Mid-way through November, all 30 major league teams appear to once again have field managers. Seattle signed Bob Melvin to a two-year contract to become the 12th manager in Mariner history. The Mariners went through an extensive interviewing process before choosing Melvin. He was reportedly the 11th man interviewed for the position.

Since his name began circling with other managerial candidates, I've questioned whether Melvin has sufficient experience to deserve a shot at managing a major league team. He retired from a 10-year major league career as a catcher following the 1994 season. Following his retirement, he amassed a year of experience as a scout, another as a minor league roving instructor, and a third as an assistant to the GM, all in the Milwaukee organization. In 1999, he took his first major league coaching job as bench coach under Phil Garner. He followed Garner to Detroit in 2000, but Melvin left the Tigers in 2001 to become the bench coach for old friend Bob Brenly in Arizona. The 41-year-old leaves his post as the Diamondback's bench coach to join the Mariners. Aside from the few occasions when Garner or Brenly were unavailable, Melvin's only managerial experience was managing Maryvale in the Arizona Fall League in 1999.

I don't consider Garner and Brenly to be good mentors for managerial candidates. Melvin listed Roger Craig, who he played under with San Francisco, as one influence during his introductory press conference. He also stated that Frank Robinson "made me become a man in Baltimore." The later comment is not the type that comforts me coming from a new manager, as such statements tend to indicate a predilection for macho actions that hinder rather than help a team.

On the positive side, if a team is going to hire someone with major league coaching experience and little managerial experience, bench coaches are better choices than anyone else on the staff. I don't understand the high value placed on third base coaching experience.

Melvin also has a reputation of very thorough preparation, which should be a positive attribute. Hopefully he'll be able to rise to this new challenge, though I think the Mariners could have filled their managerial opening with considerably less risky options without a significant tradeoff in upside.

The Chicago Cubs were the last team to fill their managerial vacancy, although observers have been fairly certain for a considerable time that Dusty Baker would eventually take the job. After Baker was free of his San Francisco ties, the two sides arranged a meeting, though I was surprised that they waited a few days. The process took almost a week due to salary negotiations, but the Cubs ultimately got their man. Baker signed a four-year deal on Friday reportedly worth an estimated 14 to 15 million dollars.

Johnnie B. Baker, Jr., who as we learned during the playoff broadcasts earned his nickname Dusty from his childhood cleanliness problems, has an extensive baseball history, but a surprisingly short managerial past, considering the esteem in which he's held. Baker spent nineteen seasons as a major league outfielder in his playing career. He took some time off after retiring before jumping back into the game in 1988 as the Giants' first base coach. The following season he was promoted to hitting coach, a position he held until taking over as manager in 1993. Interestingly, Baker's only managerial experience before receiving the San Francisco job in 1993 was as manager of Scottsdale in the AFL.

Baker's experienced considerable outward success with the Giants, winning the NL Manager of the Year award in 1993, 1997, and 2000 while compiling a career record of 840-715. He also rates fairly well if we look at the tools we used when evaluating candidates for manager of the year. In 1996, he had a bad season coming up three under the Giants Pythagorean and finishing 17-29 in one-run games. However he's fourteen games over his career Pythagorean with a career record of 241-213 in one-run games.

Looking at the two tables below we see that Baker definitely has good and bad seasons, but he's generally a little bit better than average.

Year	W	L	PW	PL	Diff
1993	103	59	98	64	 5
1994	55	60	58	57	-3
1995	67	77	61	83	 6
1996	68	94	71	91	-3
1997	90	72	80	82	10
1998	89	74	91	72	-2
1999	86	76	85	77	 1
2000	97	65	97	65	 0
2001	90	72	86	76	 4
2002	95	66	99	62	-4
Total	840	715	826	729	14

Year	1W	1L	WP1RG	
1993	29	18	0.617
1994	19	16	0.542
1995	26	15	0.634
1996	17	29	0.369
1997	23	17	0.575
1998	25	29	0.463
1999	28	23	0.549
2000	18	22	0.450
2001	28	22	0.560
2002	28	22	0.560
Total	241	213	0.530

While he's benefited significantly from well-stocked San Francisco rosters, Baker shouldn't have to worry about a paucity of talent in Chicago, although the Cubs have several young players they want to work into the roster. While he doesn't have a negative reputation with young players, Baker hasn't been exposed to many in his time with the Giants. He definitely places undue value on veterans, which doesn't bode well for a Chicago team that needs to integrate several potential stars from their minors if they're to be successful.

The 53-year-old doesn't have the best reputation when it comes to pitcher care, so I'm somewhat concerned for the health of the Cubs young arms. Larry Rothschild will stay on as pitching coach, but he can't be relied upon to stand in the way of pitcher abuse. None of the other coaches have been named at this time.

I don't know what affect Baker will have on the clubhouse. His positive managerial reputation should earn him some immediate respect. However, he clearly didn't preside over the most harmonious of atmospheres with the Giants.

Ultimately, I think Baker will be able to maintain his winning record with the Cubs, but I don't think the teams he manages will realize their full potential and I question his ability to win in the playoffs, regardless of his recent actions in bringing San Francisco to the World Series.