After four-plus seasons of really bad baseball, Tony Muser was fired last night by the Royals. The move wasn’t a surprise, and
it wasn’t unwarranted: Muser had a success-to-tenure ratio envied by the people who run network television.

It’s important to point out that this is just a first step, albeit a long overdue, very necessary one. All of the Royals’
problems aren’t the fault of Tony Muser; they’re largely the result of an organization that has for too long been behind the
knowledge curve. What sacking Muser does is remove one barrier to success, but unless the Royals do a better job in acquiring
and developing talent–and there are positive signs–this isn’t going to make a huge difference.

Keep in mind that the Royals still have to fill the position. Current Omaha manager Bucky Dent is considered the favorite for
the job, and there’s not enough of a file on him–just a half-season with the Yankees a lifetime ago–to make a case for or
against him.

I do believe, though, that the Royals need to go in a different direction. whereas their last four managerial hires have been
men with no prior MLB experience, people they hoped would grow with a young team, I believe it’s time they make a statement that
they intend to win, and bring in someone with a track record of doing so. With all due respect to Dent, this team needs someone
like Buck Showalter, or Davey Johnson, or probably the best candidate, Larry Dierker. Dierker would be an excellent choice for a
team with a good collection of young pitchers, and he won four division titles in his five years in Houston. The Royals need
that, not someone else learning on the job.

Building is nice. Winning is better. Larry Dierker for Royals manager.

A few weeks ago I wrote this in the wake of the Phil Garner firing:

My question is the same as it always is in these situations: how can a manager be the right man for the job from October through
March, then suddenly become not the right man six games into the season?…

I just have to wonder what good it does to let one guy run the team all through spring training, pick the roster, set the rules,
get to know the players, then dump him because the team has a six-game losing streak…. Is it somehow worse because it comes at
the start of the season?

Since writing that, three more teams off to terrible starts have canned their skippers. The point stands, and I think it’s worth
making in stronger terms:

A good organization does not fire the manager in April.

The teams that have dumped their managers this month have three of the worst-run organizations in the game (and you can debate
whether the Rockies should be on that list), and that’s not surprising to me. An organization with a plan and the confidence to
execute it doesn’t make a decision on the basis of one month’s worth of results. If a manager was the right man for the job in
November, and in March, than it stands to reason he’s the right man for the job in May, irrespective of April results.

I think I’ve made this point about players, but it applies to teams and managers as well: people get way too fired up about
April performances. Would Tony Muser be any better suited for his job had the Royals started the season 12-11? No, of course
not. It’s just that the 23-game stretch looks worse at the start of the season, because there’s no good stretch to balance it
out. It’s the same dumb thing we see in player evaluation, where April stats get blown way out of proportion because they’re the
only numbers we have.

It’s the same thing in Milwaukee and Colorado and Detroit, and perhaps by the weekend, in Philadelphia. Those teams had a
stretch of poor results at the time when "a stretch of poor results" is all the results. A well-run organization
recognizes that a season is 162 games long, that they hired their manager for a reason, and shows patience. A bad organization
doesn’t have a rationale for employing its manager to begin with, and simply tosses him aside because it needs to do

The Royals, like the Brewers and Tigers, may have done the right thing, but they did it for the wrong reasons. Their willingness
to allow short-term outcomes to undercut the commitments they made doesn’t speak well for their ability to commit to a plan that
will put a winner on the field any time soon.

Joe Sheehan is an author of Baseball Prospectus. You can contact him by
clicking here.

Thank you for reading

This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.

Subscribe now
You need to be logged in to comment. Login or Subscribe