Fire Todd Butler

[shockfan89_]

Todd's not going anywhere. The pitching needs to be fixed without a doubt, but the position players are there. And anyone that thinks they can fire Todd and keep all those talented freshmen are kidding themselves.

He'll get it done here. Yes it's taking longer than any of us would like, but it's going in the right direction. Just gotta fix what's happening on the bump.

No I'm not related to him and no he's not perfect but you might as well get to yard and support him because (rightly) he ain't going anywhere.

Also stop living in the past. We aren't playing Friends 15 times a year anymore. College baseball is a lot different today. But WSU will be back.

What makes you think he will get it done? The fact that we have gotten worse and worse every year since he's been the coach?

I think if HCTB is fired most of the freshmen would stay.

I think we have a good group of freshmen than can hit, but none of them have impressed me at all with their fielding or baseball IQ. I think Jenista is probably the best of the group but I think the others are decent freshman that are getting valuable playing time on a below average team. Most of the time they have been inserted into the lineup for their hitting even though at times they are defensive liabilities.

What I really want to see if how they develop over the next two years. We have a couple guys that looked pretty good as freshmen last year that haven't developed at all, and some that have taken a step back. We also have a couple of Juniors that looked really good that have taken a step back. The question I still ask myself every week is there anyone on this team that is better than they were last year (has anyone been developed)? I can't think of one. Can anyone else?

I think HCTB gets highly rated recruiting classes by signing a lot of people, and signing big physical specimens that look good on paper. I haven't seen a lot from a coaching standpoint that impresses me. Case in point pinch hitting Tinkham for Vickers today. I know it is easy to second guess individual moves here and there but there are a lot of things that happen that leave me scratching my head. Much the same way we used to look at some of the moves made by other MVC coaches in years past.

[Cdizzle]

Pinch hitting Tinkham for Vickers was just insane. I get it in the 9th, when you have to have the 3R-homer. But getting 1 or 2 and keeping the inning moving was good enough in the 9th. And at this point, I'd have more confidence in Vickers hitting one out anyway.

No idea what happened to Tinkham.

[Aargh]

Butler getting it "done"?

He's just about got it "done", but not in a good way.

If the Shox keep winning 2 of 3 in the weekend series, he's going to get another year.

[xazshox]

Just big guys?

Hey ShockFan89, have you bothered to look at the stats for the big guys since you seem to think only Jenista is any good. The other big guys all have excellent batting averages, OB % & slg %, too. They are all young. They have gap power. This team has a fielding % of 0.968 which is excellent. I think you need to polish your glasses or something.

[XManCometh]

Butler getting it "done"?

He's just about got it "done", but not in a good way.

If the Shox keep winning 2 of 3 in the weekend series, he's going to get another year.

He's getting another year no matter what, imo. I mean, this school kept Jane Albright around for 5 seasons and she was well under .500 for 4 of them. They're not firing Todd after 3.

[1972Shocker]

He's getting another year no matter what, imo. I mean, this school kept Jane Albright around for 5 seasons and she was well under .500 for 4 of them. They're not firing Todd after 3.

I tend to agree with you although I don't think the comparison with Jane Albright is very comparable. Jane was probably making $100K - $125K or so per year back then and she was coaching a much lower profile sport that had really no successful history or tradition at the Valley level let alone at a national level. There really wasn't that much clamoring to dump Jane.

Coach Butler's contract provides a base salary of $320,000 through June 2017 and then $340,000 for the final 3 years of his contract ending in June 2020. A buyout of $1,340,000 in place at the end of his June is a much higher hurdle than the relative pittance they would have owed Jane Albright after 3 years. WSU wasn't willing to just buyout Jody Adams and part ways at a price of $500,000. Makes me think HCTB may well get two more years. A lot will depend on how much revenue damage WSU thinks they will sustain by retaining HCTB vs replacing him. That is really just a guess but a Hooper or Standiford hire would have an immediate positive impact I think. That really wasn't a big concern with women's basketball.

[ShockTalk]

I tend to agree with you although I don't think the comparison with Jane Albright is very comparable. Jane was probably making $100K - $125K or so per year back then and she was coaching a much lower profile sport that had really no successful history or tradition at the Valley level let alone at a national level. There really wasn't that much clamoring to dump Jane.

Coach Butler's contract provides a base salary of $320,000 through June 2017 and then $340,000 for the final 3 years of his contract ending in June 2020. A buyout of $1,340,000 in place at the end of his June is a much higher hurdle than the relative pittance they would have owed Jane Albright after 3 years. WSU wasn't willing to just buyout Jody Adams and part ways at a price of $500,000. Makes me think HCTB may well get two more years. A lot will depend on how much revenue damage WSU thinks they will sustain by retaining HCTB vs replacing him. That is really just a guess but a Hooper or Standiford hire would have an immediate positive impact I think. That really wasn't a big concern with women's basketball.

This has been mentioned before, but WSU needs to look at the cost of baseball, both in salaries and damaged control. They are going to pay Butler whether he is coaching here or not. That money is gone.

1) Is it better to keep Butler in hopes that he will turn the program around? If he does, how fast and big a turnaround would be needed to get old baseball monies back into the program?

2) Is it better to let Butler go and re-energize the program with a Hooper or Standiford? The other part of this question is how much would either of them cost. I'll throw out $225,000. It might be more or less. This would mean WSU would be paying out $565,000 for both the old and new coaches. That figure is not much over what Gene was making and some of that would be covered by former baseball monies coming back into the program, probably at a quicker and bigger amount than if Butler stayed while assuming he starts to turn the program around.

[Kung Wu]

They are going to pay Butler whether he is coaching here or not. That money is gone.

I don't disagree with anything you said really, but I don't like this argument.

It's like your wife arguing that she needs a new wardrobe regardless of the fact that she still owes $10,000 for all the past clothes she has bought. "Regardless whether she's wearing those older threads, that money is gone -- so might as well buy new clothes!"

Sometimes the right answer is "No, baby, you get to live with the clothes you bought until you have paid for them."

I am not saying that's the case here -- that we should live with Butler -- but in general, I don't like that flippant argument for incurring new debt.

[ShockTalk]

I don't disagree with anything you said really, but I don't like this argument.

It's like your wife arguing that she needs a new wardrobe regardless of the fact that she still owes $10,000 for all the past clothes she has bought. "Regardless whether she's wearing those older threads, that money is gone -- so might as well buy new clothes!"

Sometimes the right answer is "No, baby, you get to live with the clothes you bought until you have paid for them."

I am not saying that's the case here -- that we should live with Butler -- but in general, I don't like that flippant argument for incurring new debt.

I don't like it either, but I don't have access to all the numbers such as current lost revenue vs reasonable projected increase in revenues to know if it's even a good argument. What we do know is what we were paying Gene and staff, past revenues before his last 5 years, how workable those numbers were, and how big an impacted Gene waning years and Butler's drop has hurt those revenues vs expenses.

I'm not sure I agree with your "clothes" analogy as that was a pure cost (unless your wife brought in more revenues with those new clothes :tongue-new:).

I could say those old clothes were a bad purchase as they are falling apart and in tatters and you, the AD if you will, allowed the purchase in the first place. Maybe she should divorce you.

What it really comes down to is what the big money does or does not want to do.

[shockfan89_]

Hey ShockFan89, have you bothered to look at the stats for the big guys since you seem to think only Jenista is any good. The other big guys all have excellent batting averages, OB % & slg %, too. They are all young. They have gap power. This team has a fielding % of 0.968 which is excellent. I think you need to polish your glasses or something.

Um I think maybe you are the one that might need to polish your glasses. I said "I think we have a good group of freshmen that can hit", and I said "I think Jenista is probably the best of the group". How do you get from that that I think only Jenista is any good? Yes they are young and I hope they can build on this year. We have a lot of other players on the team that haven't improved from year to year and that is where my real concern is. That and pitching are the big question marks right now.

I don't think I have ever voiced concern over the young guys ability to hit. Also keep in mind that fielding percentage doesn't factor in balls that are hit over your head or that you don't get to in the hole or mental mistakes of not being in position to cut a throw or throwing to the wrong base and allowing a runner to move up. There are things that need to be coached. Some kids get it faster than others. We saw a true freshman in CF this weekend that could hit, field his position, and understood the game. Again, I'm not knocking our Fr, but they are obviously more advanced hitting AT THIS STAGE than they are fielding and the other facets of the game. That is why I also stated "What I really want to see if how they develop over the next two years."

[Keyser Soze]

ShockTalk is onto the right idea. Economically, the only things that matter are the incremental benefits and the incremental costs associated with the decision. The fact that you still owe previously contractually committed (sunk costs) funds to Butler is not relevant at all. In other words, if firing him yields an additional $300,000 of benefit and cost you $200,000 of additional expense, you could owe Butler $1 million per year and it would still be the correct economic decision.

The wife analogy is a red herring since it didn't incorporate any potential benefit to the additional cost decision. You obviously don't fire Butler if you don't conclude there's a high probability that the future (and thus revenue generation) will be more fruitful in doing so.

[Cdizzle]

Hey ShockFan89, have you bothered to look at the stats for the big guys since you seem to think only Jenista is any good. The other big guys all have excellent batting averages, OB % & slg %, too. They are all young. They have gap power. This team has a fielding % of 0.968 which is excellent. I think you need to polish your glasses or something.

The only thing I see being polished around here is a turd. Trying to hawk the defense as "excellent" is the biggest joke I've ever heard.

[THam]

This team has a fielding % of 0.968 which is excellent. I think you need to polish your glasses or something.

Calling a .968 fielding %, which ranks Wichita State 128th out of 295 in D1 and 7th out of 8 MVC teams "excellent" is quite a stretch.

[Kung Wu]

ShockTalk is onto the right idea. Economically, the only things that matter are the incremental benefits and the incremental costs associated with the decision. The fact that you still owe previously contractually committed (sunk costs) funds to Butler is not relevant at all. In other words, if firing him yields an additional $300,000 of benefit and cost you $200,000 of additional expense, you could owe Butler $1 million per year and it would still be the correct economic decision.

Sure, but the next coach we hire will immediately result in a NEW sunk cost. And as with Butler, that much larger now combined sunk cost will come without assurances that there will be a positive benefit equal to or greater than what could be achieved with the much smaller existing sunk cost over some short period (1 or 2 years?). Each year that passes that threshold changes considerably, and the risk/reward becomes more attractive for making a change if there is no continued improvement.

I don't know the economics behind our A.Dept's decision making, but it's possible that Butler will get another year. It's possible that once his marquee recruiting class becomes upperclassmen, and most of Gene's kids have left the squad, that the chemistry and play will improve. Not completely unreasonable.

[shockfan89_]

I don't know the economics behind our A.Dept's decision making, but it's possible that Butler will get another year. It's possible that once his marquee recruiting class becomes upperclassmen, and most of Gene's kids have left the squad, that the chemistry and play will improve. Not completely unreasonable.

I don't disagree with you, I also think HCTB will get another year.

I believe the only players left from Gene are Mucha and Kirk so I doubt two people have much influence over a roster of 37.

Just curious which marquee recruiting class you are talking about? I assume you mean the 2014 recruiting class that was ranked #2 in the country. After this season there will still be 10 players from that recruiting class (assuming no early departures). Of these, only 3 or maybe 4 have received much playing time this year. Things can still change but a big part of that recruiting class was the JC guys coming in that will already be gone.

R-Fr - Travis Young
R-Fr - Jordan Boyer
R-Fr - Josh Debacker
R-Fr - Bret Fehr
So - Keenan Eaton
So - Taylor Sanagorski
So - Gunnar Troutwine
So - Trey Vickers
So - Chandler Sanburn
So - Tyler Jones