Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
wildcard

Who is filling out the lineup?

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, eddie83 said:

Maybe it’s just me but if I am Elias the last thing I am worried about is lineup construction. Let Hyde learn  on the job. A benefit of not expecting to be any good is that it allows for more growth on the job without cost.  

I agree. I do not expect Hyde to be micro managed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What has always been the nadir of a good manager was how he built relationships with his players.  How he communicated there roles and prepared them for the upcoming game or series.  This was Buck’s biggest asset.  I don’t believe Elias and the front office will do anything to hamstring the manager from building this relationship with his players.  I believe with Hyde , Elias believes he has an individual who can balance information up and down the chain without damaging those relationships.  Time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Woody Held said:

What has always been the nadir of a good manager was how he built relationships with his players.  How he communicated there roles and prepared them for the upcoming game or series.  This was Buck’s biggest asset.

You lost me a bit here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wildcard said:

I don't have time to post what I want to now but...

The O's had a organizational framework when Earl was managing.   Dalton, Cashen or Peters as GM acquired that players and Earl played them. 

Earl's index cards were part of why he was ahead of the game in his day.  On a certain level, Sig is just making really good index cards here.

Maybe even so good that faces are turning to alabaster because, well, Sting said it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wildcard said:

So you think  who fills out the lineup changes when the O's are ready to win?

The manager who replaced Hyde.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Woody Held said:

What has always been the nadir of a good manager was how he built relationships with his players.  How he communicated there roles and prepared them for the upcoming game or series.  This was Buck’s biggest asset.  I don’t believe Elias and the front office will do anything to hamstring the manager from building this relationship with his players.  I believe with Hyde , Elias believes he has an individual who can balance information up and down the chain without damaging those relationships.  Time will tell.

U8e38EI.gif

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, OrioleDog said:

Earl's index cards were part of why he was ahead of the game in his day.  On a certain level, Sig is just making really good index cards here.

Maybe even so good that faces are turning to alabaster because, well, Sting said it.

I think most sabermetricians would reject Earl’s cards on the “small sample size” theory.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Earl didn't interact with his players.

He wasn’t friendly with and in Palmers and some others he was  confrontational with them, but he definitely interacted with.   The makeup of today’s players is much different than those in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Woody Held said:

He wasn’t friendly with and in Palmers and some others he was  confrontational with them, but he definitely interacted with.   The makeup of today’s players is much different than those in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s

Doesn't a quote exists where he states he barely talked to Frank and Brooks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think most sabermetricians would reject Earl’s cards on the “small sample size” theory.    

I guess I see that improvement as a byproduct of the new possibilities today.  I think in general SABR types revere him as a pioneer, even if he was only approximately correct.  There was a lot of precisely wrong out there.

I would be fascinated to know in detail just how much the Orioles knew about Koufax in his last game - I imagine reports from several advance scouts, subjectively compiled, and plenty of notes from Frank.

Then I imagine if Kershaw's last game is Game 1 of the 2024 World Series against us, what kind of knowledge will be available to Mullins leading off another 5 years from now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, OrioleDog said:

I guess I see that improvement as a byproduct of the new possibilities today.  I think in general SABR types revere him as a pioneer, even if he was only approximately correct.  There was a lot of precisely wrong out there.

I would be fascinated to know in detail just how much the Orioles knew about Koufax in his last game - I imagine reports from several advance scouts, subjectively compiled, and plenty of notes from Frank.

Then I imagine if Kershaw's last game is Game 1 of the 2024 World Series against us, what kind of knowledge will be available to Mullins leading off another 5 years from now?

koufax-scouting-report-1966

However, there’s one more thing to consider. Jim Russo, a co-writer on the report, was a legendary scout for the Orioles. He is considered one of the all-time greats. He had a high track record for being right.

So what he and fellow scout Al Kubski filed on Sept. 16, 1966 contains some telling clues about Koufax.

Specifically, it looks as if Koufax was beginning to lose his legendary curve ball. They wrote:

It now lacks its former velocity and sharpness. Still has his sharp breaking curve ball but has not thrown this pitch for strikes. His big breaking curve has been hanging and this is why he has stayed with his fastball more.”

Throwing a curveball puts the most strain on the elbow. So it is telling that Russo notes that Koufax only threw two curves in the last three innings of the game he scouted. Perhaps throwing the curveball was getting to be too much for him?

Russo also wrote that Koufax’s fastball only was a “TWO.” Not exactly sure what this means, but they noted that it often rises out of the strike zone. He thought batters were helping out Koufax by swing at the high fastball that otherwise would have been balls. He implored the Orioles to lay off the high fastball.

http://jewishbaseballmuseum.com/spotlight-story/fifty-years-ago-final-scouting-report-koufax-provide-clue-decision-retire-30/

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • I was pointing out that Dan did make an attempt to bring in a high OBP guy that had some statistical similarities to Martin. I was also making the point that college stats are not necessarily that meaningful. I don't expect any college players K rate to transfer to the majors for instance.
    • From what I read the main thing is his K rate wasn't what folks were hoping for early in the season.  It started to improve the last couple of starts but the damage had been dealt.
    • While true, no scouts are saying that Martin’s swing will need to be rebuilt because of an extreme crouch, that he lacks the athleticism to play a premium position, or that he would be a reach at the number 2 pick. Martin could bust. However if people read this and think that Stewart’s plate discipline hasn’t transferred (and I’m not sure he’s ever been given a fair chance), so Martin will end up a AAAA player (I’m not saying that you are saying this, only that it could be interpreted that way), there are plenty of reasons why Stewart’s lack of major league success is not predictive of whether Martin will succeed.
    • I haven't followed this thread but what happened to Emerson Hancock?
    • So, if I understand you correctly, there is absolutely nothing that this player could possibly have done to make you think he's a worthy choice here.  He has performed at a tremendous level wherever he's been for several years, but it must be all smoke and mirrors, coupled with pure luck over a particular small sample size.  Sorry, but you haven't shown me any reason whatsoever to agree with you that he isn't the player he seems to be.  You asserted that his home park in college was the sole reason for his numbers, yet his performance away from that environment shouldn't be considered either, because the Cape Cod League's season doesn't last 749 games.  You are certainly welcome to your feeling that something tells you that Gonzales isn't for real, but your feeling alone doesn't convince me to agree with you. I am trusting Elias here.  I'd be happy with any of Tork, Martin, Lacy, or Gonzales.  I don't see any valid reason to eliminate Gonzales from that discussion.  It comes down to what the Orioles' baseball people think, which is OK by me.
    • I think 1900 the average was about 45, although the distribution was very different because the infant and child mortality rate was many, many times higher than today.  So if you got to 20 you had a good shot at 60 or older.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...