Your Top 20 Managers

[Bill Burgess]

Here is my slate for Top 20 Managers.

1. Connie Mack - Pirates (1894-96), Phil. A's ('01-50) BB's closest thing to a saintly person.

2. John J. McGraw - Balt. (1899-1902), NY Giants (1902-32); From '03-31, 28 yrs., came in lower than 3rd only 5 times.

3. Ned Hanlon - 1899-1907 - Pirates, Orioles, Dodgers, Reds - invented inside BB, spread it through McGraw, Jennings, Robinson, etc.

4. Ty Cobb - Detroit - 1921-26 - brilliant mastermind, carried sub-par team on his hitting coaching, fiery leadership. Tactical/strategic genius. Ousted due to false scandal. Irreparable loss to the game.

5. Billy Martin 1969, 1971-83, '85, '88 - traveling salesman, won wherever he went. Famed as Yank skipper, feuds with Steinbrenner.

6. Casey Stengel - Brooklyn (1934-36), Braves (1938-43), Yankees (1949-60), Mets (1962-65) colorful, tactical wiz.

7. Miller Huggins - Cardinals (1913-17), Yankees (1918-29), Tactical wiz, similar to Selee, Gleason, Stallings. Told Ruppert/Huston "Get me Ruth." Coped with Babe as best he could. Trained Gehrig to field well. After '25, told Ruppert, "team is fried", got new starting SS, 2B, C. Ruppert gave him best possible prospects.

8. Whitey Herzog - KC (1975-79), Cardinals (1980-90). Everywhere he went, he won. Like B. Martin.

9. Al Lopez - Cleveland (1951-56), White Sox (1957-65, '68-69). After long ML catching career, he broke up Stengel's 50's hegemony. Won pennants in '54 & '59. His Indians won 111 games in '54.

10. Walt Alston - Dodgers (1954-76). Presided over exit from Ebbets Field on Flatbush Ave. Won 6 pennants and 1 Division. Came in top 3 10 times, and in Division battles, 7 top 3 finishes.

11. Joe McCarthy - Cubs (1926-30), Yankees (1931-46), Red Sox ( 1948-50). The Joe Torre of the 30's. Top talent, merely had to do pitching staffs, pinch hitting options. Consistent winner, but with such top talent, hard to gauge his smarts. 9 pennants, 7 WS titles. But had Ruth, Gehrig, Dickey, Gomez, DiMag AND T. Williams.

12. Leo Durocher - Dodgers (1939-48), Giants (1948-55), Cubs (1966-72), Astros (1972-73). Won pennants in '41, '51, '54. Suspended all of 1947 for saying BB had Mafia ties. Very sharp, natty dresser. Impeccable suits. Leo loved his silk & jewelry. Was like father to Willie Mays.

13. Sparky Anderson - Reds (1970-78), Tigers (1980-95). Was winner with Big Red Machine. Good manager with good players = success.

14. Dick Williams - (1967-69, '71-88), Red Sox, A's, Angels, Montreal, Padres, Mariners. Dick was a traveler. Made his name with A's and Montreal. Won a pennant and 4 Division titles.

15. Joe Torre - Mets (1977-81), Braves (1982-84), Cardinals (1990-95), Yankees (1996-present). Covered some ground before arriving in Big Apple. Hard to better his record since. Resembles and behaves like Joe McCarthy. Has never been known to move a muscle during game. But his owner will buy him whatever he murmurs. It must be nice.

16. Bobby Cox - Atlanta (1978-81, '90-present), Toronto (1981-85). Since 1991, all he's done is win.

17. Tony Larussa - White Sox (1979-86), Oakland (1986-95), Cardinals (1996-present). Gained fame with Oakland. Won 4 Divisions in 5 yrs.

18. Cap Anson - White Sox (1879-97). Came in top 2 11 out of 13 yrs. Slugging 1Bman helped his own cause. From 1892-98, could hardly reach 4th.

19. Tommy LaSorda - Dodgers (1976-96). Won 9 Division titles & 5 seconds. And don't forget that Olympic WIN.

20. Frank Chance - Cubs (1905-12), Highlanders (1913-14), Red Sox ('23).
From '06-11 didn't finish lower than 2nd. Finished 1st 4 of 5 yrs.

21. Fred Clarke - Louisville (1897-99), Pirates (1900-15). Won 4 pennants, between 1900-12, finished lower than 3rd only once.

22. Earl Weaver - Baltimore (1968-82, '85-86). 6 Division titles. Between '68-82, finished lower than 3rd only twice, and in top 2 12 times.

23. Frank Selee - Braves (1890-01), Reds (1902-05) - From 1891-99, finished lower than 3rd only twice.

24. George Stallings - Braves (1913-20), Famed for '14 win.

25. Kid Gleason - White Sox (1919-23). Went 1, 2 with the Black Sox in '19-20. Then 7, 5, 7 with the carcass of the White Sox. He was real brains behind White Sox win in '17. Rowlings was just for show.

26. Danny Murtaugh - Pirates (1957-64, '67, '70-71, '73-76. Won 2 pennants and 2 Divisions. But also came in 4th or lower 7 times.

27. Charlie Grimm - Cubs (1932-38, '44-49, '60), Braves (1952-56). After long 1B career, when with Cubs initially, ran off 2,3, 3, 1,2,2,3. Later with Braves ran off 2, 3, 2.

28. Bill McKechnie - Pirates (1922-26), Cardinals (1928-29), Braves (1930-37), Reds (1938-46). Managed Federals in '15. Won pennants in '25, '28, '39, '40. Came in 4th or lower 14 times.

29. Billy Southwood - Cardinals ('29, '40-45), Braves (1947-51) - From '41, went 2,1,1,2.

30. Jimmy Dykes - White Sox (1934-46), traveling salesman after that. Came in 3rd or above 3 times in all his yrs.

31. Bucky Harris - 1924-43, '47-48, '50-56. Major traveling salesman. Won 3 pennants. Spent 24 yrs. at 4th or lower.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The above chart shows that some very knowledgeable BB men, respected by reputation, had some gosh-darn terrible records as managers, when they lacked the men to win. But when they had them, they showed their great managerial chops. To wit:

1. Connie Mack - 1915-24, 1935-50.
2. Casey Stengel - 1934-43, 1962-65
3. Pretty much most of the managerial careers of Bucky Harris, Jimmy Dykes, Billy Southwood and Bill McKechnie prove the time-tested theory, that without the men, the manager is helpless. Ty Cobb is a partial, complicated proof of that, since he achieved only partial success.

Bill Burgess

[Imapotato]

Wow, I don't think I can go that far Bill, but I'll try and do top 10

1. John McGraw
2. Walt Alston
3. Bill McKechnie
4. Miller Huggins
5. Casey Stengal
6. Connie Mack
7. Lou Pinella
8. Pat Moran
9. George Stallings
10. Ned Hanlon

I think these managers had strong teams AND weak teams so it's easier to judge how well they did with nothing to work with...

[KHenry14]

Bill, I don't know enough about early 20th C. managers to make my own list, but I got to say, any list that doesn't have Dick Williams on it, like yours, makes me wonder. The guy is a lot like Billy Martin and Leo Durocher, won wherever he went, including WS championships. He is easily as good as LaRussa, and to me at least he belongs in the top 20 if not 15.

Did you forget about him, or did you have a reason for leaving him off?

KH14

[prof93]

1.Casey Stengel
2.John McGraw
3.Joe McCarthy
4.Connie Mack
5.Miller Huggins
6.Billy Martin
7.Earl Weaver
8.Billy Southworth
9.Dick Williams
10.Al Lopez
11.Bill McKechnie
12.Tom Kelly
13.Bucky Harris
14.Walt Alston
15.Leo Durocher
16.Bobby Cox
17.Sparky Anderson
18.Joe Torre
19.Tommy LaSorda
20.Gene Mauch

[leecemark]

--So much of a managers success is tied into the quality of his players I don't know that you can really pick one guy as the best or have a list you have a whole lot of conficdence in. There are, of course some managers who got more out of their teams than others and some who get much less.
--I think all these guys were great managers who could usually get a team to half a dozen more wins than the average guy;
--Harry Wright - the first great manager or at least first great team builder.
--Ned Hanlan and Frank Sellee - great rivals of the 1890s.
--John McGraw - I don't know that he could be successfull today with his style, but he won pretty consistenty for 20 years way back when.
--Connie Mack - built two dynasties 20 years apart and won a couple other times.
--George Stallings - never had the talent of some others, but won more than he should have.
--Miller Huggins - founder of the Yankees legacy.
--Joe McCarthy - won everywhere he went
--Bill McKechnie - the prophet of defense.
--Billy Southworth - very underrated.
--Leo Durocher - probably overrated, but still very good.
--Al Lopez - battled Stegal's Yankees for a decade with two different teams.
--Casey Stengal - won more than any Yankee manager, although his teams don't look quite as good on paper.
--Walt Alston - never got much credit, but always won.
--Dick Williams - agree with KH14 that he has to be on any best manager list.
--Earl Weaver - zero b.s.. All about winning baseball.
--Billy Martin - quick results, but wore out his welcome fast too
--Whitey Herzog - best manager in KC and StLouis history
--Sparky Anderson - best in Cinci and Detriot history
--Lou Pinella - won everywhere he went (well not TB ), a Seattle icon
--Bobby Cox - his run with Braves as impressive (in reg season) as anything Stengal did, although the payoff hasn't been there
--Tony LaRussa - never liked him myself, but the wins follow him around.
--Joe Torre - has all the talent, but many couldn't keep them all focused on team goals.
--That comes to 23, but I don't know who to cut to get down to 20. All of them had different strengths and some would be better for one type of team than another.

[leecemark]

--Prof's list reminded me of a couple oversights on mine, Tommy Lasorda and Tom Kelly. I don't think either are really near the top, but both may be better than some of mine. They make an even 25 anyway.

[prof93]

--Prof's list reminded me of a couple oversights on mine, Tommy Lasorda and Tom Kelly. I don't think either are really near the top, but both may be better than some of mine. They make an even 25 anyway.

The Twins were blessed with Kelly's talent and they wasted that talent for years. Kelly led the Twins to wins in two World Series in four years, but most of the time the Twins saddled him with inferior talent and the lowest payroll in the American League. He still produced a .478 W% with 2 WS Pennants and 3 second place finishes. I know while he was here people in MN respected him a great deal, I wonder what he might have accomplished with a team that had a better money situation and superior talent??

[Bill Burgess]

KHenry14/Mark,

Yes, I was negligent in omitting Dick Williams, who did so well with Oakland/Montreal. Thanks for the head's up. Always welcome corrections.

Bill Burgess

[leecemark]

--Pretty good with Boston and SanDiego too.

[prof93]

--Pretty good with Boston and SanDiego too.

Dick Williams is somewhat forgotten, not sure why because we did very well in both leagues and handled players extremely well. He is Top 10 in my book.

[ElHalo]

1. John McGraw
2. Connie Mack
3. Miller Huggins
4. Walter Alston
5. Ned Hanlon
6. Earl Weaver
7. Casey Stengel
8. Billy Martin
9. Leo Durocher
10. Al Lopez
11. Joe McCarthy
12. Tommy Lasorda
13. Joe Torre
14. Dick Williams
15. Frank Selee
16. Lou Boudreau
17. Tom Kelly
18. Joe Cronin
19. Billy Southworth
20. Sweet Lou

[Bill Burgess]

Mack/McGraw:

I rate Connie Mack as the Greatest Manager Ever. I rate McGraw as having the greatest record ever compiled. Contradiction? Not in BurgessLand.

1. Connie Mack - Pirates (1894-96), Phil. A's ('01-50) BB's closest thing to a saintly person.

2. John J. McGraw - Balt. (1899-1902), NY Giants (1902-32); From '03-31, 28 yrs., came in lower than 3rd only 5 times.

Explanation. From '03-31, 28 yrs., McGraw came in lower than 3rd only 5 times. That is a record I doubt can be broken. His strength came from having been a very good player. He was able to routinize his teaching of the different skills, such as fielding, sliding, throwing the ball in on one bounce, etc.

Since he played in a big market (NY), he seldom had financial problems. He was acknowledged as a master of the trading market. Not a winter would pass by, without him trying to strengthen his squads. He tried in vain since 1920 to buy Rogers Hornsby from Branch Rickey, who wouldn't sell him, even when offered $300K. McGraw also tried to get Cobb in Dec., 1926. But Landis told him, "Lay off, Cobb." Landis intended to restore TC to Detroit, to shove it up Ban Johnson's butt, who had sworn TC would never play in the AL again.

So the question might be, why would I put Mack over McGraw, if I think McGraw had the better record? Simple. They didn't have a level playing field. McGraw had advantages Mack didn't. And Mack couldn't level the conditions out.

McGraw, in NYC, had no "blue laws", prohibiting activities on Sundays. Mack did, and it caused, indirectly, Mack having to break up his teams in 1914, and 1933-35.

McGraw had fans who supported the Giants no matter what. Mack had fans who refused to come out to the games, and support their local team. And since Mack was legally prevented from playing games on Sundays, his attendance stunk. Even when he won pennants, he had attendance problems. I put in red, where he won the pennant.

--Yr.---Attend.-------Yr.-----Attend.------Yr.----Attend.------Yr.-------Attend.
1905----2nd-------1910-----5th---------1925-----1st---------1930------2nd
1906-----3rd--------1911-----1st---------1926-----2nd--------1931------2nd
1907-----6th--------1912-----3rd----------1927-----4th--------1932------3rd
1908-----7th--------1913-----3rd---------1928-----2nd--------1933------6th
1909-----3rd--------1914-----5th---------1929-----3rd--------1934------6th

So one can see from the above chart that Mr. Mack had a real problem getting his fan base to turn out and support their team. And in the days before TV money, fan attendance forms the foundation of a teams income.
It was bad enough to not be able to play on Sundays, but poor fan interest really killed the A's. Connie had good teams in all of the above yrs. except perhaps 1934. And he failed to come in the top 3 in attendance 7 times out of 20. This is the reason why he couldn't afford to pay his players well.

In 1914, the A's finished 1st, but placed only 5th in attendance. When his players wanted increases to match what the Federal L. was dangling in front of them, he couldn't match the Fed's offers. So Plank and Bender jumped to the Federals. And to keep the rest from doing the same, Connie sold his players off, before they could jump, and leave him with nothing. Something like selling your stock in a company before they go under or take a big hit, like Martha Stewart.

I believe that if Mack had no blue laws to cramp his attendance, he would not have felt compelled to break up his 2 great teams, and hence would have surpassed John McGraws great record. So that is how I justify placing Mack on top, while still feeling that McGraw had the most impressive record, on paper. Different conditions. At least that's how it looks to me.

Bill Burgess

[westsidegrounds]

You can't leave Frank Chance off the Top Ten list. Yeah, I know Bill James is madly in love with Selee and thinks that a pile of dirt could have won big with the team he left in Chicago, but we're all rational people here on BBF & we know it doesn't work that way. Having an excellent team does not gauarantee success - the manager's job is to get that team to win. (And we won't even get into the widespread myth that the Cubs infield was actually a bunch of bozos who don't belong within a lightyear of the HOF. We can thank BJ for that one too, just another weird contradiction from the World of Bill.)

Four seasons with over 100 wins with the Cubs; all but two seasons over the Pythagorean W/L for that team (and one of those was his rookie year as a manager); and at the end of his career, sick and managing a terrible BoSox team in '23, a 61-91 record with a team that should have (Pythagorean W/L again) finished 54-98.

Looks pretty good to me.

[leecemark]

--For me a manager needs to be successfull with more than one team to be considered amoung the all time greats. He can accomplishe that either by changing teams or staying somewhere long enough that the team changes around him (such as McGraw, Mack, Alston, Weaver).
--Chance's Cubs were enormously successfull and he deserves some credit for that, but it was basically all the same team he won with. He never showed he could do it with another team or type of team. Maybe he could have, he was after all "the Peerless Leader, but he didn't.

[Bill Burgess]

Mark,

"For me a manager needs to be successfull with more than one team to be considered amoung the all time greats."

This "theory" bears deeper reflection.

At what moment did getting along with your boss work against one's reputation? Those who were with one team a long time like Mack, McGraw, Alston, Anson, LaSorda, Fred Clarke, Earl Weaver, Danny Murtaugh are no less able, solely because they were able to find a way to either win with one team or get along with ownership.

On the contrary, the traveling salesmen, often either hit an impasse with one team or had their owner lose faith in them. Or, . . . were too brusque, like Hornsby. Under normal circumstances, a manager moving on, means something went wrong. Didn't win enough, or pissed off the wrong person.

Since when did good relations or good fortune become a negative? If polled, I'd think the travelers would have preferred a less nomadic BB career. And envied their more fortunate brethren. How often do managers quit and say, "I'm tired of this situation. I need to ramble a bit."?

It seems as if your "new theory" could use a tweaking, to make more sense.

Bill Burgess

[westsidegrounds]

Mark,

Those who were with one team a long time like Mack,

Connie got along very well with A's ownership, far as I know... :laugh

[westsidegrounds]

--For me a manager needs to be successfull with more than one team to be considered amoung the all time greats.

So Casey's out?

[ElHalo]

So Casey's out?

Casey was succesful with different teams. The late 40's teams centered around DiMaggio that he won championships bore very little resemblence to the late 50's teams centered around Mantle that he won with. If you re-read Mark's posts, he said that having full roster turnover counts as multiple teams.

[nightal]

1.Whitey Herzog(can't help myself)
2.John McGraw
3.Casey Stengal
4.Earl Weaver
5.Billy Martin
6.Billy Southworth
7.Connie Mack
8.Bill McKechnie
9.Casey Stengal
10.Miller Huggins
11.Bobby Cox
12.Tony LaRussa

al

[westsidegrounds]

Casey was succesful with different teams. The late 40's teams centered around DiMaggio that he won championships bore very little resemblence to the late 50's teams centered around Mantle that he won with. If you re-read Mark's posts, he said that having full roster turnover counts as multiple teams.

You are correct sir!

My apologies to Mark!

In my defense I can only say that my reasoning faculties were numbed by " ... and he deserves some credit for that ..."

......

[RuthMayBond]

Not that anyone cares about Total Baseball, but they rank managers by how many games they should have won given the scored/allowed differential, not whether the owner let them buy good players. Some of their better ones include BCox, Howser, HJennings, BMartin, ALopez, Weaver, Chance, Larussa, Rose :eek: and Herman Franks. Some of their worse ones include Lasorda and McCarthy (he won 106 in '39 but "should" have won 114)

[Bill Burgess]

Anyone care to put the 2nd echelon managers into sequence.

Al Lopez
Walt Alston
Sparkdy Anderson
Earl Weaver
Bucky Harris

Bill Burgess

[leecemark]

--I wouldn't describe Lopez, Anderson, Weaver or Alston as "2nd echelon". Any of them are about as good as anybody else. Weaver, I actually think might be the best manager ever. Anyway, my order;
1) Weaver, 2) Lopez, 3) Anderson, 4) Alston, 5) Harris. Bucky is way behind the others IMO.

[Bill Burgess]

Hmm. Thanks. Maybe I shouldn't have included Weaver. He was like Herzog and Martin. Won wherever he went.

Thanks.

BB

[RuthMayBond]

Anyone care to put the 2nd echelon managers into sequence.

Al Lopez
Walt Alston
Sparkdy Anderson
Earl Weaver
Bucky Harris

Bill BurgessWho says they're second-tier? I'll go with
Alston
Weaver
Lopez
Anderson
Harris

[Bill Burgess]

They are only 2nd string compared to Mack, McGraw, Stengel, McCarthy, Hanlon. I've leave 1 name off the 1st string, so no one will need prepare the tar & feathers. I so hate when that happens.

Bill Burgess

[RuthMayBond]

They are only 2nd string compared to Mack, McGraw, Stengel, McCarthy, Hanlon. I've leave 1 name off the 1st string, so no one will need prepare the tar & feathers. I so hate when that happens.

Bill BurgessMcCarthy, Stengel & McGraw, gee they had such bad material to work with. Mack's main asset was longevity. Hanlon sure slipped at the end. You forgot Cobb

[Bill Burgess]

Jeffrey,

"You forgot Cobb."


No, I didn't. I am merely excercising the anti-tar & feathers defense mechanism.

I know this house too well.

Bill Burgess

[Bill Burgess]

I thought I'd clean out my earlier closet and resurrect some survey/polls for the new batch of guys.

Bill

[RuthMayBond]

We could use a good laugh, so my approximate order is
Cox
Alston
McKechnie
Jennings
Weaver
Martin
Anderson
LaRussa
Houk
Valentine
Herzog
Lopez
Griffith
Huggins
WRobinson
Zimmer
SO'Neill
Chance
Dressen
Southworth

[Bill Burgess]

& McGraw, gee they had such bad material to work with.
One of the reasons McGraw was so successful is he was the best trader of his time. He never sat pat in winters, but traded constantly to strengthen his team.

Bill Burgess

[mordeci]

1. Maury Wills. No contest.

[Bill Burgess]

Anyone else care to offer their list?

[RuthMayBond]

We could use ANOTHER good laugh, so my approximate REVISED order isGlad to see you're not feeling listless today, Bill :dance

Cox
McKechnie
Alston
Jennings
Valentine
Torre
Weaver
Houk
Martin
Lopez
Anderson
CGriffith
Gardenhire
Howser
LHarris
DGarcia
BCarrigan
GGibson
PRose
Franks

[STLCards2]

I am not a big Larussa fan, but his teams always seem to compete. The last three years, he has taken some of thos most injury-ridden teams in recent NL memory and competed - even winning a World Series. He has gone to three different franchises that were struggling, and soon after he arived, they were very good teams. What Larussa did in 2002, with the death of Kyle, and the subsequent problem of having no pitching, was remarkable. Does Larussa overthink? Yes! Has he been blessed with great players? Sure! Has he had 3 teams with over 100 wins get their rear-ends kicked in the playoffs by equal or less-than teams? Yes! But Larussa seems to get the most out of every player most years.

I never thought I would be defending Larussa - but this is the second straight year the Cardinals are way overachieving-and about the 5thtime since he has been here. I wouldn't call him a "genius", and the fact that Knight and Billichek are good buds angers me :), but I can't see how the 2-time WS champ is not in some people's top 20 managers.

[Ubiquitous]

Davey Johnson
Larry Dierker
Ron Gardenhire
Earl Weaver
Lou Piniella
Tony LaRussa
Bobby Cox
Sparky Anderson
Jim Leyland

[Bill Burgess]

Glad to see you're not feeling listless today, Bill :dance
Listless?? Moi? Why my name and the word can never appear in the same sentence. I'm feeling quite in a working mode.

[Bill Burgess]

Davey Johnson
Larry Dierker
Ron Gardenhire
Earl Weaver
Lou Piniella
Tony LaRussa
Bobby Cox
Sparky Anderson
Jim Leyland
Nice list. I see we woke up on the bold side of the bed today, Ubi. Or are you just feeling controversial?

[Bill Burgess]

Glad to see you're not feeling listless today, Bill :dance

Cox
McKechnie
Alston
Jennings
Valentine
Torre
Weaver
Houk
Martin
Lopez
Anderson
CGriffith
Gardenhire
Howser
LHarris
DGarcia
BCarrigan
GGibson
PRose
Franks
My my. Half of your list would not survive popular consenus. You do realize that, don't you, Jeffrey.

Jennings won 3 early on but couldn't put together another winning combo though he had 2 of the L's superstars. McKechnie I have always liked but he had a record that proved that he couldn't win without the horses.

Clark Griffith was more known as a ML pitcher/owner, but his record as a manager was 'less than to be desired'. Rose played himself ahead of better players, so his managerial judgment must come in for questioning. Lopez I like too, and I also like Billy Martin, but member 538280 just hates him.

Always says he ruined his pitching staffs. And on and on. Keep working this list, Jeff. You can do better.

[Ubiquitous]

I've never seen Connie Mack or John McGraw or any of the old timers manage. I have no idea what their real in game tactics were or how they used players. Secondly of the greats of old, like Mack and McGraw, they were different kind of a manager then today. They were the front office and a lot of times they weren't managers in a modern sense. McGraw was often gone from the dugout for large stretches of time during the season scouting players and such.


To me the attributes that need to be identified and measured for managers is in game tactics, player usage, player development, and managing of the players. Some of these things we can obviously identify in the old managers such as player signings and to some degree player development but I just don't know how much these old time managers are responsible for it and how much some old grizzled catcher or bench coach or ghost manager is responsible for it.

Obviously these men were great baseball figures and great "managers" of their day but to me it is like lumping in cricket players with baseball players when compiling the games greatest hitters. Apples and oranges.

[Ubiquitous]

McKechnie I have always liked by he had a record that proved that he couldn't win without the horses.


Who can? ................

[Bill Burgess]

but to me it is like lumping in cricket players with baseball players when compiling the games greatest hitters. Apples and oranges.
Just keeps getting bolder and bolder. And more interesting too.

[RuthMayBond]

My my. Half of your list would not survive popular consenus. You do realize that, don't you, Jeffrey. Like I give a rat's

<Jennings won 3 early on but couldn't put together another winning combo though he had 2 of the L's superstars.>

He ain't the only one

<McKechnie I have always liked by he had a record that proved that he couldn't win without the horses.>

He did pretty darn good with ponies

<Clark Griffith was more known as a ML pitcher/owner, but his record as a manager was 'less than to be desired'.>

How so?

<Rose played himself ahead of better players, so his managerial judgment must come in for questioning.>

Perhaps, but he tended to do above expectations

<I also like Billy Martin, but member 538280 just hates him.

Always says he ruined his pitching staffs. And on and on.>

Only with Oakland

<Keep working this list, Jeff. You can do better.>

Likewise :rofl:

[Bill Burgess]

Like I give a rat's

<Jennings won 3 early on but couldn't put together another winning combo though he had 2 of the L's superstars.>

He ain't the only one
Hughie had also turned into an alcoholic at the end of his Detroit tenure.
McKechnie I have always liked by he had a record that proved that he couldn't win without the horses.>

He did pretty darn good with ponies
Bill won 4 pennants but he also came in below 4th place 14 times. So, I had to put him at the back end of my great managers. He was a great baseball man, but not in the upper echelons, for me anyhow.
Clark Griffith was more known as a ML pitcher/owner, but his record as a manager was 'less than to be desired'.>

How so?
It was during Clark's managerial tenure with Washington, that the saying went out, 'Washington - first in war, first in peace, and last in the American L.' That was during Walter Johnson's heyday.

Rose played himself ahead of better players, so his managerial judgment must come in for questioning.>

Perhaps, but he tended to do above expectations
Any manager who had better players, yet plays himself anyway, is not a team player. And the manager is supposed to be the ultimate team player. Rose cared more for his own stats & place in history, than he cared for his team winning. That's not my idea of a good manager, or even a bad one.

I also like Billy Martin, but member 538280 just hates him.

Always says he ruined his pitching staffs. And on and on.>

Only with Oakland

<Keep working this list, Jeff. You can do better.>

Likewise :rofl:
You claim you want feedback, but when you get it . . .

[RuthMayBond]

McKechnie I have always liked but he had a record that proved that he couldn't win without the horses.
Tell me what the 66 Cubs did.
With Banks
AND Billy Williams
AND Santo
AND Robin Roberts
AND Jenkins

[Bill Burgess]

Tell me what the 66 Cubs did.
With Banks
AND Billy Williams
AND Santo
AND Robin Roberts
AND Jenkins
Or the 2002-2008 Yankees!

[RuthMayBond]

Bill won 4 pennants but he also came in below 4th place 14 times.Oh, like Mack

<It was during Clark's managerial tenure with Washington, that the saying went out, 'Washington - first in war, first in peace, and last in the American L.' That was during Walter Johnson's heyday.>

Refer to horses, need some

<You claim you want feedback>

When did I claim that? :hide: You claim you want my list, but it seems you want your list

[Bill Burgess]

Oh, like Mack
Or like Stengel, too. Or like many others.

<It was during Clark's managerial tenure with Washington, that the saying went out, 'Washington - first in war, first in peace, and last in the American L.' That was during Walter Johnson's heyday.>

Refer to horses, need some

<You claim you want feedback>

When did I claim that? :hide: You claim you want my list, but it seems you want your list

This next quote sounds an awful lot to me like a man who wants some feedback.
About as interesting as your reaction to my updated list :shhh::silent:

[RuthMayBond]

This next quote sounds an awful lot to me like a man who wants some feedback.I was just wondering if you were going to acknowledge it

[Bill Burgess]

I was just wondering if you were going to acknowledge it
Don't I always? Don't I usually?

[RuthMayBond]

Or the 2002-2008 Yankees!So now Torre's awful?

[RuthMayBond]

Bill won 4 pennants but he also came in below 4th place 14 times.Nine times, Bill, I forgot to do your fact-checking

<It was during Clark's managerial tenure with Washington, that the saying went out, 'Washington - first in war, first in peace, and last in the American L.' That was during Walter Johnson's heyday.>

Interesting. They weren't anywhere NEAR last place until his fifth year

[Bill Burgess]

So now Torre's awful?
Heaven's no. No one on my list is awful. My list is of the greatest, not the worst. Joe is a great manager.

He had the horses and produced great. But even with the horses, he didn't win ALL the pennants. His teams from 1996-2007 always either won the pennant or came in second.

For any manager, in an 11 year period, to win the WS 4 times, and the pennant another 2 times is a great manager, even with the horses.

For some reason, with great players like A-Rod, Jeter, Posada, Abreu, Clemens, etc., Joe couldn't win the pennant in recent years. I don't know why. And neither did George Steinbrenner. Call it an anomaly, if you must.

[Bill Burgess]

Nine times, Bill, I forgot to do your fact-checking
I just rechecked my facts. Bill McKechnie came in 4th or lower 14 times. Don't believe me. Here's the link.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/managers/mckecbi01.shtml

<It was during Clark's managerial tenure with Washington, that the saying went out, 'Washington - first in war, first in peace, and last in the American L.' That was during Walter Johnson's heyday.>

Interesting. They weren't anywhere NEAR last place until his fifth year
It was a saying, RBB. Must you take even sayings literally. The question is, why does Clark Griffith make your list?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/managers/griffcl01.shtml

His actual managerial record is about as dreary/lack-luster as they come. Guess you forgot to check your own facts, this time, eh, Jeff?

[RuthMayBond]

I just rechecked my facts. Bill McKechnie came in 4th or lower 14 times. Don't believe me. Here's the link.---http://www.baseball-reference.com/managers/mckecbi01.shtmlYou said LOWER than fourth


<It was a saying, RBB. Must you take even sayings literally.>

Why did you bring the saying up?

< The question is, why does Clark Griffith make your list?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/managers/griffcl01.shtml>

I told you, he had no horses

[Brad Harris]

1. John McGraw
2. Connie Mack
3. Joe McCarthy
4. Bobby Cox
5. Casey Stengel
6. Earl Weaver
7. Walter Alston
8. Frank Selee
9. Sparky Anderson
10. Harry Wright
11. Tony LaRussa
12. Leo Durocher
13. Whitey Herzog
14. Dick Williams
15. Joe Torre
16. Al Lopez
17. Ned Hanlon
18. Miller Huggins
19. Danny Murtaugh
20. Fred Clarke
21. Cap Anson
22. Bill McKechnie
23. Billy Martin
24. Jim Leyland
25. Billy Southworth

I give more credit to men who won in the free agency era, who won with different teams than those who didn't. I credit playoff appearances but don't detract for post-season losses unless it's directly attributable to managerial error. A few of these men receive credit as innovators in their profession.

Tommy Lasorda, in my opinion, wasn't a particular good manager. He happened to be a cheerleader who worked for the flagship franchise in the league during most of his tenure. For the number of years he managed, he took very few teams to the postseason and the '88 World Championship was a total fluke. Of course, he's gotten on my nerves ever since I read in an SI issue that season where Tommy referred to Yahweh as "the big Dodger in the sky." :laugh I'm sure Lasorda would probably make my Top 40 list but I'm not inclined to split enough hairs to distinguish between him and the others who might follow after #25 so baseball's pasta poster boy can rot for the time being.

I'm curious to see if three-time Manager of the Year Dusty Baker makes anyone's list. If so, I'll have to throw some rope, duct tape and a crowbar in the trunk and take a little road trip. :laugh

[RockyC]

My picks (top five)
1- Casey Stengel
2- John McGraw
3- Joe McCarthy
4-Connie Mack
5- (tie) Walter Alston and Miller Huggins

[RuthMayBond]

I'm curious to see if three-time Manager of the Year Dusty Baker makes anyone's list. If so, I'll have to throw some rope, duct tape and a crowbar in the trunk and take a little road trip. :laughAngels and Marlins fans seem to like him awfully well. It serves him right for not signing my baseball when I went to a Cards game in 1982

[Yankeefan94]

1. McGraw
2. Mack
3. McCarthy
4. Weaver
5. Anderson

6-11 in no particular order
Stengal, Torre, Boudreau, Herzog, Martin, and Huggins