Watershed Moment?

by PinchHitLancePainter on May 19, 2007 7:46 AM MDT

Last night highlighted the never-ending saga of the Clint Hurdle tenure. His decision to remove Francis was one for the ages. One has to question the reasoning. Lifting Francis after two batters and one out in the eight and allowing him to hit with two runners on in the bottom of the seventh defies explanation. If he was going to lift him in the eight, why hit him in the seventh with a potential game breaking situation at the plate. The potential to send up Hawpe and orchestrate a double switch was in order. As it was it played out in the worst case scenario.

This shows in my mind an inability or gut feeling regarding certain game nuances. I would have thought that given only 79 pitches (the number on the Coors Field pitch tracker) and a shutout he would have allowed Francis to face at least the on deck righthanded hitting Grudz.

The next few days may see the end of the Hurdle era. It was pretty ugly in the stands last night following the debacle.

Sure Hurdle stepped up and faced the music as he always does. The question remains is to how long will Rockies management accept his apologies. The man has a very losing record as a manager. Was a bust as a player. He has shown no inclination or flashes or brillance as a manager.

Joe Girardi looms as a strong candidate. Given the situation in NY and the potential for an implosion there any day, how long will Rockies management wait to make a move? Or do they have no interest in Girardi given his management struggles last year in Florida?

Girardi has proven he can produce maximum results with minimum talent. He would seem tailor-made for the Rockies situation.

Was last night the straw that broke the camels back? Or yet another bad decision, by a bad organization that seems to accept losing and poor performance as the rule rather than the exception.

Is this a watershed moment or just another day at the office for an organization that cannot produce results?

Eat. Drink. Be Merry. But the above FanPost does not necessarily reflect the attitudes, opinions, or views of Purple Row's staff (unless, of course, it's written by the staff [and even then, it still might not]).

Tweet Comment 46 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Excellent post.....

It was actually only 74 pitches thrown by Francis, who was still in total command against the lowly Royals offense. No other manager in baseball would have made that mechanical move, lacking any instincts, in removing him for his "8th inning guy".

We have a good thread going on regarding this subject at Fanhome:

http://www.fanhome.com/forums/colorado-rockies/7218-royals-rockies-series-thread.html

The thread's moderator, Heltonfan (a great sabermetrician) actually didn't have a problem with the move, but everyone is disagreeing with him. As I wrote there, it all comes down to gut feeling and instincts. Clint Hurdle has displayed darn little of either in his tenure as Rockies manager.

I have a sneaking feeling that this boneheaded move may have even gotten under Charlie Monfort's skin, but would be shocked if this was the "straw that broke the camel's back." Hurdle has done so many stupid things in his 5+ years as manager without ever being held accountable that I don't think anything short of a complete fan revolt would get him fired.

Then again, the fans DID revolt last night. Never have I heard the chorus of boos raining down from the stands like I did last night when Hurdle appeared out of the dugout to get Corpas. I suppose we can only hope that his days are numbered, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

by Roxpert on May 19, 2007 10:12 AM MDT reply actions

Okay, I'm deleting both those comments

Name calling's not what we need here. If you have troubles with the attitudes and opinions expressed by users, please keep your responses civil.

by Rox Girl on May 19, 2007 11:24 AM MDT reply actions

Good post

I do not blame Hurdle for every loss, because plenty of it is lack of offense and just plain bad pictching, bullpen issues, etc, etc. I don't think Hurdle is the sole reason the Rockies are not doing well, HOWEVER.

Hurdle has displayed a remarkable record of losing, and any time a team is consistently losing and the manager is making consistent mistakes, you have to question why he is still there, or at least what he is thinking. I agree, Hurdle has not displayed any kind of gut feeling or instinct, and while I will not make the grave mistake of accusing him of not wanting to win, sometimes I believe he puts the development of players and equal opportunity before winning, which is good for the minor leagues but very bad for the majors.

Let's examine his choice of removing Francis. Yes, I do admit that going to Corpas is usually a good idea, and Corpas presented a very bad outing. HOWEVER. Francis was working on a shutout, with 74 pitches. And he had just gotten a HUGE punchout. He had a lot of momentum going, and I just REALLY question why there was a need to even take Jeff out, no matter if Corpas needed work or not.

by Squeaky on May 19, 2007 4:18 PM MDT reply actions

Let's be honest

I hated that Hurdle took Francis out. Didn't like the move, but Corpas will usually get out of that inning without hardly any damage.

With that being said, if we cannot score more then 2 runs against the everloving ROYALS, then we will not win very many games regardless of who's pitching. The sheer fact that this lineup seems incapable of producing any sort of offense boggles the mind. Whether it's a lack of timely hitting, incredible baserunnning, or missing any sort of plan up at the plate, something needs to be done with our lineup. Calling up Spillborghs is a nice start. Playing Iannetta couldn't hurt. But at some point, we might have to face the ugly theory that these players are not nearly as talented as we thought they were (Atkins, Hawpe). At some point, either we have to look at the performance and make a decision: Is this the player's fault or is it inadequate coaching?

So there you go, there's the Rockies problem right there. Now we just have to pray that the front office, who has been mediocre, will make the right decisions.

Personally, I think that there is something to be said for inadequate coaching. I look to the consistently terrible baserunning, inexplicable late inning maneuvers, and general malaise around this team and say that there should be a change made. The team is just not meeting expectations in my mind, and the person in charge of that in most accountable organizations usually loses their job in those cases.

by MattTheRock on May 19, 2007 5:57 PM MDT reply actions

this is not a good post

first of all, if youre trying to make a serious point, use of hyperbole ("[the decision] was one for the ages") doesnt really help. i know you dont really mean that baseball historians will be talking about what happened 100 years from now. nevertheless, it still decreases the magnitude of your message when you say stuff like that.

second, yeah, the decision ended up backfiring. but this is a classic case of hindsight being 20/20. can you really get upset about bringing in corpas? its not like hurdle brought in someone who's been shaky all year. corpas has been absolutely lights out. he had given up 3 ER in like 20 appearances prior to friday. hes been our best arm out of the pen, no doubt about it. meanwhile, francis had been through the lineup 3 times so guys were about to see him for the 4th. i dont care what his pitch count was, hurdle probably pulled him because he didnt want guys having that 4th crack at francis. obviously, hes a pitcher that relies on deception to get outs. hes not overpowering. deceiving a guy on his 4th trip through the lineup can be pretty tough.

third, ive been yelling my head off at plenty of people (you included) about this for a while so im not going to go into much detail. but where do get this idea that managers are so heavily responsible for what happens on the field? i just cannot understand what everyone's fascination with managers is. this isnt football, or basketball, or hockey, or any sport where there are timeouts to manage and plays to call and tons of matchups to exploit. the manager makes substitution decisions, might call for a situational at bat from time to time... and thats it. (sure, you take issue with last night's substitution, but like i already said i dont see anything wrong with bringing in a guy whos been almost unhittable to get 2 outs.) other than that, all that matters is whether or not the players like him and play hard for him. and i dont think hurdle struggles in those departments. joe girardi did not "prove" he could win last year. his team proved they could win. im sure hes a good motivator, and its likely he influenced the marlins in a positive direction. but again, i dont see anyone calling hurdles motivational skills into question. if i had one wish for the people on this board, it would be for them to realize that THE MANAGER DOESNT HAVE THAT MUCH OF AN IMPACT ON THE GAME. more than in any other sport, baseball is won and lost on the field (as opposed to by the coaches and their decision making). also, good job taking a shot at hurdle for being a bad player. thats very relevant here. nicely done. really drives home your point.

fourth, thank you matttherock for bringing up the real problem with the rockies- they arent scoring enough freaking runs. prior to saturday night's game, they were scoring 3 runs a game on this homestand. 3 runs a game! are you kidding me? i dont care if you exhume and reanimate the corpse of john mcgraw to manage the team. youre going to lose more than half your games if you cant score runs. guys like atkins, hawpe, and our catchers need to get their freaking act together and start putting numbers on the scoreboard. (each went deep last night, we subsequently scored 6 runs instead of 2, and won. coincidence? HMMMMMMM........) i guarantee you thats a better way for the rockies to turn things around than to switch out the guy that hands the lineup to the umpire before every game. please, one more time, im begging you-- stop it with the manager obsession. this team has much, much, much bigger problems than that.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 10:10 AM MDT reply actions

I agree somewhat...

I will say right now that I know Hurdle doesn't make a ton of difference as far as in-game management goes. There are tons of other skippers who would've done the same thing with Francis and unfortunately gotten the same result.

My biggest issue is more of an intangible. It's like I said, I don't see this team meeting expectations. When the Monfort's say that they expect us to be over .500, I would hope that they would stick to their words. In my mind, I just see this team do a lot of dumb things, things that sound fundamental coaching should fix. That is my biggest issue with a Hurdle coached squad, and why if he is let go, I won't be extremely sad by any means.

by MattTheRock on May 20, 2007 12:58 PM MDT up reply actions

Few options

For a team that is under-funded, banged-up, fighting a culture of losing and somewhat talent deficient there is little to no margin for error. This is where Hurdle hurts the Rockies.

Just as the Rockies can't afford to miss on free agents and still compete, they can't afford to mis-manage games and still have any hope of competing.

Also, the lack of hitting has a lot to do with the lineup card that you mention.

Examples include running out Mabry and Finley all year long, playing Yorvit over Iannetta, etc., etc.

by MADness on May 20, 2007 10:51 AM MDT reply actions

not really

the lack of hitting doesnt have much to do with the lineup card, actually. yes, the two issues (pinch hitting and the catcher spot in the lineup) you mention have been poorly handled and problematic. but in terms of reasons why we havent scored enough runs, they pale in comparison to the struggles of hawpe and atkins. you WANT your pinch hitters to come through more than mabry/finley have. you WANT your catchers to contribute more than ours have. but you NEED the guys regularly hitting 5th and 6th in your lineup to contribute something every single game. that has not happened, and is certainly not hurdle's fault.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 12:31 PM MDT up reply actions

Margin for error

Again, Hurdle isn't the primary reason for our struggles (offensively or otherwise) but his decisions have had an impact upon our record (just how big that impact happens to be is debateable).

We can't pick up a super-star centerfielder or Jeff Kent or wave a magic wand to make Atkins and Hawpe start hitting better.

What we CAN do is manage the bullpen and the line-up better.

I have no idea how many games the Rockies lost as a result of leaving Hawkins in the 8th inning role as long as they did or by keeping Mabry on the roster as long as they did but in a season where our chances to compete were slight to begin with the only way that this Rockies team was going to be able to compete was for all of the little things go right and managing decisions are one of those little things.

by MADness on May 20, 2007 12:53 PM MDT up reply actions

My point

What I am trying to get across is that while Hurdle is not the primary reason that the Rockies are struggling (as some fans seem to believe), you are going too far in the other direction by suggesting (intentionally or otherwise) that Hurdle's coaching has been a non-factor this season.

by MADness on May 20, 2007 12:55 PM MDT up reply actions

fair enough

i appreciate your rationality, thats for sure. thanks for that. i still dont think hurdle should be canned, not yet anyways. although its taken a little while in each case he has been fixing problems (dumping mabry, switching corpas into the 8th inning slot). lets see if the team can put a run together while healthy and get back in it before the all star break.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 1:06 PM MDT up reply actions

Amen

LarryB, you are the voice of wisdom amidst this latest Hurdle feeding frenzy. Clint Hurdle is far above such things anyhow, having the strong mental toughness required of anyone participating in pro sports..

Quoting from a column by Patrick Ridgell in today's Longmont Times-Call (no link)...

...About 12 hours after Hurdle bungled Friday night's 5-2 loss to Kansas City, he took his young daughter, Madison, to Starbucks. There, the clientele greeted him with "hang in there" and "you're an idiot," among other encouragements. Having the youngster in tow, Hurdle suspects, might have kept a tongue or two from wagging more. But of greater note, young Madison wanted nothing to do with reliving Friday's sorrow.

"That was just the beauty of life, and the beauty of me needing to move forward, and Maddy saying, 'Let's go dad; we have stuff to do,'"Hurdle said. "That's what we do on Saturday--we don't lollygag, we don't feel sorry for ourselves, we don't second guess ourselves, we get ready to move." ...

by DeepPurple on May 20, 2007 12:09 PM MDT reply actions

Great guy

No one is questioning that Clint is a great guy. Heck, he is almost impossible not to like.

That said, he is in a business that demands results and the 'nice-guy' label only earns him so much slack.

by MADness on May 20, 2007 12:18 PM MDT up reply actions

The Hurdle defenders....

have to realize that on game #50 of the 2008 season, Clint Hurdle will join a select list of managers. He will be among the ten losingest managers in major league history with at least 1,000 games managed, measured by winning percentage. He already has lost more games than any manager in history with his first team.

In other words, nobody has been given a longer, or a fairer, chance to succeed or show progress than Clint Hurdle. He has gotten a ton of slack from the ownership and O'Dowd, probably due to the youth movement.

This was supposed to be the "report card" year for Clint Hurdle, so said Charlie Monfort. He was extended instead. Do you blame fans for being pissed at the lack of accountability that the owner himself said would apply this season?

Look, managers are not sacrosanct. They get fired as a matter of course in the game of baseball. There is good reason for it since a managerial firing takes some of the heat off the players themselves, and sometimes gives them a jolt. Fair or unfair, firing a manager such as Clint Hurdle has been done hundreds of times by all other MLB franchises in history. Great guys lose their jobs all the time in this game.

It's a results oriented business, and if he doesn't get the results, eventually even Clint Hurdle has to go. Sorry it's so hard for some of his apologists to take that hard fact of baseball life.

by Roxpert on May 20, 2007 3:48 PM MDT reply actions

youre right

it is a fact of baseball life and has been done hundreds of times. but what im saying, as a sort-of hurdle apologist, is just because its the norm doesnt mean its a smart thing to do. who gives a crap about his winning percentage? its not like hes a pitcher or something. up until this year, hes had no talent to work with. even now the rockies are middle of the pack at best in the talent department. i understand its a "results oriented business", thanks for filling me in on that. but firing the manager of a bad team (which given their bullpen struggles and the lack of production from several spots in the lineup, i would say the rockies are) is like firing the president of an airline because one of their jets crashed in a freak accident. yeah, it happens, but only to make the public feel better about the situation. if the rockies want to actually make a change that will have an effect on the team, they should can o'dowd or (i know this is impossible) somehow get rid of the monforts. both of those people/groups of people have 10 times the impact on the team that hurdle does. and you know who has even more impact than that? the guys on the field who actually play the games. fancy that. so yeah, i bet hurdle gets fired soon. and thats the kind of thing that happens all the time. but that doesnt mean its going to make a lick of difference for the club, minus maybe a one or two week jolt. what happens when that wears off and the new guy also cant do any better with the terrible bullpen and bench o'dowd has put together?

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 6:30 PM MDT up reply actions

a freak accident?

Having a winning season would be a freak accident. The rockies crash and burn with regularity...

by moomacher on May 20, 2007 7:04 PM MDT up reply actions

Fact is...

While it is true that baseball managers are fired all the time, it's always done by the club's GM and/or owners. In the Rockies case, the Monforts, O'Dowd, and Hurdle are all on the same page, like it or not. Either they all go, or none of them goes.

by DeepPurple on May 21, 2007 2:23 PM MDT up reply actions

Thought about managing:

I truly, honestly believe that a good manager makes the difference. Here is why:

The Rockies have GOBS of talent. There is absolutely no doubt about that. But somehow they just can't tap it. They have hopes to win, not intentions, and there is a HUGE difference there. I believe the manager can instill a LOT of that, and I have NEVER seen this from Hurdle. Example: Check what Leyland did not only in Florida, but with Detroit. Sure, the Tigers played good baseball, but I REALLY think the manager plays an important role in the long run. Clint has never had a winning record and I really think it's hurting the Rox.

I don't place all the blame on Hurdle. Example: today. But you never hear about a really, really GOOD decision from Hurdle. it's either routine or it causes outrage/controversy, and that, to me, is very telling.

by Squeaky on May 20, 2007 5:39 PM MDT reply actions

ill be brief

sorry, but youre living in a dream world.

"the rockies have GOBS of talent."

no. they do not. ask any scout, any general manager, any informed writer like tracy ringolsby. in terms of pure talent, the rockies are in the middle of the pack of the league at very best. maybe closer to 20th-ish.

"They have hopes to win, not intentions, and there is a HUGE difference there."

and you know this... how? do you have an inside contact on the team thats confirmed this to you? is there some kind of magical machine that can discern this subtle difference? i seriously doubt the rockies huddle in the clubhouse before every game and say to each other: "gee golly, fellas. i really HOPE we win. but we definitely shouldnt INTEND to. that would be wrong." please. that sentence sounds like something mark kiszla would write. (thats not a compliment)

"Check what Leyland did not only in Florida, but with Detroit."

yeah, and while youre at it, check out what he did in pittsburgh throughout the mid 90s. or what he did in florida the year after they won it all (im not going to look it up now, but i think they lost 110 games). or lest we forget, what he did during his joke of a season in colorado. jim leyland is a joke who stumbled into two incredibly talented teams and won pennants with them. he batted neifi perez and his .250 OBP leadoff for like 50 games last year. enough said. next time someone on this board brings up leyland like hes some kind of managing god im kicking my computer out my window. its not worth it anymore. youre all beyond help.

"But you never hear about a really, really GOOD decision from Hurdle."

thats because of 2 things. (1) the media is dumb. (2) an extension of (1)- poor managerial decisions get ten, maybe 100 times the attention that good ones do. managing is a lot like umpiring/officiating: when youre doing it right, people dont talk about it. please tell me the last time you heard anyone talk about a good decision from ANY manager. the only time you ever really hear about it is when they call for a squeeze and it works, and thats because a squeeze is exciting.

listen, i dont mean to be all testy. but it frustrates me to see people write stuff on here like you have and pass it off as if its fact, when in reality its completely wrong (your talent comment) or completely indeterminable (youre "hope/intend" thing). come on.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 6:41 PM MDT up reply actions

I too...

feel it is time for Hurdle to go. I think Hurdle is a great man and a great baseball man. He's a good hitting coach. But he's not a good manager. It has been talked about before on here, and I wholeheartedly agree with it: there is a culture of losing here. The players need somebody to light a spark under them. Hurdle's "messages" has become stale to these players. The players need a different voice over them, one that gets the most out of every player he has. Giradi is that man, and he proved it in Florida.

by Rockiesbiggestfan on May 20, 2007 6:12 PM MDT reply actions

i love double standards

last year the rockies and marlins were both supposed to lose 100 games, according to most preseason projections. when the dust settled, lo and behold, neither even lost 90. for the marlins, according to everyone, this happened because joe girardi is a brilliant manager. for the rockies however, it happened because atkins and holliday were complete monsters. and specifically not because hurdle is a good manager.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 6:44 PM MDT up reply actions

I am not using

a double standard. Last season was Giradi's first with the Marlins. They had a lineup full of rookies. What did Giradi do? He led to Marlins to greatly overachieve.

The Rockies didn't have rookies last season. They had none in the lineup. It was also Hurdle's fifth season with the Rockies. His message is becoming stale.

Some managers just happen to have the ability to get the very best out of each and every player. Hurdle clearly does not have that...

by Rockiesbiggestfan on May 20, 2007 6:55 PM MDT up reply actions

it doesnt matter

how much experience the players have. the only thing that matters is how much talent they have. and the rockies were regarded as having roughly the same amount as the marlins last year. most preseason projections had the marlins at about 57-105 and the rockies at 60-102. they had roughly equal expectations.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 7:27 PM MDT up reply actions

apples and oranges

the Marlins came damn close to making the playoffs.

by RandyMann on May 20, 2007 7:00 PM MDT up reply actions

hahaha

yeah, youre right.... by winning 2 more games and losing 2 less games than the rockies, the marlins were in fact a whole whopping 2 games closer to the playoffs. so, yeah, if you consider that really significant... i dont know what to tell you.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 7:25 PM MDT up reply actions

Let me just ask this hypothetically

I've been reading this diary and haven't chimed in yet, and I think Larry has made some great points as a proclaimed "Hurdle apologist." I don't often agree with Larry but I do on this subject. The manager of a baseball team does have little to do with the results of the game, more so in the A.L. but overall the manager just doesn't effect a game like a coach in another sport could. I don't think firing Hurdle would be the answer for this team, although I love the thought of hiring Girardi. That being said let me look at another angle here. What kind of demand would other teams have for Hurdle if we fired him and he could coach whatever team needed a manager say starting this off season? How long would he be unemployed? I'm talking a head coaching job. Be honest here, what do you guys think?

by stuntdaddy1 on May 20, 2007 7:06 PM MDT reply actions

how about that

you and i, were not so different. well, once in a while anyways. i dont think he would be hired as an mlb manager for a long time, maybe forever. but thats more a function of teams not wanting to take a PR hit (diehard fans: "what? they hired that guy who managed those terrible rockies teams for like 8 years? im cancelling my season tickets!!") than a reflection of his abilities. wrong as it is, teams care about wins and losses when it comes to managers. with as smart a baseball guy as he is, though, im sure clint could find a job with just about any team as a hitting coach or a bench coach very quickly.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 7:33 PM MDT up reply actions

Oh I totally agree

That he would find a job in baseball in some variety, but like you said it would be a huge PR hit if say the Mets or somebody were to hire him. You gotta admit it would be interesting if he got a chance to manage a team like the Red Sox, or Braves, or Tigers for a while.

I've actually had the privelage of meeting Clint Hurdle at a golf tournament and he is a tremendous man, with a lot of baseball knowledge so I would feel bad if he were to be fired, but I would certainly understand.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 20, 2007 7:56 PM MDT up reply actions

Comparing MLB managers to NBA coaches....

or NFL coaches, or whatever, is irrelevant. The fact is when baseball teams fail to achieve exepctations, managers often get the axe, fairly OR unfairly.

Let's put this another way. If you and Larry are right, and managers have little if any impact on team success, then why would you care one way or the other whether Hurdle is fired? It seems people here are going out of their way to defend Hurdle and say it would be wrong to fire him, but these same people are saying managers really don't matter that much.

Well, then, why not TRY something different if Hurdle and managers don't really matter? At the very least, it would provide some intrigue and spice to a season already gone wrong, and it actually may show that (for at least short-term periods) a managerial team DOES make a difference.

This team does have much greater problems than just Clint Hurdle. But as a manager, he's the most visible lightning rod, and canning him may remove all the pressure and heat off of the players. He likely won't be fired due to the extension he received, but I can think of far worse things that could happen to the Rox than replacing one Clint Hurdle!

by Roxpert on May 20, 2007 7:23 PM MDT reply actions

I meant.....

that a managerial CHANGE can make a difference, at least in the short term.

I know one face-saving move the Rox could make. Instead of "firing" Hurdle, they could "reassign" him to the front office in some new capacity, such as special assistant to Dan O'Dowd, VP of baseball operations, or even as "President" of the Rockies to replace Keli McGregor. If the extension has paralyzed Monfort from a firing decision, this would be the way out of it.

by Roxpert on May 20, 2007 7:29 PM MDT up reply actions

I really like this idea...

Because if managing doesn't matter, then nothing will change, but the fans will see that the front office is at least trying to find a solution, giving that much needed change or at least some kind of vote that they aren't giving up on the season and just waiting until things work out. If managing does matter, then we win on both accounts.

Never mind.

by Squeaky on May 20, 2007 7:40 PM MDT up reply actions

you

have a pretty strong grasp on the situation and i respect you for that. to answer your question about why he shouldnt be fired: because the players like him and seem to be playing hard. i dont see any effort or hustle problems. but you know what a total nightmare would be? we fire hurdle, the team continues to struggle, and then in the offseason holliday makes it known that hes very unhappy with hurdle's departure and there's now a 0% (rather than a 5%) chance hell re-up with the rockies after 2008 and they might as well deal him now. shudder. that would be horrible.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 7:47 PM MDT up reply actions

I also get the feeling

That the players love playing for him. I think he would be a great guy to play for. But this could be a problem in a sense that he's being too much of a friend instead of a coach.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 20, 2007 7:59 PM MDT up reply actions

This is not really related

But I'm reminded of the movie "Miracle on Ice". A hockey movie, of course, not baseball, and therefore not applicable in this situation, but there is a scene where the head coach is first meeting his players and he says, "I am your coach, not your friend." I think that, while it is important to be on very good terms with your manager, being concerned with befriending your team is not the best way to go...example, the equal opportunity to play thing. Everyone, no matter how their season is going, gets a chance to play, because it's fair. just a thought, but you often hear guys on some of the other teams complaining because they aren't playing. I'm not saying this is applicable now, and I understand that complaining players can really screw up a clubhouse chemistry, but maybe the "play everyone as much as possible" theory isn't the best. Again, just a thought, and again, all of this may not apply to baseball, I was just reminded of the movie.

I am really up for a move on the team, whether or not it is firing Hurdle. Otherwise, I get the sense that we are employing the "ignore it and it will go away" solution method, or the "wait and see if it gets better" solution method, both of which are extremely frustrating.

Well...frustrating unless it's Rockies fans hoping that the 'ignore it and it will go away' method will work for this season.

Never mind.

by Squeaky on May 20, 2007 8:14 PM MDT up reply actions

I'm with ya

And I'm not saying that he is definately being too much of a friend rather than a coach, I'm not in the clubhouse or with the team everyday so how would I know. All I'm going off of is what I see watching games and hearing press conferences and it's just an opinion.

Playing sports all my life I've always felt a lot better playing for a coach like Hurdle, someone you can get along with, someone you're not afraid to approach rather than a coach like Bobby Knigt (even though he's obviously not a baseball coach) who you're intimidated by and you feel pressured by all the time. Being an upbeat, easy to get along with manager has its positives and negatives.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 20, 2007 8:30 PM MDT up reply actions

Managers don't change games...

well what would have happened in tonights game if Hurdle had put on the sac bunt when Atkins was up? If he bunted successfully there would have been runners on 2 and 3rd with 1 out and Hawpe up. Hawpe may have grounded out still but fielding a ball with the infield in and throwing out the runner at home is difficult. That would have been a decision that could have affected the outcome of the game.

by RandyMann on May 20, 2007 8:42 PM MDT up reply actions

Hindsight is 20/20

And that is a good point. It was definately an option to have Atkins bunt there, considering there were 0 outs and he hadn't produced all day. But when was the last time Atkins bunted? What if he failed to get the bunt down? Is he even a good bunter? What if he popped the bunt up and got someone doubled off? A lot could've went wrong with that as well.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 20, 2007 8:47 PM MDT up reply actions

yeah

like 2 weeks ago or so he had hawpe try to bunt in a late game situation and it totally backfired.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 8:55 PM MDT up reply actions

Exactly

Then everyone would be saying, why the hell did Hurdle have Atkins bunt there. That was stupid.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 20, 2007 8:59 PM MDT up reply actions

Not really saying this either

I was just remarking on something that popped into my head.

By the way, since I'm posting, I want to clear up something I said earlier with the intention v. hope thing. I will freely admit that I am kind of unusual and probably not entirely logical when it comes to mindsets, seeing as I am kind of obsessed with them. But, I was recalling something Jennings said bitterly once departing, that when the Rockies come into ST, they don't EXPECT to win, they just hope to do so. I think this is a telling remark, because with hoping to win, it garners the sense of a whatever happens, happens kind of attitude. Expecting to win gives me the impression that they will find a way to win no matter what. Example, Steinbrenner expects to win and when the Yankees don't, he gets extremely upset and makes the threats or the moves. Of course, this may not really have anything to do with winning at all, and mindsets don't really matter, but I just get the "hoping to win" impression rather than the "expecting to win" impression. especially as a fan. Seriously, I almost never truly expect the Rockies to win. I hope they will. As a fan, I understand this is totally different than actually playing the game, but that's what I was talking about.

Never mind.

by Squeaky on May 20, 2007 9:03 PM MDT up reply actions

Good point

I forgot about that Jennings quote. And you're right there is a big difference between hoping to win and expecting to win. It's one of the things this team needs to improve upon so they can actually start winning.

I hate to go back to this, and you gave the Yankees as an example, but as a Broncos fan I expect them to win every game they play except win they play the Colts. With the Rockies you do just hope they can come through and win no matter who they play.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 20, 2007 9:11 PM MDT up reply actions

thats fine

youre entitled to your opinion, i just wish you had said it was an opinion in the original post as opposed to presenting it as a proven fact. i for one disagree. to make it to the major league level, a player (obviously) has to have out of this world talent and dominate at pretty much every stop along the way from little league all the way up through AAA. subsequently, and i know this is also obvious, most of these guys are competitive beyond your wildest imagination. sure, there are those that take things even further than most (and those that become famous for doing so tend to be legends like elway or jordan). but on the whole, anyone playing professional sports at the highest level is just going to outrageously competitive each and every season, every game, every at bat. with some rare exceptions (the randy mosses and chris webbers of the world) you simply will not make it to the top without this mindset. just because the yankees have a batshit crazy billionaire owner who likes to make a monumental deal out of things all the time doesnt mean they "expect" to win any more than other teams. obviously this all anecdotal. my point is, and i think youll have a hard time arguing this, that pro athletes in MLB, the NBA, the NFL, the NHL, etc. on the whole are in the top .1% of competitiveness. they all expect to win, all the time. theyve been dominating their sport and probably been playing for very good teams ever since they were 10. in my opinion, there is no way "lack of intention to win" is a problem for the rockies. i dont care what jennings said as he bitterly left town.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 9:19 PM MDT up reply actions

also

i dont feel fans' perceptions of expectation to win are relevant at all. were more likely to be concerned with this kind of thing because we have no control over the game. were not playing it, were not involved, so we need some way to either reassure ourselves that everything is ok (stuntdaddy with the broncos) or lower our expectations so we dont get hurt when things dont work out (squeaky with the rockies). but im pretty darn sure the players arent thinking about this kind of stuff at all. theyre more concerned with what theyre going to do next play, next at bat, next pitch.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 20, 2007 9:23 PM MDT up reply actions

While you are right Larry

I was just stating my gut feeling when both teams play. When the Rockies play I do only hope they win, versus when the Broncos play I expect them to win. I was just looking for an example. That's coming as a fan. I'm not saying the players feel the same way. And I guaruntee you losing eats at the Rockies players 25 times more than it does us. There's no doubt in my mind.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 20, 2007 9:33 PM MDT up reply actions

And this ties into wolf's remark below

Whether or not mindsets really do make a difference, there is a culture of losing that surrounds the team, especially percieved by the fans. I understand the Rox may love having Clint around, but then keep him as a bench coach or something. Have him in the clubhouse as a mentor, I don't know. The Rockies are as competitive as you say they are, Larry, and if (which is a big if) they start actually winning with a new manager, then I am sure they will be just fine with playing for him. Like I said, perhaps it would be better to have Clint around as a mentor figure, because then he can befriend and hang out with the guys, but he doesn't have to worry about managing them on the field.

Never mind.

by Squeaky on May 21, 2007 7:13 AM MDT up reply actions

Fire Clint

I understand a lot of the Points Larry Makes on this diary, however I still think Hurdle Needs to go.

No manager has had a longer tenure with the team and has as bad as a recored as Hurdle does. While I understand the argument that he hasn't had talent to play with, it doesn't excuse the fact that he can't get the most out of the talent he does. Last year we had Atkins, Holliday, Hawpe, Jennings, Fuentes, Corpas, Rami, Carroll, all turning in big years, and yet with all of that we were nothing more then a fourth place team.

I worry about the culture of loosing that goes on around this team. Its like they don't know how to win, how to an important hit, how to hold a lead, how to keep a winning streak going longer then 2 games. That culture of loosing needs to turn around, and I don't think Hurdle is the guy for doing that, given his recored as a manager and a player.

Also I would like to see some accountability. We as fans where told that this would be a .500 ball club, and most of us ate that up... what now? Is it wait for next year? Some of us are tired of hearing wait for next year. We have waited since 1993 while the Marlins and D-Backs have all had successful seasons. When is somebody going to put their foot down and say that this loosing is not going to be tolerated anymore?

People think the players like to play for Hurdle? Why don't you ask Jeff Francis what he thinks of the guy right now. This team is lost, and sometimes I just feel like they don't care.

Firing Hurdle weather it be right or wrong, might at least light a fire under the butts of some of the players, instead of letting the dog days of summer just drag on.

by wolf213 on May 21, 2007 12:26 AM MDT reply actions