Joe Maddon: The Man Behind the Glasses

[R-V]

a better tactician like Trueblood

I laughed. I also have to admit the David Ross thought entered my head last night, although there's really no way to know if he'd actually be a good tactician or just revert to his gut in October like Joe does.

[SKO]

a better tactician like Trueblood

I laughed. I also have to admit the David Ross thought entered my head last night, although there's really no way to know if he'd actually be a good tactician or just revert to his gut in October like Joe does.

Joe said something before the Nats series, when someone asked him about his lineup vs Scherzer (who is mortal vs LHB and Godlike vs RHB) and how it didn't feature that many lefties and Joe said "now is the time for simplicity."  That to me seems so ass-backwards and so indicative of how Joe seems to freeze up at crunch time. The guy plays matchups all year long, pays close attention to pitcher splits/reverse splits etc but come October it's "make one lineup and stick with it" and "ride the horses that brought you here" like you're Dusty Baker. This should absolutely be the time to seek every possible matchup advantage you can.

He's a guy that seems to love his reputation as a wacky and unconventional and yet he retreats to managing by a book written in 1968 when October rolls around.

[Brownie]

I can't defend the decisions and this weekend was not Joe's best effort, but give me a break... you want to fire Joe Maddon, a manager whose regular season record is 99 games over .500 in three seasons with the Cubs and who has won 39% of the franchise's postseason games and 67 percent of its playoff series?

The Cubs stole Games 1 and 3 vs. Washington. CJ Edwards made one mistake or they would have won Game 2 as well. That series was as physically and mentally draining as you can get in a 5-game series.

The fortunate thing is these weren't elimination games.

[SKO]

I can't defend the decisions and this weekend was not Joe's best effort, but give me a break... you want to fire Joe Maddon, a manager whose regular season record is 99 games over .500 in three seasons with the Cubs and who has won 39% of the franchise's postseason games and 67 percent of its playoff series?

The Cubs stole Games 1 and 3 vs. Washington. CJ Edwards made one mistake or they would have won Game 2 as well. That series was as physically and mentally draining as you can get in a 5-game series.

The fortunate thing is these weren't elimination games.

I get it, but as Cubs fans one thing we're going to need to do is stop comparing what this team does to team history and saying "see it can't be that bad." Expectations have been raised, I don't give a shit if he's better than Jim Lefebvre. The % of franchise postseason wins he's managed is irrelevant. The only question that should ever be asked is "could the Cubs hire a manager that gives them a better chance of winning the next world series than Joe." I'm actually not sure if the answer is yes right now, but I know it's not wrong to ask.

[Brownie]

I can't defend the decisions and this weekend was not Joe's best effort, but give me a break... you want to fire Joe Maddon, a manager whose regular season record is 99 games over .500 in three seasons with the Cubs and who has won 39% of the franchise's postseason games and 67 percent of its playoff series?

The Cubs stole Games 1 and 3 vs. Washington. CJ Edwards made one mistake or they would have won Game 2 as well. That series was as physically and mentally draining as you can get in a 5-game series.

The fortunate thing is these weren't elimination games.

I get it, but as Cubs fans one thing we're going to need to do is stop comparing what this team does to team history and saying "see it can't be that bad." Expectations have been raised, I don't give a shit if he's better than Jim Lefebvre. The % of franchise postseason wins he's managed is irrelevant. The only question that should ever be asked is "could the Cubs hire a manager that gives them a better chance of winning the next world series than Joe." I'm actually not sure if the answer is yes right now, but I know it's not wrong to ask.

It's not a question of whether you employer can fire you and replace you if they find someone who'd be better and more willing to do your job, especially if they pay you whatever they are obligated to. It's a question of whether doing so when you have achieved every measurable objective, have the support of your direct reports, and have otherwise exceeded expectations is good for the organizational culture. He's made tactical errors, major ones even. Who hasn't?

[SKO]

I can't defend the decisions and this weekend was not Joe's best effort, but give me a break... you want to fire Joe Maddon, a manager whose regular season record is 99 games over .500 in three seasons with the Cubs and who has won 39% of the franchise's postseason games and 67 percent of its playoff series?

The Cubs stole Games 1 and 3 vs. Washington. CJ Edwards made one mistake or they would have won Game 2 as well. That series was as physically and mentally draining as you can get in a 5-game series.

The fortunate thing is these weren't elimination games.

I get it, but as Cubs fans one thing we're going to need to do is stop comparing what this team does to team history and saying "see it can't be that bad." Expectations have been raised, I don't give a shit if he's better than Jim Lefebvre. The % of franchise postseason wins he's managed is irrelevant. The only question that should ever be asked is "could the Cubs hire a manager that gives them a better chance of winning the next world series than Joe." I'm actually not sure if the answer is yes right now, but I know it's not wrong to ask.

It's not a question of whether you employer can fire you and replace you if they find someone who'd be better and more willing to do your job, especially if they pay you whatever they are obligated to. It's a question of whether doing so when you have achieved every measurable objective, have the support of your direct reports, and have otherwise exceeded expectations is good for the organizational culture. He's made tactical errors, major ones even. Who hasn't?

See those are fair questions to ask, TJ. I'm honestly not sure if they'd get better by firing him, I just think another postseason of miscues might start to tilt the scales, my point was one way or the other his place in Cubs history is irrelevant, if he's not the best man for the job now it doesn't matter what he once did.

[Chuck to Chuck]

I can't defend the decisions and this weekend was not Joe's best effort, but give me a break... you want to fire Joe Maddon, a manager whose regular season record is 99 games over .500 in three seasons with the Cubs and who has won 39% of the franchise's postseason games and 67 percent of its playoff series?

The Cubs stole Games 1 and 3 vs. Washington. CJ Edwards made one mistake or they would have won Game 2 as well. That series was as physically and mentally draining as you can get in a 5-game series.

The fortunate thing is these weren't elimination games.

I get it, but as Cubs fans one thing we're going to need to do is stop comparing what this team does to team history and saying "see it can't be that bad." Expectations have been raised, I don't give a shit if he's better than Jim Lefebvre. The % of franchise postseason wins he's managed is irrelevant. The only question that should ever be asked is "could the Cubs hire a manager that gives them a better chance of winning the next world series than Joe." I'm actually not sure if the answer is yes right now, but I know it's not wrong to ask.

It's not a question of whether you employer can fire you and replace you if they find someone who'd be better and more willing to do your job, especially if they pay you whatever they are obligated to. It's a question of whether doing so when you have achieved every measurable objective, have the support of your direct reports, and have otherwise exceeded expectations is good for the organizational culture. He's made tactical errors, major ones even. Who hasn't?

This is the "Process vs. Outcomes" argument.  If I underwrite my loans really shitty, but the clients still make all the payments on the loan, it doesn't mean I've done a good job. It means I got lucky.

What's so disappointing about Maddon is that he doesn't even follow his own rules sometimes. Case in point, only bringing in Lester last year in Game 7 in a clean inning, yet didn't do that. Wild pitch, runs scored, but they won the game.

Did Joe do a good job last year in that game? No. Did they win? Yes.

I don't think Joe has earned a ticket out of town.  I just wish he'd follow through on certain decisions for pre-game tactics once the game actually starts.

[Oleg]

I can't defend the decisions and this weekend was not Joe's best effort, but give me a break... you want to fire Joe Maddon, a manager whose regular season record is 99 games over .500 in three seasons with the Cubs and who has won 39% of the franchise's postseason games and 67 percent of its playoff series?

The Cubs stole Games 1 and 3 vs. Washington. CJ Edwards made one mistake or they would have won Game 2 as well. That series was as physically and mentally draining as you can get in a 5-game series.

The fortunate thing is these weren't elimination games.

I get it, but as Cubs fans one thing we're going to need to do is stop comparing what this team does to team history and saying "see it can't be that bad." Expectations have been raised, I don't give a shit if he's better than Jim Lefebvre. The % of franchise postseason wins he's managed is irrelevant. The only question that should ever be asked is "could the Cubs hire a manager that gives them a better chance of winning the next world series than Joe." I'm actually not sure if the answer is yes right now, but I know it's not wrong to ask.

It's not a question of whether you employer can fire you and replace you if they find someone who'd be better and more willing to do your job, especially if they pay you whatever they are obligated to. It's a question of whether doing so when you have achieved every measurable objective, have the support of your direct reports, and have otherwise exceeded expectations is good for the organizational culture. He's made tactical errors, major ones even. Who hasn't?

This is the "Process vs. Outcomes" argument.  If I underwrite my loans really shitty, but the clients still make all the payments on the loan, it doesn't mean I've done a good job. It means I got lucky.

What's so disappointing about Maddon is that he doesn't even follow his own rules sometimes. Case in point, only bringing in Lester last year in Game 7 in a clean inning, yet didn't do that. Wild pitch, runs scored, but they won the game.

Did Joe do a good job last year in that game? No. Did they win? Yes.

I don't think Joe has earned a ticket out of town.  I just wish he'd follow through on certain decisions for pre-game tactics once the game actually starts.

But that example also would be evidence that's he's not so rigid as to be completely inflexible when the game situation warrants it, whether it was the right call or not.  We also don't really know what was exactly said...he could have told Lester that odds are he would enter a clean inning but, if the situation arose, would he be comfortable coming into the game in the middle of an inning.

By far the more egregious error was leaving Schwarber and Happ on the bench (what the fuck did Happ do to lose so much playing time) while Alomora flailed away against the Dodgers' bullpen.  By the way, not a single pinch hitter last night, huh?

[Saul Goodman]

Interesting theory, but if that was Joe's thinking, I think he's being too cute by half.

[Tony]

Interesting theory, but if that was Joe's thinking, I think he's being too cute by half.

If Joe really wanted to rest and regroup to focus on the home games he should have started Lackey in the first game.

[SKO]

Interesting theory, but if that was Joe's thinking, I think he's being too cute by half.

If Joe really wanted to rest and regroup to focus on the home games he should have started Lackey in the first game.

Yeah, that's why I don't buy this. Make Lackey go 6/7 against Kershaw no matter what, start a fully rested Quintana who can hopefully go 6+ and thus avoid the bullpen problems in G2.

There's only two answers here: Joe fucked up, or Wade is hurt and Joe is trying not to tell anyone that because gamesmanship, I guess.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Interesting theory, but if that was Joe's thinking, I think he's being too cute by half.

If Joe really wanted to rest and regroup to focus on the home games he should have started Lackey in the first game.

Yeah, that's why I don't buy this. Make Lackey go 6/7 against Kershaw no matter what, start a fully rested Quintana who can hopefully go 6+ and thus avoid the bullpen problems in G2.

There's only two answers here: Joe fucked up, or Wade is hurt and Joe is trying not to tell anyone that because gamesmanship, I guess.

Three: Both.

[Brownie]

Interesting theory, but if that was Joe's thinking, I think he's being too cute by half.

If Joe really wanted to rest and regroup to focus on the home games he should have started Lackey in the first game.

Yeah, that's why I don't buy this. Make Lackey go 6/7 against Kershaw no matter what, start a fully rested Quintana who can hopefully go 6+ and thus avoid the bullpen problems in G2.

There's only two answers here: Joe fucked up, or Wade is hurt and Joe is trying not to tell anyone that because gamesmanship, I guess.

I agree with this.

[Brownie]

Interesting theory, but if that was Joe's thinking, I think he's being too cute by half.

If Joe really wanted to rest and regroup to focus on the home games he should have started Lackey in the first game.

Yeah, that's why I don't buy this. Make Lackey go 6/7 against Kershaw no matter what, start a fully rested Quintana who can hopefully go 6+ and thus avoid the bullpen problems in G2.

There's only two answers here: Joe fucked up, or Wade is hurt and Joe is trying not to tell anyone that because gamesmanship, I guess.

Further, there's something to be said for not being afraid to lose a game, but in short series that's not a luxury that Joe would have had had this been a mid-August series at the tail-end of a 9-game west coast trip and the middle of a 25 games in 24 game stretch that is common that time of year. In that case, sure, pack it in, get Davis rested and come back for the homestand with St. Louis, Milwaukee and Colorado healthy and rested.

Also, I'm not sure that Yasiel Puig or Justin Turner are feeling the weight of the world on their shoulders. 29 years should be the mean wait given the number of teams in the league.[

[CBStew]

29 years should be the mean wait given the number of teams in the league.[

Um.  Ok?