clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

More on Torre and Girardi

Keith Law has a column up, explaining why he believes Joe Girardi is probably a better fit for the Yanks going forward than Joe Torre...

And in reading it, there are a few paragraphs that jumped out at me:

Torre showed himself to be a strong manager of a veteran club with defined roles for most of its members, above all those in his bullpen. But when presented with competitions for specific jobs, or with a bullpen without a clear hierarchy of usage, he struggled.

Perhaps the biggest criticism of Torre is that he did not have any track record of developing young starters. Andy Pettitte already had a full year of above-average pitching under his belt when Torre arrived in 1996, leaving Chien-Ming Wang as the only starter to reach the majors under Torre and develop into a starter with the team.

Torre's track record with St. Louis in the early 1990s wasn't much better, with highly touted Allen Watson never panning out and Donovan Osborne blowing out, but with Ken Hill flourishing after one season under Torre and then a trade to Montreal.

There were some cries for the Rangers to ax Ron Washington and hire Torre when news broke that he wasn't going to stay in New York, including Jim Reeves' column lamenting that Tom Hicks is too cheap to hire Torre.

But does anyone -- even Reeves -- want the Rangers to bring in a manager who is "a strong manager of a veteran club," but who struggles when players are competing for jobs? And whose track record for developing young starters is as poor as Torre's?