The benefits of a manager change...

[NewMarketSean]

OR

we could fill big holes at first and third and have a starting rotation that keeps their ERA around streetlevel as opposed to the lower stratosphere.

Give Trembley better pitching and at least fill one of the corner infield holes and a lot - A LOT - of this team's problems vanish.

They'd still run into too many outs on the basepaths and the bullpen would be maxed out by June.

[Khaezh12]

Maybe we need a good cop, bad cop pair of co-managers. No one guy is ever going to be the right guy for 25 players.

I really hope this is a joke, because if not it could very well be the worst idea I have heard in a very, very long time.

[ledzepp8]

I am just trying to avoid another collapse, and short of holding the players at gunpoint, I am pretty much up for anything.

I just don't see the benefit in firing yet another manager, especially in a season that was looked at the beginning as a season of learning, just because you want to avoid some collapse. What does that mean anyway and what difference does it make? Is that going to have any bearing on what the prospects do?

[NewMarketSean]

I really hope this is a joke, because if not it could very well be the worst idea I have heard in a very, very long time.

You obviously don't know me well. Of course it was a joke.

It is true, no manager is ever going to be the right guy for 25 different players.

[NewMarketSean]

I just don't see the benefit in firing yet another manager, especially in a season that was looked at the beginning as a season of learning, just because you want to avoid some collapse. What does that mean anyway and what difference does it make? Is that going to have any bearing on what the prospects do?

I want to try and protect our players from months of baseball where there are a handful of wins. AM is all about protecting the prospects and bringing them up to go through a 5-25 September sure as heck isn't going to help them.

[El Gordo]

I want to try and protect our players from months of baseball where there are a handful of wins. AM is all about protecting the prospects and bringing them up to go through a 5-25 September sure as heck isn't going to help them.

You want to protect the players from a manager who won't brow beat/motivate them into winning? Boy have you got it backwards. If they can't win unless some one is yelling at them, they probably just can't win. No matter who you are getting in here, the difference in the W/L collumn isn't going to be more than a 3-4 games at best.

[NewMarketSean]

You want to protect the players from a manager who won't brow beat/motivate them into winning? Boy have you got it backwards. If they can't win unless some one is yelling at them, they probably just can't win. No matter who you are getting in here, the difference in the W/L collumn isn't going to be more than a 3-4 games at best.

You missed the point. This has nothing to do with being yelled at. I want to protect them from the losing. If canning Trembley helps with that, then I am all for it.

Do you want Reimold or Wieters to turn into the next Brian Roberts? Sulking and failing to run out ground balls?

[SilentJames]

They'd still run into too many outs on the basepaths and the bullpen would be maxed out by June.

If the starting rotation is better then the bullpen gets less work.

See because the starters are better and going deeper into games, more consistently.

The basepath errors might also go down. Players don't feel the need to try to go to home and get that extra run right there because the pitching is better. Everyone relaxes and stops trying to do too much which leads to a lot of those baserunning mistakes. Hit and run calls probably go down because we don't feel the urgency to get every last run because, once again, the pitching is better.

You honestly think Trembley CHOOSES to go to the pen in the fifth and sixth innings half the time?

[SilentJames]

You missed the point. This has nothing to do with being yelled at. I want to protect them from the losing. If canning Trembley helps with that, then I am all for it.

Do you want Reimold or Wieters to turn into the next Brian Roberts? Sulking and failing to run out ground balls?

While leading the American League in doubles and rests in the top five in most offensive statistics for leadoff hitters including Runs, RBI, HR, Hits, SB. He is sixth in walks and OPS.

So yeah, he is totally dogging it.

[SteveA]

I agree, if Trembley isn't the guy then he should be replaced now. There are no benefits to keeping him the rest of the season, while a different message could actually get through to the players.

Keeping Trembley will not avoid a collapse, replacing him just might IMO...

Disagree. There is no sense firing in mid-season unless you absolutely know who your replacement is, and he is currently available.

But if you are going to interview and try to find the best person, or if your idea of the best person is currently managing the Chiba Lotte Lions, or coaching for another team ... there's no sense making the move until after the season.

Certainly, with the gradual flushing out of Eatons, Hills, Hendricksons, Simons, Moellers, Freels and replacing them with Bergeson, Hernandez, Wieters, Reimold, Tillman -- who all except Tillman have definitely performed BETTER than the person they replaced -- if this team has another horrendous Aug/Sept collapse like the last two, then Trembley is gone. The fact that we have made those replacements, and each of those guys has been statistically better than who they replaced, yet the results on the field are still crap -- is very disappointing. Last night is a perfect example....if you had told me Berken would pitch a great game, AJ would have a 2-run HR, Wieters would have 4 hits, and Reimold would have a good night.....I would have said that this was the kind of game we've been waiting for. But all it was was another damn L. One that a bunch of us on this board seem to take harder than some of the guys on the team. Maybe they have been told enough that they aren't "expected" to win this year that they don't really hate losing.

[El Gordo]

You missed the point. This has nothing to do with being yelled at. I want to protect them from the losing. If canning Trembley helps with that, then I am all for it.

Do you want Reimold or Wieters to turn into the next Brian Roberts? Sulking and failing to run out ground balls?

You missed my point. If they are such losers, the difference between DT and someone else isn't going to protect them. No manager makes that much of a difference. DT could go to the LAD's and Torre could come here and not that much would change.

[JTrea81]

Disagree. There is no sense firing in mid-season unless you absolutely know who your replacement is, and he is currently available.

But if you are going to interview and try to find the best person, or if your idea of the best person is currently managing the Chiba Lotte Lions, or coaching for another team ... there's no sense making the move until after the season.

Certainly, with the gradual flushing out of Eatons, Hills, Hendricksons, Simons, Moellers, Freels and replacing them with Bergeson, Hernandez, Wieters, Reimold, Tillman -- who all except Tillman have definitely performed BETTER than the person they replaced -- if this team has another horrendous Aug/Sept collapse like the last two, then Trembley is gone. The fact that we have made those replacements, and each of those guys has been statistically better than who they replaced, yet the results on the field are still crap -- is very disappointing. Last night is a perfect example....if you had told me Berken would pitch a great game, AJ would have a 2-run HR, Wieters would have 4 hits, and Reimold would have a good night.....I would have said that this was the kind of game we've been waiting for. But all it was was another damn L. One that a bunch of us on this board seem to take harder than some of the guys on the team. Maybe they have been told enough that they aren't "expected" to win this year that they don't really hate losing.

You tell the players that Trembley isn't the right guy and they won't be able to hide under him any longer. Trembley was protecting his players so perhaps they need to lose that protection. Firing Trembley is like turning a page. It tells the players losing is unacceptable. Keeping Trembley tells the players that they can tank the rest of the season because there is no accountablity. If Trembley isn't being held accountable for the W's and L's down the stretch, why should any player be held accountable?

[SilentJames]

You tell the players that Trembley isn't the right guy and they won't be able to hide under him any longer. Trembley was protecting his players so perhaps they need to lose that protection...

And you also get a look at Jauss too, who has been a bench coach under Grady Little. Perhaps he could be a candidate.

The point is that the people that want to fire Trembley nowhave no real clue who they want to replace him with.

That is the problem. Its a lot of "perhaps" "maybe" "he sounds good". Dave Jauss was also bench coach for Dave Trembley, you honestly think things would be different?

[JTrea81]

The point is that the people that want to fire Trembley nowhave no real clue who they want to replace him with.

That is the problem. Its a lot of "perhaps" "maybe" "he sounds good". Dave Jauss was also bench coach for Dave Trembley, you honestly think things would be different?

If Trembley is fired, it tells the players, what he and they were doing was unacceptable. To keep him on, tells them the exact opposite IMO.

Jauss would be an interim guy, that's true, but who cares who manages the team really, the season is already lost. It just can't be Trembley because he is the status quo.

If you want to send a message to players that their play has been unacceptable, you fire DT, because he is ultimately responsible.

[TJ Wrangler]

OR

we could fill big holes at first and third and have a starting rotation that keeps their ERA around streetlevel as opposed to the lower stratosphere.

Give Trembley better pitching and at least fill one of the corner infield holes and a lot - A LOT - of this team's problems vanish.

I don't want to say that a good in-game manager would have won last night, but Trembley did a lot of things I disagreed with last night in the last inning. He pinch ran Pie, but then called for a bunt with Izturis. Izzy struck out. I would have pinch hit for Izturis with either Wigginton or Zaun, who has been hot of late, and then let the top of my lineup try to score. The game ended with Pie getting forced out at second. The small ball game and moving the runners over failed for Trembley last night. A different game plan could have changed the outcome. We still could have lost, but at least it would have been on the players to take their 3 outs to get a run in, not by giving one up.

Now I can understand that a good in game manager likely only adds 3 wins or so, but it puts the team in a better position to win many more than that. A good manager also puts the players in the best position to succeed and get the team a win. That doesn't always amount to a win and won't show up in the stats. That is what gets the players to respect you and trust your decision making. Maybe I'm stupid, but I'll take the likely 3 extra wins and a better chance to win many more games while the team respects and trusts the manager's decision making and likewise play to win when given the opportunity over a less than stellar in game manager that doesn't increase our chance of winning by failing to make astute and strategic in game decisions any day of the week.