536D62626861666568684C61766B040 wrote:
They need to clean house. This season just went way too bad. A huge part was injuries. However, the epic, post ASG slide is on Hurdle.
I will never stop finding it ironic that the guy who took his team to the World Series in 2007 by winning 14 out of their last 15 games led his next team to three excruciating, year-ending collapses in nine years.
I believe Hurdle was vastly overrated based on 1 amazing hot streak in his only winning season in Colorado.
He had a 73-89 record in his 1st managing season in 2002.
His 2003 team was 56-55 on 7/31 but collapsed to 18-33 the rest of the way for a record of 74-88.
His 2004 team was 68-94.
His 2005 team was 67-95.
His 2006 team was 41-38 on 6/30 but collapsed to 35-48 the rest of the way for a record of 76-86.
His 2007 team was a modest 76-72 on September 15 and went 14-1 the rest of the way plus sweeping 2 playoff series but then got swept in the WS being outscored 29-10.
His 2008 team spent 2 days over .500 (including opening day) and went 74-88.
He was fired in 2009 after beginning the season 18-28.
Hurdle is certainly entitled to the credit he gets for taking the Rockies to the WS in 2007 (despite the poor result). But it took a 14-1 stretch after Sept 15 that year just to make the WC by 1 game over SD. That's how close they came to not even making the post season. His only success there was based on an incredibly hot month that was uncharacteristic of how the team had played the rest of the season or in any other season that he managed there which were all losing seasons including a pair of big collapses.
Hurdle got a ton of mileage out of 1 very brief period in an otherwise unsuccessful 7+ seasons there.
A Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk and a Poke in the Eyes
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
A Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk and a Poke in the Eyes
6C414C5D5A4B5C1C1F2E0 wrote:
They need to clean house. This season just went way too bad. A huge part was injuries. However, the epic, post ASG slide is on Hurdle.
I will never stop finding it ironic that the guy who took his team to the World Series in 2007 by winning 14 out of their last 15 games led his next team to three excruciating, year-ending collapses in nine years.
I believe Hurdle was vastly overrated based on 1 amazing hot streak in his only winning season in Colorado.
He had a 73-89 record in his 1st managing season in 2002.
His 2003 team was 56-55 on 7/31 but collapsed to 18-33 the rest of the way for a record of 74-88.
His 2004 team was 68-94.
His 2005 team was 67-95.
His 2006 team was 41-38 on 6/30 but collapsed to 35-48 the rest of the way for a record of 76-86.
His 2007 team was a modest 76-72 on September 15 and went 14-1 the rest of the way plus sweeping 2 playoff series but then got swept in the WS being outscored 29-10.
His 2008 team spent 2 days over .500 (including opening day) and went 74-88.
He was fired in 2009 after beginning the season 18-28.
Hurdle is certainly entitled to the credit he gets for taking the Rockies to the WS in 2007 (despite the poor result). But it took a 14-1 stretch after Sept 15 that year just to make the WC by 1 game over SD. That's how close they came to not even making the post season. His only success there was based on an incredibly hot month that was uncharacteristic of how the team had played the rest of the season or in any other season that he managed there which were all losing seasons including a pair of big collapses.
Hurdle got a ton of mileage out of 1 very brief period in an otherwise unsuccessful 7+ seasons there.
I wonder if he was on the hot seat before the hot streak to end 2007?
They need to clean house. This season just went way too bad. A huge part was injuries. However, the epic, post ASG slide is on Hurdle.
I will never stop finding it ironic that the guy who took his team to the World Series in 2007 by winning 14 out of their last 15 games led his next team to three excruciating, year-ending collapses in nine years.
I believe Hurdle was vastly overrated based on 1 amazing hot streak in his only winning season in Colorado.
He had a 73-89 record in his 1st managing season in 2002.
His 2003 team was 56-55 on 7/31 but collapsed to 18-33 the rest of the way for a record of 74-88.
His 2004 team was 68-94.
His 2005 team was 67-95.
His 2006 team was 41-38 on 6/30 but collapsed to 35-48 the rest of the way for a record of 76-86.
His 2007 team was a modest 76-72 on September 15 and went 14-1 the rest of the way plus sweeping 2 playoff series but then got swept in the WS being outscored 29-10.
His 2008 team spent 2 days over .500 (including opening day) and went 74-88.
He was fired in 2009 after beginning the season 18-28.
Hurdle is certainly entitled to the credit he gets for taking the Rockies to the WS in 2007 (despite the poor result). But it took a 14-1 stretch after Sept 15 that year just to make the WC by 1 game over SD. That's how close they came to not even making the post season. His only success there was based on an incredibly hot month that was uncharacteristic of how the team had played the rest of the season or in any other season that he managed there which were all losing seasons including a pair of big collapses.
Hurdle got a ton of mileage out of 1 very brief period in an otherwise unsuccessful 7+ seasons there.
I wonder if he was on the hot seat before the hot streak to end 2007?
-
Bobster21
A Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk and a Poke in the Eyes
5E78796E78681B0 wrote:
They need to clean house. This season just went way too bad. A huge part was injuries. However, the epic, post ASG slide is on Hurdle.
I will never stop finding it ironic that the guy who took his team to the World Series in 2007 by winning 14 out of their last 15 games led his next team to three excruciating, year-ending collapses in nine years.
I believe Hurdle was vastly overrated based on 1 amazing hot streak in his only winning season in Colorado.
He had a 73-89 record in his 1st managing season in 2002.
His 2003 team was 56-55 on 7/31 but collapsed to 18-33 the rest of the way for a record of 74-88.
His 2004 team was 68-94.
His 2005 team was 67-95.
His 2006 team was 41-38 on 6/30 but collapsed to 35-48 the rest of the way for a record of 76-86.
His 2007 team was a modest 76-72 on September 15 and went 14-1 the rest of the way plus sweeping 2 playoff series but then got swept in the WS being outscored 29-10.
His 2008 team spent 2 days over .500 (including opening day) and went 74-88.
He was fired in 2009 after beginning the season 18-28.
Hurdle is certainly entitled to the credit he gets for taking the Rockies to the WS in 2007 (despite the poor result). But it took a 14-1 stretch after Sept 15 that year just to make the WC by 1 game over SD. That's how close they came to not even making the post season. His only success there was based on an incredibly hot month that was uncharacteristic of how the team had played the rest of the season or in any other season that he managed there which were all losing seasons including a pair of big collapses.
Hurdle got a ton of mileage out of 1 very brief period in an otherwise unsuccessful 7+ seasons there.
I wonder if he was on the hot seat before the hot streak to end 2007?
I don't know. But it's interesting that the Rockies fired him just 46 games (18-28) into his 2nd season after going to the WS (and being 74-88 the year after the WS). Imagine the outrage if the Pirates had fired him 46 games into 2017 when they were 20-26 but not coming off a WS 2 years earlier and being 78-83 the year after winning 98 games in 2015. Seems strange. But it looks like the Rockies were cognizant of the fact that Hurdle's brief but significant success in 2007 did not offset all the losing that took place in every other season.
They need to clean house. This season just went way too bad. A huge part was injuries. However, the epic, post ASG slide is on Hurdle.
I will never stop finding it ironic that the guy who took his team to the World Series in 2007 by winning 14 out of their last 15 games led his next team to three excruciating, year-ending collapses in nine years.
I believe Hurdle was vastly overrated based on 1 amazing hot streak in his only winning season in Colorado.
He had a 73-89 record in his 1st managing season in 2002.
His 2003 team was 56-55 on 7/31 but collapsed to 18-33 the rest of the way for a record of 74-88.
His 2004 team was 68-94.
His 2005 team was 67-95.
His 2006 team was 41-38 on 6/30 but collapsed to 35-48 the rest of the way for a record of 76-86.
His 2007 team was a modest 76-72 on September 15 and went 14-1 the rest of the way plus sweeping 2 playoff series but then got swept in the WS being outscored 29-10.
His 2008 team spent 2 days over .500 (including opening day) and went 74-88.
He was fired in 2009 after beginning the season 18-28.
Hurdle is certainly entitled to the credit he gets for taking the Rockies to the WS in 2007 (despite the poor result). But it took a 14-1 stretch after Sept 15 that year just to make the WC by 1 game over SD. That's how close they came to not even making the post season. His only success there was based on an incredibly hot month that was uncharacteristic of how the team had played the rest of the season or in any other season that he managed there which were all losing seasons including a pair of big collapses.
Hurdle got a ton of mileage out of 1 very brief period in an otherwise unsuccessful 7+ seasons there.
I wonder if he was on the hot seat before the hot streak to end 2007?
I don't know. But it's interesting that the Rockies fired him just 46 games (18-28) into his 2nd season after going to the WS (and being 74-88 the year after the WS). Imagine the outrage if the Pirates had fired him 46 games into 2017 when they were 20-26 but not coming off a WS 2 years earlier and being 78-83 the year after winning 98 games in 2015. Seems strange. But it looks like the Rockies were cognizant of the fact that Hurdle's brief but significant success in 2007 did not offset all the losing that took place in every other season.
-
rucker59@gmail.com
A Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk and a Poke in the Eyes
Clint was fired because somebody HAD to be fired. I do not believe he was fired for performance. The reality is no one could have won with this team. This year Clint was not only dealt a short hand talent-wise, he also had some bad characters in the locker room.
Just because we have a new manager next year does not mean we have a better manager. For as frustrated as Clint made me, my guess is he is better than the guy sitting in the dugout next year.
That’s not to say I disagree with the firing. I think Clint was burnout. You can only do this so long, especially with the lack of support of ownership. But he’d be back next year except somebody HAD to be fired and it was clear Clint would be the fall guy.
Just because we have a new manager next year does not mean we have a better manager. For as frustrated as Clint made me, my guess is he is better than the guy sitting in the dugout next year.
That’s not to say I disagree with the firing. I think Clint was burnout. You can only do this so long, especially with the lack of support of ownership. But he’d be back next year except somebody HAD to be fired and it was clear Clint would be the fall guy.
-
rucker59@gmail.com
A Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk and a Poke in the Eyes
Neal was not fired because he is too valuable to Nutting. He would’ve fired on probably 29 other teams. I like Neal a lot, but the failure at drafting/developing/trades would have doomed him with any other team.
But Nutting needs Neal. First, Neal “covers@ Nutting like few would. He takes hits Nutting should be taking.
Second, and this is probably bigger than I’ve previously imagined, say what we want, Neal has won for Nutting. If Nutting is not going to change than I can understand staying with the guy who did it once before. You hope he can do it again.
I can understand Nutting keeping Neal.
I can’t understand Neal staying with Nutting.
But Nutting needs Neal. First, Neal “covers@ Nutting like few would. He takes hits Nutting should be taking.
Second, and this is probably bigger than I’ve previously imagined, say what we want, Neal has won for Nutting. If Nutting is not going to change than I can understand staying with the guy who did it once before. You hope he can do it again.
I can understand Nutting keeping Neal.
I can’t understand Neal staying with Nutting.
-
Bobster21
A Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk and a Poke in the Eyes
7374626A6473343841666C60686D2F626E6C010 wrote: Clint was fired because somebody HAD to be fired. I do not believe he was fired for performance. The reality is no one could have won with this team. This year Clint was not only dealt a short hand talent-wise, he also had some bad characters in the locker room.
Just because we have a new manager next year does not mean we have a better manager. For as frustrated as Clint made me, my guess is he is better than the guy sitting in the dugout next year.
That’s not to say I disagree with the firing. I think Clint was burnout. You can only do this so long, especially with the lack of support of ownership. But he’d be back next year except somebody HAD to be fired and it was clear Clint would be the fall guy.
I don't think Clint was a good manager. I think he didn't want to rock the boat. Either with his players (poor fundamentals. sometimes lack of hustle, locker room fights) or his GM (follow orders based on statistical analysis). I think he made a number of bad decisions that cost games. I suspect his replacement will be an improvement. But as long as Nutting pinches pennies and NH drafts, develops and evaluates poorly, a better manager won't make much of a difference anyway. So I would agree he was fired essentially as a scapegoat unless we see a dramatic change in how this organization operates (which I doubt). I look forward to a better manager but I don't kid myself that this is what will propel the team to becoming competitive.
Just because we have a new manager next year does not mean we have a better manager. For as frustrated as Clint made me, my guess is he is better than the guy sitting in the dugout next year.
That’s not to say I disagree with the firing. I think Clint was burnout. You can only do this so long, especially with the lack of support of ownership. But he’d be back next year except somebody HAD to be fired and it was clear Clint would be the fall guy.
I don't think Clint was a good manager. I think he didn't want to rock the boat. Either with his players (poor fundamentals. sometimes lack of hustle, locker room fights) or his GM (follow orders based on statistical analysis). I think he made a number of bad decisions that cost games. I suspect his replacement will be an improvement. But as long as Nutting pinches pennies and NH drafts, develops and evaluates poorly, a better manager won't make much of a difference anyway. So I would agree he was fired essentially as a scapegoat unless we see a dramatic change in how this organization operates (which I doubt). I look forward to a better manager but I don't kid myself that this is what will propel the team to becoming competitive.
A Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk and a Poke in the Eyes
7770666E6077303C456268646C692B666A68050 wrote: Neal was not fired because he is too valuable to Nutting. He would’ve fired on probably 29 other teams. I like Neal a lot, but the failure at drafting/developing/trades would have doomed him with any other team.
But Nutting needs Neal. First, Neal “covers@ Nutting like few would. He takes hits Nutting should be taking.
Second, and this is probably bigger than I’ve previously imagined, say what we want, Neal has won for Nutting. If Nutting is not going to change than I can understand staying with the guy who did it once before. You hope he can do it again.
I can understand Nutting keeping Neal.
I can’t understand Neal staying with Nutting.
I couldn't figure out how to quote both of your comments, but I wan't to reply to them both.
Hurdle was definitely fired because someone needed to be fired. Everyone needs to be fired. A bit of hyperbole there. But I disagree on your statement that performance had nothing to do with it. I think Hurdle's performance completely justifies his termination. NH and others should have also been fired. Just because they weren't don't mean that CH was fired in an unjustifiable way.
I write this next part even though it jives with my personal ethic... Bob Nutting is from the Pittsburgh area. He is from Appalachia. Loyalty is a HUGE thing in Appalachia. I think Nutting very much operates from a place of loyalty. Reading his statement, it is clear that it was personally hard for him to fire Hurdle. It seemed like Nutting really appreciated Hurdle as a person for what he has historically has done for Pittsburgh. And he's not wrong. I think Hurdle has been an amazing gift over his tenure.
However, (and this is the part that I struggle with), that loyalty is terrible in managing a MLB baseball franchise. I think loyalty is an incredibly good personality trait. But that loyalty that he has to his front office may be crippling the organization for years. I don't think this loyalty is because they protect the bottom line. I actually think Nutting wants to win but isn't willing to lose money to do it. NH, Hurdle, and the rest of management actually accomplished that for a time under Nutting's constraints. I would imagine that he will forever appreciate what they did to be a winning team. Unfortunately, that era is over. And also unfortunately, Nutting's loyalty is not over.
But Nutting needs Neal. First, Neal “covers@ Nutting like few would. He takes hits Nutting should be taking.
Second, and this is probably bigger than I’ve previously imagined, say what we want, Neal has won for Nutting. If Nutting is not going to change than I can understand staying with the guy who did it once before. You hope he can do it again.
I can understand Nutting keeping Neal.
I can’t understand Neal staying with Nutting.
I couldn't figure out how to quote both of your comments, but I wan't to reply to them both.
Hurdle was definitely fired because someone needed to be fired. Everyone needs to be fired. A bit of hyperbole there. But I disagree on your statement that performance had nothing to do with it. I think Hurdle's performance completely justifies his termination. NH and others should have also been fired. Just because they weren't don't mean that CH was fired in an unjustifiable way.
I write this next part even though it jives with my personal ethic... Bob Nutting is from the Pittsburgh area. He is from Appalachia. Loyalty is a HUGE thing in Appalachia. I think Nutting very much operates from a place of loyalty. Reading his statement, it is clear that it was personally hard for him to fire Hurdle. It seemed like Nutting really appreciated Hurdle as a person for what he has historically has done for Pittsburgh. And he's not wrong. I think Hurdle has been an amazing gift over his tenure.
However, (and this is the part that I struggle with), that loyalty is terrible in managing a MLB baseball franchise. I think loyalty is an incredibly good personality trait. But that loyalty that he has to his front office may be crippling the organization for years. I don't think this loyalty is because they protect the bottom line. I actually think Nutting wants to win but isn't willing to lose money to do it. NH, Hurdle, and the rest of management actually accomplished that for a time under Nutting's constraints. I would imagine that he will forever appreciate what they did to be a winning team. Unfortunately, that era is over. And also unfortunately, Nutting's loyalty is not over.
A Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk and a Poke in the Eyes
1F0226242A4F0 wrote: Neal was not fired because he is too valuable to Nutting. He would’ve fired on probably 29 other teams. I like Neal a lot, but the failure at drafting/developing/trades would have doomed him with any other team.
But Nutting needs Neal. First, Neal “covers@ Nutting like few would. He takes hits Nutting should be taking.
Second, and this is probably bigger than I’ve previously imagined, say what we want, Neal has won for Nutting. If Nutting is not going to change than I can understand staying with the guy who did it once before. You hope he can do it again.
I can understand Nutting keeping Neal.
I can’t understand Neal staying with Nutting.
I couldn't figure out how to quote both of your comments, but I wan't to reply to them both.
Hurdle was definitely fired because someone needed to be fired. Everyone needs to be fired. A bit of hyperbole there. But I disagree on your statement that performance had nothing to do with it. I think Hurdle's performance completely justifies his termination. NH and others should have also been fired. Just because they weren't don't mean that CH was fired in an unjustifiable way.
I write this next part even though it jives with my personal ethic... Bob Nutting is from the Pittsburgh area. He is from Appalachia. Loyalty is a HUGE thing in Appalachia. I think Nutting very much operates from a place of loyalty. Reading his statement, it is clear that it was personally hard for him to fire Hurdle. It seemed like Nutting really appreciated Hurdle as a person for what he has historically has done for Pittsburgh. And he's not wrong. I think Hurdle has been an amazing gift over his tenure.
However, (and this is the part that I struggle with), that loyalty is terrible in managing a MLB baseball franchise. I think loyalty is an incredibly good personality trait. But that loyalty that he has to his front office may be crippling the organization for years. I don't think this loyalty is because they protect the bottom line. I actually think Nutting wants to win but isn't willing to lose money to do it. NH, Hurdle, and the rest of management actually accomplished that for a time under Nutting's constraints. I would imagine that he will forever appreciate what they did to be a winning team. Unfortunately, that era is over. And also unfortunately, Nutting's loyalty is not over.
Pmike good post, but I wonder about Nutting's loyalty. Is there evidence that he is loyal in his other businesses (newspapers and ski resorts). If so that would be evidence that loyalty is playing a big part with the Pirates.
But Nutting needs Neal. First, Neal “covers@ Nutting like few would. He takes hits Nutting should be taking.
Second, and this is probably bigger than I’ve previously imagined, say what we want, Neal has won for Nutting. If Nutting is not going to change than I can understand staying with the guy who did it once before. You hope he can do it again.
I can understand Nutting keeping Neal.
I can’t understand Neal staying with Nutting.
I couldn't figure out how to quote both of your comments, but I wan't to reply to them both.
Hurdle was definitely fired because someone needed to be fired. Everyone needs to be fired. A bit of hyperbole there. But I disagree on your statement that performance had nothing to do with it. I think Hurdle's performance completely justifies his termination. NH and others should have also been fired. Just because they weren't don't mean that CH was fired in an unjustifiable way.
I write this next part even though it jives with my personal ethic... Bob Nutting is from the Pittsburgh area. He is from Appalachia. Loyalty is a HUGE thing in Appalachia. I think Nutting very much operates from a place of loyalty. Reading his statement, it is clear that it was personally hard for him to fire Hurdle. It seemed like Nutting really appreciated Hurdle as a person for what he has historically has done for Pittsburgh. And he's not wrong. I think Hurdle has been an amazing gift over his tenure.
However, (and this is the part that I struggle with), that loyalty is terrible in managing a MLB baseball franchise. I think loyalty is an incredibly good personality trait. But that loyalty that he has to his front office may be crippling the organization for years. I don't think this loyalty is because they protect the bottom line. I actually think Nutting wants to win but isn't willing to lose money to do it. NH, Hurdle, and the rest of management actually accomplished that for a time under Nutting's constraints. I would imagine that he will forever appreciate what they did to be a winning team. Unfortunately, that era is over. And also unfortunately, Nutting's loyalty is not over.
Pmike good post, but I wonder about Nutting's loyalty. Is there evidence that he is loyal in his other businesses (newspapers and ski resorts). If so that would be evidence that loyalty is playing a big part with the Pirates.
-
Bobster21
A Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk and a Poke in the Eyes
65785C5E50350 wrote: Neal was not fired because he is too valuable to Nutting. He would’ve fired on probably 29 other teams. I like Neal a lot, but the failure at drafting/developing/trades would have doomed him with any other team.
But Nutting needs Neal. First, Neal “covers@ Nutting like few would. He takes hits Nutting should be taking.
Second, and this is probably bigger than I’ve previously imagined, say what we want, Neal has won for Nutting. If Nutting is not going to change than I can understand staying with the guy who did it once before. You hope he can do it again.
I can understand Nutting keeping Neal.
I can’t understand Neal staying with Nutting.
I couldn't figure out how to quote both of your comments, but I wan't to reply to them both.
Hurdle was definitely fired because someone needed to be fired. Everyone needs to be fired. A bit of hyperbole there. But I disagree on your statement that performance had nothing to do with it. I think Hurdle's performance completely justifies his termination. NH and others should have also been fired. Just because they weren't don't mean that CH was fired in an unjustifiable way.
I write this next part even though it jives with my personal ethic... Bob Nutting is from the Pittsburgh area. He is from Appalachia. Loyalty is a HUGE thing in Appalachia. I think Nutting very much operates from a place of loyalty. Reading his statement, it is clear that it was personally hard for him to fire Hurdle. It seemed like Nutting really appreciated Hurdle as a person for what he has historically has done for Pittsburgh. And he's not wrong. I think Hurdle has been an amazing gift over his tenure.
However, (and this is the part that I struggle with), that loyalty is terrible in managing a MLB baseball franchise. I think loyalty is an incredibly good personality trait. But that loyalty that he has to his front office may be crippling the organization for years. I don't think this loyalty is because they protect the bottom line. I actually think Nutting wants to win but isn't willing to lose money to do it. NH, Hurdle, and the rest of management actually accomplished that for a time under Nutting's constraints. I would imagine that he will forever appreciate what they did to be a winning team. Unfortunately, that era is over. And also unfortunately, Nutting's loyalty is not over.
Just a word about the part I highlighted. The figures below are from Spotrac. https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/2012/
In 2012, the year before the winning began, the Pirates' team payroll was 59% of the MLB average. When the winning began in 2013 and 2014 that percentage increased to 64% of the MLB average both of those years. For the 98 win season of 2015 it again increased to 77%. That was the highwater point.
Altho the Pirates like to say they increased payroll following the franchise record attendance in 2015, the increase in 2016 was negligible (about $100,000) while the MLB average increased so that the Pirates payroll dropped to 74% of the average. So while they claimed they were raising payroll they were actually losing ground in keeping up with the rest of MLB. For the past 3 years (2017, 2018, 2019) that number has steadily declined to 69%, 65% and the current 52%.
So the financial commitment from Nutting had a great effect on the team's ability to compete. CH and NH were able to win as the financial constraints were reduced but were not able to do so as the constraints tightened immediately thereafter. When they were at 77% of the MLB average they won 98 games. This shows they don't have to be among the big spenders to win. They don't even have to have an average payroll to win. But they have to at least be wiling to be in the ballpark of average. Since that year the discrepancy between their payroll and the average MLB payroll has gotten larger each year and the team has gone from a 98 win season to no longer being competitive. The modest commitment from Nutting that enabled his mgt team to compete for 3 years is no longer there.
Just my opinion but I believe that when he saw the price tag on being a legit contender (a modest payroll by most MLB standards), Nutting decided to reduce his financial commitment and his mgt team would have to deal with the resulting decline in talent. I'm sure he would rather win than lose but he made a decision to slash payroll so losing is to be expected.
But Nutting needs Neal. First, Neal “covers@ Nutting like few would. He takes hits Nutting should be taking.
Second, and this is probably bigger than I’ve previously imagined, say what we want, Neal has won for Nutting. If Nutting is not going to change than I can understand staying with the guy who did it once before. You hope he can do it again.
I can understand Nutting keeping Neal.
I can’t understand Neal staying with Nutting.
I couldn't figure out how to quote both of your comments, but I wan't to reply to them both.
Hurdle was definitely fired because someone needed to be fired. Everyone needs to be fired. A bit of hyperbole there. But I disagree on your statement that performance had nothing to do with it. I think Hurdle's performance completely justifies his termination. NH and others should have also been fired. Just because they weren't don't mean that CH was fired in an unjustifiable way.
I write this next part even though it jives with my personal ethic... Bob Nutting is from the Pittsburgh area. He is from Appalachia. Loyalty is a HUGE thing in Appalachia. I think Nutting very much operates from a place of loyalty. Reading his statement, it is clear that it was personally hard for him to fire Hurdle. It seemed like Nutting really appreciated Hurdle as a person for what he has historically has done for Pittsburgh. And he's not wrong. I think Hurdle has been an amazing gift over his tenure.
However, (and this is the part that I struggle with), that loyalty is terrible in managing a MLB baseball franchise. I think loyalty is an incredibly good personality trait. But that loyalty that he has to his front office may be crippling the organization for years. I don't think this loyalty is because they protect the bottom line. I actually think Nutting wants to win but isn't willing to lose money to do it. NH, Hurdle, and the rest of management actually accomplished that for a time under Nutting's constraints. I would imagine that he will forever appreciate what they did to be a winning team. Unfortunately, that era is over. And also unfortunately, Nutting's loyalty is not over.
Just a word about the part I highlighted. The figures below are from Spotrac. https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/2012/
In 2012, the year before the winning began, the Pirates' team payroll was 59% of the MLB average. When the winning began in 2013 and 2014 that percentage increased to 64% of the MLB average both of those years. For the 98 win season of 2015 it again increased to 77%. That was the highwater point.
Altho the Pirates like to say they increased payroll following the franchise record attendance in 2015, the increase in 2016 was negligible (about $100,000) while the MLB average increased so that the Pirates payroll dropped to 74% of the average. So while they claimed they were raising payroll they were actually losing ground in keeping up with the rest of MLB. For the past 3 years (2017, 2018, 2019) that number has steadily declined to 69%, 65% and the current 52%.
So the financial commitment from Nutting had a great effect on the team's ability to compete. CH and NH were able to win as the financial constraints were reduced but were not able to do so as the constraints tightened immediately thereafter. When they were at 77% of the MLB average they won 98 games. This shows they don't have to be among the big spenders to win. They don't even have to have an average payroll to win. But they have to at least be wiling to be in the ballpark of average. Since that year the discrepancy between their payroll and the average MLB payroll has gotten larger each year and the team has gone from a 98 win season to no longer being competitive. The modest commitment from Nutting that enabled his mgt team to compete for 3 years is no longer there.
Just my opinion but I believe that when he saw the price tag on being a legit contender (a modest payroll by most MLB standards), Nutting decided to reduce his financial commitment and his mgt team would have to deal with the resulting decline in talent. I'm sure he would rather win than lose but he made a decision to slash payroll so losing is to be expected.
A Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk and a Poke in the Eyes
022F22333425327271400 wrote: Neal was not fired because he is too valuable to Nutting. He would’ve fired on probably 29 other teams. I like Neal a lot, but the failure at drafting/developing/trades would have doomed him with any other team.
But Nutting needs Neal. First, Neal “covers@ Nutting like few would. He takes hits Nutting should be taking.
Second, and this is probably bigger than I’ve previously imagined, say what we want, Neal has won for Nutting. If Nutting is not going to change than I can understand staying with the guy who did it once before. You hope he can do it again.
I can understand Nutting keeping Neal.
I can’t understand Neal staying with Nutting.
I couldn't figure out how to quote both of your comments, but I wan't to reply to them both.
Hurdle was definitely fired because someone needed to be fired. Everyone needs to be fired. A bit of hyperbole there. But I disagree on your statement that performance had nothing to do with it. I think Hurdle's performance completely justifies his termination. NH and others should have also been fired. Just because they weren't don't mean that CH was fired in an unjustifiable way.
I write this next part even though it jives with my personal ethic... Bob Nutting is from the Pittsburgh area. He is from Appalachia. Loyalty is a HUGE thing in Appalachia. I think Nutting very much operates from a place of loyalty. Reading his statement, it is clear that it was personally hard for him to fire Hurdle. It seemed like Nutting really appreciated Hurdle as a person for what he has historically has done for Pittsburgh. And he's not wrong. I think Hurdle has been an amazing gift over his tenure.
However, (and this is the part that I struggle with), that loyalty is terrible in managing a MLB baseball franchise. I think loyalty is an incredibly good personality trait. But that loyalty that he has to his front office may be crippling the organization for years. I don't think this loyalty is because they protect the bottom line. I actually think Nutting wants to win but isn't willing to lose money to do it. NH, Hurdle, and the rest of management actually accomplished that for a time under Nutting's constraints. I would imagine that he will forever appreciate what they did to be a winning team. Unfortunately, that era is over. And also unfortunately, Nutting's loyalty is not over.
Just a word about the part I highlighted. The figures below are from Spotrac. https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/2012/
In 2012, the year before the winning began, the Pirates' team payroll was 59% of the MLB average. When the winning began in 2013 and 2014 that percentage increased to 64% of the MLB average both of those years. For the 98 win season of 2015 it again increased to 77%. That was the highwater point.
Altho the Pirates like to say they increased payroll following the franchise record attendance in 2015, the increase in 2016 was negligible (about $100,000) while the MLB average increased so that the Pirates payroll dropped to 74% of the average. So while they claimed they were raising payroll they were actually losing ground in keeping up with the rest of MLB. For the past 3 years (2017, 2018, 2019) that number has steadily declined to 69%, 65% and the current 52%.
So the financial commitment from Nutting had a great effect on the team's ability to compete. CH and NH were able to win as the financial constraints were reduced but were not able to do so as the constraints tightened immediately thereafter. When they were at 77% of the MLB average they won 98 games. This shows they don't have to be among the big spenders to win. They don't even have to have an average payroll to win. But they have to at least be wiling to be in the ballpark of average. Since that year the discrepancy between their payroll and the average MLB payroll has gotten larger each year and the team has gone from a 98 win season to no longer being competitive. The modest commitment from Nutting that enabled his mgt team to compete for 3 years is no longer there.
Just my opinion but I believe that when he saw the price tag on being a legit contender (a modest payroll by most MLB standards), Nutting decided to reduce his financial commitment and his mgt team would have to deal with the resulting decline in talent. I'm sure he would rather win than lose but he made a decision to slash payroll so losing is to be expected.
That is some really interesting analysis. Would you conclude that if NH was given an adequate payroll (as he was during those three year) he could produce similar results?
But Nutting needs Neal. First, Neal “covers@ Nutting like few would. He takes hits Nutting should be taking.
Second, and this is probably bigger than I’ve previously imagined, say what we want, Neal has won for Nutting. If Nutting is not going to change than I can understand staying with the guy who did it once before. You hope he can do it again.
I can understand Nutting keeping Neal.
I can’t understand Neal staying with Nutting.
I couldn't figure out how to quote both of your comments, but I wan't to reply to them both.
Hurdle was definitely fired because someone needed to be fired. Everyone needs to be fired. A bit of hyperbole there. But I disagree on your statement that performance had nothing to do with it. I think Hurdle's performance completely justifies his termination. NH and others should have also been fired. Just because they weren't don't mean that CH was fired in an unjustifiable way.
I write this next part even though it jives with my personal ethic... Bob Nutting is from the Pittsburgh area. He is from Appalachia. Loyalty is a HUGE thing in Appalachia. I think Nutting very much operates from a place of loyalty. Reading his statement, it is clear that it was personally hard for him to fire Hurdle. It seemed like Nutting really appreciated Hurdle as a person for what he has historically has done for Pittsburgh. And he's not wrong. I think Hurdle has been an amazing gift over his tenure.
However, (and this is the part that I struggle with), that loyalty is terrible in managing a MLB baseball franchise. I think loyalty is an incredibly good personality trait. But that loyalty that he has to his front office may be crippling the organization for years. I don't think this loyalty is because they protect the bottom line. I actually think Nutting wants to win but isn't willing to lose money to do it. NH, Hurdle, and the rest of management actually accomplished that for a time under Nutting's constraints. I would imagine that he will forever appreciate what they did to be a winning team. Unfortunately, that era is over. And also unfortunately, Nutting's loyalty is not over.
Just a word about the part I highlighted. The figures below are from Spotrac. https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/2012/
In 2012, the year before the winning began, the Pirates' team payroll was 59% of the MLB average. When the winning began in 2013 and 2014 that percentage increased to 64% of the MLB average both of those years. For the 98 win season of 2015 it again increased to 77%. That was the highwater point.
Altho the Pirates like to say they increased payroll following the franchise record attendance in 2015, the increase in 2016 was negligible (about $100,000) while the MLB average increased so that the Pirates payroll dropped to 74% of the average. So while they claimed they were raising payroll they were actually losing ground in keeping up with the rest of MLB. For the past 3 years (2017, 2018, 2019) that number has steadily declined to 69%, 65% and the current 52%.
So the financial commitment from Nutting had a great effect on the team's ability to compete. CH and NH were able to win as the financial constraints were reduced but were not able to do so as the constraints tightened immediately thereafter. When they were at 77% of the MLB average they won 98 games. This shows they don't have to be among the big spenders to win. They don't even have to have an average payroll to win. But they have to at least be wiling to be in the ballpark of average. Since that year the discrepancy between their payroll and the average MLB payroll has gotten larger each year and the team has gone from a 98 win season to no longer being competitive. The modest commitment from Nutting that enabled his mgt team to compete for 3 years is no longer there.
Just my opinion but I believe that when he saw the price tag on being a legit contender (a modest payroll by most MLB standards), Nutting decided to reduce his financial commitment and his mgt team would have to deal with the resulting decline in talent. I'm sure he would rather win than lose but he made a decision to slash payroll so losing is to be expected.
That is some really interesting analysis. Would you conclude that if NH was given an adequate payroll (as he was during those three year) he could produce similar results?