Talk of firings premature
I have to agree with Thiel, the M's find themselves in a tough spot. If Baek pitches well tonight, it begs the question of why you threw so much money and resources at so little (Weaver, Ramirez etc...)
If he pitches poorly, the losing streak likely continues. Which then leads to job security issues for Bavasi and Hargrove (or so the theory goes). Given the conservative nature of the M's, firing a manager (much less a GM) in the middle of a season would not be something taken likely. We've heard talk of firings before, only to get our hopes dashed in the end.
If you are in the fire-Hargrove camp (card carrying member myself) there is one possible angle that hasn't been talked about.
Value.
It's possible the M's owners might be expecting more for $106 million then the current payroll is producing. Certainly if I was an owner, raising the payroll by $30 million ought to be get me something, right? Yet current results seem to say otherwise. Since I don't have direct access to the owners, I can only speculate, but it's possible the money was authorized with great reluctance and quite possibly is amping the pressure on the wonder duo of Bavasi and Hargrove. (Bargrove, B-grove, Havasi??? - we need a moniker stat.)
In the end, you usually use the press to gauge the managers hot seat. Last year bloggers were certain Hargrove was gone (swung and missed), but until Hickey, Baker etc... start penning columns calling for/speculating on a managerial change, don't expect much. Lincoln and company pay close attention to the media and what is being reported. If a change is being considered, they will likely want to float the idea publicly, and see what the response is first.
To clarify, these comments from sports writers and columnists needs to happen IN THE PAPER, not on some silly blog.
Everyone knows blogs are untrustworthy.
I have to agree with Thiel, the M's find themselves in a tough spot. If Baek pitches well tonight, it begs the question of why you threw so much money and resources at so little (Weaver, Ramirez etc...)
If he pitches poorly, the losing streak likely continues. Which then leads to job security issues for Bavasi and Hargrove (or so the theory goes). Given the conservative nature of the M's, firing a manager (much less a GM) in the middle of a season would not be something taken likely. We've heard talk of firings before, only to get our hopes dashed in the end.
If you are in the fire-Hargrove camp (card carrying member myself) there is one possible angle that hasn't been talked about.
Value.
It's possible the M's owners might be expecting more for $106 million then the current payroll is producing. Certainly if I was an owner, raising the payroll by $30 million ought to be get me something, right? Yet current results seem to say otherwise. Since I don't have direct access to the owners, I can only speculate, but it's possible the money was authorized with great reluctance and quite possibly is amping the pressure on the wonder duo of Bavasi and Hargrove. (Bargrove, B-grove, Havasi??? - we need a moniker stat.)
In the end, you usually use the press to gauge the managers hot seat. Last year bloggers were certain Hargrove was gone (swung and missed), but until Hickey, Baker etc... start penning columns calling for/speculating on a managerial change, don't expect much. Lincoln and company pay close attention to the media and what is being reported. If a change is being considered, they will likely want to float the idea publicly, and see what the response is first.
To clarify, these comments from sports writers and columnists needs to happen IN THE PAPER, not on some silly blog.
Everyone knows blogs are untrustworthy.
posted by Tom at
1:28 PM
