JASON REID: Nationals should show Jim Riggleman that he’s part of their future – The Post
Reid, the newest Post columnist, argues that the Washington Nationals need to exercise the option on Jim Riggleman‘s contract. He sites his experience covering the Los Angeles Dodgers and the stability that having a contract beyond the end of the season gives a manager. Managers are more willing to make unpopular short-term decisions when they have an expectation they come back. I see his point, but I want to see what the Nats do in the first part of the season. Let’s see how the Nats are doing at Memorial Day — if they are playing better fundamental baseball and being competitive, go ahead and extend Riggleman. If they are playing sloppy, don’t extend him then and continue the evaluation.
I would be thrilled if Riggleman, a Montgomery County, Md. native, succeeded here, but it has to be based on the standings more than sentiment or his affordable contract. Riggleman tends to overmanage — double switches are not required, Jim.
Lastly, I think it is kind of funny that Reid cites the Dodgers as an example of managerial security. The Dodgers went over 40 years without offering a manager a multi-year contract. An important plot point in Roger Kahn’s Boys of Summer was that Charlie Dressen lost his job after winning 2 consecutive pennants in Brooklyn because he wanted a multi-year deal. Walt Alston and Tommy Lasorda each had a series of 1-year deals too. It was not until the end of Lasorda’s career that he got a mult-year deal and I don’t think he was able to finish it in the mid-1990s. That had changed by the time Reid hit the Dodgers beat, but it was worth mentioning.
