Second-Guessing Jim Leyland: Why Tigers' Skipper Draws Fan's Ire

This has been a fascinating situation for me to watch as a Detroit Tigers fan. But for as long as I can remember, no manager has had nearly the same type of career arc while coaching a Detroit team.

Sure, Wayne Fontes was an easy target. He was perpetually on the hot seat; however, I don't remember fans ever really liking him.

Larry Brown was loved then hated, but it had less to do with the way that he ran the team, and more to do with his "dream job" comments.

Scotty Bowman and Chuck Daly were just loved.

Marty Mornhinweg and Michael Curry were just hated.

Fans were fairly ambivalent about Flip Saunders, as well as everyone in between Sparky Anderson and Jim Leyland as Tigers' skipper.

The only comparison I can make a case for is Phil Garner. Fans started out being optimistic about him, but quickly soured.

But the Leyland situation is fascinating.

When he was signed, fans were optimistic. Then he led the team to one of the most dramatic turnarounds, eventually losing in the World Series in 2006.

After that season, people loved Leyland. I mean loved Leyland. You would routinely see "Leyland for Governor" signs throughout Michigan.

The man could do no wrong.

But a funny thing happened after that. The second-guessers started to come out of the wood works. It started with a trickle. Leyland's substitutions out of the bullpen became easy targets. People wondered aloud whether he was starting the right guys. But it was the basic gripes that fans have with managers.

But in 2008, the team had huge expectations and a bloated payroll and they struggled out of the gate. Leyland took plenty of blame, but more than anything the fans started to despise the overpriced players who weren't contributing.

Shortstop Edgar Renteria was the biggest flop, and the fans were all over him. Similarly, Gary Sheffield bore a good chunk of criticism.

But even after that disaster of a season and the eventual departures of Sheffield and Renteria, the fans still wanted their pound of flesh. And while Brandon Inge had his moments of fan disdain, it always came back to Leyland.

The fan gripes had started to turn into a chorus line, with many more added to their ranks.

Personally, I was one of the last to stick on the Leyland bandwagon. I always defended him. To me, Leyland personified what a manager should be.

He was rough around the edges, spoke his mind, and more than anything looked the part. I could imagine him as my manager, and I liked the idea.

But over time, I began to start to listen to the complaints, and I found some of them myself. He did seem to have a strange devotion to certain players. He did tend to have a strange substitution pattern out of the bullpen. He did tend to give his players a lot of days off.

Personally, I would say that this all came to a crescendo in my mind after I began reading Moneyball by Michael Lewis.

In this story of Billy Beane, the general manager of the Oakland A's, the battle lines are drawn between the old guard of baseball and the new school. Out went the mysticism that we all love and the un-written rules that we all have been told.

In came the objectivity of playing players who produced, and staying away from those who just looked the part.

This is when I came to realize that while some gripes about Leyland were superficial and stupid, others were absolutely warranted.

Now, some might say that I am comparing apples to oranges since Leyland is a manager, not a general manager. This is true in a way; however, the fact is that Leyland truly embodies that old guard of baseball thought, and his lineup card is the perfect example of subjective thinking.

Take this past week for example. Brennan Boesch goes yard in the first of four games against Minnesota. He has been on a nice run lately. In fact, two days prior to his dinger, he had a three-hit game.

So what happens the next day? Boesch finds himself on the bench.

So exactly what is the logic here? Some could argue that Boesch needed a break.

However, he is a 26-year-old kid in the prime of his life that just had the All-Star break a couple weeks prior.

Others could argue that it was because he is a lefty going up against a lefty.

This is the most faulty of arguments given that anyone that knows the Tigers knows that Boesch torches lefties. In fact, he is hitting .341 this year against lefties with a .388 on base percentage. Those are superstar numbers.

And it's no fluke, Boesch hit extremely well last year against left-handers.

So what exactly sparked the change? Who knows, it's just the world according to Leyland.

Take the case of Ryan Raburn. Even though Raburn has been a mess most of this season, Leyland continued to trot him out nearly every day. The argument goes that Raburn is a terrible first-half player but a great second-half player, right?

Well then, play him sparingly in the first half and make him earn his second-half at-bats. Instead, Leyland let him hover around the Mendoza line for half the year before his recent tear over the last seven games.

But if you look at Raburn's career, what exactly do you have? He is a career .263 hitter with an OBP of .317 who has never had more than 27 walks in a year. He strikes out a ton, and he hits the occasional home run, but usually only in the second half of seasons.

In fact, he has nearly double the home runs in the second half of seasons than the first half over the last three years (not including this year). He hits close to .300 in the second half of seasons, but only about .240 before.

The smart money would have been for the Tigers to play someone else as the regular in the first half, and if and when they struggled, give Raburn their at-bats.

It's not like he is a hot shot prospect, but rather a guy that is nearing his last few productive years. Careers don't exactly start at 30 in sports.

Now I'm not going to even touch Brandon Inge, but that move should have been made a long time ago. Don Kelly is not a world beater, but his .245 average over the last few years runs circles around Inge.

And I'm not going to get too much into the Phil Coke debacle because I don't know whose idea that was. But Coke should have never been moved into the rotation.

Now the point is that Leyland needs to change his ways and quickly if this team is going to avoid another second-half swoon. He needs to play his best nine players every day. These are young, strong men who can handle it. If someone is dragging, pull them. If they aren't, run them out there.

He also needs to avoid sitting people who are on a tear. How often have you seen Magglio have a multi-hit game and then promptly get sat the next day? Is Leyland rewarding these guys with a day off when they are producing?

If so, how faulty is that logic? Baseball players get into a groove, and when they are on that groove, you need to ride them until they buck you.

Lastly, he needs to put his players in positions in which they can succeed. If Ryan Perry or Daniel Schlereth find their way back onto the roster, put them into lower-pressure situations.

Don't try to make them the focal points of your middle relief. Bring them along slowly, maybe facing a batter or two at most. But don't put them into a spot where they have to bail the team out. They are young kids who have lost some confidence. Bring them along slowly.

So can Leyland change his ways? Probably. Will he? Probably not. For better or worse, Leyland is a stubborn old man who refuses to change even in the face of overwhelming evidence that he should.

But there will be a lesson here. If Leyland's Tigers collapse again, it will be the end of him. If they don't, he will have some ammunition for the critics.

At the very least, the last couple months of the season will be interesting.