TheLeviathan

I think you took my remarks too literally. Especially since I said right off the bat that I "feel" like things he is doing differently are showing up in the W-L record. It's very hard to assign wins and losses to anything in a concrete way, that was never what I said, that was an interpretation you ran with. But that doesn't mean differences in managerial style can't have a real effect, it's just impossible to directly assign. But I never tried to do that either.

Do you have access to a means by which I can view all possible worlds? Because otherwise these are kind of silly questions. I think his willingness to adjust things based on player performance is benefitial. Certainly moreso than "play catcher hit third" or "play second, bat second" sort of nonsense.

Heh. My position is pretty simple, I think Molitor was worth a win or two more than Gardy would have been. And it's based on things he's done that Gardy wouldn't - namely his lineup flexibility. I don't disagree it's hard to quantify. I don't suggest that it is a hard and fast rule or fact. Just that my gut instinct from watching this team, looking at the individual performance, and comparing managerial actions thus far this year to the last decade of them tells me Molitor has gotten more out of this team so far than our previous manager. I think the run differential being only -20 or so is impressive when you look at just how bad our offense has been. (50 runs worse than last year) You are welcome to disagree, you may well be right and the larger sample as we go on will bear that out. But I am not falsely attributing anything as you said, we just have different feelings about how wins and losses are attributed and with how much confidence.

Absolutely, fully admitted that it's a small sample size. My take on it could change very much this next month, but I was simply sharing an observation that has some credible evidence to support. But it's hardly indisputable and time will tell.

I have no idea what you're arguing, you aren't being clear. You want to suggest managers make a difference in some way but also are arguing against my position that Molitor is making a difference.

So it exists but won't show up in wins and losses?

Speaking of fallacies: Didn't you just say it's flawed to use wins and losses to judge a manager and then....use wins as a measure for something a manager does well? (Mange the clubhouse) All I did was attribute a win or two this month to things Molitor is doing - ranging from flexible lineups to in-game strategy to clubhouse management. I don't think we get those 1-2 extra wins under Gardy for those same reasons, but that's just my opinion.

Milone was just demoted and until his last start there was clamoring to do the same for Gibson. So three guys compared bad to dismal starts from Santana, Vargas, Hunter, Arcia, Schaeffer, Escobar, Dozier, Nolasco, Hughes, Stauffer, and Duensing. I'm going to go out on a limb and call that a bit unbalanced. Get back to me in May then, this is purely from a perspective of one month in with all small sample sizes admitted. That is a DRAMATIC difference in offense from April '14 to April '15. The pitching disparity isn't even close to that.

Only if you believe a manager is worthless and interchangeable. I'm not sure that's true.

April 2014: 254/353/392 131 Runs Scored April 2015 243/301/342 86 Runs Scored The pitching has been better this year, so far, however. I would argue the fielding might be even worse, or is at least as bad.

Not all of them were awful though, take just Colabello as an example. I feel like you're getting caught up in the names, look at our stats - we have about three regular guys in the lineup that are putting up a respectable OPS.

You are wrong on both points. I've worked in social services, youth corrections, and group homes in the Chicagoland area. You are really, really wrong about this. I have stories I could tell that you wouldn't believe. And those stories are more commonplace then you'd ever accept via anecdote because they defy your sense of humanity. I had to stop working in those areas because exposure to it was jeopardizing MY humanity.

We're likely going to disagree about which challenges were worse, but I maintained last year that MANY things went ridiculously right for the Twins that helped that. Those things just crashed to earth later. But how many players do the Twins have outperforming or even performing to expectations? When I look at what this team is doing individually it sure doesn't look like a .500 team.

I'll say this a month in, given the way many of the players have performed, the dismal start to the season, and other challenges - I'm pretty damn happy with the job Molitor is doing. I don't feel like this would be a .500 team under Gardy.

On your first point, it's speculation. There were riots in Ferguson and there was no indictment, but that was largely because the whole situation was a fabrication of events. We'll have to see who the evidence played out, but I would hope the decision to indict or not indict isn't dependent upon the number of nursing homes or gas stations burned down but on the actual facts of the situation and the desire to bring justice. One of the core issues in all of this is injustice, it's foolish and hypocritical to demand indictments that are undeserved. Hopefully this prosecutor did her job, not succumb to intimidation. On your second point - I commend you for your willingness to say that. Many liberals (and conservatives on the flip side) are unwilling to acknowledge both sides of this. What I find so frustrating about the left (the right is just dumb on this, so let's just agree to that and focus on people who can be helped to help the situation) is that they say there are external factors hurting black communities and that have been hurting them for generations, but yet when we talk about the consequences of that leading to a culture/reality for young black men and women that is harmful to society that becomes racist. Those external factors are real and have desperately needed to be changed for decades, but that they haven't been has caused real and lasting effects to the black community. We have to fix those external factors but we also have to acknowledge that there will have to be a sea change within many black neighborhoods to make those changes matter. You can build a new school and hire the best teachers...but if education isn't important, will it change much? I could rattle off a lot of other examples, but the solution to this has to come from solutions that fix both the internal and external factors. Virtually everyone talking nationally on the issue is entirely focused on one and entirely ignoring the other.

I dig the jab, but in truth this was one of the main reasons to be against an extension for Dozier. We're only a month in and I'm not writing that off as a bad idea (WAY too soon for that), but Dozier has always been a really erratic contributor.

I also think people are falsely equating the attention riots bring to a cause and later solutions. Charismatic leaders are far more influential than riots, they are just short term blips on the radar, leadership drives the engine of change.

Curious...do you think the same of urban black youth? One could argue you are using the same logic that would be ok to say "yes" to that. (And I'm not even saying "yes" is wrong, but rarely find anyone with the gumption to say it)

I agree he's best served emphasizing his best trait (getting on base) at the top of the order, but thus far he hasn't been doing a great job at that either.

Anyone concerned about him yet? Or thoughts on his rather poor start to the season? Last year at this time Dozier had twice as many walks and his XBH had been mostly HRs rather than doubles. My biggest concern with him has always been the erratic nature of what he does well from month to month, is this just a down month or are there underlying problems we need to be worried about going forward? (It's nice the team is playing .500 ball in spite of his play, that' encouraging)

What that mother did and the nation-wide reaction to it is one of the most depressing aspects of this whole thing.

Maybe, but it seems odd to me if this is a central part of the problem that one of the cities that does not have this problem is one of the worst offenders. Part of the issue, in my eyes, is the quality of the individuals working as police officers in the first place. Trying to meet a demographic quota doesn't help that.

Also, I think we're having a hard time with blurring the lines between confrontational and violent. These protests should be (and probably need to be) confrontational. But violent? No. That focuses the camera lense in the wrong direction.

Baltimore has a long history of reports of cop violence and their police force, mayor, and many city council spots are occupied by black men and women. I really think that point is flimsy to irrelevant. The issues with abusive cops aren't racially driven IMO.

I can sympathize with that criticism for sure.