Master Index of Archived Threads


Willie got ripped off

metsguyinmichigan Nov 15 2006 02:41 PM

If Joe Girardi was such a good manager, then... 1) Why did he finish six games below .500 2) How come he couldn't get along with his GM or owner? 3) Couldn't get a job managing this season, heading instead to the Yankees' booth? That award should have been Willie's.

Nymr83 Nov 15 2006 02:44 PM Re: Willie got ripped off

="metsguyinmichigan"]If Joe Girardi was such a good manager, then... 1) Why did he finish six games below .500 because he had a payroll the size of arod's contract and a very inexperienced team 2) How come he couldn't get along with his GM or owner? beacuse the owner down there is a shmuck who doesnt care about winning 3) Couldn't get a job managing this season, heading instead to the Yankees' booth? That award should have been Willie's. want some cheese with that?

metirish Nov 15 2006 02:47 PM

I've no problem with him winning,Leyland wins in American League.

metsmarathon Nov 15 2006 03:09 PM Re: Willie got ripped off

metsguyinmichigan wrote: 3) Couldn't get a job managing this season, heading instead to the Yankees' booth? did he even try? it looks like he's just waiting out joe torre for the yankees job.

Frayed Knot Nov 15 2006 03:49 PM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Nov 15 2006 04:10 PM

1st Place 2nd Place 3rd Place Total No Vote Girardi(Fla) 18 6 3 111 5 Randolph(NYM) 8 11 8 81 5 Bochy(SD) 5 6 7 50 14 Little(LA) 1 5 10 30 16 Manual(Phil) 0 3 0 9 29 Narron(Cinn) 0 1 3 6 28 Garner(Hou) 0 0 1 1 31

Frayed Knot Nov 15 2006 03:53 PM

1st Place 2nd Place 3rd Place Total Leyland(Det) 19 7 2 118 Gardenhire(Minn) 9 15 3 93 Macha(Oak) 0 5 11 26 Torre(NYY) 0 1 12 15

Johnny Dickshot Nov 15 2006 04:00 PM

I think as things turned out Willie certainly deserved the honor. But what can you do.

sharpie Nov 15 2006 04:01 PM

Hard to figure that third place vote for Garner.

Yancy Street Gang Nov 15 2006 04:02 PM

Probably cast by a crony.

Frayed Knot Nov 15 2006 04:11 PM

Always interesting when you see that 1st & 3rd place in the NL plus 3rd in the AL are all already out of their jobs.

Edgy DC Nov 15 2006 04:28 PM

Girardi was in the running for the Nats job and pulled out, probably figuring (with more than some risk) that sitting tight in the Yankee booth and getting in line for Torre's job was a stronger career move.

metirish Nov 15 2006 04:30 PM

I thought Mattingly was the manager in waiting,or is that just media boosting?

Yancy Street Gang Nov 15 2006 04:42 PM

I'd say they're both among the many ladies in waiting.

patona314 Nov 15 2006 07:37 PM

girardi as the 06 met manager and randolph as the 06 marlin manager... what do think the results would have been?

metirish Nov 15 2006 08:23 PM

patona314 wrote: girardi as the 06 met manager and randolph as the 06 marlin manager... what do think the results would have been? Well now come on,that's impossible to even speculate on.

Yancy Street Gang Nov 15 2006 08:25 PM

Here's my guess: The Mets win the NL East, the Marlins don't.

Edgy DC Nov 15 2006 10:47 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 16 2006 07:51 AM

metirish wrote: I thought Mattingly was the manager in waiting,or is that just media boosting? I'm not saying that it's a one-person line. But being in house, having coached under Torre, and coming off a Manager of the Year season is a pretty good position to be in.

metirish Nov 15 2006 10:56 PM

Yeah,it should be interesting year for them, of course if they win it all then Torre stays...will be interesting to see if Girardi is critical of the team when it warrents it....

Vic Sage Nov 16 2006 11:41 AM

its about expectations. everybody picked the Mets to challenge for the division this year, and they were amongst the favorites to win the NL pennant. They actually fell one game short of most expectations, despite their huge payroll. Whereas the Marlins were expected to lose 100 games, relying heavily on many unheralded rookies, with the lowest payroll in baseball. That they played around .500 ball and were actually in the race for the WC fairly deep into the season set Girardi up to win the award. His getting fired after just 1 season actually added to his aura as a tough maverick. That being said, and my initial dislike for Willie's hiring (i was stumping for Leyland) and his game management style aside, Willie's team had a +6 above the W-L projection based on pythagorean projections, while Girardi was -2. Meaning Willie got a good team to win 6 more games than an analysis of their runs scored and runs allowed indicate, and Girardi lost 2 more games than his team should have, given their runs and runs allowed. Not that that's the only basis for picking a MOY, or even a good basis, but i don't think payroll or pre-season expectations by the media (which can simply be wrong) is any kind of basis at all.

seawolf17 Nov 16 2006 11:48 AM

I agree with Vic (I think). I had much higher expectations for Florida than most; I thought they had very good young pitching, and some guys who were ready to pop at the plate. Combine that with the fact that they were playing with house money -- everyone expected them to lose 100, so they stayed loose all year (well, everyone except Scott Olsen), and played well. Credit them -- and I guess credit Girardi as well -- for keeping them up and ready to win every night.

Edgy DC Nov 16 2006 11:49 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 16 2006 11:50 AM

The baseball-loving world is so far from consensus on what makes a manager good or bad, it's best not to get too worked up if the voters disagree with us.

metirish Nov 16 2006 11:49 AM

Lou Piniella and Jim Fergosi thought Willie woz robbed... ] "You gotta be kiddin'!" said Piniella. "I thought Willie did an outstanding job this year. The Mets played hard all year and his starting rotation was in flux. Taking nothing away from Joe, who also did a real nice job down there in Miami, but if I had a vote, I'd have Willie first and Joe second." ] "How do you have a guy be manager of the year with a losing record?" said the equally flabbergasted Fregosi.

Edgy DC Nov 16 2006 11:50 AM

Fregosi is being kooky.

metirish Nov 16 2006 11:54 AM

Yeah, he probably told Miami writers that Girardi desearved it.

Elster88 Nov 17 2006 01:29 AM

I kind of agree with Fregosi. Girardi took a team that was thought to be putrid and made them mediocre. Ok, great, big deal. Didn't like 25 different teams win 80 games in the NL this year?

Edgy DC Nov 17 2006 08:09 AM

What he's implying is that any manager whose team loses more than it wins should be disqualified. And I don't think that stands the test of logic.

MFS62 Nov 17 2006 08:27 AM

]"How do you have a guy be manager of the year with a losing record?" said the equally flabbergasted Fregosi. He should know all about managers with a losing record. He was one. Combined w-l pct for teams he managed was .484. Later

metsguyinmichigan Nov 17 2006 12:55 PM

Elster88 wrote: I kind of agree with Fregosi. Girardi took a team that was thought to be putrid and made them mediocre. Ok, great, big deal. Didn't like 25 different teams win 80 games in the NL this year? Maybe the projections were wrong. Just because the pre-season prognositicators picked them to lose 100 games doesn't mean they were going to. So does Girardi get credit for people misjudging his team's talent? And I'm not slamming him. I just think Willie did a better job.

iramets Nov 17 2006 02:27 PM

metsguyinmichigan wrote: Maybe the projections were wrong. Just because the pre-season prognositicators picked them to lose 100 games doesn't mean they were going to. YEAH!! And just because those same prognosticators said Willlie's team looked strong didn't mean squat, either. Willie should get full credit for managing a weak, pathetic squad of losers deep into the playoffs. A miracle! The skies part! How he ever did it, no one will ever know! Working with nothing, Willie got 97 victories! Who could have foreseeen that the Mets were a good team? Or maybe you don't like that reasoning? Maybe you even felt that the Marlins were a weak squad with a low payroll and the Mets were quite the opposite? Maybe you're even one of those lameass prognosticators?

metirish Nov 17 2006 02:32 PM

People were calling Steve Somers on the FAN last night suggesting racisim as the reason why Willie didn't win.

Edgy DC Nov 17 2006 02:40 PM

Brilliant!

Nymr83 Nov 17 2006 02:59 PM

bang your guiness bottles together folks, that one takes the cake.

patona314 Nov 18 2006 05:21 AM

sorry willie lovers (i like him too) but joe did one heck of a job w/the marlins this year. too bad he won't be around when those saplings blossum.

metsguyinmichigan Nov 19 2006 10:54 AM

iramets wrote: ="metsguyinmichigan"]Maybe the projections were wrong. Just because the pre-season prognositicators picked them to lose 100 games doesn't mean they were going to. YEAH!! And just because those same prognosticators said Willlie's team looked strong didn't mean squat, either. Willie should get full credit for managing a weak, pathetic squad of losers deep into the playoffs. A miracle! The skies part! How he ever did it, no one will ever know! Working with nothing, Willie got 97 victories! Who could have foreseeen that the Mets were a good team? Or maybe you don't like that reasoning? Maybe you even felt that the Marlins were a weak squad with a low payroll and the Mets were quite the opposite? Maybe you're even one of those lameass prognosticators? I don't have a problem with disagreeing, but I don't understand being nasty. Debate is a good thing. Yes, the Mets were supposed to be good. But then the pitching fell to pieces and we had the likes of Jose Lima out there and a bunch of rookies. Using your arguement, Torre didn't deserve his votes -- didn't he come in third in the AL? -- because his team had a $200 million payroll and was expected to win.

Nymr83 Nov 19 2006 11:51 AM

Torre came in 4th. he received no 1st place votes and only 1 2nd place vote (likely from the NY writer) i see no problem there.

iramets Nov 19 2006 12:12 PM

metsguyinmichigan wrote: [Yes, the Mets were supposed to be good. But then the pitching fell to pieces and we had the likes of Jose Lima out there and a bunch of rookies. Yes, and the Mets had the payroll and the lineup and depth to weather their rotation problems, which is a big reason they were picked to win their division. It wasn't just a few oddballs who figured the Marlins to be a weak team, It was pretty much a concensus that a team with no payroll would not win a lot of games. If the baseball world sees them a very weak club and they manage to eke out a better record than ALMOST EVERYONE AGREED they would, then what's your point? Someone gets the credit for that improvement, and the manager is an excellent candidate for causing that improvement. If two clubs win a lot of games, and one of them is widely perceived as a weak team and the other as a strong team, then the MOY is going to go to the manager of the weak team 99 times out of a hundred, and that's how it should be. Unless you're saying that every team begins the season with not only a theoretically equal shot at the division but an actual equal shot at winning the division.

cleonjones11 Nov 19 2006 09:07 PM Re: Willie got ripped off

metsmarathon wrote: ="metsguyinmichigan"] 3) Couldn't get a job managing this season, heading instead to the Yankees' booth? did he even try? it looks like he's just waiting out joe torre for the yankees job. He'll have to Kill Mattingly first

metirish Nov 21 2006 01:12 PM

] Geffner: Randolph was robbed This was back in the first weekend of July, at Yankee Stadium during the Subway Series. The Mets were already running away with the NL East, up by 11, and I was sitting in the visiting dugout before the game, as the Yankees were taking BP, when suddenly Willie Randolph, with that purposeful step and stone-cold game face, crossed right in front of me. "Hey "¦ hey, you!" I called out to him, trying to get his attention, which isn't always the easiest thing — him and that famous focus of his. "Hey, you, manager of the year." It was a playful line, of course, attempting to do two things: bring a smile to his face and let him know, without being mushy about it — he absolutely hates anything mushy — that I thought he was doing a great job. Mind you, I've known Randolph since the day he broke in with the Yankees in 1976. Used to hang by his locker just shooting the breeze nearly every day of the season for years. So I can't help but have a special fondness for him. He quickly snapped his head around, looking to connect that disconnected voice, and indeed gave me that smile. A big one too. Then he slowly came right up to my ear and in a low voice gave me something I didn't expect. "Nooooooooo!" he said, holding that smile, "Joooooooooe Girrr-raaaaaarrr-di. He couldn't have stretched the syllables any longer, couldn't have been more lathered with sarcasm, couldn't have made his point any clearer. He already sensed that the wave of positive vibes — and votes for the NL Manager of the Year — was moving unstoppably, irretrievably, against him and in the direction of the then-manager of the Marlins. A guy who, unlike Willie, unlike him by a long shot, needed a scant two years after his retirement as a player to be in such a supreme position with a big-league baseball team. Funny how I thought at the time that Randolph was merely being paranoid, still gun-shy from all the rejection he suffered for a decade trying to so desperately to land that managing job, simply bracing himself early, out of habit, if nothing else, for another round of disrespect. Little did I know that he had the whole thing nailed. In the end, he got beaten out by a guy who'd led his team to, of all things, a losing record, who didn't even capture so much as a wild-card spot, who was fired right after the season. In fact, in the 23-year history of the award, the thing hadn't ever been given to a losing manager. Until yesterday. Until baseball, with its great wisdom, decided to give it to a guy who'll spend next season not in the dugout but in a TV broadcasting booth. Way to go, guys. Nice job. The final tally: Girardi — 18 first-place votes, 111 total points, Randolph — 8 first-place votes, 81 total points. It wasn't even close enough to demand a recount. Leave it to baseball and its association of writers to find another way to stick it to Willie — despite him winning his division going away and tying with the Yankees for the best record in baseball. And doing all that pretty much without his ace (Pedro Martinez) and two of his other starters (Brian Bannister and Victor Zambrano) and his meat-of-the-order left fielder (Cliff Floyd) and maybe his best pitcher in the pen (Duaner Sanchez). Let the writers who didn't cast a first-place vote for him, who only followed the team from a distance — in the newspapers and on TV — talk about the Mets' huge payroll and all the superstar talent and how it gave Randolph an unfair advantage. Those who saw the club day in and day out at Shea know differently. They know he performed something of a minor miracle to get this hobbling-from-the-start team within a single game of playing in the World Series. They know that, in the tiny space of two seasons, he has turned around the entire mindset of this franchise. Made these Met players not only into winners on the field but also in their collective heads and bodies and souls, molded them in his own image into nothing less than the Yankees by the Flushing Bay. And for all this, he's handed the wonderful Thanksgiving gift of Joooooooooe Girrr-raaaaaarrr-di. I hope he can still smile about it the way he did back in July. Michael P. Geffner's column appears regularly in the Times Herald-Record.

Edgy DC Nov 21 2006 01:16 PM

Wow. Dude, if you disagree, that's fine. But it wasn't about sticking it to Willlie. It's nothing so personal.

metirish Nov 21 2006 01:19 PM

Seems very personel to Gaffner though.....

Johnny Dickshot Nov 21 2006 01:44 PM

I'd have guessed Jerry Narron at the halfway point.

metirish Dec 06 2006 10:29 AM

From Newsday ] Notes & quotes: Randolph expressed disappointment over finishing second to Joe Girardi in the NL Manager of the Year balloting. "I'm just totally dumbfounded on how it works, obviously," Randolph said. "If we start trying to figure out what the criteria is and why people vote for what they vote for and what they see, that's not my concern. I feel like we deserved it." ...

Yancy Street Gang Dec 06 2006 10:30 AM

Is that the royal "we" that Willie is using?

Edgy DC Dec 06 2006 10:46 AM

Only one piece of hardware that matters, Willie. Somebody get a satchel of cliches over to that guy, STAT!

Rockin' Doc Dec 06 2006 12:12 PM

Translating Willie's remarks for Ricky Henderson and his fans: Randolph expressed disappointment over finishing second to Joe Girardi in the NL Manager of the Year balloting. "Willie's totally dumbfounded on how it works, obviously," Randolph said. "If Willie starts trying to figure out what the criteria is and why people vote for what they vote for and what they see, that's not Willie's concern. I feel like Willie deserved it. ..."* *Quotes have been edited for fun and are not directly attributable to Willie.