Steve_S. summed up what a lot of us are feeling here lately when he said, “Personally, the last time I was pleased with the Mets manager was around 1990 with Davey Johnson. Three decades ago!”
Anyone who’s read this blog for awhile knows how I feel about Johnson. He was smart, knew his stuff, was tough and wasn’t afraid to tell either players or management to take a hike. And partly because of that style, he wasn’t a one or two-stop manager. Instead, Johnson skippered five different squads, taking four of them to the post-season.
In 17 years as a manager, Johnson compiled a 1372-1071 mark, good for a .562 winning percentage. Over 17 years, Johnson’s average teams won 91 games. Since the Mets kicked him to the curb, they’ve won 91 games three times in 31 years. This is what happens when you stop looking for managers who are “smart” and “tough” and instead look for guys who cash checks by being malleable and great communicators.
Luis Rojas is praised to the mountaintop for his communication skills. While I’m willing to wager that no one reading this has ever spoken with Rojas and directly witnessed his communication skills in action – I’d like to propose that we all agree that he is, indeed, a great communicator. Does that make his 96-104 record as Mets manager acceptable?
Without a doubt, Rojas has been placed in less-than-ideal circumstances. He got the gig after Brodie Van Wagenen’s initial hire had to be replaced before being at the helm for one game. Then came the pandemic. And this year saw a wave of injuries no one should have to suffer. But none of those things are why most of us are down on Rojas as a manager.
Instead, it’s the strategic moves he makes that continually have us shaking our heads.
New conventional wisdom is that strategic moves don’t matter as much in evaluating a manager. Perhaps that’s true. But please show me the study where a manager’s ability to charm the press and players with his verbal eloquence has ever made the difference in winning one single game.
The bottom line is this: You cannot win a game in the clubhouse or in front of the microphone that you lost on the field. So, the players in uniform should have their top – if not sole – priority be doing what it takes to win on the field. A manager makes a bonehead move in front of the press, the GM can always come in and fix that. A manager makes a bonehead move in a game – well, there’s nothing anyone can do to change that. No one can undo moves that resulted in a loss. That “L” is permanent.
We need a WPA-style stat to grade specific managerial moves. What was the impact of letting Edwin Diaz face a hitter with an .870 OPS with the winning run on third base instead of a hitter with a .505 OPS?
One of the criticisms I faced early and often with the start of this blog was my devotion to quantification over all else. Show me a better way to win consistently and that will be my new focus. Rod Tidwell got Jerry Maguire to shout, “Show me the money!” Show me the proof that being a good communicator means more than being utterly clueless over which batter to face with the game on the line.
Show me the damn money on that one.
I feel your pain, Brian. Rojas’s style has not translated to playing better on the field. The Mets lack grit and toughness, and they lack the urgency to win a tough playoff race.
Rich Hill was two pitches away form allowing no runs… both came on 0-2 counts and we should expect a wiser approach from a “crafty” 41-year old journeyman. Now imagine if the Mets wind up beating Alcantra 1-0 after Conforto’s HR… that would be a game that the serious teams win.
Rojas does not win those games.
I would love to see a WPA type of stat for managers. I think it would be interesting to see, but I also think that it would tend to be a pretty low number in either direction. I tend to think that managerial decisions have less of an impact on games than most fans think. Games are decided by players on the field for the most part. That’s not to say that managers don’t make good or bad moves, and the pinch hitting and decisions on who to pitch to from last night can certainly be criticized, but generally most decisions are grey and are not cut and dry. If the Mets hitters were hitting like we expected this year and the pitching was the same as it’s been, they’d have run away with the division by now. Rojas has made some questionable decisions, and bad ones last night in must win games are what get you fired, but if they score more than a run, they win.
I’ve been pleased with a Mets manager more recently than Davey Johnson, specifically Bobby Valentine. He often seemed a step ahead of the opposition, and he put the 2000 team in the World Series, with a roster that was not the best in the NL
I’ll grant you that Valentine was the second best manager of the Mets since the mid-1980s, but I was no fan.
I remember screaming at the TV as he left pitchers in too long sometimes.
One such time was when we lost in the playoffs to the Braves in 1999 as Valentine stayed with Benitez and then Rogers in extra innings in the last game. The former pitcher didn’t have it and the latter one was left in to walk in the winning run with the bases loaded.
Always interesting as a discussion with this topic. I think what seem to be missing is alist of managerial duties that the FO actually grades on. We as fans have no say, and see the game in its most granular sense free of any game planning meetings, information about injuries or nagging things, the role of the analytical team in tactical and strategic decision making, and FO oversight.
Absent all this, we see the guy on the top step making a pinch hit choice or sending in a reliever and think thats all that is in the decision at the moment.
I dont think there is any question that managers are managed. Even still Rojas does deserve his share of the crap we see.
However, reality dictates he is not between the lines where the vast majority of mistakes and failures are made that lead to losses. He is not responsible for the RISP matter, deGroms arm, a reckless, pure HR swing approach, base-running gaffes that spin your head etc etc. I think games are lost by the players, not the skipper – unless he only played 8 people. I do think the clubhouse toxicity is on Rojas, and for that he deserves to be evaluated particularly harshly, to the point of being let go. That is his domain, and the look is terrible.
It is worth looking back on the record as a measure to be sure. And what I see is an Alderson regime characterized by failure and incompetence and negligence. Developing a team approach has been an unmitigated disaster. The personnel selections make the Mets a laughing stock. Remember, Alderson wanted Trevor Bauer in the worst way. And lets look back on the Mets record under the oppressive Alderson years, better yet, lets not.
Fire Rojas. Sure, I dont care. But the root cause of the spreading virus lays at the hands of Alderson. He needs to be fired immediately.
Then, clean house for players not getting it done, while remembering its about the name on the front of the jersey, not the back.
A few more two cent observations –
Most everyone loved Davey and his swashbuckling anti-establishment style. I did and do too. But, like many things from yore, Davey’s legend has grown some. He was a great Met manager, no doubt, but he made his mistakes, and to some degree was a product of his time…prior to social media, daily pre-game/post games on TV, and much of the technology that allows all of us to both micro-manage games. Also, the DJ Met team reflected the excesses of the 80s, and while he did win a title (with a huge thanks to the Red Sox), he also had a team that easily could have won several, so he takes some knocks for his part in both allowing and facilitating the craziness and lack of discipline.
Regarding Chris F’s point, I wholehearted agree that it is mostly on the players, as the manager does not play. His pinch hitters could get the hit, his bullpen guys the out, etc. But, the manager is accountable for those on field decisions, especially glaring errors. But, the same is true for the GM. Yes, Alderson has his blemishes, but if deGrom and Carrasco made 80% of their starts, and the bats were 90% of their annual averages, most would not be calling for heads. 90% to 95% of the Met issues this season are on the players’ performances and injuries. That doesn’t mean the manager is absolved and gets to come back, but the root cause is on the guys between the lines…and the catchers.
I think one other thing about the Davey Johnson era is that you cant have “Franken-baseball”. That was also a time without huge analytics depts. Managers could bluster their way through games and seasons relying on feel. If you want that kind of skipper, then you wont get the other stuff. That was the dig on Dusty Baker, who I think would have been a fabulous manager. He doesnt need some snot nosed economy major from Penn State telling him when to take out the starter, even if its the third time through (thats the new 100 pitch replacement).
I dont think you can have baseball 40 years ago, and true outcomes baseball run by the bean counters. Exactly zero FOs would give that much power to the mgr.
I am fond of him too, but it is quite ironic that Davey Johnson is revered for his old school persona and macho managing style. Compared to the modern manager and game, that’s certainly true. But that image has been somewhat a manifestation of time. In his day, he was actually a “nerd” manager. He himself was the snotty-nosed math major, whose use of computers and statistics was looked down upon by many of his contemporaries, while simultaneously providing him with some of that cockiness. He was a computer geek at a time before even accountants were computer geeks. With the Mets, he essentially had an analytics department, establishing lineups and making many in game moves based on percentages determined by head to head career averages. Had his methods been questioned in post-games after losses on television, they’d be regularly rerun on Mets Classics.
Rojas’s strategic moves makes me scratch my head. To name a few, pulling the starting pitcher early when he is cruising or using a front tier reliever when they a four run lead or last’s night debacle in the 10th inning makes me reach out for the Head and Shoulders.
This team was 10 over .500 and didn’t put the division away. They had opportunities in the past week to cut the lead. There are many culprits to blame and one of them is Rojas.
So let’s recap. The order of blame for the state of the team at this moment is:
1. Sandy A.
2. Luis Rojas
3. Lindor (not his fault they overpaid him, but he sucks comparatively.)
4. DeGrom’s injury. Blame Gary Cohen… jinxed him by starting every sentence with Jacob deGrom…
5. Conforto. Too many bad ABs to even recount.
6. Dom Smith: lost his intensity somewhere in April… just doesn’t like playing LF, I guess.
7. Jeff McNeil: forgot how to hit… not strong enough to be a lower hitter.
8. E. Diaz: grow up. Learn how to pitch. Harness your raw talent, you’re not in high school anymore.
9. Familia: not true, I just love to blame him.
10. Me: despite my best intentions, I’m cursed, I’m a Mets fan.
Love your response. Alderson needs to retire. Rojas needs to go. The team just has a bad makeup. It needs to get really shaken up. Step one, let’s see if Cohen has the stones to dump Alderson. That would be a good start. What I don’t like about Rojas is that he is lifeless. I like a manager with some fire in his belly.
Brian, I always knew Davey was great, but never knew exactly why until now. La Foca earned an BA degree from trinity University in… hint: subject starts with “M”. Note that mum called him that because she said he looked like a walrus