1,671-1,504 in 20 seasons a manager

Led the Giants to the 2002 World Series, which they lost to the Angels.

Led the Reds to 2 NL Central Division titles.

Led the Cubs to the 2003 NLCS.

(11-03-2015, 01:28 PM)QueenCitySouth Wrote: 1,671-1,504 in 20 seasons a manager

Led the Giants to the 2002 World Series, which they lost to the Angels.

Led the Reds to 2 NL Central Division titles.

Led the Cubs to the 2003 NLCS.

They're doomed.  Why do people keep hiring this guy?

(11-03-2015, 04:24 PM)McC Wrote: They're doomed.  Why do people keep hiring this guy?

He is a winner.

How many times have the Reds been worth a shit in the last 20 years when Baker was not the manager?  The Reds should have kept him.

I know he has never won a World Series, but I don't know of any manager available who has.

(11-03-2015, 08:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: He is a winner.

How many times have the Reds been worth a shit in the last 20 years when Baker was not the manager?  The Reds should have kept him.

I know he has never won a World Series, but I don't know of any manager available who has.

He was the beneficiary  of the best roster the Reds have had in quite a while.  And he still couldn't win a playoff series.
 
He had outstanding rosters with the Cubs and Giants too.  Hence, all the wins.  Worth mentioning--a whole bunch of losses too, not far above .500.

He is out of touch with how to win in today's game.  I stand by what I said--they are doomed.  Not doomed to sukking.  They have too much talent to be bad.  Just doomed to never getting over the hump.

(11-04-2015, 11:41 AM)McC Wrote: He was the beneficiary  of the best roster the Reds have had in quite a while.  And he still couldn't win a playoff series.
 
He had outstanding rosters with the Cubs and Giants too.  Hence, all the wins.  Worth mentioning--a whole bunch of losses too, not far above .500.

He is out of touch with how to win in today's game.  I stand by what I said--they are doomed.  Not doomed to sukking.  They have too much talent to be bad.  Just doomed to never getting over the hump.

Then who should they have hired?

I say Baker was the best option out there.

(11-04-2015, 12:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then who should they have hired?

I say Baker was the best option out there.

That probably had a lot to do with it.  There probably aren't a lot of great options.  Don't know what weird thing happened with Bud Black.

(11-03-2015, 04:24 PM)McC Wrote: They're doomed.  Why do people keep hiring this guy?

They really wanted Brian Price, but he wasn't available.  Hopefully, he will be soon.