wsnydes

Nope, but if the guy with that responsibility isn't getting the job done, it's on the manager to either help or find someone that can. Either way, that isn't happening. Considering the fact the fundamentals were a strong suit of Molitors game, it stands to reason that he should be able to instill them in his players. I don't see that happening at all.

Didn't say turn them into stars. He can teach them to run the bases correctly, throw to the correct base, situational hitting and fielding... little things that don't require a minimum skill level. I'm not asking for miracles, just fundamental baseball. This team lacks it.

You might be right on that they have been less significant than we've thought, at least in game. I still think they're more important outside of the game. Once the game starts, most of their job is done. Thanks for the debate! I enjoyed it.

I would argue that Molitor is a poor example to use, but to your point, it doesn't take a massive amount in game. One move or non-move can drastically alter a game. Most of the managers work is outside of the game anyway. That's how it's always been. How many in-game technique/mechanics adjustments or on the fly game plan changes can your statistician make? Is that person going to notice that the opposing pitcher doesn't have his fastball that day and adjust the batters game plan accordingly? Is that statistician going to notice that they're working a hitter a particular way and call for a hit and run to take advantage of it? That's the sort of thing a good manager is looking at. Sure, you have the "experts" to do some of that stuff, but the more eyes on those types of things the better off you will be. I don't disagree that those sorts of skill sets will creep into the dugout. they clearly are, but if the game progresses to the point where it's so robotic that nobody makes any sort of strategical adjustments based on current game conditions, then it's going to get even more boring than it is already becoming. There will likely be statisticians sitting in the dugout feeding the manager info, but the guy making the decisions has to understand what's going on on the field as much as he understands the information he's being given. That part of your point I don't disagree with at all. The game is already there. For what it's worth, when Epstein was hired by the Red Sox it was pretty clear even before he accomplished anything that that was where baseball was going to go in my view. The game the FO plays and the game in the dugout are two very different games though.

This makes more sense than what I was interpreting. However, basically what you said, is that it's not all that different (if at all) than it is now. If you still have a point man, would he not be the manager? Even if not in title? I agree that the manager position has changed a lot in a rather short amount of time. The skill set required is evolving and always will. The game is constantly evolving, it only makes sense that all those players and coaches involved will also need to evolve. I think where I might differ from your opinion is that the "point man" will always be a baseball guy. I think there's much more to managing that analyzing data and making a decision. Will that person need to know how to use data effectively? Absolutely. But he's also going to need to know the game beyond the data. I'm not sure if you're disagreeing with that at all though. I think FO's can be filled with Stanford nerd types more practically than a dugout. The decisions that a FO make are more data driven to begin with. The day to day routine's are completely different requiring completely different skill sets.

You've mentioned this before in other threads. How would this work in your mind? I don't really agree, but I do think it's an interesting idea. I'm just not sure how it would work in practice. I assume that the three or four people have their own discipline in which they work in, but what happens where there is overlap? What happens a decision must be made quickly? Wouldn't you need someone to be the "point man", so to speak? Do these guys also work with the players to improve their skill/technique? I'm genuinely interested in how you see this arrangement work in practice.

Looking at 3+ years of overall track record and pointing at 2 months that are clearly outside of the norm is also cherry picking. The peaks and valleys this team exhibit is insane. The fact that Molitor can't even teach his team his own strengths as a player is alarming and problematic. I'm a firm believer that HoF type players generally make terrible coaches because things come so naturally to them that they don't know how to pass that knowledge on to others. I don't care so much about his overall record. I care about his inability to get the most out of the players that he is given. I care about his inability to get his team to play solid fundamental baseball. Doing the little things requires no minimum skill level.

True, but he was also actually pitching... Throwing a ball towards home plate anyway.

I'll take that for the guys that will be free agents after the season though. May as well get something for them.

I appreciate the optimism, but in order to turn things around for this season they've got to play as well collectively as they have played poorly collectively thus far. Sano isn't coming back up anytime soon. Buxton isn't hitting AAA pitching. Dozier, Morrison and Kepler have been ice cold. We still don't know what we're going to see from Mauer the rest of the season. All of those things will need to turn a complete 180 in order to make this team a legitimate threat. One or two of those guys might come around, but they need all of to do it. And they'll need to do it at the same time, and then sustain it for the rest of the season. I don't want to speak for anyone else, but I see that as pretty unlikely. Of course, all of that assumes that the pitching holds true and Rosario and Escobar continue their level of play. That's a lot to ask.

Yup, the game has become pretty boring in that aspect. Even keeping score when at a game is boring because nothing happens. It's no wonder attendance is falling.

By my accounting, all they need is two catchers, a DH, a 2B, a RF, a CF, two bench players, a manager and Cleveland to be contracted. I don't know what all of this sell talk is, they're clearly right there!

I was going to make a small sample size quip, but you beat me to the punch in a more serious form. That is quite shocking. It's hard to believe, but I just read an article the other day about the league is on pace to have a higher strike out total than total hits for the first time in the game's history. That puts things in context pretty well I suppose.

I didn't think Rogers had an option left, but I could be wrong. Hildy won't be sent down, like you said. Leaving one spot to use to rotate arms, and that spot is currently occupied by someone that's actually reliable and effective. Signing Belisle only made the bullpen more rigid.

They were basically forced into the move because they built a bullpen without a spot or two that they could rotate a few guys between the minors and the big league club. It makes for odd moves like this, especially since they apparently have no desire to part with Belisle. So they have a 40 man roster full of pitchers, but no flexibility to move them in and out of the active roster to take advantage of it. Genius.

It sucks even more when you realize that Belisle still has a job.

It's got to be deflating for him. He does everything he's asked to do and pitches well enough in the process to earn more time and perhaps the opportunity to be put in higher leverage spots than he's been pitching in. He seems like he's a perfect guy to bridge the game to get to Pressly or Reed or Duke. I don't get it at all.

Also important to note that Escobar is playing so much because of Sano and Polanco not being available. Adrianza, while starting slow, has really come on of late too filling in for Polanco. Guys that haven't been hurt aren't producing either. Dozier, Kepler and Morrison have struggled most of the season. Injuries aren't the only story for this season, that is for sure.

Fair point, indeed. However, perhaps what the "offending" player needs is to realize that by continuing to make mental errors they not only hurt the team with the error, but also by being benched for repeated offenses. By benching, you hope that that gets the point across. Short term loss for long term gain.

Thank you, I appreciate the compliment! I agree that there is some luck involved with the bullpen management, no doubt. A manager can push the right buttons for a given situation all he wants, but it still boils down to the player executing. I do think that maximizing the odds of a potential outcome to be very real however. I've mentioned putting players in a position to succeed in many other posts in other threads, this is what I'm referring to. Putting the right player in the right position to maximize their chances of succeeding - and achieving a positive result for the team because of it. One recent example of where I believe that Molitor fails at this is Lance Lynn's previous start. Molitor allows Lynn to come out for the 7th inning of a 1-0 game. I had no issue with that, I actually applaud the notion of letting the starter go deeper. Lynn gives up a leadoff triple and is allowed to continue the inning. In my view, this is where Molitor failed the first time. Lynn was running out of gas and near the end anyway. In my opinion, Lynn should have been pulled at that point. Allow a fresh arm to come in and try to work out of a tough jam. To Lynn's credit, he did get two outs. However, the first of those was a sac fly that tied the game. Could that have happened to the reliever? Absolutely, but Lynn wouldn't be on the hook for the loss either (if you care about such things). After striking out McCann, Lynn then plunks Iglesias. I believe that Molitor failed here too. I realize that Jacoby Jones wasn't lighting the world on fire, but any major league hitter can be dangerous and now the go-ahead run is on base. Lynn remains in the game and gives up a 2-run HR and now an inning that started as a 1-0 lead is now a 3-1 deficit and NOW Molitor takes out his starter. The damage had already been done. At that point, Molitor may as well have let Lynn finish the inning. These types of scenarios play out more often than what I see the Maddon's or Francona's of the world allow to happen. They have a feel for the game that tells them to stop the bleeding before it starts. If the reliever brought in gives up the lead in that scenario, then so be it. That's the luck that you mentioned. But at least the manager maximized the odds of succeeding in a late game situation.

I wouldn't say that it's being ignored. It's not by me anyway. Even from my perspective, I found his post to be very interesting. However, it talks about what managers do in game. In my case, I have issue with what he's able to get across to the players behind the scenes that result in poor fundamental play and that things aren't corrected. You can argue that these things should have been addressed in the minors or in high school (which I agree with), however fact of the matter is that they are not or have not been effectively anyway. That leaves the big league guy to get things sorted out. I agree that the managers role is shrinking in game. As for the portion of the bullpen usage, I didn't interpret it to take into account when relievers are used or when they're brought in or pulled. That's my primary issue. I think he overuses a couple of guys and doesn't use his entire pen efficiently though too. He doesn't seem to have a feel for it. He too often leaves a guy in, whether it be a starter or reliever, until after the damage is done. The next guy is brought in to stop the bleeding instead of trying to avoid the puncture wound in the first place. I also agree with jimmer in that the most common complaint on fanboards is probably about bullpen management. I acknowledge that it is not easy and there is some art to it. But that's why a big league manager "makes the big bucks." Bullpen management is probably the most important aspect of a managers role in a game these days. It stands to reason that that is what people are going to zero in on. And people are going to have differing opinions on how it's done.

It's not that these things happen just once. Things happen, mistakes get made. That's not on Molitor. It's when they're repeated over and over again that I look at the manager and wonder why it hasn't been corrected.

I gave you some examples, there are plenty more. Were you expecting me to list all of them? Sure, things happen to even good teams. They happen more to bad teams. At no point have I claimed that I was looking at just 2018. In fact, I have clearly stated that I am looking at Molitor's entire managerial resume. These are things that have plagued his teams throughout his tenure, not just this year. His resume includes a .466 winning percentage. I don't know where that sort of record, accrued over a handful of seasons equates to good; especially in a division as putrid as the Central has been during that time. At this point, we're going to have to agree to disagree. It's pretty clear that we won't agree on much regarding this topic.

What defensive gaffes? Rosario throwing to the wrong base or no base in particular. Grossman airmailing cutoff men. Throwing down to 2B to nab a slow as molasses runner stealing 2B while the runner on 3B scampers home to score. These aren't physical errors, they're mental and they happen far too frequently for a professional baseball team. What baserunning gaffes? Logan Morrison getting picked off of 2B late in a tie game. Rosario rounding 1B on a hit to RF and getting picked off when the throw goes behind him. Getting in more rundowns than a Little League team. These are mental errors and they happen far to frequently for a professional baseball team. Neither of those two things require any particular level of skill, just awareness of what's going on. Poor bullpen management - I'll refer you to Chielf's comment (post #48) above since he already did the work for me. These things contribute to the overall record and have no relation to the injuries you're using as an excuse.

Yet, injuries can't be blamed for the lack of situational awareness, prevalent base running gaffes, defensive gaffes and poor bullpen management that have plagued the entirety of his managerial tenure. The first three take no level of talent to understand or execute - it's simply being aware of what is going on in the game. So simply saying that Molitor has been handcuffed with injuries or a lack of talent and should get a pass because of it is missing where the dissatisfaction stems from.