New Manager - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2015 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Kansas City Royals

New Manager

Moderators: joshparrish, prodpaul, Baseball Moderators

Who will be our new Manager

Poll ended at Wed May 18, 2005 2:31 pm

Larry Bowa
Frank White
No votes
Art Howe
No votes
Don't Care
Total votes : 4

New Manager

Postby prodpaul » Wed May 11, 2005 2:31 pm

So who do you think it will be?

General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterSweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 2475
Joined: 22 Jan 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Kansas City, MO

Postby kev921 » Wed May 11, 2005 3:44 pm

It needs to be a guy with some big league managerial experience. You can't mess around with these youngsters, they need big league guidance (it sure doesn't look like they'll ever see much more of the minor leagues).
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 657
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Kauffman Stadium

Postby prodpaul » Tue May 24, 2005 5:27 pm

I am changing my vote to Art Howe. Looks like he is been getting a closer look from the execs.

What do you think of Howe?

General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterSweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 2475
Joined: 22 Jan 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Kansas City, MO

Postby nuggets » Tue May 24, 2005 6:35 pm


Veteran managers outperform rookies


The Kansas City Star

The Royals appear to be doing the right thing by looking for a veteran manager. It also looks as if Terry Collins, a dark horse who has cropped up on the elusive “short list,” deserves serious consideration.

Collins has the first prerequisite for the Royals' managerial search: He's managed (and won) in the big leagues.

As a rule, do veteran managers make more of an impact?

To examine this question, we looked at the managerial records for the last 15 seasons. We looked at each new manager and marked him as a veteran manager (previous big-league experience) or a rookie manager (no big-league experience). There were 44 rookie managers and 41 veteran managers during this period.

To measure the effect of the two groups, we looked at the two seasons before the managerial change, then the two seasons after the change, including the new manager's first season with his team. Thus, new managers needed at least two seasons with their new team to qualify for the study.

The measurement we'll use is called EFF162 (effect per 162 games). It is calculated by subtracting the winning percentage for the seasons before the change from the percentage after the change and multiplying that times 162.

The veteran managers clearly were the more effective group. The teams that hired managers with experience improved their two-season win total by an aggregate of 85 games, for a 2.2 EFF162. Teams that rolled the dice on unproven managers dropped an extra 71 games in the aggregate for a -1.6 EFF162.

Twenty-six of 41 (63 percent) veteran managers had a positive effect on their new team. Only 18 of 44 (41 percent) first-timers aided improvement.

There were eight first-time managers on the list who had a negative EFF162 who were later given a second chance with another team. Four of the eight posted a positive EFF162 the second time around — Gene Lamont, Johnny Oates, Buddy Bell and Jim Riggleman.

Lamont is thought to be on the Royals' short list of candidates but has not been confirmed.

There were also six first-timers who posted a positive EFF162 and then went on to manage another team. All six of them vindicated themselves by improving their new charges as well.

Of these “sensational six,” four of them already have managing jobs — Dusty Baker, Buck Showalter, Felipe Alou and Phil Garner. Two of them don't — Collins and Kevin Kennedy.

Collins topped our study of available managers last week based on wins added with a score of 3.3 wins added per 162 games (WA162). Kennedy placed third on that list with 1.9 WA162 (see the Stat Guy blog for details). Collins has been verified as a member of the short list. Kennedy has not been mentioned as a candidate.

Another member of the short list, Art Howe, actually predates this study as a first-time manager because he made his debut as manager in 1989. But if he had qualified, Howe wouldn't have fared very well because the Astros got markedly worse the first two seasons after he took the helm.

Howe did make the study as a veteran manager — twice. In both instances, the teams he took over (the Athletics and Mets) got worse in the two-year period after his hire. Of course, by the time he left the Athletics, the squad had won more than 100 games for two straight seasons.

Howe posted a 1.4 WA162 in last week's study, good for fourth place on the list. Lamont finished out of the running with a -1.2 WA162. Collins is the only candidate on the unofficial short list to score well in both studies.

So it appears that the Royals are talking to the right candidate (Collins) and the right kind of candidates (veteran managers).

Of course, talk is just that — talk. Who actually gets the job remains to be seen.

To reach Bradford Doolittle, send e-mail to

Spoils of experience
Veteran managers seem to have a more positive effect on a team's victory total than first-time managers. A look at new managers in the period from 1990 to 2003:

Category Veterans Rookies
Number of managers 41 44
Change in winning percentage +.013 -.010
Effect on wins +84.6 -70.5
Effect per 162 games +2.2 -1.6
Managers with positive effect 26 18
Managers with negative effect 15 26

Pack of contenders for Royals manager


The Kansas City Star

Who will be the Royals' next manager?

New names are thrown out daily, the most recent being Indians bench coach Buddy Bell. There's also former Red Sox manager Grady Little, longtime manager Jim Fregosi and former Texas manager Jerry Narron.

All fit the Royals' main requirement — big-league experience — but don't quite fit the team's needs. So if an early handicap exists, the five managers profiled here are atop — or at least among — the pack. Here's a little on who they are, why they're right and wrong for the job and how they manage.

ART HOWE, 58. Has won with kids before

• Experience: 14 years; 1,129-1,137 career record; three playoff appearances

• Why he fits: He works well — and has won — with young players. Managing Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio with Houston, then Tim Hudson, Barry Zito and Mark Mulder in Oakland, Howe knows how to mold talent.

• Why he doesn't:

Only in sports might this be considered a flaw: Howe is a nice guy, considered by some too nice. Does he have the ability to crack the whip when a losing team needs it?

• Baseball philosophy: “I wish it was that easy. ... It's baseball season. The first in 35 years I'm at home. The bug's there.”

GENE LAMONT, 58. Past ties to organization

• Experience: Eight years; 553-562 career record; two playoff appearances

• Why he fits: Deep Royals ties bring Lamont back to the late '70s and early '80s heyday of the franchise. Reputation as a good organizational man — i.e. he'll buy into the program — helps.

• Why he doesn't: Lamont's last tenure as a manager, a four-year stint in Pittsburgh where he went 57 under .500, doesn't inspire confidence. He's certainly not a splash, either.

• Baseball philosophy: “I don't think you can say you have a philosophy. You have to manage to the players you have. You have to get to know your players well enough where you can put them in spots where they can succeed.”

JIMY WILLIAMS, 61. Strong teacher of the game

• Experience: 12 years; 910-790 career record; two playoff appearances

• Why he fits: Strong knowledge of the game allows him to teach. Worked with kids in Toronto — Fred McGriff, George Bell, Tony Fernandez — and won in Boston and Houston.

• Why he doesn't: While he won in his last two stops, he didn't win big. Both teams fired him in the middle of the season. Williams is the oldest of the candidates — too old, perhaps?

• Baseball philosophy: Straightforward and conservative. Although Williams spent most of his managerial career in the American League, he has an NL mentality, having worked as a coach with Bobby Cox and the Braves.

TERRY COLLINS, 55. Top talent evaluator

• Experience:

Six years; 444-434 career record; zero playoff appearances

• Why he fits: A great evaluator of talent now working as Dodgers farm director, Collins is known for his baseball mind and his ability to dredge the most from his players. He'd surely fill Allard Baird's “development” criteria.

• Why he doesn't: Six seasons, no playoffs. Collins got only three years in Houston and Anaheim, so that label isn't exactly fair. But the Royals want to build a winner by 2007, and postseason experience matters.

• Baseball philosophy: “I care about how the game is played. I want it done correctly. I don't accept stupid plays. And if you do them, you'll hear about it, and then I'll try to teach you what went wrong.”

BOB SCHAEFER, 61. Has already won over team

• Experience: One year, 6-6 career record; zero playoff appearances

• Why he fits: He's keeping the ship afloat. As interim manager, Schaefer has earned the trust and respect of the Royals by playing aggressively in spite of mediocre talent. The players are comfortable with Schaefer, as is he with them.

• Why he doesn't: Five words: No previous major- league experience. Although Schaefer is on the short list, Baird and president Dan Glass have said experience managing in a full-time role is among the most important attributes.

• Baseball philosophy: “The big thing I stressed is we're going to attack the ball,” Schaefer said a day after his hiring. “We've got guys who can hit.”
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3342
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Return to Kansas City Royals

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact