Dale Sveum, Joe Girardi, and the Impending Decision

joe girardi managerI haven’t written much about the Dale Sveum managerial situation recently, in large part because I didn’t believe there was a whole lot to say that hadn’t already been said by Sveum, himself, and by team president Theo Epstein. Indeed, even as a bevy of national writers were talking about Sveum and the Cubs, each was kinda-sorta just saying, “yeah, it’s possible the Cubs might let Sveum go because they’ve had some struggles … and, hey, Joe Girardi might be available!” Not a lot of meat there – at least not any that we hadn’t already chewed on.

That said, these things have a way of reaching a smoke-before-fire kind of fever pitch, and it’s worth discussing, even if the bottom line remains “Sveum is under contract through 2014, he may return next year, and he’s being evaluated.” Most of what is out there beyond that is just informed speculation.

One thing we do now know is that Sveum – together with his coaching staff – is expected to learn his fate on Monday in a meeting with Epstein. Outside of that …

  • Ken Rosenthal wrote what was perhaps the most pointed Sveum piece this week, writing in unequivocal terms: “But let’s get one thing straight: The Cubs did not hire Sveum to be a long-term answer. He was the caretaker, the bridge to the big-name manager who would ‘complete the job’ once the team was ready to win. Sveum knew it. The Cubs knew it. Everyone knew it.” Rosenthal concedes that the Cubs might stick with Sveum for another year, the final year of his contract. To be clear, I like Rosenthal. I think he is among the best of the national guys for a variety of reasons. But I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out (1) Rosenthal’s “caretaker” comments are written in a conclusory fashion without any source language (that’s odd for Rosenthal, who always cites sources), suggesting he’s offering his own thoughts; and (2) Rosenthal suggested earlier this year that Don Mattingly would be let go, just before the Dodgers turned things around. This is all to say that, while I find Rosenthal’s thoughts intriguing, and encourage you to read them, I don’t think it’s quite fair to say that Rosenthal is reporting Sveum will be fired, or that Sveum is unlikely to return.
  • You can read a great deal of additional thoughts from the very-honest Sveum here. As he’d indicated before, he knows the score: it’s a constant process of evaluation, and the poor performance of the big league team certainly isn’t going to save him (even if it is excusable based on the roster). Sveum understood what he was getting into when he signed onto a clear rebuild that was going to involve selling assets and starting youngsters. Among his words: “The bottom line is we haven’t won as many games as we’d like to. I knew getting this job there was going to be a good chance of people getting traded for prospects and that we needed to get the Minor League system much healthier and hit the jackpot on some free agents that we signed. Nothing’s really changed from what I was told. You’re never promised anything.”
  • Jon Heyman writes dueling pieces – which ask more questions than offer answers – about whether Joe Girardi would head to the Cubs, and whether Dale Sveum is out the door. The Yankees publicly want Girardi back. That’s about the only factual update I could glean.
  • Kevin Capie, out of Peoria, writes about whether Joe Girardi would actually leave the Yankees for the Cubs. Sounds like Girardi’s Little League coach thinks Girardi would jump at the chance to come back to the Cubs. That’s as good of a source as anyone’s found.
  • ESPN New York argues that Girardi would be crazy to leave the best job in the sport – manager of the Yankees apparently holds that title (I’d’ve thought something involving parties in San Diego) – and suggests Girardi play the field a bit, if only to increase his offer to return to the Yankees.
  • Bob Nightengale and Nick Cafardo write generically about Girardi, Sveum, and the Cubs. Cafardo has a Yankee source who says it’s 70-30 that Girardi returns to the Yankees.
  • At bottom, I still think it’s more likely than not that Sveum is brought back. I can envision scenarios where, through back-channels, the Cubs have discerned that Dream Managerial Candidate A (could be, but is not necessarily, Joe Girardi) is amenable to coming to the team. In that scenario, maybe Sveum is dumped. Query whether big money for another manager is the best use of limited funds right now, but I guess we’ll get there when we get there. Circling back: I don’t think Sveum would be fired on Monday unless the Cubs already had a very good idea of who they want to replace him, and whether they’ll be able to land that guy.
  • Whatever decision is made on Monday, I’d think we’re going to hear about it loudly and quickly. If Sveum is staying, the Cubs will want to give him a swift public backing so that he can confidently resume his role as a coach and development cog. If Sveum is let go, the Cubs will want to set about finding his replacement as quickly as possible for largely the same reason.

Brett Taylor is the editor and lead writer at Bleacher Nation, and can also be found as Bleacher Nation on Twitter and on Facebook.

203 responses to “Dale Sveum, Joe Girardi, and the Impending Decision”

  1. Noah_I

    Yeah, I don’t buy the “Sveum was hired to be a caretaker” thing. When the Red Sox hired Francona, he was not a big time manager, He’d managed mediocre to bad Phillies teams for 4 years, and had a couple years as a bench coach in between. I don’t really see Theo/Jed wanting to pay a premium for one of the “premiere” managers, since all the data shows that managers don’t make much of a difference.

    1. Funn Dave

      I disagree. When the Cubs hired Sveum, they knew they wouldn’t be competetive for at least another three years. Lo and behold, that’s the exact same length as Sveum’s contract. They knew they couldn’t get a big-name manager to manage such a shitty team, so they put Sveum in as a placeholder until they could. If Sveum were to end up being an excellent manager, then of course they would keep him. Otherwise, he’s essentially an interim manager without the interim part in the title.

      1. willis

        Yeah Sveum was/is a puppet placeholder who wouldn’t have the clout to make waves while the rebuilding was going on and the team was tanking. But, what they’ve seen to this point with the manager and staff has been bad enough that they are now internally (according to reports) questioning Sveum as the manager. Either way he was made to be the goat and take it on the chin, but with how horrible things have turned out and the performance of key pieces being unsatisfactory to the bosses, he may be on his way out.

  2. jh03

    Where’s assman when we need him? He’d have the inside info for us….

  3. TWC

    “Most of what is out there beyond that is just informed speculation.”

    Informed? Or uninformed?

    Maybe both.

  4. RWakild

    Sveum’s overusage of Russell and his inability to see it happening before it happens is one of the reasons that I don’t like him. I say give him another year but for the love of God learn from your mistakes Dale.

    1. ClevelandCubsFan

      I had an electronic Yahtzee game that I’d play on the van. After awhile the only point is to beat your high. 409 point games are meaningless. So I’d start playing against the odds so as to give myself a chance to do the only thing that mattered.

      If they only thing that matters is the playoffs andthe 2013 Cubs are your roster…. then you lean on Russell and giv e Marmol too many chances because although you can save face by pulling them back but you ain’t making the playoffs unless those guys step up and are awesome. In a way, if all that matters is the playoffs however long the odds, they are your only hope.

  5. Leo L

    I wonder if Svem wants an extension. I would if I were him. little more security. If they don’t want to give him one then I think it suggests that they don’t see him as a long term answer (atleast right now and maybe they want another year of evaluation). I still think that he will return next year. but if they don’t extend him this year then the chances of renewing his contract next year is smaller. The joe girardi thing. well …gotta sign him when he is available. But the timing doesn’t seem right. Do the cubs really want him that bad? maybe getting him will inspire fans to come back to the park? that could be a big free agent signing.

    1. MichiganGoat

      Kinda hard to ask for an extension when your record is roughly 100/200. If he sticks around and the Cubs become a miracle team then he can discuss extension.

  6. Nick Pipitone

    I say let him go, especially if better managers are available now. Frankly, it has always bothered me that the Cubs staff was stocked with people who, at heart, are Brewers. Sveum, Bosio and Deer aren’t Cub guys. They never were and never will be. Girardi is a Cub guy.

    1. Cubbie Blues

      Is that akin to being a ‘real’ Yankee?

      1. MichiganGoat

        True Cub

    2. TWC

      “…people who, at heart, are Brewers”

      Nick Pipitone has looked deeply into Dale Sveum’s eyes. He’s seen deep into his heart. And Nick knows: Dave Sveum is a Brewer.

      Codswallop.

  7. Spriggs

    I am more concerned about losing guys like Dave McKay and Chris Bosio than I am Sveum.

    1. Nick Pipitone

      Definitely keep McKay, but Bosio has to be the first one to go. Smarja hasn’t gotten better under him. Edwin Jackson underperformed uner Bosio. The entire relief staff has sucked for the most part under Bosio’s tutelage. James Russell has seriously regressed. The bright spot is Wood and to an extent Blake Parker. Strop and Arrieta have been decent, but they haven’t been here that long.

      1. C. Steadman

        you are forgetting names like Feldman, Garza, Gregg…Russell was solid the first half but eventually the overuse caught up to him…he is a lefty specialist and was his outings were stretched too long, where he would face too many righties to bridge the gap between lefties in the order..adding Rosscup to the bullpen will definitely help Russell

        1. Funn Dave

          Feldman’s a great example. Garza, though, was already a great pitcher before he came to the Cubbies.

    2. MichiganGoat

      The problem is if we bring in a big name manager (ie Girardi), he will want to bring in his own staff. Now maybe he won’t be able to have “his guy” but he will hand select who is on his staff. So maybe one of the assistants stick around, but no big ticket manager is going to let a FO dictate who is on his coaching staff.

      1. Spriggs

        Right. That’s what I was really inferring. The loss of Sveum doesn’t concern me, but it does imply that others will have to be gone along with him. I assume that most managers, especially big names like Girardi, will want at least a couple of their own guys. I really want McKay – more than any of the others – to stick around though. I like the way he works.

        1. MichiganGoat

          Gotcha Spriggs, any incoming coach wouldn’t be able to bring in all his coaches and I guess there is something to be said about keep a previous coach to help with the transition. If Girardi comes I doubt Larry R. would return with him (oh the horror of Prior/Wood speak) so Bosio might stand a good chance.

  8. cubsfanforever

    Why just Girardi. There could be other good candidates

    1. Scotti

      Girardi is the BEST candidate IF he would be considered by the Cubs. The others being talked about are meh.

      1. Funn Dave

        I’d just like to point out that we have no way of knowing that Girardi is the best manager available. Even if you looked at all their (the managers’) W/L records and all the players they’ve had and all the obstacles they’ve overcome and all the variables in their success, for all we know, there’s some no-name kid who’s an absolute baseball whiz and could take a team full of Tony Campanas and Brian Lahairs to the World Series.

  9. EvenBetterNewsV2.0

    I would be shocked if the FO and their “take the best talent when its available” policy is only applicable to players, when the coach is close to fulfilling his contract and you know what you are going to get.

  10. MichiganGoat

    I’m also surprised there have been no serious rumors about Jason McLeod being considered as a replacement for out going GM. The reality of his leaving has got become very real this offseason.

    1. Featherstone

      I would then ask, which GMs are getting the boot? Only people I could think of are Dipoto of the Angels, maybe Daniels of the Rangers (especially if they miss the playoffs), Amaro Jr. of the Phillies. I believe Zduriencik is getting one more year to figure that mess out.

      Anyone else that i’m missing?

      1. MichiganGoat

        Yeah that would be why rumors aren’t flying but I can’t imagine there are more GM on the hot seat. I don’t follow other teams closely enough to know what is going on with their FO situation. Anybody have any ideas?

        Can you imagine if McLeod goes to Philly with Ryno… THE HORROR THE HORROR!

  11. Lou Brock

    With the volume of Latin/Spanish speaking players coming up thru the Cubs system keep your eyes on Sandy Alomar Jr. As a possible candidate. Castro, Lake,Alcantara, Soler, Vizcaino and others will be here soon . It makes sense from a communicating and teaching viewpoint. I’m sure there are others available if Girardi is not available. I believe I read somewhere that Girardi has learned to speak Spanish as well.

    1. chrisfchi

      This is why i’m surprised no one has mentioned Ozzie. Not that I want him, just surprised his name isn’t floating around the rumor mill.

      1. MichiganGoat

        Yeah his stock vanished after the Miami experiment exploded.

        1. chrisfchi

          That’s what I was thinking. Guy is too full of himself. Personally if they did dump Dale, I wouldn’t mind alomar Jr.

      2. NyN

        Would Ozzie even stoop low enough to manage in the trash heap that is Wrigley Field?

        I guess you have to pay the bills. I’d love to hear the humility in him humbling himself before the press on that one.

        1. C. Steadman

          would the FO stoop low enough to hire the trash heap that is Ozzie? I would rather have Dale Sveum than Ozzie Guillen…I dont care what you say but I hate that man from his White Sox managerial days(2005 is the 2nd worst baseball season I’ve lived through and remembered(born in 1991), under 2003′s collapse…its the only thing White Sox fans can hold over Cubs fans)

          1. NyN

            The comment was directed as a joke to Ozzie’s comments about the quality of Wrigley Field.

            However, To me if we can get Girardi I am all for it. Simply because he is a Chicago guy (I will always be biased to bringing back these guys). Otherwise I am in the keep Sveum category as well.

    2. Funn Dave

      Thanks for bringing that up. I don’t know too much about Alomar Jr. but I like the idea of having a manager that can actually communicate with all the players without a translator. Imagine what that could do i terms of teamsmanship, cameraderie, cohesiveness, etc.

      1. Cubbie Blues

        Unless we get Tanaka. Also, isn’t it imperative for the player to learn the language of the country he works in? ::ducks::

  12. Brian Peters

    You know, I’m so friggin’ tired of espn’s opinion on everything. They hate the Cubs. Fine. Go suck an egg (or Hal’s lady parts).

    1. Funn Dave

      Saaame here. The worst is when they talk about a past story that was blown out of proportion by “the media,” when they were the ones blowing it out of proportion in the first place. Buncha hypocrites.

    2. Funn Dave

      Their magazine sucks now, too. It’s all features and no actual content. And they always build their issues these days around some dumbass theme–the point of magazines is variety; nobody wants to read an entire magazine about one subject–”the money issue,” “the image issue,” etc. They should spread that shit out over the year.

      1. willis

        ESPN blows all around. But I will say, “The Book of Manning” was pretty good. Other than that and some 30 for 30s…that station/site/magazine is absolutely terrible and they have little to no on air talent.

        1. Funn Dave

          That’s true, some of the 30 for 30s are really good–the Reggie Miller one and the Red Sox one come to mind. Besides that, I would love to see ESPN just F off and die (although I’d have to switch to Yahoo for fantasy football). Not to mention their borderline monopoly on all-inclusive sports media.

          1. willis

            “The U” and the one about SMU were my favorites. Those were very fascinating.

            1. Funn Dave

              The U was great. Haven’t seen the SMU one though.

  13. sven-erik312

    As the FO has said many times,the quality of the team is on them. Last season and this season, there was far too much that was out of Sveum’s control to warrant any second guessing of his tactics. My personal opinion was that he went too much with statistical matchups when he didn’t have the horses to perform those matchups. With the players he had, the only thing he could really do, and sometimes, did not do, was simply go with who was hot at the moment.
    I remember hearing a Dodgers/Cubs game back in August. It was in LA and it was the game Travis Wood won. Vin Sculley was doing the play by play. He went through the stats of the entire bullpen for the Cub’s season. We all know it has not been good, but to hear it all from him, it was very clear why this team was loosing. From the sound of his voice, it wsa like the Dodgers were just waiting for the bullpen to come in and give them the game. I just can’t see them throwing Sveum at this time.

  14. Dustin S

    I’m thinking they’d have let Dale know and been more public in his defense if he were staying for 2014. At this point it kind of feels like an inevitable path that he’ll be let go. As far as replacements, I’d be all for Girardi or Gardenhire over Dale in 2014. Ron Washington or Scoscia on the other hand, I’d just as soon they save the money and let Dale run the team in 2014. I know his players love him but I’ve never been impressed by Washington at all.

    1. Funn Dave

      That’s what’s confusing me, too. I would have assumed that they’d keep him next year & let him finish his contract while the team sucks anyways, but you’d think they would have backed him publicly by now instead of highlighting the fact that he’s not proven enough to be a sure thing. And they’ve had two seasons to evaluate him, so I really don’t think checking off a few boxes on their evaluation is holding anything up. They evaluate everyone, but the only one they keep bringing up publicly is Dale.

      1. DarthHater

        I think it’s the reporters that keep bringing the situation up publicly.

        1. Funn Dave

          They certainly don’t help, but I believe it was Epstein’s statement last week that really got people talking. Over a week ago, he announced that Dale would be evaluated, and that one of the things they’d be evaluating him on is the progress of young players such as Rizzo and Castro, which if based on them alone would be pretty damning.

  15. Spoda17

    Sveum will be here in 2014 unless they get Girardi… other than that, no reason to make a change now.

    1. wilbur

      I agree in general. But if they don’t make this move now, when they have options on hiring someone like Girardi, then next year they are going to need to look at extending Sveum and having him for another 3 or 4 years. Then he becomes your longterm pick for your rebuilt and contending team. Or, you have to have an extended period of lost seasons so you could make the manager change during Sveums second contract period. I don’t think that latter scenario is very likely.

      So this may actually be about as good as the timing will get for changing managers. Just depends on what Girardi wants to do.

  16. Jon

    The Cubs managerial job has to be one of the least appealing in baseball. I can’t imagine any “established” manager with other options even considering it.

    1. wilbur

      Why so down on the cubs all the time? Seems like an odd pastime to just follow a team to bash them. Unless you have some agenda like a fan of another team or pushing a rooftops interests. Otherwise why bother?

      1. jon

        What am I bashing? I am only stating why this job is unappealing. Quite frankly, as long as Theo is here, I think you may never see a big name manager. That’s just a result of having a GM driven organization. The manager will always have to yield power.

        Tito was a castoff when he was hired in 2004.

    2. Norm

      1) Just like free agents, it’s about the money.
      2) Ego – any manager would love to be the one on the first World Series champ in a century.
      3) Farm system

      1. Voice of Reason

        Take #2 and #3 off your list.

        It’s about the money!

        The ego drives people to work for the best or most powerful organizations. That certainly isn’t the Cubs RIGHT NOW or over the past 100 years! They want owners who will spend and put them in position to win. The crap about being the first World Series champ in a century only sounds great to Cub fans. Everyone else could give a shit and we’re laughed at about it across the country.

        The farm system? There isn’t a manager with a winning background who thinks about taking the job because of the farm system. It’s about the money and the organization’s power and desire to spend to kick everybody else’s ass!

        1. Norm

          Well this is probably the same exact thing people were saying when it was a pipedream to get Epstein in the front office.

  17. rich

    Hey Brian Peters , I totally with you ESPN not only hates the Cubs but all Chicago sports teams. Thanks for the insight !

  18. William

    Robinson Cano thinks he’s worth 305 million. Lmfao!

  19. Stevie B

    I don’t think Sveum is the guy who takes a talented Cubs team to the finish line, and as many have pointed out, you sign the needs you have when they are available.
    “It sends the wrong message”
    Screw the “message”, it’s time time win before this 44 year old sitting behind this key board is an 88 year old in a nursing home minus a title.

  20. Jon

    With the Dodgers out there, why not? I’d think that too if I was him.

  21. David

    Time to play big boy baseball. Hire Girardi.

    1. Cubbie Blues

      big boy baseball … smh

      1. hansman1982

        Which of course, leads us to the question:

        Why isn’t there a woman in baseball?

        1. Cubbie Blues

          Why isn’t there a man in softball?

        2. DarthHater

          There’s no crying in baseball.

  22. Eric

    If Sveum is let go, and Girardi isn’t the choice of the FO, then I don’t know who would be. The entire point of that exercise is to bring in a proven manager. That rules out quite a few.

    1. Funn Dave

      Who says he nees to be a proven manager? They hired Dale, and he wasn’t proven. The fact that he hasn’t turned the team around doesn’t inhibit them from hiring a nobody with intellect.

      1. Eric

        Dale was the manager to get them past the hard part. He doesn’t know how to win. The point in replacing him would be to bring in a proven winner. I don’t think I worded that right before.

        1. Funn Dave

          I guess I’m just not convinced by that line of thinking. If every team only wanted to hire a proven, winning manager, where would new managers come from? I’ve had this conversation here before, and while I do see the appeal of hiring a proven winner, I just don’t think it’s logical to follow that path exclusively or at the expense of giving other options their due consideration.

  23. Jon

    I’m sure Joe Girardi is chomping at the bit to:

    1) Come to a major market(& major expectations and pressure) and be saddled with a middle market payroll.

    2) Being the fall guy for another 90+ loss season.

    3) Have zero power in the organization and get brow beat on the daily basis by Theo and Jed Hoyer.

    Where does a guy like this sign up! Girardi(or any established manager) to the Cubs is a freaking fantasy.

    1. Norm

      1) You have no idea what the payroll’s will look like over the next 3 years.
      2) No one is going to blame the next manager if the 2014 team loses 90+.
      3) really?

      1. willis

        I think we can safely guess around $90ish mil for the payroll next season. Maybe $94 mil if Ricketts really gets wild.

        1. Jon

          Keep in mind, Cubs payroll commitments for next year are in the low 70′s which includes the $$$ still owed to Soriano. If factoring a payroll around 90 million, then assume the payroll on the field to be 17 million less than that.

    2. Funn Dave

      If I were a big-name manager, I’d sure as hell be chomping at the bit to have an opportunity to manage such a historic and storied franchise & to take them to the World Series for the first time in over a century. And let’s lay off the speculation about the power dynamic between the FO and manager. Nobody here has that kind of insider knowledge. Just because people try to excuse Sveum’s performance by saying that he was always being told what to do by the FO doesn’t mean that’s actually the case.

      1. Dave

        Many a manager have come and gone thinking they would be the one to less them to the promised land.
        I think that mindset has come and gone.
        The reality of whoever would take over if Svuem is fired would be getting in over his head just like the others. Worse than some considering the state of the major league roster.

  24. Patrick W.

    I can’t shake the feeling that if they haven’t told Sveum he’s staying yet, they don’t want to tell him. Why wait until Monday if your plan is to keep him? Nothing in the final three games is going to change their evaluation, is it? They finish up on Sunday, is the FO then going to cram in all the evaluation in the 15 hours or so before they meet with Sveum?

    I suspect they are hoping that a guy they want for the next 5 seasons takes their call Monday morning and says “Sign me up”. If he says anything different then Sveum stays 1 more year. I just don’t think they don’t already know, and if he was staying they would have told him already.

    1. C. Steadman

      i think its interesting that the decision is Monday, the Yankees are done Sunday as well so our negotiations with Girardi wont hinder a postseason run…I dont think its that farfetched to see Sveum gone and Girardi with a verbal commit to the Cubs come EOD Monday

      1. Cubbie Blues

        Julie DiCaro said that Theo is tired of having to overrule Sveum with the handling of the kids.

        1. willis

          Not sure how reliable she is but could be. I also think, at the risk of getting hammered around here, that Theo expected more out of Rizzo and is disappointed with the results. Couple that with Castro’s bed shitting year and I do think he’s questioning the management/coaching staff. Whether right or wrong, I do think that holds weight.

          1. Cubbie Blues

            For instance, Sveum said Castro deserved to be at the bottom of the order and then almost immediately was placed at lead-off with Rizzo batting 2nd.

            1. willis

              Yep. I can totally believe what she said, I just don’t know how inside she is. But I agree that’s an issue. What about the closer thing to? I wonder if it came down that they want to see Strop in that role the last 2-3 weeks, Dale said as much publicly, and then other than one time has kept Gregg in that roll. That’s a much lesser degree than the Castro of course but it made me curious as to why it came out, and then other than one time he keeps running Gregg out there.

              1. Cubbie Blues

                Yeah, the more I think about it, I don’t see Sveum back next year. I think there is just too big of a disconnect between he and the FO. It’s not as much what he did wrong, but what the FO would have liked him to do differently.

    2. hansman1982

      “I can’t shake the feeling that if they haven’t told Sveum he’s staying yet, they don’t want to tell him. ”

      This. Sveum is gone and I think he’s known it for a while which may explain some of the lineups.

      1. willis

        Man I hope you are right.

    3. TWC

      “Why wait until Monday if your plan is to keep him?”

      Sample sizes.

      With three more games under Sveum’s belt, he will have officially passed the “small sample size” threshold and the sabermetrically-inclined front office will be *officially* able to evaluate his efforts.

      1. C. Steadman

        hahaha yeah if he sweeps the Cards, he’s staying!!!

      2. Patrick W.

        Great point. I bet they are hoping for extra innings at least *once* during this series.

      3. Funn Dave

        hahaha hilarious.

  25. Rizzo1684

    I can only see them hiring Girardi or another big time manager if they plan on making some splashes in free agency. If the Cubs had an idea for a TV contract in place where they can plan accordingly on the payroll of the team. Maybe just maybe the Cubs shock us all and realize we already have a top 3 farm system and we are going to have another top 5 pick next year, lets use this and build a winner now. Maybe the Cubs bump up the team salary to 130 million again, sign Cano to a 10 yr 290 million, sign Girardi, sign Tanaka, sign Nelson Cruz to a 2 year deal and there you have it the Cubs will have a legit shot next season with a top 3 farm to back it up. I don’t think any of this will happen but only a small number of ppl really know.

  26. DarthHater

    The Cubs can offer a “big-name” managerial candidate one opportunity that exists nowhere else in all of sports: the opportunity to be the guy that leads a team to end the longest losing streak in professional sports history. There are some guys–and Girardi may be one of them–for whom that opportunity could be a significant attraction. But I’m not sure that opportunity is close enough yet to be a realistic selling point for the Cubs in attracting candidates.

    1. jon

      That opportunity is three to four years away.

      1. C. Steadman

        yeah but the beginning of the graduation of prospects will be in 2014…who do you want molding them into ballplayers is a serious question that needs answering…Sveum definitely wont be back after 2014 so we’ll need a new manager then anyways, why not take the shot with Girardi now?

        1. jon

          The Cubs I’m sure would take the shot, but why would Girardi agree?

          Not all of those prospects that graduate are going to meet expectations
          Those are your only pipeline until the revenue from the stadium deal comes in
          If those prospects don’t pan out, Theo/Jed are going to pin that on him.

          I think herpes might be more appealing that the current Cubs manager job.

          1. C. Steadman

            I dont think Theo or Jed will blame someone for prospects panning out…they’re smart and know prospects flame out, but under Girardi I think they have a lesser chance of flaming out…and Girardi did grow up as a Cubs fan, went to school near the Cubs, played for the Cubs so i think he’d choose the Cubs job over herpes…I’m not saying its a for sure thing he’ll be the manager(his family is settled down in the NYC area and he has older children that would maybe not be happy with papa moving them)but its a real possibility or else respected reporters like Ken Rosenthal wouldnt almost guarantee it

      2. Stevie B

        Now waiiiiiit one second.

        I said playoffs in 3 about 2 weeks ago and got spleen &ucked.

        Why is this ok to say now….?

        1. Cubbie Blues

          How does one become spleen sucked?

          I still disagree by the way. The same discussion does get tiresome though.

        2. Jon

          Some people love to drink the Kool-AId. These team will be lucky to avoid 90+ losses again next year.

          1. C. Steadman

            if you accuse people of “drinking Kool-Aid” does that mean you’re drinking Haterade?

            1. Jon

              Haterade with a shot of reality.

              1. C. Steadman

                so you think its unrealistic that the Cubs could go 73-89?

                1. Jon

                  a-chance.gif

                  1. C. Steadman

                    I’ll make a bet with you…if the Cubs lose 90+ in 2014, I’ll change my name on this site to “Kool-Aid Man” for the entire offseason, while if they lose less than 90 then you change your name to “Haterade Guy” for the offseason

  27. Aaron

    I would be open to Sveum coming back for one more season. However, if Joe Girardi is available to manage the Cubs next season and is interested in taking on this huge task, then you need to let Dale go.

    But if they let Dale go on Monday…and Girardi signs an extension with the Yankees, that would be absolutely terrible. At least with Dale and his staff, you know what you’re going to get, and after his contract is over after 2014, you can start fresh. At that time many of our top prospects will be on the major league roster.

    The FO cannot mess this one up. Future of the club is at stake.

  28. Die hard

    Another season wasted — attendance next year to be 500000

    1. Cubbie Blues

      I suppose this is one of the predictions you will want us to forget about.

      1. hansman1982

        It’s not a prediction until it comes true.

      2. DarthHater

        Somebody better call the Infinite Monkeys Prediction Bureau. Seem to be some monkeys on the fritz again.

    2. TWC

      Struck will stick!

    3. C. Steadman

      6,173 fans per game…i think they can do a little better than that

      1. jon

        That’s what the White Sox consider a “packed house”

  29. Kyle

    So if Epstein decides he has to fire the manager before his contract is up, does that count as a mistake for hiring him to begin with?

    1. jon

      I don’t think so. They knew they were going to have to fire this first manager, probably the next one too.

    2. Jono

      No, not if they fire him to get Girardi. If he failed other responsibilities, then maybe. But just because a decision didn’t work out doesn’t mean it was a bad decision. There are good decisions that work, good decisions that don’t work, bad decisions that work, and bad decisions that don’t work.

    3. bbmoney

      Sure.

  30. Jono

    I’d like to see the WAR stat for managers. I wonder what the best managers’ WARs would look like. Maybe 5? Less? More?

    1. bbmoney

      Less. Unless you can quantify TWTW.

      1. Jono

        TWTW is incalciumable

    2. Jono

      I bet the value to a manager’s WAR (dollars per WAR) is MUCH BETTER than players’. So it might be worth spending big on good managers because you get more for the money. If you can get 2 or 3 wins a season for $3 million, that’s pretty good compared to players.

    3. jon

      I’m of the school of a thought that there is no manager that is going to buy a “ton” of wins for a team, but bad manager can sure cost a team a ton of wins.

      1. YourResidentJag

        I’ll second that school of thought.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.