What u think?

He's a guru at bonding with his players, building their confidence, and getting them to go to the wall for him. Strategically, he's a knucklehead. You have to take the bad with the good with him. I think that loyalty with his players worked extremely well for him until last year, when he burned out some oldsters by being afraid to sit them more.

he's a less with more guy

^
Ridiculous

Clubhouse manager with poor in game management. Nothing more nothing less

quote:

---

Clubhouse manager with poor in game management. Nothing more nothing less

---

That is most managers these days. Joe Maddon the most obvious exception.

I agree w Danny.

He seems to be able to motivate the players well. He's a little too aggressive for my taste but overall he's pretty good.

Danny pretty much nailed it.

It begs the question... what's more important?

The preponderance of evidence is that Wash's way is working. Obviously, JD gets the credit for building the club and the farm system. The Rangers are doing an OUTSTANDING job preparing young arms to compete and win at the MLB level. That's way more than just Wash.

Those who sell short his managerial style would do well to recall that the Texas Rangers were 1-9 in postseason play all time prior to him taking the helm. He is doing more right than wrong. He and the entire Rangers staff at all levels have done an incredible job this season so far.

If he wins his division this season and doesn't finally win AL manager of the year, it's a crime.

The injuries thus far would have overwhelmed many other teams.

Over the past 18 months off the top of my head he's lost (to injury or free agency):

1. CJ Wilson (all-star)
2. Matt Harrison (all-star)
3. Colby Lewis (horse)
4. Michael Young (all-star)
5. Josh Hamilton (all-star)
6. Mike Napoli (all-star)

and (aside from Yu Darvish) the team has really added nothing to speak of other than a crappy third starter at the deadline last season and a bunch of youth/journeymen. He's a great regular season manager, just not sure he can win the big one.

Agree. It's amazing this team is where it is in the standings given the injuries and net loss it suffered in FA.

If you want to see a manager doing less with more, check out Mike Soscia's work the past 3 years.

Word.

Excluding the one game playoff, they are 4-2 in playoff series with Wash. To gauge that vs quality of opponent, 3 series were against teams with a better regular season record (2-1) and 3 series were against teams with a worse regular season record (2-1 as well). It's an imperfect way to look at it, but on the whole, one could say that they've performed better than the expected result.

[This message has been edited by DannyDuberstein (edited 6/29/2013 3:28p).]

Read what Leonys said about Wash and you get a good feel for Wash. At the beginning of the season Wash said Leonys was going to be his project (Similar to what Wash did with Holland). Last week Leonys said he has great confidence in himself, and that Wash always believed in him, and that he draws much of his confidence from Wash.

I know Perez is one of those guys Wash constantly tells he needs to "be who he is." The huge in the dugout and the parrot of coach speak from Perez shows what Wash drills into him.

It has been my impression (and I've expressed here) that part of why the players buy into Wash is Wash's loyalty... but also Wash's decisions. Those decisions that many on here don't like, are the very decisions the players know are why the play so hard for Wash. Wash has said something like as a player he always wanted a Manager to believe in players and he wanted to be that type of manager. To believe in players whether they are at the top or struggling. His belief in players when they struggle, are what frustrates some on here (see comments above), but it is also why players like Perez, Holland and Leonys are loyal. Wash believed in them, when few others did. After Tep's last struggle, when I and many were ready to ship him to AAA, Wash said, "He'll be ready for his next turn in the rotation." Never a flinch he'd be in the rotation. See Kirkman.

Holland - Veteran of the SP staff \ 16 GS this season

Darvish - 2nd Season in MLB \ 16 GS this season

Ogando - 30 GS coming into the seaosn \ 10 GS this season

Harrison - 1 GS this season

Working with nothing:

Grimm: 2 GS coming into the season \ 14 GS this season
Tepesch: 0 GS coming into the season \ 14 GS this season
Perez: 6 GS coming into the season \ 3 GS this season
Lindblom: 0 GS coming into the season \ 4 GS this season
Wolf: 0 GS coming into the season \ 1 GS this season

43 GS from a "veteran" group.
36 GS from a group that came in combined with 8 career GS.

They are 4th in the AL with a 3.88 ERA.

Wash gets a lot of that credit. It isn't lost on my that Maddux has a HUGE role. He did similar work with the Brew-crew.

And JD and scouts have been magnificent. Grimm was surprise when drafted. Ogando was a Rule V OF from Oakland.

It is a great chemistry in the Office, even if there is conflict and dissension.

In my opinion, too much credit is given to the manager when the team wins while too much blame is given to the manager when the team loses (similar to how quarterbacks are treated in football).

I don't think there is much to the strategic side of managing. Most baseball managers are idiots who do everything "by the book" even though statistics how shown that it is not effective.

Where they are important is keeping players motivated and engaged. 162 games is an insanely long season. Lots of drama, injuries, egos, etc to keep focused for the long haul.

Honestly, I think that Wash would not succeed w/o JD and vice versa.

With all of JD's moving parts, he needs a manager like Wash who can stick up for the players and make sure that they can be themselves and have fun playing baseball. With that being said, if you put Wash in a situation without a lot of talent coming up, he's not going to be able to coach his way to success. They balance each other out very well.

Talent is part of the equation... getting players to reach their potential is most certainly about coaching.

IMO, Wash's style is very much strategic. When Leonys says that his confidence is sky-high with the success he has had, because Wash has always believed that he could play like he is, shows very much the importance of a Manager.

When you hear a young SP say "Wash says you have to earn the right to pitch deep into games."

Wash gives players some simple things for them to succeed, and let's them know if they do them, they will be successful and if they don't, not only will they not be successful, but they will be limited in their opportunity.

If anything... Wash's failure (per this board) is his inability to be tactical. Getting a BP guy up late, so he hasn't warmed up enough to come it... is very much a tactical failure. Switching signs and then having a player going with a sac bunt on a missed sign from the dugout, is a tactical failure.

And don't lose sight of Maddux in all this.

I think JD would be a different GM, if he had a different Manager, and vice-versa. Wash would be a different manager with a different GM.

A fern could manage this team to the same win totals.

I think most agree strategically he's a below average (possibly bad) manager. His "gut" is wrong more times than not. This is a guy that rode his veterans in 2012 until they broke. This is a guy that pulled a rolling Darvish out of a do-or-die playoff game. This is a guy that then brought in a starter as a reliever into said game. This is a guy that constantly tried to get Michael Young into the game defensively and constantly had it backfire on him.

And while I won't disagree his players love to play for him, at the root of things his players also love to win. It's not like these guys would otherwise be happy just being an 80 win team. For all the talk of Wash's motivation, the following has happened the last 3 years:

2010 - Rangers favored going into the WS, looked stagnant the entire series and lose in 5.

2011 - Rangers blow Game 6 and are unable to muster much of anything in Game 7.

2012 - Rangers have an absolutely epic choke job in the last few weeks of the season going from a team with the best record in baseball to one that didn't even make the "real playoffs".


You could make a very strong case that the Rangers choked each of the last 3 years -- really hard to then turnaround and give credit to a manager for motivating the players.

Personally, I think he's a figurehead and other people are running the team.

myhaden, have you seen the injuries this team dealt with the past two seasons?

Secondly, SF was the hotter team.

Game six was brutal but I don't see how that is on Wash.

quote:

---

Game six was brutal but I don't see how that is on Wash.

---

I'm a fan of Wash, but there was no reason to leave Cruz in RF in the 9th. Bonehead move. Was not a fan of bringing Oliver in for the 10th either.

RedAgs:

At the end of the day there's been 3 straight years where Texas choked when it mattered.

That doesn't make them a bad team or Ron a bad coach, but I think it certainly shoots holes in that he's some great motivator.

SF was just the better team, but yeah...Nefty and Cruz choked.

That's on Ron?

Ok.

I'm sure he would have been given as much credit had they won game 6 after Josh's HR.

It was Wash's motivation that made him hit that, right?

corleone,
It's on Ron for not making an obvious move like putting defensive replacement in for Cruz. Unfortunately, we saw exactly why the replacement was necessary.

quote:

---

corleone,
It's on Ron for not making an obvious move like putting defensive replacement in for Cruz. Unfortunately, we saw exactly why the replacement was necessary.

---

I guess I'd debate it was obvious. How many times did Cruz get late inning replaced that year? I think there's some hindsight going on.

quote:

---

A fern could manage this team to the same win totals.

---

Then why haven't the Rangers been expected to finish very high during ST? It isn't like he has a team of All-Stars or high paying mercenaries. This is a team that is rolling out 3 Rookies in the Starting Rotation. 2 guys who were not even on the radar for the rotation and ONLY got the nod because of injuries.

quote:

---

I think most agree strategically he's a below average (possibly bad) manager. His "gut" is wrong more times than not.

---

I think you and I have differing opinion of what is strategic and what is tactical. Maybe you are thinking more micro-strategy and I'm more macro.

quote:

---

This is a guy that rode his veterans in 2012 until they broke.

---

We've discussed this... his use of veterans is no different than ANY other manager. The collapse of Hamilton had nothing to do with Wash and everything to do with the collapse of the team.

quote:

---

This is a guy that then brought in a starter as a reliever into said game.

---

Something he has done, quite a bit. His use of the SP from the BP was done to give the SP a "rest" day during the season, and his use of the SP from the BP on their normal off-day pitching day during the playoffs was very smart and well done. THAT is certainly something you'd expect Nolan, Greg Maddux and Mike Maddux to have been key. It didn't work, but was a great strategy.

quote:

---

This is a guy that constantly tried to get Michael Young into the game defensively and constantly had it backfire on him.

---

That was hardly a "late inning defensive replacement" move.

quote:

---

And while I won't disagree his players love to play for him, at the root of things his players also love to win. It's not like these guys would otherwise be happy just being an 80 win team.

---

Show me any team of players that would be happy with 80 Ws. It isn't like their natural desire has elevated their lack of talent to a level that allows them to succeed.

quote:

---

For all the talk of Wash's motivation, the following has happened the last 3 years:

2010 - Rangers favored going into the WS, looked stagnant the entire series and lose in 5.

---

SF was NOT expected to be in the playoffs, and they were expected to lose EVERY series.
Do you put Cliff Lee giving up 6 ER in 4.2 on Wash? I mean, was that on Wash?
Cain absoluting dominated the Rangers going 7.2 IP \ 4H \2BB. That was on Wash?
Both games in SF.

Followed by Bumgarner going 8IP \ 3H \ 2 BB. That was on Wash?

A team getting shutout twice in the WS has very little to do with the Manger. They just got beat.

quote:

---

2011 - Rangers blow Game 6 and are unable to muster much of anything in Game 7.

---

Again... this is on Wash? Cruz' error was what it was. Cruz was never seen as a defensive liability, AFAIK. He just misplayed the ball. It sucked. But Wash had nothing to do with that.

quote:

---

2012 - Rangers have an absolutely epic choke job in the last few weeks of the season going from a team with the best record in baseball to one that didn't even make the "real playoffs".

---

Again... look no further than Hamilton to see the team's fate. They were 1st when he was the best player to ever play and disappeared when he disappeared. Hamilton missing a routine flyball had nothing to do with Wash and everything to do with <insert Hamilton's excuse> .

quote:

---

You could make a very strong case that the Rangers choked each of the last 3 years -- really hard to then turnaround and give credit to a manager for motivating the players.

---

You could easily argue with any other coach the Rangers would NOThave never been a playoff team in those 3 years. Nothing with their rosters predicted a playoff team, in spring training. Even this year they were predicted what 3rd? And here they are in 1st place with injuries to their opening day starter (Harrison) and without Colby. You could argue with Tepesch, Grimm and Perez anchoring the rotation that they have 3 guys who in spring training were not even in consideration for contributing to a team that was only projected as 3rd in the AL West. Compare those 3 to 3 SPs on either Seattle or Houston and where those 3 guys would have been projeced in either of their rotations.

I don't get your beef with Wash, but it is deeper and more personal than I've realized. I'm not sure if he slept with your wife or daughter, or you have lost great sums of money on decisions he has made. But it is irrational and not substantiated by reality. It is the exact reason I think gambling is a bad idea.

Edited a forgotten NOT which was added

[This message has been edited by DallasAg 94 (edited 7/1/2013 12:36p).]

quote:

---

SF was just the better team, but yeah...Nefty and Cruz choked.

That's on Ron?

Ok.

I'm sure he would have been given as much credit had they won game 6 after Josh's HR.

It was Wash's motivation that made him hit that, right?

---

That would be a valid comment had people been making the comment that Ron isn't a good coach becuase he's *not* a good motivator.

The consensus is he's not a good strategical manager, but that his ability to motivate is what makes him worthwhile.

My contention is if he's such a great motivator, then why have the Rangers choked in 2010 (WS favorites, manhandled in 5 games), 2011 (1 strike away multiple times in Game 6, DOA in Game 7) and 2012 (complete tankjob the final weeks of the season to lose a division that seemed impossible to lose)?

That't not to say he's a *bad* motivator -- but he's certainly not a great one.

I'm just gonna go with the guy that implied Maddon is better.

quote:

---

Then why haven't the Rangers been expected to finish very high during ST? It isn't like he has a team of All-Stars or high paying mercenaries. This is a team that is rolling out 3 Rookies in the Starting Rotation. 2 guys who were not even on the radar for the rotation and ONLY got the nod because of injuries.

---

Ignoring that there were plenty of people who picked Texas to win the division this year, they are a half-game up in July -- I wouldn't exactly call that proving anybody right OR wrong at this point.

quote:

---

I think you and I have differing opinion of what is strategic and what is tactical. Maybe you are thinking more micro-strategy and I'm more macro.

---

You can call it anything you want -- if you think that Ron Washington is a competent in-game manager then your opinion differs from just about every analyst in baseball. He's widely considered one of 3-4 *worst*, and by NO means average or above average.

quote:

---

We've discussed this... his use of veterans is no different than ANY other manager. The collapse of Hamilton had nothing to do with Wash and everything to do with the collapse of the team.

---

Yes we did discuss this - and I showed that of the playoff teams last year Texas rode their everyday starters harder than any other team -- and it showed.

quote:

---

Something he has done, quite a bit. His use of the SP from the BP was done to give the SP a "rest" day during the season, and his use of the SP from the BP on their normal off-day pitching day during the playoffs was very smart and well done. THAT is certainly something you'd expect Nolan, Greg Maddux and Mike Maddux to have been key. It didn't work, but was a great strategy.

---

Darvish's line when he was pulled:

6.2 IP (91 pitches)
5 hits -- all singles
1 earned run
0 walks
7 strikeouts



He was pulled to bring in Derek Holland - who had not pitched in relief all season long. Derek then threw a wild pitch, gave up a single and had a throwing error before getting out of the inning. *HE WAS THEN REPLACED BY UEHARA*

Essentially Ron Washington was looking for one more out in the inning, and instead of sticking with his ace that to that point was absolutely *dealing* (1.35 game era, no walks, no extra base hits) or even going with your shutdown setup man Uehara (0.64 WHIP, 1.75 ERA), he goes to Derek Holland... a guy who hadn't pitched out of relief all season long and was sporting a 4.67 ERA on the season... and a *worse* BAA vs lefties than the guy he was replacing.

You simply cannot defend that move. Probably Top 5 worst managerial blunder by Washington is his tenure here.

quote:

---

That was hardly a "late inning defensive replacement" move.

---

No, it was Ron Washington insisting that he get Michael Young on the field... A move that literally took ONE PITCH to backfire. First pitch of the game Michael Young error allows a man to reach, which led to the first run of the game and pretty much set the tone for the play-in game.

Seriously, there is not a better example of a manager having his "gut" decisions completely backfire no him then the 2012 Play-In game. It was absolutely brutal.

quote:

---

Show me any team of players that would be happy with 80 Ws. It isn't like their natural desire has elevated their lack of talent to a level that allows them to succeed.

---

Lack of talent?

Who on this team would you say has played over their ability due to the coaching of Ron Washington?

I think you are giving Washington credit for an influx of talent in the minor leagues that happened due to drafting. Andrus, Profar an the like were stud prospects before they got to the bigs.

quote:

---

You could easily argue with any other coach the Rangers would NOThave never been a playoff team in those 3 years. Nothing with their rosters predicted a playoff team, in spring training

---

Nothing with their rosters predicted a playoff team?

Wow.

Maybe you just weren't sharp enough to see it, but there were PLENTY of people -- myself included -- that predicted Texas would make the playoffs in 2010 and be the dominant force in the division for the years after.

But I guess all of those other analysts who consider Ron such a bad manager just lost a lot of money gambling on him too?

So your saying the chokes were because of motivation? That Lee tanked in his start because Wash didn't pat him on the butt the right way. The SF pitching staff was red hot, but if the team was charged up the right way, they could have hit off of everything. Regardless of the fact that the Rangers just got done beating the Yanks in the most spectacular fashion, they had no motivation to win.

Cruz misplayed the ball because Wash didn't motivate him enough? I'll give up that the team was in distraughts in game 7, but game 6 was not lost due to motivation.

quote:

---

So your saying the chokes were because of motivation? That Lee tanked in his start because Wash didn't pat him on the butt the right way. The SF pitching staff was red hot, but if the team was charged up the right way, they could have hit off of everything. Regardless of the fact that the Rangers just got done beating the Yanks in the most spectacular fashion, they had no motivation to win.

Cruz misplayed the ball because Wash didn't motivate him enough? I'll give up that the team was in distraughts in game 7, but game 6 was not lost due to motivation.

---

I'm not saying that at all -- I'm not arguing that Washington isn't a good enough motivator and that's why we lost those games.

I'm arguing against all of those that say his in-game blunders are made up for by the fact that he's just an incredible motivator -- if he was such an incredible motivator then you would assume the Rangers wouldn't have choked in each of the last 3 years.

You can't say Texas lost because Player X played poorly, but then turn around and say Washington is a good manager because he motivates his players.

quote:

---

You could easily argue with any other coach the Rangers would NOThave never been a playoff team in those 3 years. Nothing with their rosters predicted a playoff team, in spring training

---

In 2010 PECOTA projection had Texas winning 85 games -- so while they outplayed their projection by 5 wins, they certainly weren't some team expected to be 10 games under.

In 2011 the Rangers were favored to win the divsiion.

In 2012 the Rangers or Angels were favored to win the division (depending on which sportsbook you were looking at) -- but all of them basically had the consensus that it was either Texas/LAA and then a *huge* dropoff to Oakland/Seattle.


To say that nothing with the rosters of those 3 teams predicted a playoff team is absolutely, mind-boggling, stupid.

quote:

---

That would be a valid comment had people been making the comment that Ron isn't a good coach becuase he's *not* a good motivator.

The consensus is he's not a good strategical manager, but that his ability to motivate is what makes him worthwhile.

My contention is if he's such a great motivator, then why have the Rangers choked in 2010 (WS favorites, manhandled in 5 games), 2011 (1 strike away multiple times in Game 6, DOA in Game 7) and 2012 (complete tankjob the final weeks of the season to lose a division that seemed impossible to lose)?

That't not to say he's a *bad* motivator -- but he's certainly not a great one.

---

You're talking in circles a little bit because you're arguing a pretty tough point to back up with logic.

Clutch performance is never correlated with a manger's ability to motivate. You don't hear people say, after someone fails to get a big hit, that it's on the manager because he didn't motivate said player to turn on his "get a big hit" skill set.

What you do hear quite often is that teams with poor effort and/or body language are not being properly motivated. Did Cruz botch the game 6 play in RF because of effort? Did the meltdown that ensued after Josh delivered the comeback HR occur because the Rangers weren't trying?

Of course not.

So, I get that in-game tactics aren't Wash's strong suit, but I don't think you can conclude he's not that great of a motivator because of certain plays in the clutch that didn't get made. The greatest measure of his ability to motivate the team is their effort and resolve, resilience, etc.

And im pretty sure that no one will argue that Wash's teams have not had that since he was hired.

[This message has been edited by corleoneAg99 (edited 7/1/2013 2:56p).]

So basically the people who are arguing that Washington is a good coach because he's a good motivator are arguing something that can't be backed up with logic?