Joe Torre out as Yankees manager

by coochorama on Oct 18, 2007 4:49 PM EDT Comment 58 comments

Apparently the Yankees offered him a one year contract for $5 million dollars with performance bonuses pushing the contract to two years and (I'm assuming) $16 million dollars, but he turned it down. As a Yankee fan, I'm happy that Torre said no for his sake mentally, but I'm sorry to see him go, overall. It'll be interesting if the Yankees go Mattingly, Girardi, or with some other option. I'm hoping Girardi myself.

Your thoughts?

0 recs | Comment 58 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Posada and Rivera will walk IMO

This is the end of them. I think Joba will have to be the closer next year and the Yankees could trade someone for Jojima.

by Bravesin07 on Oct 18, 2007 4:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

re

They stay if Girardi comes in IMO. He and Jorge have a good relationship, as Girardi mentored him 1998-1999

by ScottAZ on Oct 18, 2007 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

that job can't have been much fun

the last few years. it's awful the way steinbrenner treated him toward the end there (calling him out in the papers etc.). new blood might not be an altogether bad thing for the yankees, just should have been handled better.

for the record i'd go with girardi, at least if they're committed to giving more playing time to the kids. the hardest thing might be bringing perspective back to a franchise that considers it a disaster if they don't win the world series every year. unless that changes no manager will have any "success".

"Well I believe in the soul..."

by D O on Oct 18, 2007 4:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

i agree with ALMOST everything you said...

...except that the Yankees are the only team in baseball that has it right. The point of a season is to win the World Series. This is why teams play. Maybe you take a year and a step back, but only to enhance your chance in the future.

And, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, Torre's 6 World Series appearances in 8 seasons, including 4 world championships, essentially met that mandate.

And I think that Girardi would be an exceptional fit, and place-filler till Player-Manager Jeter around 2012.

by GuyinNY on Oct 18, 2007 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

that's true BUT

the problem is that recently it seems like the yankees have it all backwards. it's as if they think they are the rightful winners every single year--that they begin spring training as a lock to win it, and the only thing that can possibly stop that from happening is some kind of screw up on the part of the manager (or a-rod). with that kind of thinking the games are about NOT losing. there's no such thing as winning anymore.

i'm not a yankee fan, so i can't speak exactly to what it's like... but that sure is how it looks.

"Well I believe in the soul..."

by D O on Oct 18, 2007 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is so stupid.

I'm not flaming you, I'm sure you're a bright guy, but I hate this stance. You don't need to win the World Series to have a successful season. How can 29 teams have unsuccessful seasons? This is so short-sighted it's insane. I'd like to say this is a NY thing, but plenty of other fan-bases (including my own Sox) seem to feel this way.

The postseason is such a crapshoot. Look at last year's Cardinals. I mean, Jeff Weaver. Jeff fricking WEAVER. Any team that has a few players play extraordinarily well in just a few games can win a world series if they make it in.

Far as I'm concerned, you can have a successful season if you make the postseason, if you win more games than you lose, if you develop some promising young players, oh, all sorts of ways.

What it comes down to is, how entertaining was your team's season? Winning is usually the most entertaining thing (though losing can be captivating, as Sox fans can attest), but plenty of other things are entertaining.

I think more baseball fans should look at games on TV the same way they do in person. If you go to a game, to a certain degree, you're just so happy to have gone to a game. Baseball is just such a unique, idiosyncratic, and suddenly and unexpectedly dramatic. You can hang on every pitch because so many different things can happen at any time.

Granted, maybe I go too far the other way for some. Maybe I cut my team too much slack for the 2004 World Series win, which makes everything else kinda gravy. I mean, hell, I consider the Devil Rays as having a successful season this year, and they just finished in last of 30 teams for the second consecutive year. But look at that young talent! This year was a such a great glimpse of the future, and had great unexpected things like Carlos fricking Pena. How can you not be entertained at that, at the prospect of maybe possibly theoretically having three great AL East teams, one tiny payroll hanging with Cold War Behemoths?

Maybe I just love baseball for baseball's sake more than most people. But I think many, many baseball fans ought to try to relax and enjoy things for what they are. Maybe we can meet halfway.

by abbreviatedman on Oct 19, 2007 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

dude

when your payroll is 200+ million and most teams are around 50 million making the playoffs is expected.

Based on that what is a good season? Only the WS win is a good season. Maybe a hard fought loss in the WS would be fine. But anything less is a disaster.

by pedrophile on Oct 19, 2007 2:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You have a point, BUT!

I understand how a $220 million payroll leads to superhigh expectations. But the truth is, the playoffs are such a crapshoot. The weird thing isn't that the highest payroll in baseball hasn't made it out of the first round in three years. The stranger thing is that they won 14 of 16 (I think) playoff serieseses from '96 to '01. Even with by far the best team (and they weren't in '00, incidentally, with their 87 wins), it's highly unlikely to essentially never lose a postseason series. So your expectations should be that the Yankees make the playoffs with that kind of payroll, but you really can't demand to be the best team out of eight teams over any short period.

That said, I totally understand how the way the Yankees spend money can lead you to only consider a championship a success. I don't think I'd feel that way even if I were a Yankee fan, but maybe I would, and you know, whatever, I won't stand in your way if you want to feel your team's season is wasted nearly every year.

No, my real problem was with how the other guy put it. "The Yankees are the only team in baseball that has it right." Nooooo thank you. There are plenty of fans of other teams who feel that way, that the only success is a championship. And I pity them, because they're going to be unhappy fans so much of the time. What's the point of being a fan if it makes you unhappy? You can argue over whether a $220 payroll makes anything less than a championship disappointing, but surely not even the $150 million Red Sox should be looked at that way. And certainly not the $65 million Indians and Rockies.

The Yankees aren't the only team that has it right. They are, at best, the only team in their situation, a situation where, maybe, the only success is the trophy. The rest of us, by and large, are enjoying the game of baseball.

by abbreviatedman on Oct 19, 2007 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Enjoyment

I find it to be terribly presumptuous of you to assume that I equate success with enjoyment. While I never explicitly delineated the difference, I will now. It is possible to have fun during a season in which you did not win the world series. However, you did fail in your task as a franchise, which is to win a world series.

It may be cliche, and it may have been parodied ad nauseum, but Herm Edwards nailed it. You play to win the game. In any non-management capacity (where profit will sometimes trump success), the sole objective of a baseball season for your team is to win a world championship or, in the case of a lost season, to further your future chances. At the end of the season, there are 29 losers and there is 1 winner. Period. End of story.

This does not mean that you cannot enjoy the ride. I'd wager that Yankee fans had more fun this year, ostensibly their biggest failure in a decade, than at any point since the 2003 season. But, you know what's a helluva more fun than a come from behind wild card? A world championship.

To deny that the sole purpose of baseball from a player/manager/fan's perspective is to win a championship is to accept mediocrity. Because the Yankee front office is the only front office which explicitly states that a World Series victory is the only acceptable measure of success for a season, the Yankee front office is the only front office which is demanding that the ultimate goal of the game be reached. I frankly wish that the Mets goal was as definitive and compelling as the Yankees goal, and I think that sort of standard (rather than some "meaningful games in September" nonesense) filters down through the system and attracts people who are similarly compelled.

The Yankees are the only team that has it right. At best, every other team is accepting mediocrity in form or another.

by GuyinNY on Oct 19, 2007 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

its weird

I live in NYC and have always been a big Yankees fan, and i agree with what you said: that you should enjoy things for what they are. I have love for baseball as a whole, I will watch any game, any team, I am huge into prospects. However, the attitude about the Yankees winning it every year..I dont know if its just a NY syndrome..you said it is other teams as well, but I do feel it is a disappointment to not win the WS. Perhaps we did it to ourselves...when you win the WS 3 years in a row, and make the post season 13 straight years you set such a high standard that there is no way to maintain it. But I am getting better...I think seeing the rise of Joba, Hughes, Kennedy, the further development of Cano, and just witnessing the insane season from A-rod made this season worth it. WS be damned. I had a lot of fun watching the Yankees this past season, and I will admit we shouldnt have advanced to the 2nd round, we were just outplayed. I tip my cap to CC and Fausto and the Indians offense...they just shut us down. I blame a good portion on Wang...I was there for game 4 when they sent us home for the off-season...and it was terrible to see in person.

Babe Ruth and Travis Snider back to back!!!

by realityconquest on Oct 19, 2007 3:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Zero chance

That Posada and Rivera leaves.

by hallofamer2000 on Oct 18, 2007 4:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

how do you know

Mo said that if Torre left his chances of going back to the Yankees drops.

by Bravesin07 on Oct 18, 2007 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

How do YOU know?

How can you be so certain that Mo and Posada leave? Yes, I know both said they were going to wait to see what happened with Torre, but it was easy for them to say that at the time since it was a huge decision on the mind of all involved. Now that it has been decided and the likely replacement is either Mattingly or Girardi - both in house guys - the reality is they are both comfortable with either and know both. It is likely that both want to be a Yankee more than being a Yankee managed by Torre. This is just my opinion, but being a Yankee fan and following them closely all year round gives me that perspective.

VTYankeesFan

by VTYankeesFan on Oct 19, 2007 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

Unlikely the Mo goes, Yankees will offer the most $$$

Posada could attract some stuning FA offers.

by elricsi on Oct 18, 2007 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

exactly

Posada and Rivera will follow the money like EVERY other professional athlete. Speculating on how much they want to come back is pointless.

by kaisertown on Oct 19, 2007 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think Mo's

comments hint at the fact that he won't take a hometown discount to stay with the Yankees, but as the Yankees are still the Yankees, they should be able to match and beat any offer on the market.

http://mvn.com/milb-yankees/

by lemonjello on Oct 19, 2007 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tony LaRussa

...just waiting in the wings...

by siddfynch on Oct 18, 2007 4:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

As a yanks fan

I would cry if they hire LaRussa. I am really hoping for Trey Hillman from AAA but hes not a big enough name so if they go for a big name I think Girardi is the best option

by Kanst42 on Oct 18, 2007 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hillman might be going to KC

He's one of the canidates along with Terry Collins.

by Bravesin07 on Oct 18, 2007 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

by coochorama on Oct 18, 2007 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

say no to Tony....

LaRussa's ego is bigger than any Yankee player, The Yanks need a manager that leaves his ego at the door such as Giradi, besides LaRrusa can't bat the pitcher 8th in the AL.

by kashman on Oct 18, 2007 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excellent news!

I think The Yanks decided to move on and met with Joe to come up with an exit strategy that saved face for everyone.

Posada and Rivera weren't going to give a home town discount and are unlikely to do anything different now that Joe is gone.

Personally, I expect Posada to have a free agent hangover season and then fade from career norms after that.

by emac2 on Oct 18, 2007 6:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

How can you say......

Offering him a pay cut "saves face for everyone" seems like a spit in the face to Torre to me.

by goalieguy on Oct 18, 2007 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

well

Then the Yankees can say they tried, and Joe gets to save face because he's walking away from the job rather than getting fired.

Jay Bruce can DISAPPEAR

by ufoboy90 on Oct 18, 2007 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Slap in the face?

He had an amazing run and when that deal expired he was given an insane deal.

He then failed to do anything in the playoffs and was still offered almost twice the next highest paid manager.

If he wants guaranteed wage increases he should join the UAW.

by emac2 on Oct 18, 2007 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Girardi is the way to go.

LaRussa would be interesting and Duncan would make it worth any headaches but I think Girardi would be the best for a lot of reasons that shouldn't matter but usually do.

by emac2 on Oct 18, 2007 6:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think it was time.

Joe's largest accomplishment aside from the WS rings is the way he dealt with George all those years. Personally, I truely believe that an AL Manager is based primarly on their player and bullpen management. Clearly Joe was one of the best at that throughout his years as a Yankee helping develop a ton of players including but not limited to Jeter, Rivera, Bernie, Posada, and Pettitte.

Other than that I'm not sure he was the greatest manager looking at his track record with the Mets, Cardinals and Braves he only made the playoffs once in 15 years as a manager. Maybe that doesn't tell the whole story and maybe he did the best he could given his team's talent. But I think its hard to argue that he was a successful manager prior to his time with the Yankees.

I see them going with Giradi. What he did with the Marlins was amazing hopefully Cashman moves in on him quickly because he'll do well.

by Metty5 on Oct 18, 2007 7:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

+1

There is no other managerial job like the Yankees'. I thought Torre was worth keeping purely for his skills in managing up. Next year we may be surprised at how chatty George Steinbrenner is after a long, mostly peaceful lull.

I thought Mattingly was the guy but he's loyal and may not want to get the job this way.

by whichthat on Oct 18, 2007 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

donnie b.

i dont think he'll manage...he respects joe way too much 4 this 2 happen over nothing and then take his job

girardi takes it (i hope) like he wanted to and mattingly comes in later

--http://yankeesfuture.blogspot.com Bobby Mcnally (alias)

by bobbymcnally on Oct 18, 2007 9:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

thanks for the referential memories

by abbreviatedman on Oct 19, 2007 12:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Nice

Can't wait to your updates on his negotiations with those bastards from Houston.

by siddfynch on Oct 19, 2007 10:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

False alarm

I heard he was going to be an architect instead.

by Yakker on Oct 19, 2007 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nope.

At that moment... he was... a marine biologist.

by abbreviatedman on Oct 19, 2007 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Girardi

If the Yanks really intend to go with Hughes and Chamberlain in the rotation next year, Girardi might not be the best choice:

Scott Olsen. At age 22 and coming off 100 IPs and an injury in 2005, Olsen threw 180.7 IPs in 2006. After tying for 9th in ROY voting in 2006, Olsen went 10-15 and posted a 5.81 ERA in 2007.

Anibal Sanchez. At age 22 and coming off 135 IPs in high A and AA in 2005, Sanchez threw 199 total IPs in 2006, including 114 at the ML level. After tying Olsen for 9th in ROY voting in 2006, Sanchez missed most of 2007 with a shoulder injury.

And, of course, both Josh Johnson (age 23) and Ricky Nolasco (age 24) struggled this year, as well, although their IPs did not show a dramatic uptick.

Still, when 4 of your 5 starters are hurt or ineffective the following year (arguably 5 of 5, if you include Dontrelle), it certainly gives one pause.

by Yakker on Oct 19, 2007 4:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Josh Johnson

Isn't he the one that Girardi threw back out there after a two hour rain delay?

by abbreviatedman on Oct 19, 2007 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's right

Forgot about that. Girardi sent him back out after a big rain delay, then all of a sudden Johnson's elbow hurts, and he misses his next few starts.

OK, put JJ on Girardi's tab, too.

by Yakker on Oct 19, 2007 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Or you could say

that Girardi was a major part of their success.

by nyy601 on Oct 19, 2007 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

That might jibe with the "ineffective" part, but not the injuries. Plus, IMO much of Olsen's woes in 2007 are tied to the overuse.

by Yakker on Oct 19, 2007 8:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's not like he had any other options

those were the starting pitchers on his team. There was nothing else he could do. The only other option he had was pulling them early, then you end up with major bullpen problems.

by nyy601 on Oct 20, 2007 3:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

IMO, Girardi rode the guys hard because he wanted to add to his personal accomplishments. In fact, even now, the take-away for Joe's 2006 in Florida is that Girardi somehow managed to keep the under-powered Marlins "in the playoff race" until well into August. That doesn't happen if he takes his young starters out after 5 IPs.

And then there's the whole rain delay thing, which is completely inexplicable.

by Yakker on Oct 20, 2007 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Giaradi

I think you have to talk to the Florida front office in regards to those pitch totals. He has to work with what they give him and he did complain and said he wanted some more/other guys.

It isn't like he had the option to forfeit the rest of the season in August when they hit the limits he would have liked to see.

The problem with Torre was he would ignore the front office and pitch the same guy day after day after day

by emac2 on Oct 19, 2007 5:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

A manager needs to take responsibility for how he uses his starters and how he manages his bullpen.

I mean, what else do these guys do? Deciding whether to let a pitcher go back out for another inning or two is one of the most important decisions a manager makes during a game, IMO.

by Yakker on Oct 19, 2007 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A manager

Needs to work with what he is given. Girardi wasn't given any pitching depth and very little experience.

You don't think the front office should shoulder any of blame for how much the pitchers were used?

Are they too busy doing other things or is that simply not part of their job decription?

by emac2 on Oct 20, 2007 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Response

Of course, there's plenty of responsibility to go around. But Joe should get a fair share. Leaving 22-year olds in for those kind of IP increases is dangerous, and the rain delay thing is mind-boggling.

Girardi gets a 25-man roster, just like everybody else. And he had plenty of bullpen options: Borowski, Herges, Messenger, Tankersley, Resop, Wellemeyer, etc. Now, none of those guys are world-beaters, but it was an OK bullpen. Also, IMO, Joe shouldn't have been thinking about beating the world in 2006 anyway. He let his ego and PR drive for MOY get ahead of his young players' health.

Just last week, you yourself said that NYY should get a "manager that comprehends the idea of a relief pitcher and understands that the decisions he makes can actually have an effect on how that pitcher does."

http://www.minorleagueball.com/story/2007/10/12/21255/255

During his time in Florida, Girardi didn't demonstrate those skills.

by Yakker on Oct 21, 2007 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Should Torre have been judged on his experience

Before managing the Yankees? He wouldn't have sniffed the job if he had.

I don't judge Giaradi based on what happened in Florida because the front office forced the issue and wouldn't give him more arms to work with. They also insisted that he used some of the young guys when he didn't want to.

I'm not sure what team you follow but the Yankees are all about winning and they give the managers what they need to win. They also have a front office that stays involved and sets innings limits and stuff like that. The issue with Torre was that he ignored not only the directives but he also ignored half of the bullpen.

I don't have that concern with Girardi.

I appreciate that you do and am happy to wait until you are proven wrong.

by emac2 on Oct 21, 2007 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Torre

I like how Torre used Wang on short rest. When Wang got bombed it was all negative comments in NY about Wang. I think just about every ace pitcher that started on short rest got bombed. Maybe the blame should be on the manager?

by pedrophile on Oct 21, 2007 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

if Girardi took over

i'm sure Cash, Nardi, etc. would have enough influence (direct or indirect) to limit the innings of Phil & Joba. i have enough confidence in them to insist on it (e.g. Joba Rules), and i think Girardi is smart and loyal enough to agree.

by Travis G on Oct 19, 2007 7:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I was just gonna say that:

Assuming the opening day rotation is Wang, Pettitte, Hughes, Kennedy, Chamberlain; there would be a set of "rules" for Kennedy, Hughes, and Chamberlain.

No coming back after a long rain delay.
Skip Joba's spot whenever possible.
Nothing that high over 110ish pitches?
If they have a huge lead early (say 10-0), take them out after 5.

If this happens next year, the Yanks will need a GOOD long reliever or 2.

by hallofamer2000 on Oct 19, 2007 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Long Reliever

Hopefully Ohlendorf can be one of them.

by coochorama on Oct 20, 2007 1:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rasner

Darrell Rasner was pretty good until he got injured. He could have been a useful reliever this year.

by hallofamer2000 on Oct 20, 2007 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A GOOD long reliever

How about using Mussina and going with a 6 man rotation?

by emac2 on Oct 20, 2007 8:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Confused

Mussina as long reliever, and Wang, Pettitte, Joba, Kennedy and Hughes. Who's the other guy?

I really believe that Mussina will be sent to the Padres (Cla Meridith?), and they'll go with the 5. Or, they'll give a cheap, incentive-laden deal to someone coming off a terrible year (Jennings? Benson?), and keep someone in the minors a little.

by hallofamer2000 on Oct 20, 2007 9:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Moose as a starter

I doubt we trade Moose...I wish but I can't see anyone paying enough to make it worth it.

by emac2 on Oct 20, 2007 9:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Moose

I think he will surprise next year.

Last year he had good numbers and tired with hammy issues.

This year he hurt his hammy much worse and had no gas. Just about every NY starter had hammy issues with their horrible trainer who didn't like running.

by pedrophile on Oct 20, 2007 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Perhaps

Yes, Cashman can establish clear rules (though too many rules and there's a risk Girardi may chafe under them as he did in Florida), but only for things he can foresee.

Why not just hire someone who doesn't abuse his young arms?

by Yakker on Oct 19, 2007 8:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Give me a break

What rules did Girardi chaffe under in Florida?

The idea that Giaradi wouldn't expect front office involvement in how players are used is just stupid.

by emac2 on Oct 20, 2007 8:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Referring to

the reasons he was fired, the well-publicized incident with Loria and the disputes with the front office over Jacobs/Willingham.

by Yakker on Oct 21, 2007 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's baloney

It is one thing to Chaffe with a jerk like Loria and another thing entirely to chaffe because the front office wants to be involved in decisions on how many innings pitchers throw.

The only issues I heard about with Girardi and the marlins front office in terms of pitching was Girardi wanting a few experienced arms and the front office telling him all he had to work with were the kids.

Then they go and bash him for working with what he was given?

by emac2 on Oct 21, 2007 11:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs