Earl and The Man - Gary Armida's Blog

Arena Blog Dynasty Scores Sign Up ☰

Gary Armida's Blog

Earl and The Man Stuck

Posted on January 21, 2013 at 10:23 AM.

(0)

It was a weekend of loss for Major League Baseball. First came the news of the long time Baltimore Orioles Manager Earl Weaver�s passing. The man who built the famed �Orioles Way� was on an Orioles fan cruise when he passed away at the age of 82. Many of today�s fans may not know much more about Weaver than a couple of Youtube clips showing one of his 97 ejections. Few know that Weaver was one of the most astute and progressive Managers in Major League Baseball history.

Later, it was announced that Stan Musial, one of the legends of baseball, had passed away at the age of 92. In St. Louis, Musial was beloved and celebrated for his great accomplishments on the field. More importantly, the people of St. Louis got the constant, first hand look of why Musial�s nickname was simply �The Man� as Musial was one of those rare icons whose feats on the field were also matched by the person he was off the field.

Both Weaver and Musial have their place in Major League Baseball history. They are both enshrined in Cooperstown and both do get some acknowledgement for their accomplishments when one thinks of the greats in the game. But, both are widely underrated when it comes to their place in baseball history. When discussing the sport�s greatest Managers, Weaver�s name is rarely mentioned in the first four or five names. When talking best players of all-time, Musial is always an afterthought when names like Ruth, Mays, Mantle, Cobb, DiMaggio, and many others are put into the discussion. In both cases, their greatness is forgotten.

Perhaps it is a generation thing. Earl Weaver hasn�t managed a game since 1985. Managers are rarely put into context well anyway as their importance is always debated. Musial hasn�t played since 1962 and because he wasn�t the prototypical slugger like his contemporaries, he is rarely discussed in terms of being in Cooperstown�s inner circle.

Whatever the reason, history has done a disservice to the two men. Both are celebrated because of their names, but both have been incredibly short changed.

Earl Weaver took over the Baltimore Orioles halfway through the 1968 season as a 37 year old rookie Manager. His club finished 48-34, good for second place. That first half season began a string of 17 consecutive winning seasons as Manager of the Orioles. The following season, his Orioles club won the American League pennant, but were swallowed up just like the rest of baseball by the Miracle Mets. Weaver got his World Series ring the following season at 39 years old, leading the 1970 Orioles to 108 wins and a 4-1 World Series win over the Cincinnati Reds. Weaver�s Orioles would return to the World Series the following season, but they would lose a seven game series to the Pittsburgh Pirates.

Take a step back and just put Weaver�s first three full seasons as a Major League Manager into perspective. He got his club to three consecutive World Series and came out with one victory. During his next seven seasons at the helm, the Orioles would win at least 90 games five times. Yet, they would miss the playoffs each year, a reminder that the modern day Wild Card system can make quite an impact on a Manager�s legacy. Weaver�s Orioles would win his fourth AL pennant in 1979, but once again fall in the World Series to the Pittsburgh Pirates. He would leave the Orioles after the 1982 season, but come back to try to resuscitate them in 1985. He finished his managerial career in 1986 with the only losing season of his career. He retired at the age of 55 with a career record of 1,480-1,060, winning those four pennants and the one World Series title. At the time, it seemed like Weaver was old and the game was passing him by. But, that simply wasn�t the case.

Weaver�s legacy is sort of cemented as this crusty old Manager who would make a spectacle when arguing. It�s true that Weaver had a temper and made it no secret that he didn�t like umpires. But, that legacy overshadows what Earl Weaver really was. He was one of the most progressive Managers of his time. Many criticized that Weaver merely filled out a lineup card, but that�s because of the era he managed in.

Weaver managed during a time when bunting, stealing, and the small ball strategies were widely practiced. Weaver didn�t believe in any of that. While many will attribute the book Moneyball for the appreciation of on base percentage and for the disdain of the inefficient small ball practices, it was actually Weaver who managed differently than most during the small ball era. Weaver�s famous motto was that he loved the three run homer. At the time, it sounded like lazy managing. But, in this era of baseball, it is easily seen as efficient managing. Weaver didn�t believe in the bunt because, as he said in his book Weaver on Strategy, it wasted outs. He believed outs were precious. Weaver�s clubs consistently led the league in on base percentage because he encouraged his clubs to take the walk. He believed that a walk could win a game. His clubs walked more than any club during the 1970�s. He was also a platoon manager, maximizing the talent of his roster. While he was blessed with a tremendous rotation, he constantly pushed and prodded them and utilized his bullpen.

The Michael Lewis book gets a lot of credit for today�s modern beliefs, but Earl Weaver was putting those beliefs into practice decades before. He never really got the credit for being progressive because the game wasn�t ready for that. Instead, his temper was the legacy. Now, hopefully, there should be an appreciation for just how progressive Earl Weaver really was.

Like Weaver, Stan Musial went through most of his life without being truly appreciated for the greatness of his career. When someone would ask about the game�s best hitters, the names Ruth, Gehrig, Cobb, Mays, Mantle, and DiMaggio are always one of the first answers. While those are all great answers, Musial�s name should be among those greats. And, with the exception of perhaps Ruth and maybe Mays, Musial�s name should be one of the first names to come up.

Over 22 seasons, Stan Musial compiled a batting line of .331/.417/.559. Musial is never thought of as a slugger, yet his .559 career slugging percentage is 19th best all-time. While that career board has been littered with names such as Juan Gonzalez and Alex Rodriguez, Musial�s career mark is better than Willie Mays� and Mickey Mantle�s. He ranks 22nd all-time in on base percentage and his .331 average is 30th best of all-time. He ranks 13th all-time in OPS+ and 12th in career WAR.

His 3,630 hits are 4th most in Major League history. His 725 doubles are third most, while his 1,951 RBI are 6th most. His 2,562 runs created are third most in history. He also hit 475 home runs, added 177 triples, and walked 1,599 times during his 22 seasons. That walk number may not sound too big, but consider that he struck out just 676 times in his career. He won seven batting titles, led the league in on base percentage six times, and also led the league in slugging percentage six times. He won three MVP Awards and also finished second four other seasons. He appeared on an MVP ballot in 18 of his 22 seasons. He was also a member of three World Series winning teams, all during the 1940�s.

Despite the statistics of an all-time great, why wasn�t Musial celebrated across the Nation more than he was? It is difficult to say. He did play most of his prime before the era of Mays and Mantle, two players who put up all-time great statistics with a bit more style. His prime was played out when Ted Williams was hitting .400 and Joe DiMaggio was putting together quality years. But, even those factors shouldn�t have stopped him from being celebrated. Perhaps it was because of his quiet nature. Musial was, in fact, one of the good guys. One can�t find a negative article written about him. In many of the old articles written about him, he talked about the importance of sleep. He wasn�t the party type. He didn�t do a lot of talking about his exploits. He was quiet; he didn�t draw attention to himself. And, when the game morphed into the home run happy era where the strikeout was sort of accepted for a hitter, his excellence was lost a bit.

From the age the 21 through 37, an average Stan Musial season looked like this: .340/.426/.578 with 40 doubles, 10 triples, 25 home runs, 107 runs scored, 105 RBI, 84 walks, and just 32 strikeouts. That average does not include his last five seasons from age 38-42 when he hit a respectable .283/.369/.483. For those 16 prime seasons, Musial was one of the most consistently great players in the history of the sport. He even missed one year--1945--due to military service, which likely cost him the then magical 500 home runs. Maybe that milestone cost Musial that National notoriety that many of his peers had.

While Earl Weaver and Stan Musial were polar opposites when it came to their personalities, both were exactly the same when it came to their impact on the game. Both men were geniuses on the field. Earl Weaver consistently won using principles that wouldn�t be truly embraced until two decades after his retirement. Stan Musial compiled one of the most complete careers in the history of the sport despite missing out on the National adoration from fans and media. He was one of the handful of greatest hitters to ever step up to the plate. And, he was that great hitter for an incredible 22 years, even if he was left off Baseball�s All Century Team by the fans. A special committee added him after the vote to right the wrong of the fans.

Baseball lost two of its greatest over the weekend. It also lost two of its most underappreciated figures. If there were really an inner circle of the Hall of Fame--a group that separates the truly legendary from the all-time greats--Earl Weaver would have a place amongst the game�s greatest Managers. Stan Musial would be standing right alongside Ruth, Cobb, Mays, and the other legends as the greatest left fielder of all-time . We may not have understood each man�s excellence on the field while they on the field or even during their retirement. Maybe our understanding of the game didn�t allow it. But, as the evaluation process of baseball continues to evolve, perhaps their respective careers will be put into their proper place.

Gary Armida is a staff writer for Operation Sports. He also writes about baseball at fullcountpitch.com. Join the discussion on twitter @garyarmida