Okay, it’s always time to second-guess the Cubs. Or 1,908th-guess the Cubs. (Get it? Cuz of 1908? Get it? Okay, I’ll shut up.)
But since the Cubs interviewed and rejected a manager currently managing in the World Series, it’s particularly low-hanging fruit right about now. ESPNChicago’s Jon Greenberg goes ahead and plucks it.
First, I must apologize to my former colleague. I assumed he would talk about how masterful Girardi has been in guiding this $200 million payroll with a steady hand without mention of 2008, when the Yankees failed to make the postseason for the first time since realignment. But he doesn’t. He talks about how masterful Girardi was in guiding the 2006 Marlins to a record 12 games better than the 2006 Cubs with 16 percent of the Cubs’ payroll (Source: BaseballChronology.com).
Greenberg talks about being in Girardi’s corner in the 2006-07 offseason and disliking the move to Lou Piniella. Why? Piniella is clearly not a long-term solution (a “hired gun,” per Greenberg) and previously had no connection to Chicago or the Cubs. Meanwhile, Girardi is a Peoria native who played for Northwestern and came up with the Cubs. I felt much the same way back when the Cubs were wrestling with this decision.
I mean, Girardi was the perfect choice, especially considering the White Sox had just won a World Series with a young, outspoken, popular former player as their manager. The Cubs went with Piniella, and Greenberg and I groaned. We then ate our respective crow in 2007 and 2008 as the Cubs finished first place in back-to-back seasons for the first time in 100 years. But this season, they underperformed despite their third consecutive winning season. So we second-guess.
Frankly, I’m going the route that Cubs fans certainly can’t complain about three consecutive winning seasons and back-to-back division titles. Sure, the sweeps stunk, but what manager could make Ryan Dempster not walk seven guys or Ted Lilly not give up home runs? And as I’ve parroted on a couple of occasions this offseason, what manager could have blessed Aramis Ramirez with the health to play 150 games this season? Not Joe Girardi. But Greenberg disagrees:
“Would Girardi have been able to corral [Milton] Bradley? Would he have put a shoe to [Carlos] Zambrano’s keister and stopped the cycle of babying the volatile pitcher? I’d surmise yes for the first and yes on both counts for the second. As good as Lou has been at managing lineups, he’s not the same guy who threw down with Rob Dibble in the clubhouse. Girardi wouldn’t have let some things fly here.”
I would now insert a rant disagreeing with this vehemently, but Greenberg oddly follows that paragraph with this one: “No one can say what Girardi would have done with the Cubs. Odds are the Cubs went as far as they were capable, as far as the players could take them.”
Right, so why did you just do that? Apart from one paragraph going off the reservation, Greenberg makes a good point as far as the Cubs setting themselves up for the future. If the 2010 season is as disappointing as 2009 was, Piniella will likely wash his hands of the matter. Greenberg says Piniella will probably be gone no matter what, joining “the Yankees’ payroll in Tampa.” So the Ricketts family needs to look for something new, if for no other reason than Cubs fans are sick of re-treads.
Why must a manager have Major League experience to manage the Cubs? It didn’t seem to do Jims Lefebvre or Riggleman any good. Or Don Baylor, for that matter. Piniella played for the Yankees in the 70s and he’s getting sick of the Chicago media. So take a chance, Ricketts family. Just throw a bunch of names against the wall and see what sticks. The organization has already proved it will try just about anything.
