He's got the experience many thought Matt Williams was lacking with time as a pitching coach (from 2000-2006 with the Los Angeles Angels) under Mike Scioscia and experience as a major league manager (from 2007-2015 with the San Diego Padres). He has a reputation as a good communicator, who was popular with his players which is something that was reportedly an issue for Williams.
He's a former major league pitcher known for his ability to manage a bullpen, another issue for Williams. So was Bud Black the right choice for the Washington Nationals?
The Nationals haven't officially acknowledged that Black will become the sixth full-time skipper in the nation's capital in their eleven seasons in D.C., but as Washington Post writer James Wagner first reported, an announcement is expected as soon as the World Series ends.
Can Black, working with more than he's had before, get the Nats back to the postseason after the disappointing season they just completed?
Can Mike Rizzo rebuild his bullpen and add a bat to the lineup (somewhere?) to give Black what he needs to compete in the NL East?
There are a number of questions that remain to be answered this winter with qualifying offers still to come, free agents to be signed, trades to be made, coaches to be hired and more. But the first big step is out of the way.
Bud Black is going to be the Nationals' new manager, so what do you think of the decision? Are you the one person out there who thought they should have stuck with Matt Williams? Should the Nationals have gone with Dusty Baker and his veteran-y experience? He did reportedly smoke a non-tobacco cigarette with Jimi Hendrix after all, and he was able to manage Barry Bonds... Should the Nationals have called Cal Ripken?
It's time to vote...