[quote name='jokin'][quote name='Oxtung'][quote name='thrylos98'][quote name='one_eyed_jack']Really? That's your argument. A .002 difference in win percentage?
That's statistically insignificant.
1 Twins hot streak could put Gardy back on top in that race.
Not to mention, surely even you can work out why Gardy hasn't been run out of town the way Childress was. Childress had alieanted virtually everyone in the organization by the time he got canned, and had lost the support of his players completely. And Childress was cheated out of nothing. When you take yourself out of range of a potential game winning field goal with a too many men on the field penalty, you don't deserve to win, and you have no right to complain.
But back to baseball - if winning percentage is your measuring stick, why don't you look up how .525 stacks up against other managers, past and present. Guys like Maddon, Showalter and Tom Kelly for example.
Here a hint: it's higher. But I guess that's just "pro-Gardy bias", right?
In reverse order:
TK has 2 rings and a great post season record. Maddon has an excellent post-season record. Showalter is as good as Gardy
The Vikings were cheated big time at that game. Lots of non-calls including the bounty calls. If they called that personal foul dirty hit against Favre game was over. But the powers of being definitely had a Katrina-driven agenda.
Again, I said that Gardy's record is worse than Childress and they got totally different treatment by the fan base. Regular season records are a dead heat (so Gardy is about as great as Childress, I give you that) but the postseason/playoff records are not. Gardy is light years worse. And this is a fact.[/QUOTE]
Winning percentages between football and baseball are apples and oranges. A great baseball team might win 60% of their games (~100 wins) but win 60% (10-6) of your games in football and you aren't even guaranteed to go to the playoffs
. Great teams in football win 80%-90% of their games.[/QUOTE]
Huh ?!? This is a partly true, but in the end, still a specious argument, is the discussion even about "great teams"? Even by your criteria, Gardenhire has never had a "great team" (closest was .593 in 06), he's 0/11, while Childress had one, making him 1/5.
These are just some of many playoff teams and/or division champs over the years thanks to the ridiculous priority placed on geographical division alignments in the "League of Parity", the NFL:
78 Vikings 8-7-1
80 Vikings 9-7
04 Vikings 8-8
04 Rams 8-8
10 Seahawks 7-9 (division winners!)
04 Seahawks 9-7
99 Seahawks 9-7
99 Dolphins 9-7
95 Dolphins 9-7 (These are just a few of the countless 9-7 playoff/div. champ teams)
09 Jets 9-7
09 Ravens 9-7
91 Jets 8-8
90 Saints 8-8
85 Browns 8-8
82 Browns 4-5
82 Lions 4-5
11 Cincy 9-7
11 Broncos 8-8
08 Chargers 8-8
06 Giants 8-8
There are mediocre teams that make the playoffs in MLB as well- who would dispute that the inbalanced schedule has skewed Gardy's record significantly better than it should be?, his dreadful performance against the Eastern Division is well documented. He made his career mark feasting on the dregs of the AL and just about every inter-division series against the clearly inferior NL. This has clearly been more than "good enough" for the ownership, which fought a pitched battle to commit club suicide- leave the state or contract itself out of existence- from 2001 to 2007. It's also "good enough" for the fans, just happy to still have a team in town with a laconic, unflashy, but seemingly successful, manager. Childress, though on the surface similar in delivery to Gardenhire, by dint of his aloof and secretive ways and anal personality, was never able to endear himself in Minnesota.
In the end, the point of discussion is about a body of work over a career and the final net record, not single season "great teams". Both compiled records in some of the weaker-to-mediocre divisions in their respective leagues. Gardy gets the edge for making
the playoffs, watered down as these accomplishments are, 6/11 years, Childress made it in 2/5 years. As far as postseason goes, Gardy and Childress come up short yet again, as they both were able to make it past the first round of the playoffs just once. Curiously though, Gardy did it in his first year, inheriting a group of up-and-comers, and failed to learn and build from the experience- as we all are well aware, he has been a playoff flopper ever since, even with "better" teams on paper, and losing embarrassingly meekly each time.[/QUOTE]
Wow did you miss the point of my post. Let me try this again without #'s since that seems to have diverted you from the point. Football and baseball are very different sports. A .525 winning percentage in football is not the same as a .525 winning percentage in football from a success stand point. So like I said in my last post...apples and oranges.