Eric Wedge: This is a real screwball one, but his odds are better than you think (though still not good).
Here’s the key point on his favor: he was barely 35 years old when he started managing the Indians, making him the youngest person to fill out the lineup card in the last 25 years. He has nearly 500 wins, but he’s still younger today than Mike Scioscia was upon his hiring as Angels manager.
If he’s respected enough to last a while, he’ll pick up some very impressive career counting stats. If he lands some playoff teams in the process, he’ll have a legitimate Hall of Fame case.
I don’t see it happened, though. I don’t follow the Indians too closely, but that team usually does a little worse than expectations, which I take as a knock on the manager. An early start puts him in a good position, but he’s got to make the most of his opportunities. To date, he’s failed badly at that.
about 1 year ago
7foot3
15 comments
0 recs |
Comments
I screwed up that pretty good, here’s a link to the THT article
by 7foot3 on Sep 29, 2008 1:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Interesting. I never thought about Wedge’s youth and its potential implications for his managerial career.
by Voltaire on Sep 29, 2008 2:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hall of Fame? Too early to tell, but put me in Wedge’s corner for now. He’s young, he’s still learning, and I like what the team did the 2nd half considering what he had to work with. In fact .500 this year without Hafner, Martinez, Westbrook, Carmona much or most of the year, and losing Sabathia (a Cy Young pitcher), Blake and Byrd. Plus, somehow he and his staff turned Lee into a Cy Young caliber pitcher.
So I don’t agree that he’s failed badly at making the most of his opportunities.
by LeftyCatcher on Sep 29, 2008 2:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
With 500 already, he should put up very nice totals if he just keeps having years like he’s had.
I assume all this “expectations” knocking goes away when he wins a ring.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Sep 29, 2008 3:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This kind of demonstrates why total wins shouldn’t be valued as high as winning percentage and World Series won.
by Roger Dorn on Sep 29, 2008 3:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
You think a manager has more control over winning championships than he does day-in-day-out regular season games? He has to get there first. How’d that genius Sweet Lou handle the Rays?
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Sep 29, 2008 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No. But I also don’t think we should put a manager in a hall of fame who hasn’t ever won jack. Hall of fame should consist of the most accomplished people and part of that is World Series rings whether you think they play a role or not
by Roger Dorn on Sep 29, 2008 9:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ll tell you an odd thing about Wedge is that his clubs have never won between 82 and 92 games.
A positive thing about Wedge is that after his rookie year, when he had a rookie-laden roster not built to win in that season, he’s never really had a bad club. In down years, the team is mediocre with 78-81 wins. In up years, the team has been among the best in the game with 93 and 96 wins.
I think maybe that means something. Maybe.
by Jay on Sep 29, 2008 4:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
OK, I’ll bite: what does it mean? (Because I have no idea.)
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Sep 29, 2008 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is pretty lazy writing on Jaffe’s part. I think its fair to say that Wedge’s teams have fallen short of pre-season expectations twice in his six year career. While that’s more than we’d like to see, I don’t think that’s not the common definition of usually.
Furthermore, how effective of a test is it anyways? Lots of factors besides managerial skill play into whether a team fulfills its pre-season expectations. I realize analyzing managers is probably pretty difficult, but that doesn’t excuse lazy work.
by ClarkM on Sep 29, 2008 5:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Do you think he’s looking at exp w-l compared to pythagorean? I didnt notice it in the article, but we’re -19 in the Wedge years, and have fewer wins than expected in 5 of 6 years. Not that anyone has ever really proven that being below the expected pythagorean record should be placed upon the manager, but that could be what he means by doing worse than expectations
by 7foot3 on Sep 29, 2008 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Since the general consensus (on this site anyway) is that managers don’t matter (except that Wedge sometimes does stupid stuff we don’t like), I suggest we have a rotating manager of the year award – everyone gets a turn. Or, we could simply give an award either to the manager who succeeds in getting fired after the shortest tenure, or to the manager who is most successful in persuading his boss that he should be retained (Bobby Cox would have to be excluded on the grounds that it’s not fair).
by peter m on Sep 29, 2008 5:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Or, we could simply give an award either to the manager who succeeds in getting fired after the shortest tenure
SCOTT LINEHAN WINS, BUT ONLY BY A DAY!
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Sep 30, 2008 1:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was at Scott Linehan’s last game. Good times.
by ClarkM on Sep 30, 2008 8:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
muahahahahahahha
I don’t see it happened, though. I don’t follow the Indians too closely, but that team usually does a little worse than expectations, which I take as a knock on the manager. An early start puts him in a good position, but he’s got to make the most of his opportunities. To date, he’s failed badly at that.
FE WEE
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Sep 30, 2008 1:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

















