Piniella has to be canned

[SandbergMVP1984]

<!--quoteo(post=47202:date=Jun 30 2009, 08:32 AM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Jun 30 2009, 08:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=47075:date=Jun 29 2009, 04:37 PM:name=BackyardLegend)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BackyardLegend @ Jun 29 2009, 04:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=47062:date=Jun 29 2009, 03:35 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 29 2009, 03:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Even the 2003 Marlins were supposed to be good, after signing IRod, and trading for Pierre.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That makes my point for me. They were underperforming, so they canned the manager.

Then they won the World Series.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


so, just to be clear, if a team was not supposed to be good, and they won after a change in managers, it proves your point, AND if a team was supposed to be good, and they won after a change in managers, it proves your point as well? Is there any possible scenario which DOESN'T prove your point?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I understood it to be "If you have a team that was expected to perform well and they aren't, then changing the manager has been shown to work, although not all the time. If you have a shitty team and change managers, it's much less likely to magically make them a good one." I tend to agree that this team needs a shakeup. Firing Lou is one of the few "shake up" things we can attempt due to our lack of payroll. Whether it works or not is pretty much irrelevant and a lot of it depends on the manager that would replace Lou.