Pirates' pool of manager candidates in flux
The list of candidates for the Pirates' manager job is shrinking.
On Monday, the Seattle Mariners hired Eric Wedge, who was the first person the Pirates interviewed the day after they fired John Russell.
Also, there are indications that Bo Porter is the top contender to become the Florida Marlins' next skipper. Porter was the second candidate the Pirates interviewed.
If Porter is off limits, that would leave five names on the Pirates' list: Dale Sveum, Jeff Banister, Ken Macha, John Gibbons and Carlos Tosca. No one has interviewed since Thursday, when Tosca was at PNC Park, but it is likely the Pirates will talk to at least one or two more candidates.
The Milwaukee Brewers, Toronto Blue Jays, New York Mets and Chicago Cubs also are seeking managers.
Wedge's hiring could trigger a chain reaction of moves by the other clubs. But general manager Neal Huntington does not seem to be rushing to select the Pirates' 39th manager.
"I haven't heard a word since my interview," said Gibbons, who met Oct. 11 with Huntington, president Frank Coonelly and other front office executives.
Gibbons, 48, managed the Blue Jays from 2004-08 and went 305-305. He has been the Kansas City Royals' bench coach the past two seasons.
Familiar with the small-market approach to roster building, Gibbons is encouraged by what he knows of the Pirates.
"They have some good, young talent," Gibbons said. "The future looks bright."
Gibbons said he was somewhat surprised when the Pirates called to ask if he'd be interested in their position.
"It came out of the blue," said Gibbons, who had never before interviewed for a manager job. "I'd read that John Russell got let go, so I knew there was an opening. I was kind of hoping I'd get considered."
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.