I believe Tony had a big part in the regular season success... especially in his use of the bullpen. Not since his Oakland days have relievers allowed him to mix and match for the sake of matchups. (A recent posting at the Hardball Times about one-batter pitchers bears this out)
I was, however, disappointed with the managing in the World Series. Starting Taguchi in game one was pathetic. Starting Morris in game two threw us under the bus.
I'm not saying we would have won the Series if those moves were made differently. But I do think we wouldn't have been swept.

It seems to me like Tony goes out of his way to _not_ change anything in the postseason, even when it doesn't make any sense.

I think that, in a Jeter-esque way, his overrating by the media and George F. Will in the 80's have made him the most underrated manager in baseball.

Starting Taguchi certainly didn't lose us Game 1 -- in fact, I doubt the outcome would've been any different if K machine Mabry had gotten the start. I'm not sure starting Morris lost us game 2, either, although it certainly didn't help. When you can't score any runs, like the Cards did in games 2-4 (1 per game), you can't win.

And, for the record, I'm a huge LaRussa supporter. I like his focus, and attention to detail. Whenever he makes a move I question, I feel that he is likely to know something I don't -- and thus I'm more likely to dismiss it.

The Cardinals lost the World Series because their 4-5-6-7 hitters got one stinkin' hit in the entire series---and that was a bunt single by Edmonds in Game 1! With even average performances here, it would have been a tight series.

While I think it's hard to break these things down by percentage, from a management aspect, I think the answer is fairly clear. Without Tony, the Cards would not have won 105 games last year, much less the division.

Tony gets flack for a number of things, but it mainly comes down to the fact that he seems to be an aloof intellectual from the Bay Area and he's not Whitey Herzog.

Whitey still lives in the area and is a good ol' boy. Cardinal history is largely comprised of good ol' boys (Enos Slaughter, Ken Boyer, Dizzy Dean, etc.) and St. Louis is a town that, ironically, prides itself on its down home modesty.

Okay, Tony is not Whitey. Tony has a law degree. Tony does not live in StL. Tony doesn't eat meat. But Tony is a GREAT manager.

Very similar to Phil Jackson, and to some extent, his friend Bobby Knight, Tony knows that everyone on the team has a role to play. If you made Tony the manager of a huge corporation, I don't doubt his ability to succeed precisely because he recognizes everyones' abilities and where they fit.

Would the Cards have won 105 games last year with Dusty Baker? Maybe, but not with those players.

Part of MO Boiler's second comment pretty much summed up my feelings on Tony. I wish there were fewer moves that I didn't understand, but every time they happen, I try to tell myself there must be something I'm not aware of. After all, the manager has much more specific knowledge of each player and how they work, knowledge that goes beyond the stat sheet or the pitch counts.

And to his detractors, I say: "Who would you rather have?"