Joe Maddon is Equal to Mike Scioscia

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 28, 2008 11:24 PM EDT

That's what a recent ranking by the Wall Street Journal suggests at least. Using categories such as Close Games, Wins Above Expectation, and Player Performance Maddon finished 14th ahead of Jim Leyland, Joe Torre, Terry Francona, Eric Wedge, and Clint Hurdle.

The problem is the system is flawed and for the same reason that ranking general managers or even scouting teams is, uncontrollable variables. Wins Above Expectation, for instance, uses the Pythag Wins total, based on runs scored and allowed, compared to the actual win level. Player Performances are based on, you guessed it, the performances of players under different managers - so Joe Maddon gains huge points for Carlos Pena.

Does anyone believe that Ron Gardenhire (the "top" manager based on the metrics) can truly get more out of players than Maddon, or that somehow his God awful lineups consisting of Nick Punto somehow compelled the Twins to more victories than they essentially "deserved"?

I appreciate the effort, but these rankings are too flawed for me to place any credibility in them. The best example I can give to prove my belief would be Francona's rank, his (loaded) team won the World Series but because Julio Lugo performance was unlucky and poor under Francona somehow that's an indication on Francona's managerial skills? What about Joe Torre's win expectations, because his teams, which featured the highest payroll in the league - presumably meaning the most talent - overachieved (in theory) by 19 games over the past two seasons Torre is somehow credited for that?

Again, nice effort, but the right metric still hasn't been applied.

Tweet Comment 5 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Re: Joe Maddon is Equal to Mike Scioscia

I agree. While I don't rule out the possibility that such a metric could be created, it seems there are currently way too many variables to account for, ranging from the finances to interpersonal relationships.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 28, 2008 11:39 PM EDT reply actions

Personally I think finances could be attributed for. Set an average payroll and make that a base number, going up/down from there almost like a multiplier stats.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 29, 2008 2:30 AM EDT up reply actions

Maddon Taught Scioscia a LOT

And he helped Mike unlearn years of Tommy Lasorda tutelage about grinding a pitchers elbow into fine dust...

by Rev Halofan on Mar 29, 2008 3:08 AM EDT reply actions

It's obviously not particularly credible as a ranking system, but there is an irony in it. If there is one area that fans have been particularly critical of Maddon it is in his in-game tactics, things such as bullpen use, pinch hitting and so on. Those would seem to be the very factors that influence winning in close games, yet it is in that category that Maddon scores the highest of the three, and rather high (8) among all managers ranked.

by bobr on Mar 29, 2008 10:40 AM EDT reply actions