Cafardo: Showalter losing the clubhouse

[wildcard]

47 minutes ago, Going Underground said:

Maybe Francona will lose the clubhouse next year. Brought in Verlander in relief and he gave up a two run homer to the first batter. Boston now ahead.

I'm confused.  Francona is with Cleveland, Verlander is with Houston.  And Boston is ahead

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

I'm confused.  Francona is with Cleveland, Verlander is with Houston.  And Boston is ahead

No wonder Francona will lose the clubhouse -- he can't even tell which city it's in!

[OFFNY]

1 hour ago, Going Underground said:

 

Maybe Francona will lose the clubhouse next year. He brought Verlander in relief, and he gave up a two-run homer to the first batter that he faced. Boston now ahead.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Larry18 said:

 

Francona manages a different team.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

 

I'm confused. Francona is with Cleveland, Verlander is with Houston. And Boston is ahead.

 

o

 

I think that in his exuberance of rooting against both the Yankees and the Red Sox, he mixed up the two managers that are opposing said teams in the 2017 ALDS (Francona and Hinch.)

I think that he meant to (facetiously) say that Hinch would lose the clubhouse because of him bringing in Verlander, who proceeded to give up the 2-run home run which gave the Red Sox the lead in the game, which could have potentially cost the Astros the game.

 

o

[Enjoy Terror]

9 hours ago, Ruzious said:

You answered your own question.  If Buck has a more talented team, they don't lose, and this tiresome BS... about losing the clubhouse never comes up.  

No. Buck has a talented team. That’s the problem.

[ArtVanDelay]

2 hours ago, OFFNY said:

 

 

 

 

o

 

Fine.

Disregard "pouting and dragging their feet." 

We'll use your words, and your assertion.

What are you implying when you say that the team "May have turned on Showalter" after the Wildcard game loss last October, and how exactly could a team that tuned on their manager could have started the next season at 22-10? 

 

And if they are professionals, as you also assert, why would said professionals turn on their manager because of a bad decision that he made in a single-game elimination playoff? Pouting and dragging their feet is unprofessional and overly-dramatic, but turning on their manager because of a bad decision in a playoff game from the previous season is reasonable behavior from said professionals?

 

o

I’m saying it’s possible the players started having doubts about Showalter after the WC game and it could’ve eventually snowballed into something bigger.  Over the course of the season.  I don’t think the 22-10 start has anything to do with that.  This is speculation on my part.  I’m not in the locker room.  I was responding to a poster that seemed to think it was totally ridiculous that the clubhouse could turn on him.  I don’t think that’s the case.  I’m not stating anything as fact. 

[OFFNY]

2 hours ago, OFFNY said:

o

Fine.

Disregard "pouting and dragging their feet." 

We'll use your words, and your assertion.

What are you implying when you say that the team "May have turned on Showalter" after the Wildcard game loss last October, and how exactly could a team that tuned on their manager could have started the next season at 22-10? 

 

And if they are professionals, as you also assert, why would said professionals turn on their manager because of a bad decision that he made in a single-game elimination playoff? Pouting and dragging their feet is unprofessional and overly-dramatic, but turning on their manager because of a bad decision in a playoff game from the previous season is reasonable behavior from said professionals?

o

 

 

16 minutes ago, ArtVanDelay said:

 

I’m saying it’s possible the players started having doubts about Showalter after the WC game and it could’ve eventually snowballed into something bigger.  Over the course of the season.  I don’t think the 22-10 start has anything to do with that.  This is speculation on my part.  I’m not in the locker room.  I was responding to a poster that seemed to think it was totally ridiculous that the clubhouse could turn on him.  I don’t think that’s the case.  I’m not stating anything as fact. 

 

o

 

That supposition of that possibility is extremely flawed.

You are suggesting that the players could have turned on Showalter after his bad decision in last year's Wildcard game in October, and then you are dismissing the 22-10 start in April and early May as having nothing to do with that turning on him ...... but somehow, the Orioles' eventual demise later in the 2017 season could have been the result of a snowballing effect of negative thought which originated with the Wildcard game loss from the previous season.

There is no continuity/logic to your suggestion of that being a possibility.

 

o

[weams]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

I'm confused.  Francona is with Cleveland, Verlander is with Houston.  And Boston is ahead

And it is Farrell who lost his clubhouse!

[tntoriole]

30 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:

No. Buck has a talented team. That’s the problem.

This is pretty amusing.   "Talented" except for the worst starting pitching rotation in Orioles history.   I just have a different definition of "talented."  I reckon.  

[OFFNY]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

 

I'm confused. Francona is with Cleveland, Verlander is with Houston. And Boston is ahead

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, weams said:

 

And it is Farrell who lost his clubhouse!

 

o

 

Farrell (the current Red Sox manager), Francona (the former Red Sox manager and current Indians manager), Farrell's Red Sox vs. the Astros in one series, Francona's Indians vs. the Yankees in the other series ........ all of this information is kind of blending together in my mind to the point of which I actually have to google their names before I make a post to make sure that I don't say something erroneous. No wonder why Going Underground misspoke. ) 

 

o

 

[Luke-OH]

31 minutes ago, OFFNY said:

 

 

o

 

That supposition of that possibility is extremely flawed.

You are suggesting that the players could have turned on Showalter after his bad decision in last year's Wildcard game in October, and then you are dismissing the 22-10 start in April and early May as having nothing to do with that turning on him ...... but somehow, the Orioles' eventual demise later in the 2017 season could have been the result of a snowballing effect of negative thought which originated with the Wildcard game loss from the previous season.

There is no continuity/logic to your suggestion of that being a possibility.

 

o

I'm not going to go in depth on the speculation of "losing the clubhouse" regarding Buck and the Orioles.  I'm sure if something happened, it'll eventually come out.

However, I will talk about locker rooms and sports teams in general, it's never one thing that makes the troops lose faith in the commander.  One thing can put doubt in your mind, but it takes repeated questionable behavior (whether the treatment of athletes, favoritism, lack of communication, or perceived bad coaching maneuvers).  From my personal experience, the worst thing a coach/manager can do is playing favorites, giving more playing time, more favorable treatment to players for reasons other than performance/ability.  That is like at work when the crappy employee who kisses up gets promoted over the more deserving employee, everyone hates that, even if they aren't personally involved.  That can ruin morale and club/company culture.  

I think it's completely plausible that players felt like Buck acted in some of those ways I mentioned above as the season went on and hit rough patches.  Again, I think it's silly to try and conclude something happened either way without more evidence.

[OFFNY]

17 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

 

This is pretty amusing. "Talented" except for the worst starting pitching rotation in Orioles history. I just have a different definition of "talented."  I reckon.  

 

o

 

I think that the Orioles' core of position players are talented, but as you state, the starting pitching at-large being historically bad ...... combined with the subsequent overuse of a bullpen which was already in dire straits with the loss of Zach Britton to injury for half the season ...... were by far the largest factors in the team's sub-par 75-87 season.

Chris Davis and Mark Trumbo having very underwhelming seasons on offense were additional factors.

 

o

[tntoriole]

2 minutes ago, OFFNY said:

o

 

I think that the Orioles' core of position players are talented, but as you state, the starting pitching being historically bad (combined with the subsequent overuse of the bullpen) is easily the best explanation for the team's sub-par 75-87 season.

 

o

I agree.   By "core" you mean Machado, Schoop and ?....Jones is getting older every year, Davis and Trumbo have very narrow talents which vary from year to year...Mancini is a beast,  right field has not been good since Markakis was young (maybe Hays is the answer which would be good, but we shall see)...Cisco is unproven, Caleb is a backup catcher.....I am not sold on Beckham as the 162 game shortstop of the future......so,  the pitching was awful, and the core to me has a lot of variability in it though it is much better than the starting pitching in quality...the position players as a whole could be very good, or they could be mediocre too, but either way, this team will not compete without a major improvement in the starting pitching rotation.    And a hunk of that position core, i.e. named Manny, is gone after 2018.      

[24fps]

1 hour ago, ArtVanDelay said:

I’m saying it’s possible the players started having doubts about Showalter after the WC game and it could’ve eventually snowballed into something bigger.  Over the course of the season.  I don’t think the 22-10 start has anything to do with that.  This is speculation on my part.  I’m not in the locker room.  I was responding to a poster that seemed to think it was totally ridiculous that the clubhouse could turn on him.  I don’t think that’s the case.  I’m not stating anything as fact. 

Actually I don't think it's ridiculous that the clubhouse could turn on him under a certain set of circumstances, but I don't think that happened after the wild card game debacle or at anytime during the 2017 season.  I think the September collapse was a combination of physical exhaustion and the psychological effect of realizing that an opportunity was lost.  Natural human response to a situation not requiring anyone to blame.

My original post was a response to a type of modern journalism I that detest and completely lack respect for.  For reasons of his own, Cafardo throws out an open-ended question and the reader naturally wonders if there's a legitimate reason for asking it other than to simply stir the pot.  Well, if somebody in Cafardo's position is asking it, then there must be something to it, right?  Insiders (whoever they might be) are asking.  Well we fancy ourselves as smart enough to be insiders, right?   Players (whoever they might be) are telling their agents (whoever they might be) and before long this shadowy telephone game has become an article of faith well on its way to becoming conventional wisdom.

I'll refer back to my second post and make this point again.  I think it's useful to try and imagine what would have to first happen or be true for any open-ended question like this to have any veracity.  I don't think Cafardo's little adventure into speculation about the Orioles clubhouse meets even the loosest standard.

[OFFNY]

48 minutes ago, OFFNY said:

o

 

I think that the Orioles' core of position players are talented, but as you state, the starting pitching at-large being historically bad ...... combined with the subsequent overuse of a bullpen which was already in dire straits with the loss of Zach Britton to injury for half the season ...... were by far the largest factors in the team's sub-par 75-87 season.

Chris Davis and Mark Trumbo having very underwhelming seasons on offense were additional factors.

 

o

 

 

37 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

 

I agree. By "core" you mean Machado, Schoop and ?....Jones is getting older every year, Davis and Trumbo have very narrow talents which vary from year to year ...... Mancini is a beast,  right field has not been good since Markakis was young (maybe Hays is the answer which would be good, but we shall see)...Cisco is unproven, Caleb is a backup catcher ..... I am not sold on Beckham as the 162 game shortstop of the future......so,  the pitching was awful, and the core to me has a lot of variability in it though it is much better than the starting pitching in quality...the position players as a whole could be very good, or they could be mediocre too, but either way, this team will not compete without a major improvement in the starting pitching rotation. And a hunk of that position core, i.e. named Manny, is gone after 2018.      

 

o

Aside from Machado, Schoop, and the aging Adam Jones, I think that Tim Beckham, Chris Davis, Trey Mancini, Austin Hays (and even current free agent Seth Smith) are talented. Some players put those talents to consistent use year in and year out, and some are erratic.

 

Prior to this season, Jonathan Schoop had a career .283 on-base percentage. If somebody had asked me one year ago whether or not I thought that Schoop was talented, I would have considered him to be talented, but not-yet-proven to be a consistent offensive force (but very good on defense.)

 

o

[Enjoy Terror]

2 hours ago, tntoriole said:

This is pretty amusing.   "Talented" except for the worst starting pitching rotation in Orioles history.   I just have a different definition of "talented."  I reckon.  

Here are some 2014-2016 Stats for you compared to 2017:

Chris Tillman:  3.99 ERA has  7.84 ERA this year. Underperformed.
Wade Miley:  4.68 ERA has a 5.61 ERA this year. Underperformed.
Ubaldo Jimenez: 4.72 ERA has a has a 6.81 ERA this year. Underperformed.
Kevin Gausman: 3.77 ERA has a 4.68 ERA this year. Underperformed.
Dylan Bundy: 4.02 ERA has a 4.24 ERA. Underperformed.
Jeremy Hellickson: 4.18 ERA had a 5:43 ERA this year. Underperformed.
Brad Brach: 2.61 ERA has a 3.18 ERA this year. Underperformed.
Zach Britton: 1.38 ERA has a 2.89 ERA this year. Underperformed.
Darren O'Day: 2.02 ERA has a 3.43 ERA this year. Underperformed.

This is 73% of the innings pitched this season. This squad had a combined 3.84 ERA spanning 2014-2016 just over 3000 innings.

They pitched to a 5.19 ERA in a little over 1000 innings this year.

Don't even begin to tell me this team isn't "talented". Don't even go there. This is an incredibly talented team making a ton of money and you had 73% of your innings this year combining for more than five earned runs a game. This is the meat of the team and they are capable of much better than this.