Jump to content





Bleacher Nation is on Facebook, and you should totally "Like" us:
 


Bleacher Nation is also on Twitter, and you should totally follow us:




Upcoming Calendar Events

There are no forthcoming calendar events

Today's birthdays

No members are celebrating a birthday today

Photo

Mike Maddux VS Dave Sveum


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Sam

Sam

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 253 posts
  • Twitter:SamVari7
  • Facebook:sam.varipapa
  • LocationBaltimore MD & Huntington WV

Posted 07 November 2011 - 08:30 AM

Who would you rather see the cubs hire, Sveum or Maddux?

Personally I am beginning to lean toward Sveum. In his time with the Brewers he has proven that he can get the most out of his players offensively (Nyjer Morgan, Corey Hart, ect...). And as Brett said in today's article he more than likely has a good knowledge of all the pitchers in the NL Central and most of the pitchers in the NL. He could also help with the development of our young players ( Casto, Jackson, Colvin, Lake, LeMaheu, Camapana, and Barney), which is something that would certainly help the Cubs. Also he has worked under Epstein and Hoyer before, which means that he probably has a good relationship with them. However on the other hand you have Maddux, who has proven that he can develop pitchers, having built one of the MLBs elite pitching staffs in one of the toughest, if not the toughest, pitching ballpark in baseball.
"Some may never live, but the crazy never die."- Hunter S. Thompson

#2 Fishin Phil

Fishin Phil

    Wally Pipp of Cubs Calendar

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,034 posts

Posted 07 November 2011 - 09:02 AM

Maddux, but not by much.
Please don't feed the psychos.

#3 MichiganGoat

MichiganGoat

    Give me a BEER

  • Moderators
  • 3,798 posts
  • Twitter:MichiganGoat
  • Facebook:michigangoat
  • LocationGrand Rapids, MI

Posted 07 November 2011 - 10:00 AM

I think these two are going to the Cubs and Red Sox, what wil be interesting to see is if both get offered the same job which one is more attractive. With Boston you inherit championship caliber team, where with the Cubs you are inheriting a broken team that will be rebuilding next year (even if that not what anyone is saying that is what the Cubs are doing). Boston expects winning now where as the Cubs gig give you a couple of years before having to make a serious run. Money and resources are about equal, both have agressive media to answer to, and both are a core baseball franchise.

But where the scale is tipped: The Cubs have BleacherNation and that alone should make the Cubs the preferred gig. I expect Maddux will be offered both and accept the Cubs job... suck that Boston!

MichiganGoat on Twitter

"There are a lot of guys who are respected but not liked" - Ron Santo


#4 Brett

Brett

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,638 posts
  • Twitter:BleacherNation
  • Facebook:BleacherNation

Posted 07 November 2011 - 10:24 AM

For me, what's publicly known/discussed about them makes it too close to call. I imagine we probably know, like, 5% of what the respective interviews will reveal, so it's hard to feel super, aggressively tied to one or the other.

The idea of a pitching coach as manager is attractive because of the Cubs' pitching problems, but it's interesting that Maddux would be only the third (I believe) pitching coach to manager transition in the game today (Bud Black and John Farrell). Is there a reason for that? Is that reason compelling, or stupid?

If it came down to one of these two, the one I'd want more is the one Theo and Jed would want more, because I figure they'll have a lot more info than I have. Is that a lame cop-out answer? Yup.

#5 Katie

Katie

    Wait, is this not ChristianMingle.com?

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Twitter:@katiekatcubs

Posted 07 November 2011 - 10:33 AM

I'm leaning toward Maddux but I'd be delighted with either!
Peg: Oh Al! Did you miss me?
Al: With every bullet, so far.

#6 johnbres2

johnbres2

    I'm New

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Twitter:@johnbres2
  • Facebook:John Breslin

Posted 07 November 2011 - 11:54 AM

I want to see the press conferences before I decide. Sveum seems to have a bit more gravitas about him, but that is not the ultimate criterion

#7 King Jeff

King Jeff

    King of all Cubs fans!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,476 posts
  • Twitter:@peaceknuckle
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 07 November 2011 - 01:08 PM

The idea of a pitching coach as manager is attractive because of the Cubs' pitching problems, but it's interesting that Maddux would be only the third (I believe) pitching coach to manager transition in the game today (Bud Black and John Farrell). Is there a reason for that? Is that reason compelling, or stupid?

There seem to be a lot of pitching gurus who can't manage the whole team. There are some big time failures; Leo Mazzone, Joe Kerrigan, Marcel Lachemann, Phil Regan, and lest we forget, Larry Rothschild. All were big time pitching coaches, and all of them failed at managing. There isn't much history for a pitching coach to become a manager, and the ones that do, don't have much success. I don't think there has been a former pitching coach turned manager that has won a world series in a while.(I may have just heard that somewhere, someone more diligent than me will have to check if it's actually true.)


#8 Brett

Brett

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,638 posts
  • Twitter:BleacherNation
  • Facebook:BleacherNation

Posted 07 November 2011 - 02:30 PM

The idea of a pitching coach as manager is attractive because of the Cubs' pitching problems, but it's interesting that Maddux would be only the third (I believe) pitching coach to manager transition in the game today (Bud Black and John Farrell). Is there a reason for that? Is that reason compelling, or stupid?

There seem to be a lot of pitching gurus who can't manage the whole team. There are some big time failures; Leo Mazzone, Joe Kerrigan, Marcel Lachemann, Phil Regan, and lest we forget, Larry Rothschild. All were big time pitching coaches, and all of them failed at managing. There isn't much history for a pitching coach to become a manager, and the ones that do, don't have much success. I don't think there has been a former pitching coach turned manager that has won a world series in a while.(I may have just heard that somewhere, someone more diligent than me will have to check if it's actually true.)

I feel like I heard that recently, too. So, if two people think they heard it, it must be true.

I just wonder why it is - like, what is it about being a pitching coach that doesn't prepare you as well as being, say, a third base coach? Or is it just a statistical anomaly, and pitching coaches are just as well-prepared?

#9 hansman1982

hansman1982

    King Regent of The Calendar Trivia Empire

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,938 posts
  • Twitter:JoeHansman
  • LocationDes Moines, IA

Posted 08 November 2011 - 09:16 AM

The idea of a pitching coach as manager is attractive because of the Cubs' pitching problems, but it's interesting that Maddux would be only the third (I believe) pitching coach to manager transition in the game today (Bud Black and John Farrell). Is there a reason for that? Is that reason compelling, or stupid?

There seem to be a lot of pitching gurus who can't manage the whole team. There are some big time failures; Leo Mazzone, Joe Kerrigan, Marcel Lachemann, Phil Regan, and lest we forget, Larry Rothschild. All were big time pitching coaches, and all of them failed at managing. There isn't much history for a pitching coach to become a manager, and the ones that do, don't have much success. I don't think there has been a former pitching coach turned manager that has won a world series in a while.(I may have just heard that somewhere, someone more diligent than me will have to check if it's actually true.)

I feel like I heard that recently, too. So, if two people think they heard it, it must be true. I just wonder why it is - like, what is it about being a pitching coach that doesn't prepare you as well as being, say, a third base coach? Or is it just a statistical anomaly, and pitching coaches are just as well-prepared?


It could be in the way they coach...have there been many hitting coaches that did well as managers? One thing about a successful 3rd base coach is that they have to make a split second decision that may decide the outcome of the game. That could prepare them better to making the in-game decisions as a manager?

Same question - why don't great players turn into great managers? Could it just be the way they are wired? Perhaps it is that if you are a great player or pitching coach you just arent wired correctly to be a great manager.

#10 Evolution

Evolution

    I'm New

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 08 November 2011 - 09:22 AM

It is an interesting topic...I've always had a somewhat lower regard for the idea of pitchers becoming managers. It might be their reputation for being "different"...slightly more focused on one (highly critical) element of the game, and not necessarily having the ability to adjust to the broader picture.

On the flip side...Tommy Lasorda, Dallas Green, Roger Craig were all pitchers who became successful managers. Bud Black and John Farrell are also clearly well-regarded. If you had to bet on a pitching mind that might make a good manager...I'm pretty sure any Maddux would make the list.

#11 Sam

Sam

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 253 posts
  • Twitter:SamVari7
  • Facebook:sam.varipapa
  • LocationBaltimore MD & Huntington WV

Posted 08 November 2011 - 09:25 AM

As unlikely as this is to happen, how awesome would it be if Sveum/(or)Maddux became the manager and then Theo convinced Maddux/(or)Sveum to be the Pitching/
hitting coach? but that will probably never happen...
"Some may never live, but the crazy never die."- Hunter S. Thompson

#12 Brett

Brett

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,638 posts
  • Twitter:BleacherNation
  • Facebook:BleacherNation

Posted 08 November 2011 - 01:53 PM

It is an interesting topic...I've always had a somewhat lower regard for the idea of pitchers becoming managers. It might be their reputation for being "different"...slightly more focused on one (highly critical) element of the game, and not necessarily having the ability to adjust to the broader picture.

On the flip side...Tommy Lasorda, Dallas Green, Roger Craig were all pitchers who became successful managers. Bud Black and John Farrell are also clearly well-regarded. If you had to bet on a pitching mind that might make a good manager...I'm pretty sure any Maddux would make the list.

Good thoughts.

#13 King Jeff

King Jeff

    King of all Cubs fans!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,476 posts
  • Twitter:@peaceknuckle
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 08 November 2011 - 04:56 PM


The idea of a pitching coach as manager is attractive because of the Cubs' pitching problems, but it's interesting that Maddux would be only the third (I believe) pitching coach to manager transition in the game today (Bud Black and John Farrell). Is there a reason for that? Is that reason compelling, or stupid?

There seem to be a lot of pitching gurus who can't manage the whole team. There are some big time failures; Leo Mazzone, Joe Kerrigan, Marcel Lachemann, Phil Regan, and lest we forget, Larry Rothschild. All were big time pitching coaches, and all of them failed at managing. There isn't much history for a pitching coach to become a manager, and the ones that do, don't have much success. I don't think there has been a former pitching coach turned manager that has won a world series in a while.(I may have just heard that somewhere, someone more diligent than me will have to check if it's actually true.)

I feel like I heard that recently, too. So, if two people think they heard it, it must be true.

I just wonder why it is - like, what is it about being a pitching coach that doesn't prepare you as well as being, say, a third base coach? Or is it just a statistical anomaly, and pitching coaches are just as well-prepared?

It has to have something to do with the way they see the game. Former catchers obviously have a leg up because they are involved with defensive positioning, managing a pitching staff, and hitting. I just imagine it would take a pitcher/pitching coach with a certain mindset to succeed. If Maddux is anything like his brother, I imagine he's a very cerebral manager, and won't have the normal problems most pitching coaches do.

#14 YeOld17

YeOld17

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts
  • Facebook:facebook.com/hampson17
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 09 November 2011 - 04:35 PM

Me personally would rather have maddux... just so we can get rid of Riggins....didnt seem to be a good coach at all!

#15 Brett

Brett

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,638 posts
  • Twitter:BleacherNation
  • Facebook:BleacherNation

Posted 09 November 2011 - 06:42 PM

Me personally would rather have maddux... just so we can get rid of Riggins....didnt seem to be a good coach at all!

I'm confident Riggins is gone either way.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Bleacher Nation is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago National League Ballclub (that's the Cubs).