The talent carried Fredi not Fredi the talent...I don't see many managers that would have been less successful than Fredi with this club

IF ANYONE ELSE WAS HERE CHRIS COGHLAN WOULDA ONLY HIT .200

LONG LIVE FREDI

One of the worst ways to judge a manager is to judge him by his record. People seem to think that since we won 87 games, and we "overachieved", Fredi deserves the credit.

 

 

 

Great post.

 

 

Like I said, it depends on the circumstances. Just look what Fredi was given to work with. He had one consistent starter all year, the rest of the 4 guys were up and down in the minors. We didn't have a consistent closer. Factor that all in with us having the lowest payroll in baseball, I think the record alone should be very telling on the job Fredi did this year.

 

We won every single season series against the NL East, including the Phillies with that potent offense and the Braves with that great pitching. Yeah if Boston or New York won 90 games, you cannot just look at the record and say they had a good year, b/c they're big market teams with enormous amounts of talent each year. The Marlins don't have that luxury.

 

 

None of what you just said though had anything to do with what Fredi actually did, it was what he had to work with. 80-85 (probably closer to 85) of the wins the Marlins had should be credited to the players and the front office for putting the team together. A manager may decide a few games at max.

 

If we had a worse team, but still had a payroll in the same area as we did this past year, and we ended the season with 75 wins, would you be saying that Fredi did a worse job as a manager? Would it be Fredi's fault that the front office put out a lower quality team?

 

There are only so many things that a manager has an affect on. Setting lineups, pinch-hitting/running, and bullpen use are the three major ones that come to mind. The first two also don't have nearly the importance as the third one. So when you look at the most important decision a manager has to make (how to handle a bullpen), you ask yourself how did Fredi handle that job, and probably the majority would say that he was poor in that area.

 

How many wins did he actually cause us to win/lose? Nobody knows for sure, but the manager isn't the one who decides the outcome of ballgames, and he shouldn't be the one getting credit for winning 87 games.

 

Ok, so you're saying setting lineups, pinch hitting, and managing the bullpen only had an affect on a couple of games max ???? You can't be serious, right. What if Fredi put Coghlan 7th, and Hanley leadoff? What if he kept Boner in there batting second the whole season instead of Baker or Nick Johnson? What if he left Hermida in there, or Maybin when he was struggling mightely. Fredi realized Coghlan was a legitimate leadoff man when most of us doubted him. Remember when he was hitting .250 and had an OBP around .320. IF Hanley led off, he would have had 50 RBI's instead of 100. If you think tweaks like these would only factor in a couple of games, you're crazy.

 

Fredi had to manage the bullpen everyday. Like I said, we set the MLB record for games without a complete game. Why don't you try managing a bullpen for 4+ innings a game. Fredi, for the most part made very intelligent decisions, it just came down to the players not getting their job done. So automatically Fredi is the scapegoat ??? Not fair. And what about Fredi managing the starting rotation ?? Volstad, Nolasco, and Miller were all sent down to the minors at some point. He had to call up guys like Vandenhurk, Sean West, Badenhop, etc. You're telling me that Fredi had nothing to do with that ?

 

And little things like pinch hitting, pinch running, calling hit and runs can have a significant impact on a game. It could be the difference between a win or a loss. Yeah the front office built the team and yeah the individual players have to perform, but the manager has a huge impact on the game everyday. Why are managers constantly fired in baseball if they had nothing to do with the success of a team? Exactly.

Fredi was terrible like last year. Our team underachieved. We did as well as we did because of the talent. Just look at the two managers we had when we won the world series. That's the kind of manager we need, Fredi is not that. As a result, he needs to go.

 

 

What talent are you talking about ?? Our starters struggled mightely. Nolasco, Volstad, and Miller were all sent down. Fredi had to work with pitchers like Badenhop, Sean West, Rick Vandenhurk, etc to start a siginificant amount of games. What talent did we have in the bullpen ?? Did we have a Rivera, a K-Rod, a Fuenes, a Papelbon ?? NO.

 

Yeah we have some young talent, but a lot of our guys still aren't ready to play at the major league level, like Maybin, Gaby Sanchez etc.

 

So I'm confused as to what talent you're actually talking about ??

We had the lowest payroll in baseball and finished with a better record than the winner of the American League Central Division.

 

I think Fredie did a damn good job!

We had the lowest payroll in baseball and finished with a better record than the winner of the American League Central Division.

 

I think Fredie did a damn good job!

 

 

I agree. He may not be the most in your face kind of manager, but he does a good job, and is liked by his players. Would I like him to show a little more fire once and a while? Sure. Did I groan every time he brought in Pinto in a key spot? You bet. But overall he has done a fine job. Like Beinfest, he works miracles with the resources at his disposal. I'd be excited to see a big name manager come to town, but Fredi has done nothing to deserve getting replaced.

 

And on a side note, that AL central fact is exactly why I dream for a day with full interleague play and no divisions, and the top 8 get into the playoffs. Home and home 3 game series versus everyone else for 174 games. Oh if I were lord of the baseball universe lol.

We had the lowest payroll in baseball and finished with a better record than the winner of the American League Central Division.

 

I think Fredie did a damn good job!

 

 

I agree. He may not be the most in your face kind of manager, but he does a good job, and is liked by his players. Would I like him to show a little more fire once and a while? Sure. Did I groan every time he brought in Pinto in a key spot? You bet. But overall he has done a fine job. Like Beinfest, he works miracles with the resources at his disposal. I'd be excited to see a big name manager come to town, but Fredi has done nothing to deserve getting replaced.

 

And on a side note, that AL central fact is exactly why I dream for a day with full interleague play and no divisions, and the top 8 get into the playoffs. Home and home 3 game series versus everyone else for 174 games. Oh if I were lord of the baseball universe lol.

If you were lord of the baseball universe the majority of baseball fans would murder you.

Whomever made the decision to stick w/ Bonifacio for so long should be the one to go. Too much time was spent on trying to make us believe Boni was anything more than a pinch-runner

One of the worst ways to judge a manager is to judge him by his record. People seem to think that since we won 87 games, and we "overachieved", Fredi deserves the credit.

 

 

 

Great post.

 

 

Like I said, it depends on the circumstances. Just look what Fredi was given to work with. He had one consistent starter all year, the rest of the 4 guys were up and down in the minors. We didn't have a consistent closer. Factor that all in with us having the lowest payroll in baseball, I think the record alone should be very telling on the job Fredi did this year.

 

We won every single season series against the NL East, including the Phillies with that potent offense and the Braves with that great pitching. Yeah if Boston or New York won 90 games, you cannot just look at the record and say they had a good year, b/c they're big market teams with enormous amounts of talent each year. The Marlins don't have that luxury.

 

 

None of what you just said though had anything to do with what Fredi actually did, it was what he had to work with. 80-85 (probably closer to 85) of the wins the Marlins had should be credited to the players and the front office for putting the team together. A manager may decide a few games at max.

 

If we had a worse team, but still had a payroll in the same area as we did this past year, and we ended the season with 75 wins, would you be saying that Fredi did a worse job as a manager? Would it be Fredi's fault that the front office put out a lower quality team?

 

There are only so many things that a manager has an affect on. Setting lineups, pinch-hitting/running, and bullpen use are the three major ones that come to mind. The first two also don't have nearly the importance as the third one. So when you look at the most important decision a manager has to make (how to handle a bullpen), you ask yourself how did Fredi handle that job, and probably the majority would say that he was poor in that area.

 

How many wins did he actually cause us to win/lose? Nobody knows for sure, but the manager isn't the one who decides the outcome of ballgames, and he shouldn't be the one getting credit for winning 87 games.

 

Ok, so you're saying setting lineups, pinch hitting, and managing the bullpen only had an affect on a couple of games max ???? You can't be serious, right. What if Fredi put Coghlan 7th, and Hanley leadoff? What if he kept Boner in there batting second the whole season instead of Baker or Nick Johnson? What if he left Hermida in there, or Maybin when he was struggling mightely. Fredi realized Coghlan was a legitimate leadoff man when most of us doubted him. Remember when he was hitting .250 and had an OBP around .320. IF Hanley led off, he would have had 50 RBI's instead of 100. If you think tweaks like these would only factor in a couple of games, you're crazy.

 

Fredi had to manage the bullpen everyday. Like I said, we set the MLB record for games without a complete game. Why don't you try managing a bullpen for 4+ innings a game. Fredi, for the most part made very intelligent decisions, it just came down to the players not getting their job done. So automatically Fredi is the scapegoat ??? Not fair. And what about Fredi managing the starting rotation ?? Volstad, Nolasco, and Miller were all sent down to the minors at some point. He had to call up guys like Vandenhurk, Sean West, Badenhop, etc. You're telling me that Fredi had nothing to do with that ?

 

And little things like pinch hitting, pinch running, calling hit and runs can have a significant impact on a game. It could be the difference between a win or a loss. Yeah the front office built the team and yeah the individual players have to perform, but the manager has a huge impact on the game everyday. Why are managers constantly fired in baseball if they had nothing to do with the success of a team? Exactly.

 

 

Not batting Hanley first and Coghlan seventh isn't being a good manager, it's called common sense. No manager in the game would be stupid enough to bat Coghlan seventh with his OBP, and no manager would also bat Bonifacio second over Johnson. As for Coghlan's start, it really didn't last that long, and he didn't have many other options to bat leadoff. You're simply listing things Fredi did that only a person with an IQ below 70 wouldn't have done. Since you said he was "extremely effective", I want to know what he did that really stood out, which most MLB managers wouldn't have done.

 

If Fredi decides to use Pinto instead of Kiko or any other better relievers in a key situation, and Pinto fails, that's not a case of Pinto not getting the job done, it's a case of poor bullpen management by Fredi, which occurred plenty of times. If you remember, during the middle of the season when our bullpen was just getting hammered nearly every signle night, we were constantly sending relievers up and down to have a fresh bullpen (Martinez, Wood, Leroux, etc.) The thing is, for some reason, Fredi would use those releivers in crucial situations, even if a guy like Kiko had two or three days rest. Then the next night, when we're up by six runs, he would use Kiko then. There are ways to handle the bullpen even if you have to use them for four innings per night, and Fredi did not do his job effectively.

 

Things like pinch hitting and pinch running barely have an impact on the game, as long as you put them in at the right time, which just depends on a pitcher's pitch count/tiredness. I mean, what did he really have to decide, whether to use Gload or Helms? Hit-and-runs can have an impact on the game, but only to a certain extent, and it's hard to decide if they were actually the right decisions, and if they were effective. If you want to talk about the other little things, I don't remember Fredi having much success there, especially if you remember the Werth-Bako situation.

 

Managers in baseball get fired because of their record for the same reason sabermetricians don't get hired by front offices often. Ignorance. An owner wants to win ballgames, and he usually needs someone to put the blame on for not having a winning team, A.K.A., the manager.

Ok, so you're saying setting lineups, pinch hitting, and managing the bullpen only had an affect on a couple of games max ???? You can't be serious, right. What if Fredi put Coghlan 7th, and Hanley leadoff? What if he kept Boner in there batting second the whole season instead of Baker or Nick Johnson? What if he left Hermida in there, or Maybin when he was struggling mightely. Fredi realized Coghlan was a legitimate leadoff man when most of us doubted him. Remember when he was hitting .250 and had an OBP around .320. IF Hanley led off, he would have had 50 RBI's instead of 100. If you think tweaks like these would only factor in a couple of games, you're crazy.

 

Fredi had to manage the bullpen everyday. Like I said, we set the MLB record for games without a complete game. Why don't you try managing a bullpen for 4+ innings a game. Fredi, for the most part made very intelligent decisions, it just came down to the players not getting their job done. So automatically Fredi is the scapegoat ??? Not fair. And what about Fredi managing the starting rotation ?? Volstad, Nolasco, and Miller were all sent down to the minors at some point. He had to call up guys like Vandenhurk, Sean West, Badenhop, etc. You're telling me that Fredi had nothing to do with that ?

 

And little things like pinch hitting, pinch running, calling hit and runs can have a significant impact on a game. It could be the difference between a win or a loss. Yeah the front office built the team and yeah the individual players have to perform, but the manager has a huge impact on the game everyday. Why are managers constantly fired in baseball if they had nothing to do with the success of a team? Exactly.

 

 

 

Not batting Hanley first and Coghlan seventh isn't being a good manager, it's called common sense. No manager in the game would be stupid enough to bat Coghlan seventh with his OBP, and no manager would also bat Bonifacio second over Johnson. As for Coghlan's start, it really didn't last that long, and he didn't have many other options to bat leadoff. You're simply listing things Fredi did that only a person with an IQ below 70 wouldn't have done. Since you said he was "extremely effective", I want to know what he did that really stood out, which most MLB managers wouldn't have done.

 

If Fredi decides to use Pinto instead of Kiko or any other better relievers in a key situation, and Pinto fails, that's not a case of Pinto not getting the job done, it's a case of poor bullpen management by Fredi, which occurred plenty of times. If you remember, during the middle of the season when our bullpen was just getting hammered nearly every signle night, we were constantly sending relievers up and down to have a fresh bullpen (Martinez, Wood, Leroux, etc.) The thing is, for some reason, Fredi would use those releivers in crucial situations, even if a guy like Kiko had two or three days rest. Then the next night, when we're up by six runs, he would use Kiko then. There are ways to handle the bullpen even if you have to use them for four innings per night, and Fredi did not do his job effectively.

 

Things like pinch hitting and pinch running barely have an impact on the game, as long as you put them in at the right time, which just depends on a pitcher's pitch count/tiredness. I mean, what did he really have to decide, whether to use Gload or Helms? Hit-and-runs can have an impact on the game, but only to a certain extent, and it's hard to decide if they were actually the right decisions, and if they were effective. If you want to talk about the other little things, I don't remember Fredi having much success there, especially if you remember the Werth-Bako situation.

 

Managers in baseball get fired because of their record for the same reason sabermetricians don't get hired by front offices often. Ignorance. An owner wants to win ballgames, and he usually needs someone to put the blame on for not having a winning team, A.K.A., the manager.

 

But it's not common sense. You remember when Hanley was struggling in the 3rd spot for quite some time? Hanley his whole career was comfortable batting leadoff but Gonzo had to make a decision on if he should keep him in the 3rd spot or move him back to leadoff. He kept him in there, despite his struggles, and look at Hanley now, he's the NL batting champ. As for Coghlan, initially he wasn't your prototypical leadoff guy. He didn't have great speed, at the time, he wasn't hitting for average and his OBP was mediocre at best, definitely not leadoff material. But Fredi stuck with him and not only did it pan out, it looks like Coghlan will win ROY.

 

And we as fans have short term memories. The obvious glaring mistakes stick out, but when good decisions are made, we just look at it as 'eh' and move on. I remember numerous times when Pinto was called in on key situations and got the job done. Like I said, when managers make good decisions in key times, they go unnoticed, and two days later we're oblivious. But when Pinto doesn't get the job done, we remember it for a month and start calling for Fredi's head. We're always trying to find a scapegoat, and Fredi is the first choice.

 

And there's so much more that goes into pinch hitting and pinch running. You have to factor in how many guys you have left, what inning it is, what the score is, whether a player in game can move to a different position during a double switch. If he pinch runs, he has to make sure he has a replacement, like the numerous times he used Emilio to pinch run for Paulino. You look at it in the most simplest way possible when in reality there's so much to take into consideration before a decision is made.

 

And at the end of the day, we have no idea what goes on in the clubhouse and in that dugout and bullpen. All those times he used Pinto or another reliever instead of Calero or someone with so called "better numbers," you write it off as a bad move. What if Calero didn't have his stuff warming up, or didn't have control. What if the 2 guys he was coming in to pitch to had great numbers against him. What if a pitcher wasn't available for a reason we don't know of but Fredi and the clubhouse did. You see, we as fans look at baseball on a very basic level when in reality, it is so much more complicated, and unless we're part of the team, we'll never know why decisions are made. But there's a reason behind everything.

Ok, so you're saying setting lineups, pinch hitting, and managing the bullpen only had an affect on a couple of games max ???? You can't be serious, right. What if Fredi put Coghlan 7th, and Hanley leadoff? What if he kept Boner in there batting second the whole season instead of Baker or Nick Johnson? What if he left Hermida in there, or Maybin when he was struggling mightely. Fredi realized Coghlan was a legitimate leadoff man when most of us doubted him. Remember when he was hitting .250 and had an OBP around .320. IF Hanley led off, he would have had 50 RBI's instead of 100. If you think tweaks like these would only factor in a couple of games, you're crazy.

 

Fredi had to manage the bullpen everyday. Like I said, we set the MLB record for games without a complete game. Why don't you try managing a bullpen for 4+ innings a game. Fredi, for the most part made very intelligent decisions, it just came down to the players not getting their job done. So automatically Fredi is the scapegoat ??? Not fair. And what about Fredi managing the starting rotation ?? Volstad, Nolasco, and Miller were all sent down to the minors at some point. He had to call up guys like Vandenhurk, Sean West, Badenhop, etc. You're telling me that Fredi had nothing to do with that ?

 

And little things like pinch hitting, pinch running, calling hit and runs can have a significant impact on a game. It could be the difference between a win or a loss. Yeah the front office built the team and yeah the individual players have to perform, but the manager has a huge impact on the game everyday. Why are managers constantly fired in baseball if they had nothing to do with the success of a team? Exactly.

 

 

 

Not batting Hanley first and Coghlan seventh isn't being a good manager, it's called common sense. No manager in the game would be stupid enough to bat Coghlan seventh with his OBP, and no manager would also bat Bonifacio second over Johnson. As for Coghlan's start, it really didn't last that long, and he didn't have many other options to bat leadoff. You're simply listing things Fredi did that only a person with an IQ below 70 wouldn't have done. Since you said he was "extremely effective", I want to know what he did that really stood out, which most MLB managers wouldn't have done.

 

If Fredi decides to use Pinto instead of Kiko or any other better relievers in a key situation, and Pinto fails, that's not a case of Pinto not getting the job done, it's a case of poor bullpen management by Fredi, which occurred plenty of times. If you remember, during the middle of the season when our bullpen was just getting hammered nearly every signle night, we were constantly sending relievers up and down to have a fresh bullpen (Martinez, Wood, Leroux, etc.) The thing is, for some reason, Fredi would use those releivers in crucial situations, even if a guy like Kiko had two or three days rest. Then the next night, when we're up by six runs, he would use Kiko then. There are ways to handle the bullpen even if you have to use them for four innings per night, and Fredi did not do his job effectively.

 

Things like pinch hitting and pinch running barely have an impact on the game, as long as you put them in at the right time, which just depends on a pitcher's pitch count/tiredness. I mean, what did he really have to decide, whether to use Gload or Helms? Hit-and-runs can have an impact on the game, but only to a certain extent, and it's hard to decide if they were actually the right decisions, and if they were effective. If you want to talk about the other little things, I don't remember Fredi having much success there, especially if you remember the Werth-Bako situation.

 

Managers in baseball get fired because of their record for the same reason sabermetricians don't get hired by front offices often. Ignorance. An owner wants to win ballgames, and he usually needs someone to put the blame on for not having a winning team, A.K.A., the manager.

 

But it's not common sense. You remember when Hanley was struggling in the 3rd spot for quite some time? Hanley his whole career was comfortable batting leadoff but Gonzo had to make a decision on if he should keep him in the 3rd spot or move him back to leadoff. He kept him in there, despite his struggles, and look at Hanley now, he's the NL batting champ. As for Coghlan, initially he wasn't your prototypical leadoff guy. He didn't have great speed, at the time, he wasn't hitting for average and his OBP was mediocre at best, definitely not leadoff material. But Fredi stuck with him and not only did it pan out, it looks like Coghlan will win ROY.

 

And we as fans have short term memories. The obvious glaring mistakes stick out, but when good decisions are made, we just look at it as 'eh' and move on. I remember numerous times when Pinto was called in on key situations and got the job done. Like I said, when managers make good decisions in key times, they go unnoticed, and two days later we're oblivious. But when Pinto doesn't get the job done, we remember it for a month and start calling for Fredi's head. We're always trying to find a scapegoat, and Fredi is the first choice.

 

And there's so much more that goes into pinch hitting and pinch running. You have to factor in how many guys you have left, what inning it is, what the score is, whether a player in game can move to a different position during a double switch. If he pinch runs, he has to make sure he has a replacement, like the numerous times he used Emilio to pinch run for Paulino. You look at it in the most simplest way possible when in reality there's so much to take into consideration before a decision is made.

 

And at the end of the day, we have no idea what goes on in the clubhouse and in that dugout and bullpen. All those times he used Pinto or another reliever instead of Calero or someone with so called "better numbers," you write it off as a bad move. What if Calero didn't have his stuff warming up, or didn't have control. What if the 2 guys he was coming in to pitch to had great numbers against him. What if a pitcher wasn't available for a reason we don't know of but Fredi and the clubhouse did. You see, we as fans look at baseball on a very basic level when in reality, it is so much more complicated, and unless we're part of the team, we'll never know why decisions are made. But there's a reason behind everything.

 

 

I have a feeling most managers would have put Hanley third, knowing that he was probably the second best power threat on the team, plus he was a great contact hitter. And even if he Fredi did bat him first throughout the entire season though, how much of an impact would that really have had? Probably not more than a couple games. For all we know, it could have even been better having a Hanley/Coghlan/Cantu/Uggla/Ross lineup.

 

Managers are hired to make good decisions. When Fredi made a good decision, he was doing his job the way he was supposed to, and when he made a move like the Werth/Bako one, he failed miserably. No matter if Pinto got the job done or not, it would have nearly always been a better decision to bring in a guy like Kiko, as long as he was healthy. Kiko got the job done many more times than Pinto did last season, and when you know that one reliever is better than another, you use the better reliever in key situations. I notice, as many other fans do, when he makes good decisions, but nearly all of his decisions should be good decisions, because that's what makes a good manager. Unfortunately, this past season, that wasn't the case.

 

You're really making Fredi's job seem harder than it really is. Sorry, but I'm not buying the "inside information" excuse. And even if Fredi did have access to more specific numbers, like a pithcer/hitter matchup, the end result still usually turned out to be negative. Granted, there could be some things that are kept within the dugout that us fans never know about, but I judge someone based off of what I see and what I know, I don't just assume that there's a secret reason for a decision that Fredi makes.

One of the worst ways to judge a manager is to judge him by his record. People seem to think that since we won 87 games, and we "overachieved", Fredi deserves the credit.

 

 

what he said

havent been around much this year, but I can hostestly say while I am not a huge Fredi fan, he did an incredible job this year with the roster he had.....and for lack of a closer, 87 wins is damn impressive.....I don;;t have anything negative to say....must be a holiday

Ok, so you're saying setting lineups, pinch hitting, and managing the bullpen only had an affect on a couple of games max ???? You can't be serious, right. What if Fredi put Coghlan 7th, and Hanley leadoff? What if he kept Boner in there batting second the whole season instead of Baker or Nick Johnson? What if he left Hermida in there, or Maybin when he was struggling mightely. Fredi realized Coghlan was a legitimate leadoff man when most of us doubted him. Remember when he was hitting .250 and had an OBP around .320. IF Hanley led off, he would have had 50 RBI's instead of 100. If you think tweaks like these would only factor in a couple of games, you're crazy.

 

Fredi had to manage the bullpen everyday. Like I said, we set the MLB record for games without a complete game. Why don't you try managing a bullpen for 4+ innings a game. Fredi, for the most part made very intelligent decisions, it just came down to the players not getting their job done. So automatically Fredi is the scapegoat ??? Not fair. And what about Fredi managing the starting rotation ?? Volstad, Nolasco, and Miller were all sent down to the minors at some point. He had to call up guys like Vandenhurk, Sean West, Badenhop, etc. You're telling me that Fredi had nothing to do with that ?

 

And little things like pinch hitting, pinch running, calling hit and runs can have a significant impact on a game. It could be the difference between a win or a loss. Yeah the front office built the team and yeah the individual players have to perform, but the manager has a huge impact on the game everyday. Why are managers constantly fired in baseball if they had nothing to do with the success of a team? Exactly.

 

 

 

Not batting Hanley first and Coghlan seventh isn't being a good manager, it's called common sense. No manager in the game would be stupid enough to bat Coghlan seventh with his OBP, and no manager would also bat Bonifacio second over Johnson. As for Coghlan's start, it really didn't last that long, and he didn't have many other options to bat leadoff. You're simply listing things Fredi did that only a person with an IQ below 70 wouldn't have done. Since you said he was "extremely effective", I want to know what he did that really stood out, which most MLB managers wouldn't have done.

 

If Fredi decides to use Pinto instead of Kiko or any other better relievers in a key situation, and Pinto fails, that's not a case of Pinto not getting the job done, it's a case of poor bullpen management by Fredi, which occurred plenty of times. If you remember, during the middle of the season when our bullpen was just getting hammered nearly every signle night, we were constantly sending relievers up and down to have a fresh bullpen (Martinez, Wood, Leroux, etc.) The thing is, for some reason, Fredi would use those releivers in crucial situations, even if a guy like Kiko had two or three days rest. Then the next night, when we're up by six runs, he would use Kiko then. There are ways to handle the bullpen even if you have to use them for four innings per night, and Fredi did not do his job effectively.

 

Things like pinch hitting and pinch running barely have an impact on the game, as long as you put them in at the right time, which just depends on a pitcher's pitch count/tiredness. I mean, what did he really have to decide, whether to use Gload or Helms? Hit-and-runs can have an impact on the game, but only to a certain extent, and it's hard to decide if they were actually the right decisions, and if they were effective. If you want to talk about the other little things, I don't remember Fredi having much success there, especially if you remember the Werth-Bako situation.

 

Managers in baseball get fired because of their record for the same reason sabermetricians don't get hired by front offices often. Ignorance. An owner wants to win ballgames, and he usually needs someone to put the blame on for not having a winning team, A.K.A., the manager.

 

But it's not common sense. You remember when Hanley was struggling in the 3rd spot for quite some time? Hanley his whole career was comfortable batting leadoff but Gonzo had to make a decision on if he should keep him in the 3rd spot or move him back to leadoff. He kept him in there, despite his struggles, and look at Hanley now, he's the NL batting champ. As for Coghlan, initially he wasn't your prototypical leadoff guy. He didn't have great speed, at the time, he wasn't hitting for average and his OBP was mediocre at best, definitely not leadoff material. But Fredi stuck with him and not only did it pan out, it looks like Coghlan will win ROY.

 

And we as fans have short term memories. The obvious glaring mistakes stick out, but when good decisions are made, we just look at it as 'eh' and move on. I remember numerous times when Pinto was called in on key situations and got the job done. Like I said, when managers make good decisions in key times, they go unnoticed, and two days later we're oblivious. But when Pinto doesn't get the job done, we remember it for a month and start calling for Fredi's head. We're always trying to find a scapegoat, and Fredi is the first choice.

 

And there's so much more that goes into pinch hitting and pinch running. You have to factor in how many guys you have left, what inning it is, what the score is, whether a player in game can move to a different position during a double switch. If he pinch runs, he has to make sure he has a replacement, like the numerous times he used Emilio to pinch run for Paulino. You look at it in the most simplest way possible when in reality there's so much to take into consideration before a decision is made.

 

And at the end of the day, we have no idea what goes on in the clubhouse and in that dugout and bullpen. All those times he used Pinto or another reliever instead of Calero or someone with so called "better numbers," you write it off as a bad move. What if Calero didn't have his stuff warming up, or didn't have control. What if the 2 guys he was coming in to pitch to had great numbers against him. What if a pitcher wasn't available for a reason we don't know of but Fredi and the clubhouse did. You see, we as fans look at baseball on a very basic level when in reality, it is so much more complicated, and unless we're part of the team, we'll never know why decisions are made. But there's a reason behind everything.

 

 

I have a feeling most managers would have put Hanley third, knowing that he was probably the second best power threat on the team, plus he was a great contact hitter. And even if he Fredi did bat him first throughout the entire season though, how much of an impact would that really have had? Probably not more than a couple games. For all we know, it could have even been better having a Hanley/Coghlan/Cantu/Uggla/Ross lineup.

 

Managers are hired to make good decisions. When Fredi made a good decision, he was doing his job the way he was supposed to, and when he made a move like the Werth/Bako one, he failed miserably. No matter if Pinto got the job done or not, it would have nearly always been a better decision to bring in a guy like Kiko, as long as he was healthy. Kiko got the job done many more times than Pinto did last season, and when you know that one reliever is better than another, you use the better reliever in key situations. I notice, as many other fans do, when he makes good decisions, but nearly all of his decisions should be good decisions, because that's what makes a good manager. Unfortunately, this past season, that wasn't the case.

 

You're really making Fredi's job seem harder than it really is. Sorry, but I'm not buying the "inside information" excuse. And even if Fredi did have access to more specific numbers, like a pithcer/hitter matchup, the end result still usually turned out to be negative. Granted, there could be some things that are kept within the dugout that us fans never know about, but I judge someone based off of what I see and what I know, I don't just assume that there's a secret reason for a decision that Fredi makes.

 

Please Fredi is not that much of a thinker or stratergist in the dugout...That would be LaRussa not Fredi Gonzalez

I can only identify a couple of massively bone-headed things done by Freddi, whereas I can point at the Marlins pen being 6th worst in holding leads, and the rotation being 4th worst in quality starts as the reason why we didn't win upwards of 10 more games or at least the 5-6 more needed to be still playing now.

funny, people only remember the moves that didnt work out for Fredi. What about the moves that worked out for him? Does he not deserve credit for them?

Let's give credit where it's due. Certainly not to manager Gonzales. If I pause to think back over the entire season, the only inspired move I can recall was putting Coghlan out in left field and letting him play every day. Of course, the more inspired move would have been to trade Dan Uggla for a pitcher and put Coghlan at second. Other than that, Gonzales was a dud. And I don't even know the extent to which he can be lauded for playing Coghlan.

funny, people only remember the moves that didnt work out for Fredi. What about the moves that worked out for him? Does he not deserve credit for them?

 

 

I remember some moves he made that failed, and they were the right moves.

I remember some moves he made that worked, and they were the wrong moves.

 

Many fans, especially among folks like us that live and die in each game, do not really have any appreciation for the long haul. I remember being bulls*** apeshit pissed off at Freddi exactly once this season, because he was doing exactly the wrong thing at the wrong time. Jack did that to me more than once a year.