Don Zimmer Factor?
Posted by Steve L. on June 7th, 2005 · Comments (5)
I hate to admit this, because, in the end, Zimmer proved to be a moaning PITA, IMHO. And, when he left, it was time for Don to go. But, if you look at the time that Zimmer was bench coach for NY, you’ll see these results:
1996: Ring
1997: LDS loss – but, close
1998: Ring
1999: Ring
2000: Ring
2001: Just missed a Ring
2002: LDS knock-out
2003: Pennant
And, well, we all know how 2004 ended and how 2005 has been so far. It does beg the question – How much did Don Zimmer add to the Yankees on-field brain trust?
FWIW, Zimmer, as a MGR, just missed a pennant in 1978 (with Boston) and brought the Cubs to the NLCS in 1989.
Was Zimmer the man behind the curtain to Torre’s Wizard all this time?
I’ve heard this a lot. Seems as though people think Zim was the one who made most of the calls in the dugout.
Career, courtesy of Baseball-Reference. I say this with the belief that managers don’t make much of a difference in the grand scheme of things
————————————————
Managerial Record Glossary
Year Finish
1972 6
1973 6
1976 3
1977 3
1978 2
1979 3
1980 4
1981 2 First half of season
1981 3 Second half of season
1982 6
1988 4
1989 1
1990 5
1991 4
BostonRS 715 411 304 .575
ChicagoC 524 265 258 .507
SanDiego 304 114 190 .375
Texas 201 95 106 .473
TOTAL 1744 885 858 .508
According to Zimmer, who my good friend does business with, the dynamic worked because Zimmer was the risk taker, always attempting to make things happen (hit & run, steals, hunches ect…)while Joe’s excelled at deciding when to listen to Zim. After hearing this early last season, it has become obvious to me that it clearly was true. Torre has fallen into the trap of formula style managing, taking no risks and playing zero hunches that made him appear so special over the course of the dynasty. The thing missing the past two years is the bench coach who Torre trusts enough to allow him to contribute to this team.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing this.
I had sorta hoped that Girardi would have added some of this – because he was with Zim in Chicago and Colorado. But, maybe he does and Joe doesn’t listen to him?
“1996: Ring
1997: LDS loss – but, close
1998: Ring
1999: Ring
2000: Ring
2001: Just missed a Ring
2002: LDS knock-out
2003: Pennant
And, well, we all know how 2004 ended…”
2004 w/o Zim ended with a loss in the LCS (but close). How is that worse than 1997 or 2002, and it’s not much different from 2001 and 2003. If the loss of Zim is to blame for the Yankees poor play this year then is he also to blame for their 101 wins last year? I don’t think the Zim-factor thesis holds much water.