The Tony LaRussa Problem

by Cardinals

This is the look we've all become accustomed to. So warm and inviting, no? (source: AP)

I was once a fan of Tony LaRussa. Admittedly, my love affair with the polarizing manager of the Cardinals was a brief one; it ended about a week before the start of the 1996 season. That was, of course, when Ozzie Smith was outdueling Royce Clayton for shortstop in spring training and LaRussa STILL refused to give Ozzie the job. Like most fans, I was left muttering, “Who does this frowning, hunched-over, kitten-petting idiot think he is, anyway?”

Then it only went downhill from there.

LaRussa apologists (otherwise known as “morons”) often defend him by citing his 2,638 career wins, a heady number that places him third on the all-time list.  Neat. But he also has the second-most losses of all time, too. In other words, having that many wins is really not a gauge of his actual talent as a manager. In fact, LaRussa’s overall record tells us that he is a mediocre manager who has happened to manage longer than almost everyone else. The oldest blind chicken in the blind chicken henhouse probably ends up with the most kernels of corn, too … that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s great to be a blind chicken.

It’s actually shocking to consider LaRussa’s modest success (ranking only 64th in all-time winning percentage) given the teams and talent he has managed over the years in Oakland and St. Louis. The late-eighties Oakland teams were powerhouses featuring career years from Mark McGwire, Jose Canseco, and Dave Parker, with rotations built around 20 game winner Dave Stewart. LaRussa also managed some of the strongest Cardinals teams in decades, most of which benefitted from having one of the greatest baseball players of the modern era in Albert Pujols. A broken flip-flop could manage these teams to victory.

During LaRussa’s tenure as manager of the Redbirds, several disturbing themes have become blatantly obvious. More often than not, these managerial and personality “quirks” seize up good teams (like 2004/2005) and capsize troubled teams (like the 2010 edition). Here are some of LaRussa’s biggest problems:

NO EYE FOR TALENT

The best baseball men can look at a player and determine his strengths and weaknesses on the field; LaRussa’s inability to do this is almost pathological. Rather than assess a player’s true athletic worth, LaRussa relies on a nebulous combination of personal appreciation, work ethic, and body type. When not given hulking monsters in the lineup, LaRussa without fail gravitates to spunky, smaller players with modest numbers and an extra helping of grit. How else can you explain why Aaron Miles has been with the Cardinals for four years?

Of course, the Herzog-built teams of the eighties were full of slap-hitting and gritty guys, too. But they were also athletic, fast, and didn’t have the same range as a bag of laundry. That’s because Herzog looked at his circumstances and could accurately assess the talent on his team. He didn’t grade his players based on how much he liked them or what they did ten years ago. Which leads me to the next point …  

THE VETERAN SYNDROME

Veteran players are an important part of a winning team. But, unless they are truly superstars, veterans should have limited exposure because their age and physical deterioration makes them more of a liability in the field. For instance, the everyday lineup of the 1985 Cardinals featured nobody over the age of 30 years old. People like Steve Braun (36 years old) and Mike Jorgensen (37 years old) had limited and fill-in roles on the club. The starters and almost all of the relievers on that team were all around thirty or younger except for veteran Bob Forsch.

But LaRussa actually favors a lineup that can get coffee discounts at McDonald’s. The team has taken up this unfortunate fetish, spending offseasons dumpster-diving for the latest thirtysomething veteran castoff. This past offseason the Cardinals did this again, acquiring Lance Berkman (35) to play right field every day despite knees that could buckle by June.

Again, the problem here isn’t a reliance on veterans; every team needs them. The problem here is over-reliance on veterans. LaRussa builds teams around veteran players three years past their prime, rather than build teams around prime players and complementing with veterans.

MANAGING BY STATISTICS

I believe this, more than anything, has contributed to LaRussa’s destructive over-reliance on veterans. As a stat man, LaRussa requires extensive notations in order to manage his game plan. Rookies don’t have extensive pitching match-up statistics and obsessively-recorded hit charts, making LaRussa “blind” in his use of rookies. Someone like Berkman, however, has a wealth of statistical information on how he hits and where, which gives a numbers guy like LaRussa ample understanding of how best to use him. Of course, all of the stats in the world can’t put Berkman in a position to win when he’s laid up in the trainer’s room, but that’s another story.

CATFIGHTS AND CLIQUES

A baseball team should be like a fraternity. The guys on that team should be like brothers, a close-knit group that sticks together through individual and team-related troubles. They should cheer for each other, weep with each other, party together, and support one another.

LaRussa has a guy as talented as Rasmus on the team, and he can't figure out how to play him every day? Really? (source: AP)

However, LaRussa’s teams almost always resemble a sorority; gossipy, cliquish, divided, tense, jealous, and uncomfortable. This is almost entirely LaRussa’s fault, as his personality and tendency toward favoritism cultivates this type of atmosphere. The number of players emotionally and professionally mutilated or destroyed by a LaRussa clubhouse is disturbing. The fight list seems endless: Ozzie Smith (who has avoided the franchise because of LaRussa), J.D. Drew, Anthony Reyes, Scott Rolen, Jim Edmonds … these big stars just couldn’t seem to get along with the man.

But 2010 was LaRussa’s masterwork of destructive emotional debris. In one short season he managed to fight with Ryan Ludwick (who was then shipped off), Brendan Ryan, and Colby Rasmus. The Rasmus situation was most telling about the atmosphere of a LaRussa clubhouse. During the September revelations of a rift between LaRussa and Rasmus, it was revealed that Pujols took the young man aside to talk to him, and that it was the first time the two had really talked in the year and a half that Colby had been on the team. HUH? The only logical explanation is that Pujols, playing favorites, sided with his manager’s dislike of Rasmus and his pedigree and ignored the kid. No major league clubhouse that expects to win can have a heavy atmosphere of resentment and mistrust.

We can see LaRussa’s withholding of emotion in the day to day efforts of the team. Striving to be cooly professional all the time, the team generally lacks fire when it counts. This leads to limp playoff appearances, where the team settles into a chilled and tense mode that stifles any spirit. The best example of this came in the ninth inning of the 2005 playoffs when Pujols hit that monster three run homer off of Brad Lidge. When Pujols arrived at the plate, there was nary a celebration among the Cardinals players; they just clapped and moved on. No truly successful team has such a complete lack of fire and enthusiasm with the game on the line. This lack of emotional center comes directly from LaRussa.

INCONSISTENCIES

As Rolen found out, if you’re hurt and you don’t tell the team, you’ll be benched once it’s discovered. Unless you’re Larry Walker. Or Pujols. Or Molina. Or you’re the son of the pitching coach.

On or off the field, LaRussa doesn’t seem to have a consistent inner compass by which the other players can navigate the season. Rules seem arbitrary, shifting based on personal preference rather than being built on a solid foundation. Some players are set to unreasonable expectations that, when not met, result in their downfall (Brendan Ryan, for instance) while others are given a pass. Was Yadier Molina benched two years ago when he hit .200 for a season? Was he made to fight for a job the following year? Of course not. So what is the difference between Molina two years ago (light-hitting defensive star) and Brendan Ryan?? There isn’t one, actually, and can only be attributed to LaRussa’s inconsistent management of the team.

MICROMANAGER

LaRussa has always been a stats-heavy micromanager, but the last few years have seen him become obsessive about it – to the detriment of the team. By the fifth inning of every game, LaRussa is itching to pull a starter and begin the process of exhausting his bullpen. He’s like an impatient boss who cannot stand to see employees sitting around without giving them some busy work.

Last year’s 20 inning loss against the Mets might’ve been a win, except that LaRussa had used 80% of his pitching staff by the seventh inning. Several close losses last year could have been avoided had LaRussa not decided to pull Rasmus (who had the highest slugging percentage among centerfielders last year) in the seventh inning for the likes of Aaron Miles and Randy Winn (???).

His lineups, often the object of scorn among Cardinal Nation, reveals a mind that cannot stay focused or grasp the fundamentals of the game. What does batting Pujols third really accomplish? One hundred years of baseball history demonstrate the intelligence of batting your most powerful hitter at clean-up. Pujols is the one of the most powerful hitters ever, so if anyone should ever bat clean-up, it should be HIM. Not Chris Duncan.

But, because LaRussa thinks Pujols should bat third, we have the LaRussa brainfart of batting the pitcher eighth in order to have a “second leadoff man.” HUH? Here’s a thought: if that player batting ninth is so good, then put him at the top of the lineup in front of Pujols. The eighties Cardinals teams scored lots of runs without many home runs because they had three good hitters batting in front of their only home run threat. TRY THAT. Put some guys who can actually get on base at the top of your lineup in front of Pujols. And no, I’m not talking about Aaron Miles, either.

DESTRUCTION OF YOUTH

Nothing pains me more than watching LaRussa systematically destroy the entire farm system as it enters the major leagues. He misused Rick Ankiel. He tried to get Anthony Reyes to stop throwing his wonderful fastball for some reason. He trotted out Chris Duncan repeatedly despite his obvious lack of ability until he was worthless. He fought against keeping Pujols on the team in 2001. COLBY RASMUS. BRENDAN RYAN. It’s almost like he resents their youthful vigor or something.

Even worse, LaRussa likes to publicly trash these players as well, destroying their trade value. For instance, LaRussa calling Brendan Ryan “clueless” in the newspapers prior to the winter meetings seemed like one of the worst possible things you can do for a franchise. Sure, Tony … tell everybody how awful this guy is! I’m sure that’ll help during trade talks! Had I been the boss, LaRussa would’ve gotten a stern lecture about keeping his mouth shut.

LaRussa’s stubborn refusal to accept younger players from the farm system has almost always resulted in the franchise trading away these prospects for older veterans that do not pay off, or pay off at a steep price. This has and will continue to erode the farm system, which will take years to replenish and rebuild. Ask Oakland fans how long it too their organization to rebuild after LaRussa did the same thing over there.

CONCLUSION

When Sherlock Holmes was confronted by the evil of his arch-nemesis Moriarty, he admired the genius and wit while abhorring the wickedness. This is the exact opposite of how I feel about LaRussa. His managerial style and personal touch have been poisonous in the clubhouse and in the everyday lineup. I simply cannot accept his machinations no matter how many times he’s blessed with superior teams that win despite his basic instinct to ruin everything. 

It’s been a long 14 years under LaRussa’s spell. The coming year promises more baggage (what of the Rasmus drama over the winter?), more broken-down veterans, and more bewildering emergency lineups. I’m ready for LaRussa to retire to his kitten farm in California. I’m ready for fresh eyes to see possibilities instead of lack. I’m ready for renewal, for revival, for rebuilding.

When that finally happens, we can raise a glass together in celebration over the good times of the past, but, more importantly, the release from captivity of future’s promise. 

Hopefully soon this type of awkward situation will be a thing of the past.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments
Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Geno1939 5 pts

LaRussa is an arrogant anal retentive!

I wish the writer of this article were wrong, but the more I think of his point of view on the various sections, the more I'm afraid he is right. I've always liked LaRussa, but I guess that shows how little I know. Oh, I've been a Cardinal fan ever since I learn what Cardinal baseball was at about age 7 or 8 and I'm now 58/disabled so can watch them a lot. Hope Tony will make the needed changes, but there there is the "old dog new tricks factor." Sad. I'll cheer for any team the Cardinals field, but I won't be so satisfied with LaRussa anymore. YEA CARDINALS!! RN/MEDIC

Well put article, my exact feelings on LaRussa. The writer will be lucky if he isn't caught by the Tony Fans, feet placed in concrete and thrown into a vat of KoolAid.

I do think he will be traded. I do not think that he has taken well to LaRussa's mind games; he'd do better where the manager just says "go play."

I think management and a lot of the fans look at him and only see his flaws. They completely overlook the fact that he has a wonderful left handed power swing, because, you know, he should hit more like John Jay. You want a John Jay type, just play the real John Jay.

It would be best for all parties if they just traded Rasmus. Then you only have to worry if Mozeliak is savvy enough to get what he's worth......

My comment was a reply to you, Ray. I don't know why it's way down here. My bad.

Great article!
Tony Larussa is defined by one word!
DRUNK

Just more of the same from the LaRussa haters. Makes the playoffs for the first time since 87...not good enough, he was mean to Ozzie.

Wins the WS in 06...not happy...they were a bad team and it was his fault.

He leads one of the most successful eras in team history...we don't like him because he's too serious.

Cardinals Nation is supposed to be made up of the best baseball fans on the planet. Turns out many of them are spoiled brats.

I'm interested to see how fans react after LaRussa retires and we fall back into the Joe Torre days of Geronimo Pena and Fernando Tatis. Those teams might have been terrible, but that Torre was such a likable guy!

It's not like Torre picked Tatis and Pena; those were the players he was given. Torre didn't have the same pull within the organization that LaRussa has to make requests for moves.

The "most successful era" you speak of coincided with the rise of Pujols - possibly the best ballplayer in decades - and the teams of the early-to-mid Aughts that Jocketty built around that force. YOU OR I COULD WIN PENNANT AFTER PENNANT MANAGING THOSE TEAMS. Give me a team with the MV3, Sanders, Larry Walker, Carpenter, Wainwright, Izzy, and Yadi behind the plate, and I'll win every year. It's not hard to figure out.

Tell me: how many pennants has LaRussa managed outside of those terrific teams from 2004-2006 (in which they won two)? Try NONE in twelve years. Meanwhile Whitey managed THREE between 1982-1987. And he did it in a much stronger division than LaRussa has had to play in.

I'll admit that I don't like LaRussa's managing style. He's not aggressive enough. His teams are slow, and wait for big hits rather than make things happen to win. As I've mentioned above, his favoritism and personality create a chilly and oppressive atmosphere in the team. And his moves on the field are completely ridiculous by any measure of baseball knowledge.

So pennants is the metric for success? Is that because that's where Whitey beats LaRussa? So that's the one to look at?

Not winning percentage. Not success outside of those pennant years? What happened in 83, 84, 86, & 88?

Might not have won pennants, but it was better to watch playoff baseball in 96, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, & 2006.

I know you'll say that the 80s Cardinals didn't have the luxury of the 3 divisions and the wild card (I know Whitey has said it). Fine, but don't tell me it hasn't been a successful run.

And let me understand something. LaRussa has no eye for talent AND has way more influence over the shape of the roster than most? Ok.

But he also had a team so loaded with talent in 2004 that you could have won the World Series? I suppose that team came together based on luck. Or he was out to lunch when that team was put together?

In reference to the Clayton/Smith issue - The Cards won and made it to the playoffs for the first time since '87, and while Smith may have hit slightly better than Clayton in the Spring the defensive record speaks for itself.
Did you want to be like the Blues did last year and use Walt over and over and lose or bring in new blood and win/ Not horrible, just good managing.

The ultimate decision on the moves ARE the GM. Sure TLR has input, just like any other manager, but he is NOT the GM. Herzog wanted that power, that's why he was made GM and made several unpopular moves, but moves he felt he had to make to get a contender. (I won't even go into the whole Porter replacing Simmons deal). Besides, in order to get a pitcher like Westbrook the Padres wanted Ludwick. I would rather have traded Ryan at the time but no one wanted him. (No one really wanted him after the season either, that's why the M's gave up so little for him.

Schumaker did not play every day, the fact is they had far less depth at 2nd than they did in the OF. MO made the move because the the Padres wanted Ludwick and he was coming back from an injury and Jon Jay was hitting like a man possesed. Which brings me to another point that contradicts your whole TLR likes aged veterans. If he did, why make that move????? Also, you say that the team is chaulk full of over the hill vets. Really???? So how old is the team? Let's look: LF Holliday-31 prime of his game, CF Rasmus-24 backed up by Jay who is 25. Berkman is older but they never said he would play every day. jay figures to get a lot of playing time along with Craig-26 yrs old. Pujols-turns 31 this month, Schumaker-30, Theriot-just turned 32, Freese- 27, Molina-28. Carp is the elder statesman on the pitching staff at 35, but would you want someone else? Not me. Waino-29, Garcia- 24, Westbrook-33, Lohse-32. I would put that staff up against any top 5 in the NL hands down. I'll give you the Franklin issue, yes he needs to use Motte as the closer. But the rest are in their mid 20's. Look at the team with the exeption of Franklin, Carp, Theriot, Lohse, Westbrook, and Holliday,and Berkman, the rest made their start here. How can you possibly say he doesn't use the young kids??? That's more than half the team in Waino, Pujols, Rasmus, Garcia, Motte, Boggs, Schumaker, Jay, Ryan, Greene, Craig, Walters, McClellan, and Freese.
Oh, and I wanted to correct you as well, Molina two years ago did NOT hit .200 as you so proudly proclaim. he hit .293! Please please please get your facts straight. You are probably thinking of 2006, and the reason he didn't take him out was twofold. One: the backup was Gary Bennett, who probably couldn't have been a starting catcher for the Cubbies, let alone the Cards.
Also, you obviously don't take into consideration the differences in position between SS and Catcher. The Catcher has the extra duty of being the QB of sorts by handling the pitchers. The SS does not. Ryan batted almost .090 points less than the year before and committed 17 errors, more than double the previous year. His confidence was shot, he even admitted that. That was NOT TLR. He kept him playing longer than he probably should have giving him chance after chance, and took a lot of heat for it. So your analogy that TLR did not give Ryan a fair shot does not hold any water.

You make interesting points about the ages of the team this year. Last year part of our bench consisted of Aaron Miles and Randy Winn, who might be okay fill-in guys except that LaRussa played Miles almost every day as if he was some sort of super-sub that had to be in the lineup.

You're right about Molina's year. I was thinking it was actually 2007, but you're right it was 2006. DURING A CHAMPIONSHIP RUN. And Molina played every inning of every game and had his job waiting for him the following year. Why not lobby to have him replaced via trade or free agency as LaRussa did with Ryan?? Oh, that's because LaRussa LIKES Molina. It's inconsistent and clearly favoritism.

I won't even get into the idea that we had to trade Luddy for a pitcher right at the time when it was offense - not pitching - that was causing the team's problems. Basically it came down to LaRussa and Duncan coveting Westbrook and having the opportunity to have Mo make the trade and get rid of Luddy at the same time.

LaRussa LIKES Molina because he handles the pitching staff. He has been clear that he's willing to sacrifice offense at that position to have the right guy executing their game plan. You can not seriously compare Molina's impact on a game to Ryan's.

This has changed my mind on tony even though deep down I never really cared for him this occured when ryan franklin became our closer, ryan ludwics traded and most recently brendan ryan being traded for a single a pitcher

Yeah, the Ryan Franklin thing bugs me as well. We have two young power arms that LaRussa keeps hiding in the bullpen in favor of Franklin's old, dimpled rump.

And again, I will emphasize that I believe LaRussa is more than slightly responsible for the Luddy and Ryan trades. Some argue that he has little input, but that is ludicrous.

Wow Ray. Tell us how you really feel. Don't hold back like I think you are. Seriously, dude, you are going to have a stroke if you don't lighten up a bit. You hate TLR, ok we get it. But you need to view things objectively (other than your one sided biased opinion clouding your judgement), then you might see a lot of your arguments don't hold water. There are so many and I really don't want to publish a book here so I will just touch on a couple of things.
First of all, you say that TLR is not a good manager even though he has so many wins by citing he has so many losses. Ok, one could look at that as valid, until you look at a few people in history in similar situations. If you did I could say you don't think the great Cy Young was a great pitcher. Even though he finished with 511 wins and the most all time (and has the pitching MVP award named after him) just because he has the most losses of all time, 316. There are so many other pitchers who have a better winning percentage than Young. Likewise, so many great managers have had a worse winning percentage than TLR, like the great Connie Mack (who actually had a losing record)Tommy Lasorda, Buckey Harris, Casey Stengel, Dick Williams, Red Schoendienst, and your beloved Whitey Herzog, just to name a few. (The great Nolan Ryan- Most strikeouts, also the most walks. Martin Brodeur in the NHL- most wins 5th most losses, Terry Sawchuck 5th and 7th,) So based on your argument CY Young was a marginal pitcher who shouldn't be looked at as one of the greatest pitchers of all time. The record books in all sports are filled with examples such as this. So I'll move on.
Secondly, you chide TLR's decision to use a younger hungrier Clayton as the FT SS instead of a beaten down Smith, history is filled with coaches who have done that, winning coaches. Yeah he could have gone with Smith and played it safe but that is not the way sports is played. Older players wind down their careers and are usually employed as mentors to their replacements. Most do it gracefully, Smith did not. Clayton had a better fielding percentage than Smith that year and the Cardinals, as a team, actually won.
You also chastise him for not playing Rasmus every day or taking him out in late innings. (as a hitter Rasmus has tons of potential, but he is so streaky right now he needs to be more consistant. That was Drew's problem too, still is actually) Think about this: Rasmus is a marginal Center Fielder at best, how many times do you actually see him dive for a ball that is close? Very few, he usually just lets it drop and then chases it down. Edmonds wouldn't do that, neither would Ankiel, that's why he would put a player that is better defensively in the late innings if they were winning. Any smart coach/manager would put their best defensive players on the field/ice/court in the late stages of the game to hold a lead. Oh, and since I am on the subject of Edmonds he was NOT traded away by TLR. TLR is NOT the GM. He has input if he is asked, just like any coach in MLB, but he does not make the trades. Edmonds wanted to play every day but his body said otherwise. The Cards had space on the bench but it was HIS decision NOT TLR to leave. TLR used him continuously in the clutch and the playoffs. Being a successful coach does not require that you are friends with ALL of your players. EVERY coach, whether he is in the NHL, NBA, NFL, or MLB has players who don't see eye to eye. Every "great" coach has experienced that over and over. TLR also has not generally taken fights to the media. He has, don't get me wrong, but there are soooooo many others who use that tactic far more. Acquiring Berkman was done by the GM, not LTR. Get it right.
Thirdly, you contradict yourself with the whole Ozzie issue by bringing up the ages of the 1985 club. Hmmmm use younger players instead of older ones, isn't that what he did with Clayton? Oh and if you want to split hairs by trying to say Herzog was a better motivator that TLR then why did the '85 Cards get blown out in Game 7 after the Dekinger blown call at the end of Game 6. That should have been enough motivation by itself to come out and shut the Royals down, not get your cleats handed to you. Hmmmm.
Lastly, you argue that Pujols should bat 4th instead of 3rd. You say that one hundred years shows that the most powerful hitter should bat 4th. Really? Or do you just remember the trend of the past 30 years? Didn't Babe Ruth bat 3rd nearly his entire career? What about Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Ted Williams, Mickey Mantle, and this year's AL MVP Josh Hamilton? Let's not forget the greatest Cardinal of them all Stan Musial. All batted 3rd the vast majority of their careers, most were on Championship clubs. Sure, your most powerful hitter should bat 4th, but your best ALL-AROUND hitter should bat third. Pujols has generally been the most powerful, but he IS the best all-around player they have. This is common knowledge, I've known this since I was a kid (yes I have studied baseball history since I was a kid so I do know what I am talking about). Don't believe me on anything I have mentioned? Look it up.
Now I am not saying you have to love TLR, there are a lot of things he doesn't do right, he's human, just like any other manager out there. (Many a lot worse, trust me) You have your right to not like him, this is a free country. But if you are going to go on a tirade and spew off bits of information to make a point, get your facts straight first. That may help you gain some credibility.

So you say LaRussa did the right thing in playing Clayton over Smith, eh? Even though LaRussa made it clear that the two were competing for the job, and that the best player will win it ... and then he didn't honor that when the results were in. I personally think LaRussa was trying to make a point; that this was now HIS team, and he wasn't going to be bullied by a perennial favorite. Horrible.

Don't tell me that the moves are not dictated by LaRussa and Duncan. The last several moves (Berkman, Westbrook) are ALL LaRussa; he lobbied for both for at least a year. Same with moving Brendan Ryan and, to a lesser degree, Luddy. LaRussa dictates what he thinks needs to be moved, and what players he wants, and Mo makes it happen.

So Rasmus is not consistent enough to be played every day, but Schumaker can struggle even worse and be in there?? There is no way I can agree with you that LaRussa is a fair manager who manages with impartiality and consistency. NO WAY.

WOW! You must be reading my mind. You make some absolutely valid points; I think LaRussa has jumped the shark. He is at the point where he isn't a very good manager and he is doing more harm than good.

Now if only the team owner realized it. He still believes LaRussa is a genius. We can all sit back and watch yet another good player get run out of town-because Rasmus is next on the list. We'll see seven pitchers in a game they're up by 11 runs; we'll see that fast start out of the gate only to die towards the end, with injuries always being the excuse (other teams don't ever have any injuries, right?)never considering that the intense, joyless, emotionless man in the dugout might be a cause of the death.

Dull, lifeless, boring, emotionless, devoid of personality. Ladies and Gentlemen, Your St. Louis Cardinals. Thanks for nothing, Mr. LaRussa.

I sure hope you're wrong about Rasmus. With Rasmus, the Cardinals have actually produced a legitimate star talent that can make a huge difference in games. It would be disastrous to get rid of the kid simply because LaRussa can't get along with him.

Thank you, Ray, I couldn't have said it better! LaRussa is a cancer in the clubhouse and would have been long gone if Bill DeWitt wasn't such an idiot! Tony LaRussa....the most overrated manager in baseball history! As a trained shyster, he was trained to blow smoke up juror's noses to win cases. He's used that talent well to blow smoke up owners noses for the past 30 years. I pray for another D.U.I.!

GregandCrystalSmith 5 pts

I don't know if DeWitt and the group don't realize it. You have to consider their situation and consider all the fallout if they were to oust La Russa.

1. While I agree with you that he is VERY overrated and agree with most of the article, he does have the wins, the pedigree, and the influence in baseball that goes along with all that.

2. Consider the PR nightmare if they forced him out and the Cards followed with a few bad seasons.

3. If you lose La Russa, it is very likely that Dave Duncan is soon to follow, ESPECIALLY if La Russa is forced out. Losing Duncan would be a great loss.

4. Pujols has been a vocal supporter of La Russa. If La Russa leaves on anything other than his own terms, it is very possible that you alienate Pujols and he either refuses to resign or, if they were to resign him first, he demands a trade.

Lastly, sorry, but the DUI comment was just wrong. Even if you wish harm for La Russa, you do realize that many, many innocent people die every year because some person drinks and drives, right?

GregandCrystalSmith 5 pts

I don't know if DeWitt and the group don't realize it. You have to consider their situation and consider all the fallout if they were to oust La Russa.

1. While I agree with you that he is VERY overrated and agree with most of the article, he does have the wins, the pedigree, and the influence in baseball that goes along with all that.

2. Consider the PR nightmare if they forced him out and the Cards followed with a few bad seasons.

3. If you lose La Russa, it is very likely that Dave Duncan is soon to follow, ESPECIALLY if La Russa is forced out. Losing Duncan would be a great loss.

4. Pujols has been a vocal supporter of La Russa. If La Russa leaves on anything other than his own terms, it is very possible that you alienate Pujols and he either refuses to resign or, if they were to resign him first, he demands a trade.

Lastly, sorry, but the DUI comment was just wrong. Even if you wish harm for La Russa, you do realize that many, many innocent people die every year because some person drinks and drives, right?