Cubs should extend Baker? (Phil Rogers is a moron.)
Phil Rogers thinks now is a great time to give Dusty Baker a two-year extension. He thinks "stability" is what the Cubs need. I did a quick check to find all the "stable managers" that have won a world series.
2005: Ozzie Guillen, 2nd year
2004: Terry Francona, 1st year
2003: Jack McKeon, 1st year
2002: Mike Scioscia, 3rd year
2001: Bob Brenly, 1st year
1996-2000: Joe Torre, won series in his 1st year
1997: Jim Leyland, 1st year
1995: Bobby Cox, 6th year. The Bobby Cox example isn't great, because he won the division 3 times in those first 5 years.* (1994 had no division winner, of course)
92,93: Cito Gaston, year 4 (with 2 prior divisions)
91, 87: Tom Kelly year 2 won a series
1990: Lou Piniella, year 1
1989: Tony Larussa, year 4
1988: Tommy Lasorda, several, starting in year 6 (1981)
1986: Davey Johnson, year 3
1985: Dick Howser, year 5 (3 prior division titles)
1984: Sparky Anderson, year 7, though Sparky was a 2-time series winner with Cincy, and Detroit got better every year under him so he shouldn't even count.
In fact, all of the managers listed above with 2+ years before reaching the series all had prior success. I went back to 1968 and couldn't find a single manager that had 5+ increasingly worse seasons before winning a World Series. Tell me again why stability is a good idea for this franchise?
And while we're on the subject, I'm also sick of this "Dusty Cares" crap. "Look! He got mad and threw his hat in the dugout! He still cares!"
Big deal. There's a million Cubs fans out there that care just as much if not more, and I don't want any of them to be manager either.
He's not paid to care. He's not even paid to win. He's paid to put his team in the best possible position to win, and he doesn't do that. Period.