Buck Showalter seems agitated....

[Il BuonO]

6 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

As far as Machado to SS it's simple.... Buck doesn't believe, and I agree that Tim Beckham is not a ML SS, so Manny is the only option.

Meh, I’ve softened on this a bit. Beckham has all the skills of a ML SS. Maybe he needs the assurance of knowing he’s the guy and a whole season of reps. 

If they move Machado to SS to placate him without any possibility of signing him it’s a mistake.

Of course, I think he’s the better option long term.

[interloper]

I think Manny at SS will largely be a mistake. Though I'll happily be wrong. 

[foxfield]

1 hour ago, Il BuonO said:

Meh, I’ve softened on this a bit. Beckham has all the skills of a ML SS. Maybe he needs the assurance of knowing he’s the guy and a whole season of reps. 

If they move Machado to SS to placate him without any possibility of signing him it’s a mistake.

Of course, I think he’s the better option long term.

Agreed!

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Il BuonO said:

If they move Machado to SS to placate him without any possibility of signing him it’s a mistake.

I believe Beckham at SS and Manny at 3B is likely to be our best alignment, and that it makes sense to leave Beckham at SS since he’ll be here for three years and we really need to find out if he can play the position.   

However, I also believe that if Buck decides to move Manny to SS, it’s because he believes Manny will be materially better there than Beckham, and that Buck wouldn’t do it merely to “placate” Manny.

[Tx Oriole]

2 hours ago, foxfield said:

I don't know, maybe it is the uncertainty that we, or I, have as a fan.  But Buck seems different.  His comments are murky and philosophical as ever, but there seems to be an edge to them and I am reading this as an expression of dissatisfaction with multiple phases of the current Oriole make up.  Below are just a couple of tidbits from items read this week along with my thoughts on said comments.  What say you?

Jan 20, 2018, Roch had this to say regarding Moustakas:  

I’ve written that the Orioles discussed free agent third baseman Mike Moustakas, in case his market led to a reduction in years and dollars, but they don’t seem committed to pursuing him.

“But you could lose your draft pick. Would you do that?” Showalter said Thursday night on 105.7 The Fan.

Nothing major here except the juxtaposition of Roch making repeat of his "Orioles discussed..."  Showalter seemingly questioning it openly.  Typical Buck might have said, we are doing everything we can to improve our team and we will be ready to roll.

Jan 22, 2018 Rock had these notes from Buck in discussing defense and keeping Santander 44 days:  “We weren’t as good as we’ve been in the past and I’ve talked to Dan (Duquette). I think we’ve gotten away from that. Defensively, we took a step back and it’s going to be a real point of emphasis physically and if you want to call it spiritually or whatever. We’re going to make sure we understand that’s something we have got to get back to and especially in some areas where we’re not as good as we have been. Especially with a pitching staff that doesn’t strike out a lot of people. Believe me, if they can’t defend ...We’re talking about Santander, he’s capable of it. He’s not bad. I just want to get a real feel for what we can count on, because you don’t carry Rule 5 guys if they don’t play in the American League East. They’re going to be on the field.”

In the same piece, in reference to Hays:  Roch notes that Hays isn’t likely to be the everyday right fielder breaking camp because he bats from the right side and he’s played only 20 games above Double-A. His time is coming, though.  Showalter’s opinion of Hays defensively?

“A little bit of a riverboat gambler,” he said. “It’s not particular fluid and smooth, but he’s aggressive, he’s not afraid to dive, he’s going to throw well. But I think sometimes more is not always better and he’s trying to impress.  “I think when his clock slows down a little bit, if it will, he will be a little better. But he was running on all cylinders when he came up last year and he should be. I understand that. But also, I’ve got a feeling that’s just him. I don’t think you’re going to see him really back off a lot. But he’s going to need to learn how to live to fight another day every once in a while.”

So, I don't disagree with anything above, but the way Buck speaks here is not the way he speaks about his guys, and pointedly it corners Santander and Hays as guys he thinks are not helpful, for the teams needs today.  Roch has noted several times that Hays doesn't work as the everyday RF because he is a right-handed bat.  But in this same piece he alludes that Buck would prefer to get Gentry saying Buck trusts his defense.  Of course Gentry like Hays and Rickard is a right-handed bat.

Finally, Machado/Beckham situation seems odd.  At least to me.  Buck acknowledges he knows what he wants to do and has spoken to both players.  Then he mentions that Beckham has worked in multiple spots even the outfield.  Well, doesn't that mean Manny is your SS?  I don't know how to take it any other way, and I do not understand why the Orioles would do this without locking Manny up.  Is Buck trying to get JJ Hardy back?  Is he trying to force PA to buck up some cash?  IDK...

I just see some subtle cracks and while DD and Buck have certainly had different opinions before, I am seeing more daylight between them.  Whether that is real or something I am creating remains to be seen.  But if so, its not healthy regardless of how long either/both of them remains.

 

 

If DD and Buck allow a player to tell them what position he plays then I've lost all hope for this organization. I will sure be glad when Buck and DD are gone. 

 

[CP0861]

I've heard Buck flip the script on interviews many times when he'll pose the question back to the person asking.  "What would you do?"  "Would you do that?"  That's just Buck making the point that it's not always as easy as it sounds. It's easy to ask questions, but it's not necessarily easy to actually MAKE those decisions. 

[Tx Oriole]

2 hours ago, Yardball85 said:

I think he said all of these things during the interview on the Hot Stove show.  I think it is typical Buck speak, with maybe a sprinkling in of cynicism.  

Double talk. 

[Tx Oriole]

1 hour ago, Il BuonO said:

Meh, I’ve softened on this a bit. Beckham has all the skills of a ML SS. Maybe he needs the assurance of knowing he’s the guy and a whole season of reps. 

If they move Machado to SS to placate him without any possibility of signing him it’s a mistake.

Of course, I think he’s the better option long term.

If he gives in to Manny. Then that's a case of the animals running the zoo. This organization is so out of touch. 

[Number5]

8 minutes ago, CP0861 said:

I've heard Buck flip the script on interviews many times when he'll pose the question back to the person asking.  "What would you do?"  "Would you do that?"  That's just Buck making the point that it's not always as easy as it sounds. It's easy to ask questions, but it's not necessarily easy to actually MAKE those decisions. 

I agree.  For instance, I don't think he was saying he would be opposed to giving up a draft pick to sign a needed player.  I believe he was alluding to the fact that he hears this being asked all the time.

[Aristotelian]

3 minutes ago, Tx Oriole said:

If he gives in to Manny. Then that's a case of the animals running the zoo. This organization is so out of touch. 

It may be more of a case of not being sold on Beckham as a SS. If Beckham shifts to utility, they could sign a SS or a 3B and it wouldn't be to placate Manny.

I actually think Beckham's skills would play quite well in the outfield if he can catch the ball.

[foxfield]

Just now, CP0861 said:

I've heard Buck flip the script on interviews many times when he'll pose the question back to the person asking.  "What would you do?"  "Would you do that?"  That's just Buck making the point that it's not always as easy as it sounds. It's easy to ask questions, but it's not necessarily easy to actually MAKE those decisions. 

Yes this is common for Buck to do.  And of course it is not easy.

1 minute ago, Tx Oriole said:

If DD and Buck allow a player to tell them what position he plays then I've lost all hope for this organization. I will sure be glad when Buck and DD are gone. 

 

This concerns me and is probably the underlying reason I started this thread.  I cant get my head around moving Manny to SS if he is leaving.

[Il BuonO]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I believe Beckham at SS and Manny at 3B is likely to be our best alignment, and that it makes sense to leave Beckham at SS since he’ll be here for three years and we really need to find out if he can play the position.   

However, I also believe that if Buck decides to move Manny to SS, it’s because he believes Manny will be materially better there than Beckham, and that Buck wouldn’t do it merely to “placate” Manny.

And that makes sense, but even though I agree he’s materially better there I don’t think it’s a good choice given the long term implications with a guy they have traded for and control for the next three seasons.

How much more value do they have with Machado at SS? It’s not enough in my view to displace Beckham this year with the hopes he can either move back there in the future or become comfortable at a position with which he has little ML experience.

[Il BuonO]

39 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

It may be more of a case of not being sold on Beckham as a SS. If Beckham shifts to utility, they could sign a SS or a 3B and it wouldn't be to placate Manny.

I actually think Beckham's skills would play quite well in the outfield if he can catch the ball.

Agreed

[Frobby]

6 minutes ago, Il BuonO said:

And that makes sense, but even though I agree he’s materially better there I don’t think it’s a good choice given the long term implications with a guy they traded for and have under control for the next three seasons.

How much more value do they have with Machado at SS? It’s not enough in my view to displace Beckham this year with the hopes he can either move back there in the future or become comfortable at a position with which he has little ML experience.

I tend to agree with you on all this. But if Buck has the opposite opinion, I can live with it, so long as he’s not doing it merely to mollify Manny.    

[jtm]

3 hours ago, foxfield said:

Well, this is why I posted the topic.  I said I dont know and reading the words the tone seems different than what I typically read.  Frobby said it was Buck sending a message...but typically when he does that his words are more encouraging.  

I did not catch the interview, and clearly took all of my notes from Roch...thanks for putting more context into this, and I will try to listen to a replay.  The words read harshly and that's why I brought it here.  And to be fair, Roch noted Buck's comments on his own status and I did not use them...

Lastly, my own feelings of Buck as a manager is I want him to stay.  I am not as certain I want him as GM.  He has a lot of power already and does not get held accountable in that way...perhaps fully in the role he would excel.  The items he seems to have had the most influence on while here...not so much.

Again, thanks for adding.

Sure.  And I hope my reply didn't come off as snarky.  I merely wanted to shed some light on the actual context as I heard it.  Honestly I tuned in to the interview out of boredom, but actually after hearing Buck, I came away feeling really good about the direction and vision at least one person in power in this organization has.