Jun 5, 2012, 10:02 AM EST
When you give a talk radio dude a column, it’s always a safe bet to assume that he’s going to use the column to advocate for things that would make his talk radio job more fun and easy. To that end I give you Bill Simonson:
I think, if the Tigers fall to 8-10 games out of first place before the end of June, Leyland and his staff should be fired. It would be a move with no risk involved. He has no contract beyond this season. If he was as highly thought of by management as some Leyland lovers think, then why wouldn’t he have years left on a deal? You can’t fire a team, but showing Leyland the door might be the move this franchise needs.
I know managers get fired simply for losing all the time, but my view of things is that, among the handful of reasons to fire a manager, a poor won-loss record, standing alone, is the dumbest reason.
You fire a manager if he makes a lot of dumb decisions. You fire a manager if he bucks the authority of the front office in a way that prevents the team from carrying out the organization’s plans. You fire a manager if he loses the confidence and respect of the players or his authority over them is otherwise undermined in such a way so as to make his continued leadership untenable. You fire a manager if the composition of the roster radically changes and you suddenly have an awful fit in terms of temperament (i.e. the old vet-friendly manager suddenly finds himself in a rebuild. You fire a manager when a new owner and/or GM comes on board and the team wants to reset.
Now, a lot of those things cause poor records, and the subsequent firing may be chalked up to the poor record. But if none of the above things are present and the team is simply losing, firing the skipper is kind of pointless. He’s the same guy the GM had confidence in before the season. He still has the clubhouse under control. All that has changed is that his players are underperforming. Absent a clear link between things the manager has done and that losing, firing him is a pointless gesture.
Leyland has done none of those things. His team is underachieving. That’s on the players. Some of the players he’s had to work with don’t really belong on a major league roster. That’s on the GM. There is absolutely nothing which suggests to me that firing Leyland would turn the Tigers around because there is nothing that suggests to me that Leyland has done much if anything to make this team lose.
Jim Leyland has managed in the big leagues for 21 seasons. He didn’t suddenly forget how to do it. And getting rid of him isn’t going to suddenly make the Tigers a better team.
- Yasmany Tomas signs a six-year, $68.5 million deal with the Diamondbacks 86
- No, the Red Sox signing Pablo and Hanley is not proof that baseball needs a salary cap 162
- Red Sox announce four-year, $88 million deal with Hanley Ramirez, DFA Juan Francisco 35
- The Cubs have offered Jon Lester “north of $135 million” 68
- Pablo Sandoval’s deal: five years, $98 million plus an option 43
- Kyle Seager, Mariners close to $100 million extension 26
- The 2015 Hall of Fame ballot is out — Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez are new on the ballot 286
- So what would the Red Sox look like with Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval? 49
- The 2015 Hall of Fame ballot is out — Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez are new on the ballot (286)
- No, the Red Sox signing Pablo and Hanley is not proof that baseball needs a salary cap (162)
- More Hall of Fame ballots like Adam Rubin’s please (140)
- Report: Pablo Sandoval chose the Red Sox over the Giants because he felt disrespected (138)
- UPDATE: The Pablo Sandoval-Red Sox deal is done, pending a physical (133)