When I was in law school I had a good friend that was a high school math teacher. Somehow, we got to talking 
about his school’s recent Teacher of the Year voting and he told me that he always abstained from participating in such award voting. His theory was, he never sees his colleagues teach so his vote for Teacher of the Year would really just be a vote for Teacher I Like the Most Who Seems Like a Pretty Good Teacher. He simply did not want to participate in a popularity contest masquerading as a merit-based award.
His best argument against the process was (I am paraphrasing): “Why doesn’t anyone win Teacher of the Year in consecutive years? Did last year’s winner really change his or her teaching style since last year in a way that made them inferior, as a teacher, to this year’s winner?”
I think the same logic applies to yesterday’s results AL Manager of the Year results. Nick over at Sweet Spot member Nick’s Twins Blog has a nice breakdown of Ron Gardenhire’s time at the helm. Ron Gardenhire didn’t do anything differently in 2010. He managed games the same way and achieved, basically, the same results. So, when I saw that Gardenhire had been the runner-up five times despite winning six division titles in his nine seasons, I was pretty blown away.
Here’s my question. What is different about 2010 Ron Gardenhire that finally got him over the hump? For that matter, what is different about 2010 Joe Maddon that had him finishing third? Nothing is different. The BBWA just decided that they could not ignore Gardenhire anymore.
The worst part is, I just wrote 300 words about something I really don’t care about. Perhaps my time would have been better used trying to “[u]nderstand baseball a little more” as Anonymous so generously suggested in the comments section yesterday.
Haha…nice dig on the troll at the end, Mark.
I also have to think that Price having won the player’s respect in their choosing of him as the AL’s best pitcher gives him a real good feeling, despite the results of the Cy Young voting by the BBWA…for much the same reason as you mentioned above.
The people who have to face the pitchers every day voted differently than the people who write about them. There’s definitely something to be said about that.
So, what we need is someway to evaluate who the players think is the best manager. If this were College Football, we could judge “Manager of the Year” by recruiting. But, in this game, the almighty dollar trumps any effect a Manager may have on “recruiting.” (Omitting obvious Cam Newton joke here).
Looking at Maddon through that lens, I think he should feel as good as Price knowing that his approach to the game chased off guys like Aubrey Huff and Seth McClung and attracted guys like Carlos Pena and Carl Crawford who almost seem reluctant to earn more money playing for another skipper.
I know this sounds silly, but I thought Maddon could legitimately have been considered “manager of the year” in 2006 & 2007 as legitimately as he could be the past 3 years. In some ways, his job in those first two years was even more remarkable in setting a tone and establishing a system than it has been in the 3 years they have contended.
As you say, what is he doing differently, aside from adjusting to new circumstances? I suppose we might see some growth in his tactics such as managing a bullpen, things that experience might have helped him learn. Otherwise, in what I consider the most significant things a manager does-managing men, recognizing talent, putting players in a position to get the most out of their talent-he has been consistently excellent and was from the moment he began to helm the Rays.
I can’t totally disagree with your point which, I think, underscores just how ridiculous this award really is. Fundamentally, Joe Maddon is the same manager today as he was in 2007. His tactics just look a lot better when applied to a 90-win roster than they do when applied to a 70-win roster.