Payton to get majority of starts in LF

[MP]

To use another analogy: "I paid $200 for this chain saw, so I'm using this on everything, even though a 'saws-all' would work better for certain jobs"

Or whatever. You get the idea.

I like it! But one step better, is that there are 2 parties here. One is the overspender supplier who shilled out $200 for that chainsaw, and the other is you who are handed this chainsaw as your main tool. So you can either use it because you're all "in this together", "part of the same team", etc... or you can put it on your shelf and let the overspender fold his arms and glare at you.

Sam's in a great position here. Imagine if he goes against the FO and takes a flier on one of the unconventional setups that are dreamed up here. Let's say we put a guy in left that's never played there, and he's horrible. Pitchers lose confidence, Patterson tears a knee trying to get to a ball that shouldn't be his, the losses pile up.... Sam's just screwed.

But to stay positive, I think it'll shake out as the season goes on. I think we'll have a lot of different lineups.

[DrungoHazewood]

And the whole "Perlozzo or Front Office -- who is to blame for Payton Playing Time", this is my opinion. If the FO wants to waste $9.5 million for an average LF who should really only be playing against LHP, then that's their problem. But I, as a manager, am playing my best guys (in certain situations) no matter what their salaries are.

That's what Davey or Earl would do. But since Perlozzo is Angelos' yes man, then I guess we have to get used to watching Payton play LF 5 times a week.

Exactly right, and it reminds me of my favorite Earl story.

When Earl was managing Rochester they had a guy who was a corner infielder. Don't know his name, don't care. But this guy was a terrible third basman. Ok at first, but a butcher at third. The O's brass wanted this guy to play third. Earl wanted to win games. He knew this guy playing third was a disaster, and was going to cost him wins.

So, in the era long before the internet and long before cable tv and box scores in USA today, Earl fudged it. The Red Wings were responsible for sending the Orioles box scores and reports on a regular basis, and Earl made sure they transposed the 1B and the 3B in everything to make it look like this guy was playing third when he was actually at first. He lived in fear for months that someone would figure him out and fire him. I guess he played the guy at third when O's scouts were in town, but at first the rest of the time.

Earl Weaver wanted to win so much that he put his career on the line rather than do something he knew was counterproductive. Even in AAA. His two years in Rochester the team finished first and second.

I'm 100% certain Sam Perlozzo would have just put the guy at third base and been content with 83 wins.

[Moose Milligan]

^^^^ That's a great story. Wish there were more Earl Weaver's in baseball today.

[ScottieBaseball]

For the first time in years, the O's clearly identified areas of dire need early in the off-season (1B, LF, and the bullpen), established a plan, and followed through with it. Payton and Huff are upgrades. I've seen tons of scenarios in which players are platooned based on the opposing pitcher. I think it looks fantastic and logical on paper, but when you add in the human element (emotions, attitudes, etc.) it's not a realistic situation. Simply put, it's bad for team chemistry and clubhouse morale, two areas this team reportedly has had issues with over the last few years. If there is just one other team on which a guy feels he would start full-time, he's not going to be happy. I also feel that some folks who are saying Perlozzo labeling some guys starters is a mistake are the same people who would complain about a $10 million role player.

Before a single ball is hit in anger or thrown with any significant meaning, some of us have already labeled this team as destined for disappointment? Perlozzo's already messed up? How about we let the manager see if providing Jay Payton with a full-time gig might help him work through his shortcomings at the plate? Why don't we wait and see if Aubrey Huff's downfalls aren't dwarved in comparison to the positives he brings to the table? Why don't we wait and see if Perlozzo adjusts and tweaks as necessary when things are going according to plan? I won't dispute facts, but it seems to me people are going out of their way to find ways to support their prediction that this team will fail with the current plan in place.

I just see this general mindset repeated here that, even if it looks like things are working out come July, there will be a contingent of fans on this board that will be predicting the team's downfall 'any game now'. If we make it through the season with any amount of success with Perlozzo's plan, it'll be labeled a fluke. I can see it now..."Yeah, but see HE didn't hit well against lefties just like I predicted!" That ignores the fact that you kept a guy in the lineup regularly, something that (with very few exceptions) most hitters will tell you makes it easiest to be consistently productive and to work through slumps.

Taking into consideration all of the responsibilities and obligations of a manager, I think Perlozzo's decision to give Jay Payton the majority of the starts in LF is a good move.

[ScottieBaseball]

Exactly right, and it reminds me of my favorite Earl story.

When Earl was managing Rochester they had a guy who was a corner infielder. Don't know his name, don't care. But this guy was a terrible third basman. Ok at first, but a butcher at third. The O's brass wanted this guy to play third. Earl wanted to win games. He knew this guy playing third was a disaster, and was going to cost him wins.

So, in the era long before the internet and long before cable tv and box scores in USA today, Earl fudged it. The Red Wings were responsible for sending the Orioles box scores and reports on a regular basis, and Earl made sure they transposed the 1B and the 3B in everything to make it look like this guy was playing third when he was actually at first. He lived in fear for months that someone would figure him out and fire him. I guess he played the guy at third when O's scouts were in town, but at first the rest of the time.

Earl Weaver wanted to win so much that he put his career on the line rather than do something he knew was counterproductive. Even in AAA. His two years in Rochester the team finished first and second.

I'm 100% certain Sam Perlozzo would have just put the guy at third base and been content with 83 wins.

If he didn't, he'd be fired. Managing a major league baseball team is not the ideal occupation for putting your agenda (even if it's as noble a cause as winning) ahead of the organization's. I can't believe I just said that but it's true. I don't agree with it, but times have changed.

I think it's great what Earl did, though.

[Moose Milligan]

For the first time in years, the O's clearly identified areas of dire need early in the off-season (1B, LF, and the bullpen), established a plan, and followed through with it. Payton and Huff are upgrades. I've seen tons of scenarios in which players are platooned based on the opposing pitcher. I think it looks fantastic and logical on paper, but when you add in the human element (emotions, attitudes, etc.) it's not a realistic situation. Simply put, it's bad for team chemistry and clubhouse morale, two areas this team reportedly has had issues with over the last few years. If there is just one other team on which a guy feels he would start full-time, he's not going to be happy. I also feel that some folks who are saying Perlozzo labeling some guys starters is a mistake are the same people who would complain about a $10 million role player.

Before a single ball is hit in anger or thrown with any significant meaning, some of us have already labeled this team as destined for disappointment? Perlozzo's already messed up? How about we let the manager see if providing Jay Payton with a full-time gig might help him work through his shortcomings at the plate? Why don't we wait and see if Aubrey Huff's downfalls aren't dwarved in comparison to the positives he brings to the table? Why don't we wait and see if Perlozzo adjusts and tweaks as necessary when things are going according to plan? I won't dispute facts, but it seems to me people are going out of their way to find ways to support their prediction that this team will fail with the current plan in place.

I just see this general mindset repeated here that, even if it looks like things are working out come July, there will be a contingent of fans on this board that will be predicting the team's downfall 'any game now'. If we make it through the season with any amount of success with Perlozzo's plan, it'll be labeled a fluke. I can see it now..."Yeah, but see HE didn't hit well against lefties just like I predicted!" That ignores the fact that you kept a guy in the lineup regularly, something that (with very few exceptions) most hitters will tell you makes it easiest to be consistently productive and to work through slumps.

Taking into consideration all of the responsibilities and obligations of a manager, I think Perlozzo's decision to give Jay Payton the majority of the starts in LF is a good move.

I agree wholeheartedly.

However, I'm sure the stat fellas will be here shortly to tell you how wrong you are

[JTrea81]

I guess the real issue is with the O's FO. We have upgraded LF with Payton over Fahey/Conine/Rogers/Tatis etc, but we set our sights on Carlos Lee and wound up with Jay Payton when there were other options out there. Aubrey Huff was thought by many on this board to be the next acceptable step down from Lee given the options that were left, but now as many are realizing in reality it is Jay Payton after all. This is a major dissapointment with the FO this offseason. They could have done better than Jay Payton for LF. They get a B for the 1B solution but a D for LF.

[rolliefingers]

The only problem I have with that is Payton's weak history against LHP. He just hasn't hit them well.

But, I'm OK with trying this experiment as long as there is a contingency plan. Someone like Knott or Dubois - who have histories of hitting lefties well - should be on the roster if the "Payton against LHP" experiment fails. I don't see a problem with trying it. But, saying this is the plan and sticking to it if it fails is a mistake.

You mean RHPs. Payton hits LHPs better than RHPs, like most RH hitters do.

[Fan4Life]

The only problem I have with that is Payton's weak history against LHP. He just hasn't hit them well.

But, I'm OK with trying this experiment as long as there is a contingency plan. Someone like Knott or Dubois - who have histories of hitting lefties well - should be on the roster if the "Payton against LHP" experiment fails. I don't see a problem with trying it. But, saying this is the plan and sticking to it if it fails is a mistake.

Actually Payton hits LH pitching ok.. RH pitching is where I think were are concerned. Most of us believe he should platoon with Patterson, pinch hit, and come in as a defensive repalcement late in games. At least that's what I think many of us think....

[Dr. FLK]

You mean RHPs. Payton hits LHPs better than RHPs, like most RH hitters do.

Yeah, I butchered that. Thanks for correcting me.

[JTrea81]

This is the lineup vs. RHP most of us want to see with the current cast of players:

2B Roberts

3B Mora

RF Markakis

SS Tejada

LF Huff

C Hernandez

1B Gibbons

DH Millar

CF Patterson

and this is what Perlozzo wants:

2B Roberts

3B Mora

RF Markakis

SS Tejada

1B Huff

C Hernandez

DH Gibbons/Millar

LF Payton

CF Patterson

So to put Payton's .718 OPS in the lineup on a regular basis you subtract Gibbons' .825 or Millar's .845 OPS. It just doesn't make sense to weaken the lineup that much.

[Dr. FLK]

1. Yep. The Orioles actually made some moves this year. I think they've generally been applauded but does that mean we should accept every single move as a good one?

2. Payton and Huff are upgrades. My aunt Martha would have been an upgrade in LF.

3. Funny how the O's can't platoon because of egos on a team that's lost 9 years in a row but other teams find a way.

4. The O's made the mistake of signing Payton for 2/9.75. Now it's to be argued that a guy making that much can't be a part-time player. They painted themselves into this corner but it doesn't mean we have like it.

5. Chris Gomez had a good quote today. I paraphrase. If you accept your job it's really not that difficult to prepare yourself to do it. That goes for backups, platoons, and guys who say they can't DH.

I really liked the article on Gomez today. He seems to have a fantastic attitude towards preparation, and its good see guys respect him for it. Hopefully that attitude can become contagious, because it seems like this team as a whole could use an attitude overhaul. I'm not saying that every player has a bad attitude. But, I'd like to see everyone embracing their role and having fun out there, which seems to be exactly what Gomez does.

[Ohfan67]

1. Yep. The Orioles actually made some moves this year. I think they've generally been applauded but does that mean we should accept every single move as a good one?

2. Payton and Huff are upgrades. My aunt Martha would have been an upgrade in LF.

3. Funny how the O's can't platoon because of egos on a team that's lost 9 years in a row but other teams find a way.

4. The O's made the mistake of signing Payton for 2/9.75. Now it's to be argued that a guy making that much can't be a part-time player. They painted themselves into this corner but it doesn't mean we have like it.

5. Chris Gomez had a good quote today. I paraphrase. If you accept your job it's really not that difficult to prepare yourself to do it. That goes for backups, platoons, and guys who say they can't DH.

Interesting stuff. I really like that Gomez quote.

The O's did upgrade at 1B with Huff and Payton over the disasters they had out in LF last year. But the O's seemed to have repeated one of their big mistakes from last year...they have too many players who are similar. Gibbons, Millar, and to some extent Huff are basically redundant in many ways. They are 1B/DH guys and Millar and Gibbons aren't even really productive 1B/DH type hitters. Very similar to Conine/Millar situation from last year. I actually think signing Payton was not a bad move if used correctly as others suggested (replacement for Patterson against LH pitching, defensive replacement in left, etc.). He's going to play more than we would like but that's because the other "options" are actually very mediocre or incredibly limited in the ability to play defense. The real problem for me is the seemingly complete lack of foresight in resigning Millar when you have Gibbons on the team and a high probability of landing someone like Huff who's a decent hitter but limited in the field. I guess in all likelihood Gibbons will be on the DL for part of the year and that will make DH/1B less crowded/less redundant.

[Sports Guy]

Why is platoon a 4 letter word to the Orioles?

RZ made a great point....Why are we so worried about egos on a team that hasn't had a winning record since 1997?? Should we be worried about egos or wins??

[mweb]

Not sure why any of this is surprising to people.

- We had a hole at 1B ... so we signed a corner IF who is known more for his bat that his glove. (Huff) Yet we're surprised that he's going to get most of his AB's at 1B??

- We had a hole in LF ... so we spent almost $10 Mil. on an OFer. (Payton) Yet we're surprised that he's going to get most of the playing time in LF??

- Jay Gibbons is 30 years old and has really only had one healthy season since joining the Orioles ... yet we're surprised the team won't guarentee him a position or playing time??

- We trade for a player w/ no options (Bynum), take a rule V pick (Donachie) who himself is blocked by an even worse FA signing at the same position (Bako), trade for ANOTHER V pick (Guthrie) and retain a FA (Millar) who, though he performed well offensively, really isn't good defensively at any position ... yet we're surprised that guys like Penn, Knott, DuBois, House, Burres, etc. will all probably spend most of the year in Norfolk??

- Seems like this team hasn't platooned anyone since at least the early 90's when Angelos bought the team ... yet we're surprised they don't seem warm to the idea of platooning CF, LF, 1B AND DH??

It's not surprising at all, this was very predictable, it's just frustrating.

And to expand on this, we re-signed Millar this offseason, you guys seem to like to ignore that. So he was kept to play 1st and DH, Huff was brought in to play some first, some OF, maybe some 3rd, and some DH. Payton was brought in to play LF and CF. When you insert Millar into that equation, there isn't an obvious hole at 1st/DH for Huff to fill. And not to long ago, it was believed that Huff would play quite a bit in LF and Payton would be the 4th OF. So I guess I don't see this "we signed a LF to fill the hole in left and we signed Huff to fill the hole at 1st" argument.

And again, it's not about being surprised, not sure why that keeps being brought up.