for a meldown?  Why is the best player following him from team to team Neifi Perez?

Dusty can win when his players are talented enough and they stay healthy and happy.  If not, he can't compensate.  

Would I pick Stone over Baker? Yes, though I didn't vote for him.  I'd take anyone on that list over Baker.  I'd also add the names Ron Washington, Lloyd McClendon and Jim Lefebvre.

"Girardi said he spends hours every day teaching. This isn't what a major league manager should do"?

Al-
What, then, should a manager be doing? Anyone can play the percentages, tell a pitching coach to make a visit to the mound, signal to bring in a reliever, or put together a lineup. I really think that managers today don't teach enough. Dusty is a prime example. There's a reason he prefers veterans, even crappy ones; there apparently doesn't need to be any training or coaching.

As for the "lack of experience" that a guy like a Girardi might have, I don't think I remember anyone complaining about Ozzie Guillen after he won a World Series in just his second year as manager. Not to mention the breeding he got sitting next to Joe Torre on the bench everday for 3 years or so. Dusty Baker has 14 years experience and how's that worked out?

is talking about Guillen first, then Girardi in the last paragraph via Joe Torre.