Would we win more without him? My personal opinion is no, I don't think so. I think there are better in game guys who could handle the position but I just am not sure if there are better guys out there who could lead a band of 'misfits' the way he does.
This is just my opinion... but Murphy is a classic case of "love him for who he is, don't hate him for who he isn't" type of thing to me. What he brings to the position is an ability to lead and brings guys together, make them believe in themselves. I think it is a super fair critique to say some of his in game decisions and some of his lineup concoctions are suspect.
I just see guys like Bauers and Vaughn and Megill and Isaac Collins and Blake Perkins and Frelick and Mitchell and Priester and Durbin and Nick Mears and Grant Anderson etc etc etc ... and I just wonder how much of what they provide/d for us in the last 36 months is because of who their leader is. Would those guys and others have had as much success with Counsell's cold embrace being what greeted them in the dugout every day?
I think critiquing Murph is fair game and an opinion I wouldn't challenge. I also think we have a good one leading us and the warts he has are just another piece to the puzzle that we are needing to overcome, while also acknowledging those warts are few compared to the asset that he is.