Main Sections:
Main Site
Discussion Forum
    All Topics
    New Messages
    Search
    Last Day
    Last Week
    Tree View
    Edit Profile
    Create Login
    Guidelines
    Help
Game Chat
Fund Raiser:
Order Merchandise!

Suggested Reading:
(click cover for info)

cover

Bay Area media speak out re managers

OAFC BBS - All Topics: Archive: Bay Area media speak out re managers
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 09:56 am:

Newhouse and Glenn Dickey and their views. As usual, there always one for every taste, shape or color.

http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82%257E1748%257E,00.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2002/10/26/SP96609.DTL

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By eyleenn on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 10:23 am:

Wow, Dickey really unloaded on Howe! You can tell that he'd been just saving it all up until Howe was out the door.

That said, Dickey makes some valid points. I've been a Howe supporter, but I do think it was time for a change. Hopefully, it will be a change for the better.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By sactodavey on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 11:15 am:

Glenn Dickey said it like it was the truth, i can't waite for the NY media to tear Howe from limb to limb , he won't survive 2 yrs there.

Rick peterson is the one who developed the staff all Howe did was send his starters out there wave his right and left arms and over use Koch ,we must keep perterson. i just hope we get manager who will be his own man and implement his own style not a suck up like Howe.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By vinnieangelo on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 11:26 am:

Sacto,

I bet whomever our new Skipper is, you find wrong with everything he does....

Im sure he will be a "Brainless idiot", who doesnt know how to play "small ball", and will "overuse Koch". Don't get your hopes up for someone with any brains.

PS. You still have a shot of getting the gig. Send Beane your resume.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By sactodavey on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 11:39 am:

Vinnie ,

i don't know you seem more qualified than me read your post again , time to hang up the drums.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By vinnieangelo on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 11:43 am:

OK,

Just read my post (whew, im glad I can still read). I never said I wanted the job. Hang up drums? WTF?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By vinnieangelo on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 12:39 pm:

Sacto, can you please help me out..I want to know what the heck you mean by your last post..

-----------------------------------------------
Vinnie ,

i don't know you seem more qualified than me read your post again , time to hang up the drums.

-----------------------------------------------

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By chrishorvath on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 02:00 pm:

Even if the team does improve without Howe, I still wish him the best of luck

He's a good guy in an industry of jerks and he deserves respect for the respect he's shown others

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By vinnieangelo on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 02:12 pm:

I could'nt agree with you more Chris...

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By athletic on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 04:55 pm:

I couldn't agree with Dickey more. How made so many painfully wrong decisions it was mindnumbing. I don't buy the Beane conspiracy theory. Given the flurry of negative posts Beane has received, I must believe that the guy is a control freak. Nevertheless, Howe's the one out there on the field making the moves. There's no gun to his head. Plus, if he knows that his job is on the line, why would he care if ticked off Billy. I'm blame the playoffs squarely on Howe. Yes, Huddy, Miggy, and Billy let us down, but that's inevitable in the postseason. MOreover, other guys like Hatte and Ellis picked them up. Knowingly setting up the rotation so that Zito started once was assinine. And what's up w/T-Long. The guy plays 24-7 yet sucks. ARt's a nice guy but good riddance. True, Billy may have weaknesses but without him we wouldn't have tasted the playoffs three straight years. Without Howe, I belive, were still in the playoffs and, if anything, we go deeper. Adios Art.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By kbailey3131 on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 05:28 pm:

If Beane is this much of a genius and Howe was so wrong for the job, why did they exercise the extension on the contract this spring? Dickey is whack.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By athleticfan on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 07:19 pm:

Ok kbaily3131, I never said Beane was a genius. I'm just saying don't blame Beane for PHing Piatt for Hatte, refusing to send Durham, refusing to bunt, refusing to get up the pen when Mulder almost got blasted in game five, for knowingly setting up the rotation so that Zito pitches once (I'm not questioning whether Huddy should've pitched twice...but Zito should have been there for game one), and, going back to last year, not pinch running Byrnes for Je Giambi. You're saying that Beane's a control freak and I won't doubt that, but when it comes to game situations, I believe Howe can do what he wants...especially in the postseason. And if he's so scared of Billy, than he's a wus, and thus, I don't want him as my manager. Dickey may be whack. But Howe can hit the road. Don't get bitter at me b/c the Gonads are going to win the W.S. It ain't my fault.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By sactodavey on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 07:38 pm:

Bottom line is with all the teams in the playoffs the A's had the best pitching staff period Howe screwed us up for 2 yrs running, it should be an A's championship not gnats period!!!!!

Out with the trash.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By athleticfan on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 08:08 pm:

Right on sacto.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By deajay on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 09:21 pm:

athleticfan, you forgot sending Koch out in the 8th of last game instead of Rincon. Further, the fact that the A's (Myers) almost batted out of order. Something which should have been picked up by Howe immediately and almost wasn't picked up at all.

I've always supported Howe, but my doubts started with his failing to put Byrnes in for Jeremy last year in that critical game, not to mention his faux paux comments at the start of that series, which the Yankees likely had posted all over their walls. And, okay, maybe there wasn't anyone better to replace Long, but if what Dickey says is true ... he never worked on his fielding or hitting, well, why didn't the manager see that he did? If that is true, it is inexcusable. All those mistakes ... too big to ignore, in spite of the 103 wins. It is how you finish that counts and Howe simply doesn't have the killer instinct. I firmly believe those are the reasons, that arguably the best team of the bunch, didn't get beyond the first round this year, or last year, and even possibly in 2000, as well.

I wish Howe nothing but good and more respect than he is getting in NY, but this year's first round showed loud and clear that a change was necessary.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By oakland4ever on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 10:11 pm:

I watched a video a friend recorded of game 5. It appeared Macha was the one who noticed and told Howe, Myers was out of order. As much as I admire Howe, he was asleep at the wheel during a pivotal momemt. Good luck to him especially against frisco

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By kbailey3131 on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 11:48 pm:

Athletic...this is the 2nd time you have presumably taken personally something I've written. My response here was not to you, it was to what Glen Dickey wrote. I am not a dude and not all my responses are personally directed at your line of thinking.

Now..back to the thread...Sure all managers make mistakes in the postseason, it happens to them all. But I can't blame Howe for Lilly being drug out of the bullpen, pitching a wounded Hudson or the philosophical bent this organization has that did not allow it to manufacture a single run in game 3 last year or game 5 this year.

But it appears that regardless of how anybody feels about Art Howe, everybody wishes him well. And if the monkey is off his back all fine and good. And if the new guy comes in and the A's actually advance out of the first round, then it's good. I don't believe the managerial change will be the only reason for it.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By vinnieangelo on Sunday, October 27, 2002 - 12:23 am:

Sac, I am still waiting to know what the hell this means..Can ya help me out?

--------------------------------------------------
Vinnie ,

i don't know you seem more qualified than me read your post again , time to hang up the drums.
--------------------------------------------------

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By ronc on Sunday, October 27, 2002 - 11:25 am:

I'm glad Howe is gone. I'd given up trying to understand Howe's style of management a long time ago. To me he is an average manager who was fortunate to have Beane, Peterson and three #1 starting pitchers. I used to buy into this Beane control freak stuff but not any more. The passive style was coming from Howe. Oak4, you're right it was Macha who spotted the potential out-of-order at bat.

I don't wish he fails in New York but if he does fail he has $9.4 million to fall back on.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By resin8 on Sunday, October 27, 2002 - 04:16 pm:

Dickey's article was classic. I'm tired of Howe's conservative management style. Certainly there are no guarantees that the A's will better last seasons performance, but heck, a change was in order...and better a coach than a key player.

Incidentally, what do you guys think about the A's moving Lidle and/or Dye in the offseason. I think both guys have been key, but given their salaries and the fact that they're not one of the key five (Zito, Huddy, Mulder, Miggy, and Chavvy), I could see one or both of them leaving. I like Lidle and thought he got shafted by only pitching one inning of the postseason, but you know it might be cool to package him out. We've got that kid Arnold in AA and I heard he's the real deal. Frankly, if the A's work on the Bulle and get a leadoff man (or re–sign Durham) we'll be fine. Lastly, despite my dislike for Howe's style, Bosley should have been the first to go. Peace. Go Rally Monkeys! Screw Puffy, he needs to hit the road like Mace.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By kbailey3131 on Sunday, October 27, 2002 - 04:39 pm:

Despite the fact that I'm not even sure any of the key five are actually considered key in the auserity program masquerading as a salary budget...Lidle and Dye probably do not serve out the terms of their contract. Dye pretty much said he didn't expect to when the A's were shaking up the clubhouse in May. However, giving him that salary last year and essentially proclaiming him the guy they were going to use as one of the offensive cornerstones, what sort of validity would anything Beane says have if Dye ends up traded at some point for "financial reasons". Would people really believe there is any longevity in store for any of the key five? That really is starting to become a farce as far as I'm concerned and they haven't even started selling them off yet.

Lidle was a pretty solid starter this 2nd half and as far as I'm concerned Lilly needs to prove to me that he can hold up a full season as a 4th or 5th starter before I entrust him with the ball at the expense of Lidle.

But the had better bring some offense in if we're going to part ways with offense and defense in RF. Adam Piatt better be on his way out too, neither he nor Byrnes is an every day player.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Sunday, October 27, 2002 - 07:23 pm:

Monte Poole weighs in on Howe

http://www.dailyreviewonline.com/Stories/0,1413,88%257E10984%257E952728,00.html

Article Last Updated:
Sunday, October 27, 2002 - 4:20:42 AM MST


Disappointment of A's fans in Art Howe is misguided

THE DANCING may be winding down for some A's fans, but the singing shall continue.
Hallelujah! The A's, freed from the idiot's grip, are on their way.


No longer must they contend with Art Howe loitering in the dugout, standing in the way of greater success.

When the underdog Minnesota Twins bounced the A's from the postseason, somebody had to pay. In the hours afterward, the reaction from the A's faithful -- and the brass, to a lesser degree -- shifted from shock to anger.

Shock because the A's possessed superior talent and a distinct advantage in playoffs experience.

Anger because Howe's brain went on vacation four weeks ahead of schedule.

The A's themselves ought to know better, but a considerable portion of their fans spent two weeks whining about how Howe had become a liability.

Howe needed to go, many felt, or the A's would never win it all. Such irresponsible, misguided lashing out often occurs in the wake of agony.

But it could not, in this case, be more misplaced.

To know the A's -- and some other teams -- is to know no major decision is made solely by the manager. The A's were not Art Howe's team, and they were never going to be Art Howe's team.

They're not likely to be Ken Macha's team, either, even with a deal apparently in place for Howe's former chief lieutenant to accept the job.

Because the most influential figure in Oakland's baseball organization is general manager Billy Beane. No one else is close. The team follows his blueprint, which happens to have his fingerprints all over it.

These are players collected by Billy, trying to execute Billy's strategy, playing for a manager who prudently complies with Billy's philosophy.

The emphasis on patience at the plate? That's Billy.

The infatuation with the three-run homer? Billy, too.

The routine eschewing of the sacrifice bunt? Billy, again.

The lack of desire for stolen bases? Yep.

When the victories come, as they have for the past three regular seasons, the design is a wonderful thing.

But when the victories don't come, as in the past three postseasons, it is ... the manager's fault?

Understand, Beane has done a miraculous job building a contending team with Steve Schott's pocket change. Knowing Schott's A's will never, ever be able to afford to sign a four- or five-tool player in his prime, the GM finds men with fewer gifts, and he's willing to sacrifice speed and, often, defense.

There is a reason why Oakland's roster always will have an abundance of players with very apparent flaws.

Howe understood that, so he went along with the program -- even though he played NL ball and personally prefers that league's more aggressive style.

Yet Oakland's success is always attributed to Beane, while its shortcomings almost always slap against Howe's bald head.

Heck, there are fans who still remain furious with Howe for his "mishandling" of the pitching staff down the stretch and in the ALDS.

They want to know why Howe didn't juggle his rotation to allow left-handers Barry Zito and Mark Mulder two starts apiece against a Twins team that struggled against lefties.

They want to know why Howe used closer Billy Koch nine days a week.

They want to know why Howe didn't rest Miguel Tejada, why Howe stayed with Terrence Long in center field, why Howe didn't have Ray Durham stealing bases in Game 5.

Does anyone really believe the manager was conducting a series of one-man meetings, while the GM and coaches and scouts ate grilled-cheese sandwiches and watched Oprah?

It does not work that way, certainly not with the A's.

This is not Sandy Alderson, educated as an officer and an attorney, letting Tony La Russa manage the roster in any way La Russa saw fit.

This is a former player with a very clear idea of what he wants from his team, passing on his ideas to a manager he did not hire.

Sometimes the ideas work. Sometimes they don't.

But the fallout, good or bad, lands in the lap of both men.

Going back to the regular season, I wondered why Howe stayed so long with David Justice in the cleanup spot of the batting order. DJ wasn't driving in runs, wasn't hitting with power, wasn't making an impact.

But, deep down, I knew why.

Because no one in the organization had more faith in Justice than Beane, who had made several attempts to acquire the veteran before succeeding last winter, it's not that hard to deduce why Justice and his $7 million salary were in the middle of the batting order.

In the postgame quiet after the Game 5 defeat, after most players staggered into the evening in a trance, Beane sat in the coaches office, mounting exasperation evident in every word, grimace and fidget.

He said the offense wasn't the problem. He did not question strategy. He said the A's lost because they didn't outpitch the Twins.

Beane also implied a willingness to tweak his philosophy, having seen it flourish in the regular season only to come up dry in October.

The GM saw the impact Durham, who offers the element of speed, had on the lineup during the postseason. Though Durham is a free agent who can command a salary beyond that which the A's normally pay, Beane made it clear he wanted Durham back.

It was the closest thing to a concession that, maybe, the A's can't win a World Series without modifying the blueprint.

Three weeks later, the only substantive alteration has involved the manager. Howe is leaving, with Macha the desired replacement.

None of which will change how the A's will play baseball in 2003. As long as Billy is the GM, they will play the game the way he wants them to.

Monte Poole can be reached at (510) 208-6461 or by e-mail at mpoole@angnewspapers.com .

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By kbailey3131 on Sunday, October 27, 2002 - 10:08 pm:

and that tweaking could never come with Art Howe in the dugout, Howe had to go for BB to save face when the A's start running more and become aggressive and fundamental base runners. When the A's paint "2002 Western Division Champs" on their outfield wall for all to see, they will recognize the hollowness of that distinction when the team down I-5 hoists its World Champion flag.

I also sense a pattern with players Beane covets and his dogged allegiance to them. Ted Lilly is his next golden child. Surprise anybody why there was such a sense of urgency on getting him, rehabbing him after 2 mos on the shelf, and putting him in key spots of the ALDS? Twice?!?

Aw yes Mr. Beane, the oneus is on you now. You'll have your man, you grant him the freedom to call the shots (maybe), but it better work. 2003 is another pivotal moment for this franchise. Your owner better step up to the plate and allow you to keep Tejada, Durham and get a quality CF.

God am I glad to see people calling it like it is! If he and Schott didn't go off like they did, things would still be hunky dory. But the curtain on OZ came off and maybe the A's will be better for it. Viva Poole!!!!!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By rocket on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 09:40 am:

Nice article by Poole, it remains to be
seen though if Durham or a player like
him will be signed/acquired and if the
basic philosophy will change. I have my
doubts BB will change his basic philosophy.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By ronc on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 11:36 am:

I thought it was a pretty lame column myself. To each his(her) own I guess. To me Poole is another one of those "Jack of all sports master of none" columnists.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 11:44 am:

Of course if Poole had trashed Art Howe such as Glenn Dickey did, blaming him for any and all that went wrong with the team, it would have been a very insighful and valid column.

But I do agree that it is to each his(her) own and the best is to wait and see what happens to the A's when Art Howe can't be blamed from the other side of the country.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By ronc on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 11:54 am:

"Of course if Poole had trashed Art Howe such as Glenn Dickey did, blaming him for any and all that went wrong with the team, it would have been a very insighful and valid column. "

Absolutely not. I put Poole, Dickey, Ratto, Peterson etc etc in the same category. These guys aren't primarily baseball writers

Hey people can dog Beane and absolve Howe from any blame but realisticly without out Beane the A's lose 90+ games a year. Plus it would have been the A's on the contraction list instead of the Twins and there would very little if any political support to save the A's.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 12:07 pm:

I have never dogged Beane and think he has been a great GM, but I just don't think Art Howe deserves to carry the blame because many things that are wrong will remain wrong with or without Art Howe as manager.

Why do I have to take sides?
Why does it have to be blaming Beane and absolving Howe? I don't think the blame can be placed on one person or one or two plays such as a pinch hitting or pinch running mistake. Mistakes, like injuries are all part of the game and occur on both sides and in all teams.

I feel there is no need to use Howe as a scapegoat when the team is what it is, a team. Decisions taken by the organization which involved Beane, Howe and coaches and the performance of the team (players) have to be looked as a group which failed to compete in three post seasons.

I just don't believe that changing a manager will be the solution to all the problems. It is a much more complex issue and those who want to simplify and use Howe as the source of all that went wrong are in for a rude awakening.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By ronc on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 12:16 pm:

I get it. Anyone who doesn't agree with you is simple and in for a big surprise :-(

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 12:28 pm:

I get it. Anyone who doesn't agree with you is simple and in for a big surprise :-(

Ron, all I said is that I believe there were other factors other than Howe for the losses in post season, including other decision makers and players themselves.

I really don't try to or care if you agree or disagree with me. Just said what I believe, that is all.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By ronc on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 12:40 pm:

Just teasing ya Lil

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 12:45 pm:

Well, at least this time you didn't tell me to go root for the Mets. That was a real low blow you know... If I didn't like you so much I would have gotten much more upset :(

It's bad enough that I have all these Giants friens mad at me because I happy they lost. I've gotten so much hate may that I feel like hiding.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By ronc on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 01:00 pm:

"Well, at least this time you didn't tell me to go root for the Mets"
LOL. I was always more of an NFL fan but a good friend of mine is a Mets fan and in the mid 80s he got me interested in baseball. So if I was to root for an NL team it would be the Mets : )

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By kbailey3131 on Monday, October 28, 2002 - 02:04 pm:

Bet your bottom dollar that the philosophy will change because Howe is now gone...Bet the house, car and farm...It will have nothing to do with a change in philosophy from Howe to Macha either. Art has managed with small ball before. And Durham is now the protypical leadoff hitter, will be as expensive as Damon would have been to keep. Beane however sold the world on Jeremy Giambi being his man at the top of the lineup because of his sabr ratings. "We don't need speed" blah blah blah. Well well well, seems the offense worked out better when it did have speed, and a guy who can do what Durham can do. Maybe having more speed up and down the lineup aint bad. Maybe having people who can bunt aint bad.

Of course getting the players in here gives Beane a star to pin on his lapel, but his inability to let the people he pays to coach and manage do their things and bowing to a strategy that goes only station to station rather than aggressively running the bases and putting more pressure on the defense? It can't possibly be all Howe's doing and if it was, why is Beane so willing to keep the rest of the staff here? These would presumably be the same coaches working to make the same decisions and execute the style that Howe imposed wouldn't they?

But bet it all that the A's have a different offensive look to them. That is an absolute given.


Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.


 

Questions? Comments? Corrections? Please contact info@oaklandfans.com.