I guess I did react extra strongly to the coincidental juxtaposition of the posts from you and Julio. I will point out that on a whole host of subjects, apart from baseball, we cannot ever REALLY know what is going on. We are always forming our opinions based on the first, second, or third-hand reports of others. We handle that, in part, by judging the credentials of those making the reports to weigh the significance and veracity of what they tell us. We also synthesize what we hear from multiple, unrelated sources and decide what to make of all that input. I am tired of the current political push from one political side not to believe anything negative about them which appears in the lying mainstream media and trust only Fox and Breitbart (or worse). I believe that journalism is a profession with ethics that most journalists adhere to. Yes, they can only report what a given source(s) tell them, but they are bound to seek alternative views and a confirmatory source to support their initial source, if unnamed. When a source is actually named, as in the report of Eflin and the pitching coach, I give extra credence. It doesn't mean Eflin is correct, but the reporter isn't putting words in his mouth and it is significant that Eflin actually thinks what he said. Also significant that neither Eflin nor the team denied the report and that the coach has been fired. There were also quotes from the coach that perhaps he had spent too much time deciphering the analysis from the analytical department and constructing game plans in accord with those stats and not enough time establishing relationships with his pitchers.
I am not going to change my writing style to "If what the press says is true, then I think..." That is simply too awkward, and frankly, whether or not everything the press reports is true (and I don't think it is made up, but their source(s) probably do have an agenda in saying what they say), because not being privy to discussions in the front office or clubhouse of the Phillies, it is obvious that what I opine on about goings on there must derive from somebody's discussion with a member of the media. If I were present when the event occurred, that would be the exception, and I would say so. So, to me, it still seems an attempt to stop or reduce criticism of Phillies management to insist that posters to this board should preface their comments with "If what the media say is true, then I think..." I won't do that. It is awkward in the extreme and serving someone else's need to believe what is generally reported about the Phillies in the media is untrue and that the true state of affairs must therefore be far better than I believe it to be.
Obviously, Julio is free to preface his opinions with whatever qualifiers he feel necessarily should be assigned to the validity of media reports. I feel free to no preface my opinions.
If we are to have discussions on this forum, they will of necessity be based upon fragmentary and contractor information: what we get from media, what the team says, what stats tell us personally, what we see watching games and how we interpret it. If we know the end result and wait to comment until we know it, then there really won't be much conversation here. And there never really is an end, it can be argued that one always must wait before deciding. We will soon know whether or not Kapler is fired. it will be a year or several years after that (non)event until we know for sure whether or not the team made the right decision.