Terry Ryan: Joe Maddon had "sincere interest" in Twins job

[Otto von Ballpark]

... except for the one little detail that a good man was going to be fired as a direct consequence, in order for there to be a job for him to take right now.

 

I don't suspect tampering on the part of the Cubs; I expect they were as surprised as anyone to learn of his sudden availability, and they moved on it fast. 

 

But I can't get past this aspect of the deal, both from the team's perspective and from Maddon's. 

 

If Maddon looked ahead to the next time he would accidentally run into Renteria, at spring training or whatever, and the awkwardness didn't make him ask himself, "is this really the person I want to be?", well, I don't know what to say.

The Cubs front office spoke to Renteria before talking to Maddon:

http://voices.suntimes.com/sports/inside-the-cubs/cubs-announce-they-have-fired-rick-renteria/

 

I believe Maddon (and his agent) also publicly denied any initial interest in the job out of respect for Renteria currently holding the position, at least until they were sure Renteria had been consulted about a possible change (sorry I don't have a link handy).  Absolutely nothing happened behind anyone's back.

 

Not sure what else you expect.  TR said in August that Gardy will be back as manager in 2015 too -- should their future meetings be awkward?  Heck, from my vantage point, it's almost a certainty that TR hired Molitor last winter with the intention of replacing Gardenhire if the team didn't improve, even before his contract ended.

 

To say the two situations are completely different from an ethical perspective, given the facts we know, looks like some kind of homerism.

[alskntwnsfn]

If somebody wanted to hire you for your dream job and said we want YOU not the guy we have now. Why on earth would you care what they do with him? That's not up to Maddon. Sure you can feel bad for the guy, but there's nothing he can do. The Cubs wanted Maddon as their manager. End of story. I'm having a hard time understanding why there's this made up controversy when Renteria is let go but nobody says anything when dozens of other managers get fired. It looks like some people want to throw stones at the Cubs FO and Maddon I think. 

[Mike Sixel]

Good point.....is Molitor wrong for taking Gardy's job?

[jokin]

OK, I guess we will have different definitions / opinions.  Go back and re-read all the related posts and tell me people weren't overreacting (the nicest word I can come up with) over the potential non-Twins involvement with regards to Maddon.

 

I'm fine with whatever opinions people have abut the Twins and their successes / failures.  Just be real about it.  When people spout off and then it turns out to be not true, just own up - don't make excuses.

 

"Make excuses."  Who and what are you talking about here?  I think I stated a pretty reasonable case for what likely happened- and a big part of a GMs headhunting job in getting the best- is getting the sit-down interview.  You take the Twins ex post facto spin as gospel, check my initial post from Nick's article the day Maddon went on the market....  I pointed out in advance, that the Twins would never even get to the interview stage, as this type of hire was completely out of Terry's league for pulling off-  even as multiple stories were coming out that Maddon wasn't necessarily seeking a manager's job.  

 

This was exactly the type of hire- in some managerial capacity- that this club desperately needs- a talented, experienced, advanced-analytical set of eyes from outside the organization.  When this level of talent suddenly comes on the market, it was Ryan's job to sell this vision to Pohlad.  (In some respects, the D-Backs current situation might serve as the model here).

[jokin]

The Cubs front office spoke to Renteria before talking to Maddon:

http://voices.suntimes.com/sports/inside-the-cubs/cubs-announce-they-have-fired-rick-renteria/

 

I believe Maddon (and his agent) also publicly denied any initial interest in the job out of respect for Renteria currently holding the position, at least until they were sure Renteria had been consulted about a possible change (sorry I don't have a link handy).  Absolutely nothing happened behind anyone's back.

 

Not sure what else you expect.  TR said in August that Gardy will be back as manager in 2015 too -- should their future meetings be awkward?  Heck, from my vantage point, it's almost a certainty that TR hired Molitor last winter with the intention of replacing Gardenhire if the team didn't improve, even before his contract ended.

 

To say the two situations are completely different from an ethical perspective, given the facts we know, looks like some kind of homerism.

 

Great post, and add in the fact that there is a continued undercurrent of reporting from some sources that Pohlad was pushing Molitor to be hired a year ago (as the heir-apparent-at-some--future-point?), and then again in August, forcing Ryan to retract his public vote of confidence for Gardy.  

[jokin]

If somebody wanted to hire you for your dream job and said we want YOU not the guy we have now. Why on earth would you care what they do with him? That's not up to Maddon. Sure you can feel bad for the guy, but there's nothing he can do. The Cubs wanted Maddon as their manager. End of story. I'm having a hard time understanding why there's this made up controversy when Renteria is let go but nobody says anything when dozens of other managers get fired. It looks like some people want to throw stones at the Cubs FO and Maddon I think. 

 

*** #1 post for the thread ***

[Steven Buhr]

This kind of smells to me like one of those, "breaking unwriten rules," kind of things, where the Cubs and Maddon are concerned.

 

I know there is this perception that there's some sort of "brotherhood" of managers out there and maybe that's part of the whole romanticism of baseball, which is fine.

 

I think maybe there's also a recognition within the industry that managers are, "hired to be fired," so when one member of the fraternity is viewed as having precipitated a dismissal from a job that, by its nature, is already gripped tenuously, it's not viewed positively by that manager's peers. Certainly, if you build a resume by continuously plotting to replace sitting managers, you're not likely to build lasting respect in the business.

 

All of that said, in pretty much any business, you will find decisions being made routinely to replace an executive or manager when it would be viewed as a notable improvement. I'd love to be sitting here knowing that, even though my performance reviews have been very good, if my company decides to replace me tomorrow, I'll still collect my full salary for the next two years. But most of us don't have the protection of a multi-year contract with that kind of security. So, no, I'm not shedding tears for Renteria.

[ashbury]

Good point.....is Molitor wrong for taking Gardy's job?

Too many strawmen now.  I'm putting this topic aside.  I'm not heavily invested in it - as Brock said, it's ugly, and that's why I brought it up.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Too many strawmen now.  I'm putting this topic aside.  I'm not heavily invested in it - as Brock said, it's ugly, and that's why I brought it up.

I get your point, on the very surface of it all, it looks like the Cubs and/or Maddon could have done Renteria wrong on some level.

 

But if you look past that at all, just reading the more detailed reporting coming out of Chicago, it's pretty clear that the whole thing was above the level and SOP.  Ultimately, a manager of a losing team didn't finish a multi-year contract.  Still disappointing on some level for Renteria, but as others mentioned, he's guaranteed the cash, and he will likely get another opportunity because everyone understands the context: Renteria wasn't the reason the Cubs lost in 2014, and he only got replaced with the highest-paid (and arguably most-respected?) manager currently in the game.  Nothing "ugly" about any of it.

 

If you are suggesting the only honorable thing would have been for Maddon to pass on the job, and/or the Cubs to pass on Maddon, that really has no basis in reality.

[jay]

There is little (no?) precedent for replacing a sitting manager only after another candidate comes available. The standard is determining the need for a change and then finding the best person to fill the vacancy. Whether the Cubs told Renteria it was coming or not doesn't remove the "ugly" that many people see in the situation.

[Otto von Ballpark]

There is little (no?) precedent for replacing a sitting manager only after another candidate comes available. The standard is determining the need for a change and then finding the best person to fill the vacancy. Whether the Cubs told Renteria it was coming or not doesn't remove the "ugly" that many people see in the situation.

Just off the top of my head, wasn't Grady Little fired by the Dodgers only after Joe Torre stepped down from the Yankees job?  Proven top managers hitting the market is pretty rare by itself.  It seems more a sample size issue than one that proves the "ugliness" of such an action.  How about we expand the sample by looking at other sports?  I don't think anyone bats an eyelash when this happens in a major college sport (except, perhaps, if they were using public funds to buy out the departing coach... or if the attempted upgrade seems futile -- I'm looking at you, Golden Gophers ).

 

In any case, it seems like a distinction without a difference to me.  You're still talking about the same personnel business where TERRY RYAN of all people, one of the most universally respected men in the game, fires a man one month after saying he wouldn't.  Circumstances change, not usually as suddenly or quickly as a manager opt-out, but they do change.  (Heck, one could argue that the Twins may have "waited" to replace Gardy until Molitor was "available" in the sense that he was willing to return to the dugout full-time.)  The definitive reasoning for firing Renteria is probably better than many managers receive upon their exit.

 

Again, you can feel bad for Renteria (and I do) without any attributing anything "ugly" to Maddon or the Cubs.  And you can also assert that it's an unwise use of resources for the Cubs too.  But it's a real stretch to call anything "ugly" here in the sense of unethical or dishonorable.

[one_eyed_jack]

What the Cubs did doesn't totally sit right with me but Renteria is a big boy and he's been around the game long enough to understand that it can be ruthless at times.  I'll give Theo Epstein a little credit for being honest about it, he came right out and admitted that this wasn't fair to Rick.  A lot of organizations would have thrown him under the bus instead.

 

I'm still not sold on this idea that the Twins should have immediately gone to Maddon and offered him whatever money and authority it would have taken to get him here.  I like Maddon, and I would have been happy had they hired him.   But I don't see much reason to get all worked up over the fact that they didn't.

[jokin]

  But I don't see much reason to get all worked up over the fact that they didn't.

 A lot of strong reasons have been presented for aggressively pursuing the most qualified available talent on the market.

[one_eyed_jack]

 A lot of strong reasons have been presented for aggressively pursuing the most qualified available talent on the market.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree there.  I like Maddon, and I appreciate that players respect him, and that he's willing to do some unconventional things.

 

But I don't view him as a "do whatever it takes to get him" candidate.

 

His career winning percentage is 8th among active managers.  Not that it's a stat that tells the whole story, but it does not suggest to me that we're dealing with, say, the baseball equivalent of Greg Popovich opting out of his contract with the Spurs and going on the open market.

 

In general, I think there's only so much a manager can do to win games.  A bad manager can make bad moves, lose the clubhouse and turn a team with 90 win talent into a 70 win team.  But no matter how good of a manager you are,you're not going to win 90 games with 70 win talent.

 

I'd prefer Maddon over Molitor, but I seriously doubt it would make much of a difference in terms of wins and losses.

[The Wise One]

"So, Mister" [looks down at paper] "Maddon, tell me a little about yourself.  I see you were most recently manager for the" [looks down at paper] "Tampa Bay Rays.  Tell me, is that one of the minor league teams for the Tampa Bay Devil Rays?"

What makes you think Ryan reads the paper? You know they preach don't read those things.

FWIW some day we will hear some manager say to his players "don't go on the internet. All they say is garbage about you."

[jay]

Again, you can feel bad for Renteria (and I do) without any attributing anything "ugly" to Maddon or the Cubs. And you can also assert that it's an unwise use of resources for the Cubs too. But it's a real stretch to call anything "ugly" here in the sense of unethical or dishonorable.

Disagree with it all you want and make the case for otherwise, but the fact remains that plenty of people see some amount of "ugly" in it given the context of this specific situation.

 

There is zero reason to think Renteria wouldn't be coaching the Cubs next year otherwise. This pure cutthroat approach to the manager position is "ugly". For the record, the context of Little/Torre was quite different.

[Otto von Ballpark]

There is zero reason to think Renteria wouldn't be coaching the Cubs next year otherwise. This pure cutthroat approach to the manager position is "ugly". For the record, the context of Little/Torre was quite different.

Every situation is different, certainly.  And I wouldn't have wanted Little as my manager.  But Little was pushed aside on October 30, after the World Series, and Torre was hired almost immediately as his replacement.  The parting came late, and the replacement came quick, much like Renteria.

 

Frankly it is incredibly rare for a top manager to become an active free agent.  You can't use the history of such rare occurrences to cast aspersions on teams or people just because they're participating in a rare event.  Heck, the Twins apparently called on Maddon too, even after a month's worth of interviews with other candidates, including their hometown manager-in-waiting -- does that nudge them into the "cutthroat" and "ugly" group too?  I felt a little bad for Molitor about the circumstances, but I certainly am not going to blame the Twins or Maddon -- that's the business, the same business where TR has to quickly flip-flop on his public word.

[nicksaviking]

Disagree with it all you want and make the case for otherwise, but the fact remains that plenty of people see some amount of "ugly" in it given the context of this specific situation.

 

There is zero reason to think Renteria wouldn't be coaching the Cubs next year otherwise. This pure cutthroat approach to the manager position is "ugly". For the record, the context of Little/Torre was quite different.

 

It might be ugly, but it seems to me the managers who get fired due to what may seem like unjust reasoning tend to get other chances.  Freddi Gonzalez, Davey Johnson, Terry Francona, Ned Yost and Buck Schowalter come to mind.  Of course your Grady Liddle example would be an exception.

[Otto von Ballpark]

It might be ugly, but it seems to me the managers who get fired due to what may seem like unjust reasoning tend to get other chances.  Freddi Gonzalez, Davey Johnson, Terry Francona, Ned Yost and Buck Schowalter come to mind.  Of course your Grady Liddle example would be an exception.

Good point.  Heck, Joe Girardi got fired after winning Manager of the Year.