Snitker?

[USMA76]

Don't know if this has been discussed in any previous thread but...

Given the way we've played in a bunch of [admittedly meaningless] games in the past couple of months, is there any chance we don't remove the "interim" label from his job title?

Under Fredi, it seems like we were mathematically eliminated by mid-June so I really don't see any way Snitker isn't given the chance next year to manage games that do count.

[UNCBlue012]

Like him or not, you almost have too. The players are thriving under him, and whether it's all random or not, it's pretty incredible.

[rico43]

He seems to have the team chemistry factor working in his favor. I'm not sure they ever had this much fun even under Cox.

[thewupk]

He seems to have the team chemistry factor working in his favor. I'm not sure they ever had this much fun even under Cox.

I'm pretty sure they did when they were owning everybody in the 90's.

[USMA76]

While I like what I've seen of late, there's a completely different mentality between playing with nothing to lose versus playing with a season on the line.

[bravesfanMatt]

I think with so many keys guys endorsing Snit, you almost need to go with him until he proves he can't. I would personally prefer someone else.. but we could do worse than Snit

[GovClintonTyree]

Concur with consensus. He wouldn't have been on my list, but this is impossible to ignore.

[Enscheff]

Snitker is just a letter swap from Stinker.

Pass.

[goldfly]

don't really want him but whatever

**** getting TP to run this team. i firmly believe in the TP curse and would like him out of the organization

don't care if Eddie gets it or not

but would rather take someone else but if Bobby still has some pull (unfortunately) I would wager we stay with Snit

[50PoundHead]

Word of warning from the great Northwest. The Twins had a similar situation in 1980. Team had played poorly under Gene Mauch and replaced him with John Goryl late in the season. Team finished 23-13 under Goryl and the interim manager got the job. Twins started 11-25 in 1981 and Goryl was gone by May.

I don't have anything against Snitker, but I hope they don't simply hand him the reins. His handling of the bullpen has improved as the season has worn on, but I still worry that he's going to wear them out if he is in charge from the get-go.

[thewupk]

I think the team needs someone from outside the organization.

[JohnAdcox]

Eddie was my choice, but Snit has won me over. He's got my vote.

[smootness]

While I like what I've seen of late, there's a completely different mentality between playing with nothing to lose versus playing with a season on the line.

Eh, you could just as easily argue that it's tougher to keep a team with nothing to play for ready and hungry.

In fact, I feel like I've seen more teams in our position fall off the map than suddenly play free and win.

[Enscheff]

I think they'll probably go ahead with Snitker. I won't hate it. He's done a tremendous job, but I'd like to see them bring a few guys in from outside the organization and have a real search. That said, if it's not Snitker, I'd like it to be someone other than the Bud Black type.

What do we need to know about Black that makes him a bad candidate?

[depley]

How about the fact he only managed one team with a winning record out of 9?

What do we need to know about Black that makes him a bad candidate?

[Enscheff]

How about the fact he only managed one team with a winning record out of 9?

It was the Padres. I'm looking for a little more in depth analysis than that, but thanks for your contribution to the collective knowledge base.

[smootness]

It was the Padres. I'm looking for a little more in depth analysis than that, but thanks for your contribution to the collective knowledge base.

I mean, if a guy has managed 1 winning team in 9 tries, I think the onus is on explaining why he's good.

There may very well be reasons that he is actually a very good manager. But I'm not hiring a guy with that record just because no one can tell me why he's bad. I need some evidence going in the other direction first.

ETA: Technically he actually managed 2 winning teams in his 8 full years as manager. But one of those years, the year he won NL MOY, was actually the worst collapse in Padres history. They went on a 10-game losing streak entering September, went 12-16 in September, and lost a 6.5-game division lead. He never made the postseason there.

ETA2: He's -6 in Pythagorean wins but +15 in WAR wins. So it's tough to gauge, but I haven't seen anything that would suggest he's great.

[Enscheff]

I mean, if a guy has managed 1 winning team in 9 tries, I think the onus is on explaining why he's good.

There may very well be reasons that he is actually a very good manager. But I'm not hiring a guy with that record just because no one can tell me why he's bad. I need some evidence going in the other direction first.

ETA: Technically he actually managed 2 winning teams in his 8 full years as manager. But one of those years, the year he won NL MOY, was actually the worst collapse in Padres history. They went on a 10-game losing streak entering September, went 12-16 in September, and lost a 6.5-game division lead. He never made the postseason there.

That's why I'm asking. I know very little about Bud Black, but when he was fired there was immediate speculation that he was a strong candidate to be the next Braves manager.

Is he a good clubhouse guy like Snitker seems to be? Is he a good tactical mind like Maddon? Or is he just an established manager that would end up being a safe hire?

For what it's worth, I would like to see Dave Martinez given serious consideration. He has served as bench coach to the best manager in the game, who is running the best team in the game about as efficiently as humanly possible. I would like to see more of that "high information" decision making utilized in Atlanta over the low information crap that results in decisions like batting Adonis Garcia in the #2 slot.

[depley]

so far Freddie Freeman, Jace Peterson and Ender Inciarte have all come out is support of Snit keeping the job. If the players want him who are we to disagree?

[smootness]

By the advanced analytics? I am unaware of any metrics used to rate managers.

Or are you asserting we can assign credit for teams over/under performing their expected win values to the manager? Where has that been shown to be a reproducible skill of a manager? Everything I have read attributes performances like the Royals of the last couple years and the Rangers this year to luck and/or a lock down top heavy BP that can win more close games than is normally expected.

I am asserting that people do this. I wasn't trying to validate it, but it's there, and it's useful information.

If it was all attributable to luck, then you wouldn't see managers consistently exceeding or falling short of their expected wins...yet they do.