Only time will tell if Cincinnati's hiring of Dusty Baker was inspired or imprudent. Beneficial or forgettable. But one thing's for sure. The Reds sure didn't waste their time deliberating. They settled on Baker but quick. They pulled the trigger faster than Billy "The Kid” ever did! What must be asked now is will they regret having done so?
It looks as if once Cincy zeroed in on Baker, the deal was done. The die was cast. Everyone else then became an afterthought. Baker was the apple of management's eye and nothing was going to change that. He was clearly the object of their affection and desire. They seemed determined to move heaven and earth to make sure Baker didn't escape their covetous pursuit. It was almost as if the Reds were salivating after him. As if they couldn't do without him.
And that's a bit surprising because while Baker may have a respectable body of work, he isn't exactly the second coming of Sparky Anderson. Moreover, Baker arrives in the Queen City far from being on a roll. He was unceremoniously dumped from his last managerial stint in Chicago. The Cubs kicked him to the curb after an absolutely awful season in the Windy City.
You also hear things about Baker that aren't exactly flattering. It has been suggested that he overworks pitchers to the point where they become susceptible to injury. Baker is reputed to be a bit lax on discipline and is not known to run the tightest of ships. He's also whispered to be deficient in nurturing and developing young talent.
Whether these criticisms have credence or not is probably in the eye of the beholder For his part, Baker claims that they are greatly overblown and exaggerated. But when you talk to some folks in Chitown and elsewhere, they'll swear the knocks against Baker are justified.
Now, none of this is brought up to suggest that Baker is without merit. On the contrary, his credentials are legit. He enjoyed, for the most part, a nice run in San Francisco and he did advance the Cubs into the postseason on one occasion. In addition, his three Manager of the Year awards can't be disregarded although that designation can be highly subjective and debatable.
No, I'm not trying to imply that Baker doesn't have his good points. Truthfully, it wouldn't surprise me if he turns out to be a nice fit for the Reds. He's shown enough in the past that you'd be a fool to ever dismiss him.
But he's far from being a lock to revive the Reds. This is his third go-round and the second time he's been recycled. Generally, managers working on their third gig rarely strike gold. What I'm saying is that Baker is hardly a sure thing.
Which brings us to the crux of the issue. It's not so much the fact that the Reds selected Baker. Rather, it was the way in which he was tabbed. The manner in which it was handled. The club's methodology if you will.
The truth is there was no reason to hurry through the process. Like a grocer, Cincy could have weighed things a bit longer. It would have been to their advantage to have gotten a more complete lay of the land. To have seen who might have come available after the World Series ended. Or who, at the 11th hour, may have expressed an interest in the job.
And it certainly wouldn't have hurt to have brought in other candidates for a face-to-face with G.M. Wayne Krivsky and his boss, owner Bob Castellini. Though it's reported that Baker wowed them during the interview process, others should have been given a similar opportunity to do the same.
Not to have least looked in other directions smacks of short-sightedness. It leaves the impression that there was a rush to judgment. Will this be a case where haste makes waste? We shall soon see.
Another reality that can't be denied is that Baker wasn't exactly a hot commodity. Teams were hardly clamoring for his services. It appears no one else, save the Reds, was breaking down the door to get to him. The odds are that if Baker hadn't found employment with the Reds, no other team would have tendered him an offer.
Hence, Cincy could have done their due diligence and screened other applicants. If, after that process, the club decided that Baker was still their guy, chances are he still would have been free to take the post.
And if Baker would have taken offense because the Reds kept him waiting awhile, then tough. So be it. It wouldn't have been the end of the world if Cincy would have been compelled to search elsewhere had Baker gotten into a snit.
In this writer's opinion, Baker is tolerable but he doesn't qualify as a coup. In short, he ain't all that!
It'll be interesting to see where the Reds head with Baker at the helm. Can he build upon the stability established by his predecessor Pete Mackanin ? With some moderate tweaking, the pieces seem to be in place for the Reds to make a push up the standings. The question is whether Baker is the man to get them there and into the postseason chase? Those who believe in him are sure he's the answer while his doubters have serious reservations.
In other words, was Dusty a wise choice or did the dispatch in which Cincy hired him lead to a half-baked decision? For Krivsky's and Castellini's sake, not to mention for the health of the franchise, Baker had better pan out. If not, his hasty hire will be a bone of contention for years to come.