Bench Coach vs Manager

[MarkVIIIMarc]

I tried searching but just came up with talk on AI trading.

I manage 99% of my team's games in my league. When signing coaches I got an excellent bench coach and my team has an average manager. We squeaked into the playoffs with me working as a human manager figuring I needed the bench coach to keep the boys happy or something and I was doing the manager's job.

Is my logic right? Do you think with their overlapping responsibilities I should just promote the A+ bench coach to manager in the off season and fire my mid level manager? What are the differences in their effects on my team?

from the online manual:

Manager

A manager is responsible for handling the execution of a game. Managers control lineups and depth charts, pitching rotations, and make all the in-game decisions, but they typically have no responsibility for hiring, firing, or other general management tasks. Managers work together with bench coaches to manage a game. Managers have some impact on all areas of play, including hitting, pitching, and fielding. Unlike in real life, in OOTP, a general manager also often acts as a manager. A manager's managing_ratings and coaching ratings affect the play and development of players on his specific team.

Bench Coach

Bench coaches are responsible for helping the manager handle his responsibilities, especially during actual games. Bench coaches have some impact on all areas of play, including fielding. You have the option of delegating decision-making authority to your bench coach when playing out a game. A bench coach's coaching ratings affect the play and affect the play and development of players on his specific team.

[The Game]

I see alot of former Excellent MGR's become BC in my game. Tony La Russa got fired by STL and then was the BC for the Mets for 2 yrs til he retired. I put less weigh on MGR vs BC skills when i manage my games. I have won it all with a MGR who was decent BC and unknown and lost 100 games with MGR and BC at Excellent.

[PSUColonel]

I opened a thread one time about the differences between the two. If you notice, for some reason, despite the fact different staff are supposed to have different philosophies and attributes, they're opinions on lineups and rotations never vary. Also, I have been a proponent on having coaches and managers' having opinions on players, just as scouts might. It's my thought that the staff aspect if OOTP needs redesigning. I know others have said the same. This is an aspect if OOTP I hope got a lot of attention for 15.

[Carlton]

I'm there with you PSU

Biggest thing I've noticed, even if I have a known small ball manager
He will go by OOTP's OBP first philosophy, instead of having contact guys who can bunt but really a player who would be a bench player for a normalized MGR (all bars in the middle) should start for a small ball team

Again, if you have a MGR that LOVES defense, the better hitting SS will prevail. This is a pain for historical players, as many 2b/SS were non hitting defensive guys, George McBride,Rabbit Maranville,Dick Groat, Bill Mazeroski,Luke Appling rarely become half of what they were in many sims...and defense should mean range for 'traditional' lineups and the range+errors+DP/3 for sabermetrics lineup, as they commited many errors back in the day, but usually due to bad field conditions and shoddy gloves.

I always felt we should have a 3rd lineup choice of "early baseball" where contact+good bunters were leadoff instead of the speediest guy

[The Game]

Originally Posted by Carlton

I'm there with you PSU

Biggest thing I've noticed, even if I have a known small ball manager
He will go by OOTP's OBP first philosophy, instead of having contact guys who can bunt but really a player who would be a bench player for a normalized MGR (all bars in the middle) should start for a small ball team

Again, if you have a MGR that LOVES defense, the better hitting SS will prevail. This is a pain for historical players, as many 2b/SS were non hitting defensive guys, George McBride,Rabbit Maranville,Dick Groat, Bill Mazeroski,Luke Appling rarely become half of what they were in many sims...and defense should mean range for 'traditional' lineups and the range+errors+DP/3 for sabermetrics lineup, as they commited many errors back in the day, but usually due to bad field conditions and shoddy gloves.

I always felt we should have a 3rd lineup choice of "early baseball" where contact+good bunters were leadoff instead of the speediest guy

Ozzie Smith was released by STL in 1988 in one of my leagues. Luis Aparicio typically is a bench player on most teams.

[Carlton]

I always get Appling and Aparicio confused Appling usually does well

But yes, even Phil Rizzuto, I can force start him, but any backup the Yankees get, the back up will usually start every 7 days or every 2 days (if it was...Solly Hemus for example)

Frustrating

[DelinoDeShields]

Echoing PSUColonel.

And, because a lot of people like being GM/Manager, I hope there's no penalty for NOT having a manager on staff for the team you control in OOTP.

[Carlton]

There is no penalty for not having a GM or manager on human manager controlled teams

Only the penalty of human error, since you make all the moves.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Carlton

There is no penalty for not having a GM or manager on human manager controlled teams

Only the penalty of human error, since you make all the moves.

I am not so sure about this either. I also authored a thread about this very issue a few weeks back.

[Carlton]

I'll check it out.

[PSUColonel]

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...-opinions.html


Here is one of them

[RchW]

Here we go again. Coaching hierarchy in all sports is very rigid. No organization can tolerate many public differences in player evaluation. I'd bet some money that philosophical agreement between members of the coaching group/management is far more important than the perceived skills of individuals. I'd also bet that philosophical differences not fundamental skills are the root of most changes. In other words if you disagree with the established lineup/pitching staff/game strategy/roster philosophy, you are probably in the wrong organization.

That doesn't mean that a bench coach wouldn't have a different batting order or pitcher use strategy but these would be given as advice and if the Manager agrees it may become the "new" way. A good manager would encourage private dissent but expect public solidarity once any decision was made. Any subordinate coach that made a habit of voicing significant differences about player use from the Manager or head coach would have a short career. Any Manager that identified concerns outside the obvious roster deficiencies, ie an established big ticket FA signing, would be skating on thin ice.

If the goal is realism then OOTP should reflect real life. When I ask the AI to make a lineup or set my pitching staff I consider that solicited "advice". I take that advice and make the final decision. We never agree 100%.

[DelinoDeShields]

RichW, no-one's arguing what coaches and managers do or are or how they work, or even how they SHOULD work.

Specific to OOTP, there's no documentation of their effect.

When I take a GM job in OOTP and manage all my teams games, I don't hire a manager because I manage all my games. I do hire a bench coach and the rest of the staff. Am I being penalized for not having a manager? This is basic question.

[koufax.fan]

delete

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by RchW

Here we go again. Coaching hierarchy in all sports is very rigid. No organization can tolerate many public differences in player evaluation. I'd bet some money that philosophical agreement between members of the coaching group/management is far more important than the perceived skills of individuals. I'd also bet that philosophical differences not fundamental skills are the root of most changes. In other words if you disagree with the established lineup/pitching staff/game strategy/roster philosophy, you are probably in the wrong organization.

That doesn't mean that a bench coach wouldn't have a different batting order or pitcher use strategy but these would be given as advice and if the Manager agrees it may become the "new" way. A good manager would encourage private dissent but expect public solidarity once any decision was made. Any subordinate coach that made a habit of voicing significant differences about player use from the Manager or head coach would have a short career. Any Manager that identified concerns outside the obvious roster deficiencies, ie an established big ticket FA signing, would be skating on thin ice.

If the goal is realism then OOTP should reflect real life. When I ask the AI to make a lineup or set my pitching staff I consider that solicited "advice". I take that advice and make the final decision. We never agree 100%.

But the issue is that the staff members...never have differing opinions. I am not dying they need to be wildly different from one another, but as it stands now, there is no variation.

[koufax.fan]

delete