Fire Leland & 3rd base Gene Lamont

[TSE]

No, I'm rationalizing as to why; big fundamental difference. Call it like it is or don't make the call.

[Lionlifer]

Call it like it is or don't make the call.

This coming from the individual who made a paragraph statement about why we shouldn't acknowledge when Jim does something right, cause it doesn't mean good things will happen, and he isn't right often enough, got it.

[TSE]

Call it like it is or don't make the call.

This coming from the individual who made a paragraph statement about why we shouldn't acknowledge when Jim does something right, cause it doesn't mean good things will happen, and he isn't right often enough, got it.

Not sure what you are trying to say here. It is of no special consequence to simply acknowledge when he does something right or to not acknowledge it, I don't see the relevance of either absent a context for the purpose of the acknowledgement. If your are a positive person and you just like to count good things that happen in your life and acknowledge them then fine then that's a purposeful reason to keep track each time he makes a good decision. But the implication of the previous poster was that he was trying to justify and support Leyland as a good manager, that's what he was getting at from my interpretation of his post. He was trying to cite an example of evidence to support that idea and my point is that one single isolated decision has virtually a worth of absolute zero in being able to analyze the question of whether a manager is a good one or not. If you have a guy on first base you might want to consider stealing a base. But you certainly wouldn't choose to steal 100% of the time or not steal 100% of the time. So if you were trying to analyze just the one topic of whether a manager has a good strategy for when and when not to steal, then you can't look at one and only one of those decisions and attempt to qualify an answer. If you determined it was a good time to steal and the manager didn't, how would you know that he also didn't think it was good to steal but that this is one of the times he chooses not to steal to avoid the appearances of stealing 100% of the time and tipping his hand? And vice versa he could have made a mistake and thought the best strategy was not to steal and only chose to steal to take a gamble and to protect the secrecy of his gameplan from being 100% predictable. You can't tell by that one decision if he made the right choice or not, it's impossible as a single data point and is essentially irrelevant information in evaluating a manager.

[kellmellus50]

Quote:The manager insisted he deserved blame for the Tigers' three-game nosedive against the Royals, which wrapped up Thursday night with a 2-1 Royals victory.

"We lost three one-run games," Leyland said. "I didn't manage well enough."

fire the BUM !!!!!!!!!!!!

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2012 ... z259eIBGrV

[TSE]

Did the reporter ask him why he didn't manage well enough? What's the excuse? I know the problem is ignorance, but I would be curious to know what reason he thinks caused him to not do a good enough job. And then how and why did he lose control over whatever the answer to that question is? The point is if you have a brain fart then I want to know why is his brain failing at that moment or can he realize that he has a bad baseball philosophy in general. So which is it, are you flawed in your ability to think and how you interpret the game, or does your brain just randomly misfire for unexplainable mistakes? I don't get it, and I don't think he does either.

[kellmellus50]

Here's another blunder he puts Cabera at 3rd last nite when clearly his anke injury was hurting him than commits 2 errors.
In the first inning i was yelling at the t.v. to put him at DH till he get better before the start of the game.But leland was not listening to me.

Fire him he can not coach anymore.

By making cabera play third wile injured ,this will make his ankle worse and he could end up on the injured list and miss games that could cost the tigers a playoff birth.

Cabrera is producing. He's also bearing the pain, and you could hear it in his voice.

"That's the price you gotta take when you play hurt," Cabrera said. "People are not gonna see that, they're always going to talk the negative things. If they say I gotta run hard to first base, I gotta take it. Nobody tells me to go out there and play hurt."

The ache was etched on his face, and you could tell Cabrera had heard about the double-play controversy. He didn't want to talk much about his ankle because he knew it would sound like an excuse.

"I'm not feeling good, not feeling the way I want to feel right now, but when I'm out there, I'm playing

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2012 ... z25DtrJkqu

[TSE]

Another blunder by the team is that we just traded Jeff Baker after only one month. We gave up 2 minor leagues for him and are expected to receive 1 minor leaguer in return. Since he did poorly with us it is likely that the 1 guy we get will be worth less than either of the 2 we gave up. We gave Baker some cash for his time here, wasted the opportunity to give some useful guy for the future some reps with that time, and now we are ending it with him, why? The reason is because the Tigers suck at evaluating players. I wrote Jeff Baker off with 100% certainty that he wasn't worth being on the team before he even took his first atbat here. The Tigers took almost a month and 15 games to figure it out and they paid prices to make that happen. Just another awful set of baseball transactions that had no logical purpose to them. This is what we do with the majority of our personnel decisions; we pass up better opportunities to take the lesser value opportunities.

[Manocad]

So Leyland decided to bat right-handed hitting Delmon Young against a left-handed pitcher which paid off nicely in the win against the Angels tonight.

Where are TSE and kell talking about how Leyland made a good decision?

Good decisions don't count if you don't qualify from hitting the minimum quota, because if you don't hit the quota you are not supposed to keep your job!

So what you're saying is that every bad decision should result in a "Fire Leyland!" chant (and once again, with no suggestion of who could do a better job except for you ), but a good decision should be evaluated first relative to a quota before being categorized as a good decision?

Nice red herring. The question was very simple--since you and kell criticize every move that Leyland makes that doesn't work out, where are you when he makes a move that does work out? There's an internet term for the two of you--haters. That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

[joseph mamah]

Joe Torre, Tony Larussa, Bob Brenley, Gibby, Ozzie, Dave Martinez, Sandy Alomar jr.

Brenley would probably be the most likely candidate, Torres getting old but he might be interested in making another title run or two. Ozzie and Gibby are both already employed but could be available given the right circumstances. Gibbys probably a long shot but you never know. I could see Ozzie coming here, especially after the disastrous season they just had in Florida. I believe he and Cabby have a pretty good relationship, if nothing else him coming here would be a big FU to the Sox and I can see that being incentive enough for him.

Dave Martinez hasn't had an opportunity yet but he's another possible candidate, and I think he could be a good manager. Sandy Alomar jr. is another guy who I believe if given an opportunity could prove to be very capable. Larussa is even a possibility, I think the only reason he left the Cards was because Pujols was leaving. he might be itching to get back in the game and the Tigs are a team with championship level talent.

[TSE]

So what you're saying is that every bad decision should result in a "Fire Leyland!" chant (and once again, with no suggestion of who could do a better job except for you ), but a good decision should be evaluated first relative to a quota before being categorized as a good decision?

Nice red herring. The question was very simple--since you and kell criticize every move that Leyland makes that doesn't work out, where are you when he makes a move that does work out? There's an internet term for the two of you--haters. That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

No, if there was a chant for every bad decision he ever made that would call for countless posts which would be a waste of time. I've accepted a long time ago that he's not going to get fired whether he deserves it or not based upon my opinions and there's not much of a purpose to dwell on the issue any longer. I'm saying that he should be fired not because of ANY future mistakes, but because of the totality of his overall failure since being part of this team. I feel that he has been a terrible manager and that his report card is full of failing grades when I'm looking for a guy to score straight A's, and he's multiple letter grades of an average away from that. To me it is unconscionable to let him continue on and it's an insult to our team and our city to let somebody of such a low quality baseball intellect keep dragging our team down. Anything good or bad in the future isn't much of a factor compared with the totality of what he has done and where he's at.

Your second paragraph isn't accurate at all because that's not the case, I very rarely criticize his bad mistakes and very few of them are ever discussed in this forum. And again, there's no logic to accounting for every good move he makes, that's not what these boards are for. If we did that we would have to have a couple dozen entries for every game for every single possible decision he makes and that would be many thousands of events throughout a season. I have no interest in spending that much time talking about him and I'm not obligated to do so and so I don't understand what you are even talking about with your insinuation that I would somehow have a responsibility to show up on RealGM to pat him on the back for anything positive that he does. Is that in my RealGM user contract somewhere?

And FWIW I liked his decision the other day to let Verlander pitch that extra inning with a very huge pitch count. Some managers, including Leyland, will often pull him due to pitch count and try to get smart and clever with using relief pitchers for that extra inning. This time he felt Verlander was ok to continue on a tad bit longer because he had the feel that he was healthy and he was dominant, and I agreed with that decision in that circumstance and look what happened, it worked out perfectly and we won an extremely important game. So there's a compliment for a job well done, so what does me talking about that good moment have to do with anything if my position hasn 't changed that I still feel he's a deplorable manager?

[Manocad]

tl;dr

Brevity is the soul of wit, dude.

[TSE]

tl;dr

Brevity is the soul of wit, dude.

I tried the brevity approach and you seemed to be confused by it, so just trying to be helpful in explaining my perspective. See ya later and happy posting.

[kellmellus50]

Here we go again leland benches young for todays game, to puts in kelly.
Young has been the hottest hitter for the tigers in the last 9 days hitting over .444 and 4 hr. Lelands having another brain fart.

Also yesterday down by a run in the 8th inn fielder on second .he did not yank fielder and put a faster runner there why i don't know.
I was yelling at the t.v. to replace him.

Anyways the pitcher throws a wild pitch fielder stays if we had a fast runner he could have been at 3rd.

[TSE]

Not to mention the strategy of Peralta during that 3-1 count. Leland could have manufactured a non-out event with other choices at his disposal.

[kellmellus50]

This is why we lose game by leland again and again he make wrong personal choices all the time..
http://www.freep.com/article/20120905/S ... day-s-loss

Maybe I'm not managing good enough," he said. "I don't know. We're not doing enough to win the game. When you win one-run games, somebody is usually getting a big hit late or a pitcher is getting out of a jam late." DUHHHHHHHHHH

[TSE]

Well at least he is starting to figure out the reality of the situation. And that's just the problem is that he is unsure ("maybe"), and he just does not know what he is doing wrong ("i don't know"). How can anybody expect to do their job perfectly well if they don't have the knowledge or the information required to do so. He knows it can't possibly be because he doesn't care enough, he knows it can't possibly because he doesn't put in the time or the effort, he knows any way that you account for the lack of wins no matter how you break it down that he must therefore be missing something and that he simply can't identify what that something(s) is.

At least he is honest about his performance and not clueless that he is part of the blame. That can go a long way to reforming his baseball worth if he can now build from this realization here and take the next step. And that next step is to apply the same level of passion that he has for the game into a renewed passion into researching and learning the information of why he's failing. If he can now go to that level of personal/baseball discovery then he still has a chance to learn what he is doing wrong and he can fix it. This is where a good manager should be able to rely on his GM to ask for help. He should ask DD, "you are the GM so you tell me why I'm not winning and what area I need to improve in so that I can win". It's a moot point because DD won't be able to answer that as he has not reached step 1 for himself, which is realizing and admitting there is a problem. When DD fails to give him that answer, then Jim should go to Mr. Illitch with a complaint that he is not getting the help he needs from his GM who can't answer the all-important question. Illitch in turn should then go to DD and say get on the phone now or the computer or whatever you have to do and figure out the answer, or don't show up to work tomorrow. Right now Leyland is on his own to the find the right person to point him in the right direction.

These guys have all the money and information at their disposal they need, they aren't short of any resources, but until they can figure out how to fix their own games, they won't be able to help the Tigers with their games on the field.

[joseph mamah]

I dont think we should fire him, we should wait til the end of the year and let him retire. i think he deserves to leave with dignity, hes been a good manager for the most part hes either just mailed it in this year or hes slipping mentally. either way hes got to go but at this point we might as well let it look like its on his own terms.

[TSE]

Well yeah you want to handle managerial changes in the offseason when possible. I don't even necessarily advocate firing him, it if were me I would try to work with him to fix the areas where he makes his mistakes. I can only assume the Tigers already are on the same page with him so I can't see any other resolution but to fire him if they don't have a plan to solve his problem areas.

[joseph mamah]

I think hes got to go, he's either lost interest or his mind. unless we win the world series and even then I think it would be best for both him and the team for him to retire and for the Tigers to make a run at his buddy Tony Larussa.

[kellmellus50]

Here we go again Leland playing Rayburn,well he was hitless last nite and we lost again. Leland loves the .170 rayburn to use for a pinch hitter.
Why? you have cabera on the bench at avg.500 to hit, and you leave him there(brain fart)i think he has altimers.