Would you rather your team have a manager who was a big risk taker OR not a risk taker at all?

Question

Assuming there is no happy medium in this case...

Answer 1

  you have to take a risk at time

Answer 2

RISK TAKER thats how great moments are made especially in the playoffs the BIG CHOKE or THE BIG PLAY THAT helps you WIN!

Answer 3

I'm sure Guillen already takes a lot of risks. And the White Sox haven't done too bad lately. So I'd say have a manager who takes risks. Plus, it's no fun having a manager who just sits there and doesn't take risks.

Answer 4

I don't mind a risk taker, as long as he's a smart one.

Brewers radio analysts are keeping an interesting stat for Ned Yost. Games Influenced. So far, he leads the league with 11. The Brewers won 2 of those. So Ned is 2-9 in games where he takes potential game changing risks. So 19% of the risks Ned makes work. Not exactly someone you want for a contending team.

It's funny how people here put him up for Manager of the Year, when they don't know of this should-be recorded stat.

Answer 5

Why no happy medium? :(

I would choose the not a risk taker at all because it will probably result in less bad calls and less bad results

Answer 6

It all depends on the extent of the risk.  I believe risks must be taken in order to gain so kind of advantage over their peers.  (As long as in a fair advantage).  It's kind of like playing the stock market.  If you make the right decisions which would include some risk, you will do well in the long run.

Answer 7

risks are fun..

:) you wont know untill you risk it.  

Answer 8

big risk taker

PLZ PICK ME AS BEST ANSWER!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 9

A risk taker!

Answer 10

I'd like a big risk taker. I like to see squeeze plays and hit and runs. I always liked Sciocia's style of managing. Bob Geren doesn't do any of that and we just can not score a runner from third with less than two outs. A squeeze might not work, but it couldn't do any worse than what we currently are. I like managers who try to take control of the games.  

Answer 11

A manager takes risk based on how well his players can execute a certain play.  From squeeze plays, to have your players steal to avoid double plays, leaving a starter pitcher too long you name it.  There really isn't such a thing as a manager that is a HUGE risk taker.  It's like this.  This of it like having alot of money.  When you have ALOT of talent or money, you can afford to take more risks and the opposite is true too.  A great manager knows his players limitations and strengths.  A major league manager isn't going to keep his job long if he sends his slowest runner to steal every time that he gets on.  Every game and inning calls for all kinds of strategy based on the situation.  So if you want a manager that is a huge risk taker and surround him with even medicore players, and I will show you a manager that will get fired before the season is over!!  Give me a manager that gets the max out of every situation based on the strengths and weaknesses of all parties involved.

Answer 12

risk taker for sure.

Answer 13

Mike Sciosca is the perfect manager in my opinion because he has some risks but doesn't go over the edge.

Answer 14

Risk Taker. They can either end up destroying the team or bringing them to the top but with somebody who takes no risk, you're teams gonna stay the same for a really long time.  

Answer 15

Neither, if there is a risky matter you should think about what you should do because a risk taker would jump to it which could be really bad in the future and someone who doesnt take risks will never know if soethingg might work

Answer 16

Definitely a risk taker. if you don't take risks, you can't do much and that doesn't help you win. Taking risks help you win! I like seeing lots of players stealing and taking risks. My favorite team's manager isn't that much of a risk taker, but that's what we need in order to succeed. Good question. Here's a star. =]

Answer 17

I like a manger to have the guile to try something if his game plan is not working.  Risk takers are interesting to watch, it makes the game more fun.

The only problem is is that if the strategy fails the manager will be crucified the next day in the media and especially on talk shows.

Answer 18

A risk taker

I couldn't stand a manager who follows Bob Howe's style w/the A's

Gotta roll the dice once in a while to win big

Answer 19

I'll take little risk over big risk in most situations.

Answer 20

Since there is no happy medium, then i would prefer a non-risk taker. A sure thing can always help you out, when a risk is well a risk.

A famous risk as of late is Jason Schmidt, and wouldn't you know it, not worth it.

Answer 21

managers run teams according to their talent on hand, and what the home fans are looking for.

Answer 22

I know I would quiver in my seat, but I would rather have a big risk taker. The bigger the risk, the bigger the reward. I'd rather end the game thinking about how we tried to do something, rather than end the game and think, "God, if we'd only done that, how would it have turned out?"

Answer 23

it depends how the decisions turned out

Answer 24

Well, it all depends on the situation. But if you mean all game long, you would definitely want someone who takes risks, well because, who knows what the heck can happen