Buck's Winning Record As O's Manager Could Be In Jeopardy

[wildbillhiccup]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

Exactly.  

BUT OH MY GOD WE NEED TO FIRE BUCK!!!! 

Know what?  I'd like to see Buck get fired tomorrow so people can get what they want and then realize that it didn't move the needle at all.  Just to make a point.

The only reason I can see to fire Buck is if he continues to play Davis,Valencia, Alvarez, Trumbo, etc. over the younger players.  It's time to let them play and see who sticks. 

[Moose Milligan]

1 minute ago, wildbillhiccup said:

The only reason I can see to fire Buck is if he continues to play Davis,Valencia, Alvarez, Trumbo, etc. over the younger players.  It's time to let them play and see who sticks. 

While I'd like to agree, we both know that Davis and Trumbo get at bats no matter what.  I don't like it either, but their dollars and their contracts matter.  Sad, but true.

I'm not high on our young players but I'd like to see them up at some point.  Valencia and Alvarez have no future here.  If Mullins and Stewart have another good month they should both be up.  

[atomic]

2 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Because the manager doesn't make a difference.  So knowing that, why do you care if Buck IS fired?  It's been studied up and down, when it comes to day to day pulling strings and making decisions, the manager makes a negligible difference.  

Again, I asked a question that you dodged.  What manager would you have picked up a month ago and how much better would they have steered this roster?

 

What does this even mean?

It should be up to DD to pick the manager.  He is supposed to be the GM.  If the manager doesn't make a difference why do you care so much.  I know Mancini doesn't belong in left field and I know Machado doesn't belong at Short.  I know Davis never should have been lead off hitter and we shouldn't have 5 DH/First Basemen on the team or have started the season with 3 rule 5 guys. Those are bad decisions by Buck.  It is said in the press he controls the 25 man roster.  He didn't think a utility infielder was important and chose more DHs.  I am sure he was instrumental in Tillman being on the team. 

You never post anything useful and are just 100 percent negative except towards Buck. 

[O's84]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Mike Trout as player manager.

+WAR as a player, +WAR as a manager for buying the whole team Sweet Onion Chicken Teriyaki Subs.

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, atomic said:

It should be up to DD to pick the manager.  He is supposed to be the GM.  If the manager doesn't make a difference why do you care so much.  I know Mancini doesn't belong in left field and I know Machado doesn't belong at Short.  I know Davis never should have been lead off hitter and we shouldn't have 5 DH/First Basemen on the team or have started the season with 3 rule 5 guys. Those are bad decisions by Buck.  It is said in the press he controls the 25 man roster.  He didn't think a utility infielder was important and chose more DHs.  I am sure he was instrumental in Tillman being on the team. 

You never post anything useful and are just 100 percent negative except towards Buck. 

Right on man, thanks for the props.  I'm actually trying to figure out what your proposed solutions are, yet you keep hopping up and down and just want Buck fired.   So AGAIN...WHO WOULD YOU PICK AS YOUR REPLACEMENT FOR BUCK IF HE WERE FIRED TOMORROW?  Do you have names or are you just going to continue to whine and complain about Buck?  Provide some names man, is it that hard?  And you say I never post anything useful?  

The thing is that I don't disagree with anything that you posted!  You're 100% right!  DD should pick the manager, but I wasn't asking DD, I was asking YOU!  You want Buck fired SO bad, yet you have no offered no realistic proposal as to who you'd like to see instead and your thoughts as to why that manager would do better than what we currently have.  What are you proposing?  You seem to have some modicum of intelligence because you are right about everything you just wrote.  The thing for me is that the roster sucks, and if Buck picked it, fine.  But it's not like it was picked at the expense of other clearly more qualified players.  Tillman, for example...I didn't want him on the roster anymore than you did but who was the option for that rotation spot out of ST, Mike Wright?  Pretty much a wash, he's terrible, too.  Davis should never have batted leadoff, but that was well over a month ago, so what?  Mancini doesn't belong in LF, you're not wrong!  I hate Rule 5 guys, too!   But, IIRC, DD picks the Rule 5 guys so Buck's gotta live with them.  

If I don't post anything useful, I'm not sure what you post.  If you can't see why I'm so negative about this team then you haven't been paying attention.  In the grand scheme of things, Buck being fired tomorrow or at the end of the year doesn't make any difference when this team is owned by the same old terrible fartknocker, has a paper thin farm system, absolutely no international scouting presence, 130 million owed to a first baseman who's got a .491 OPS, a pretty crappy rotation, an overrated bullpen and blew significant chances to trade Manny and Britton....and you're wondering why I'm ambivalent about Buck?  And you're wondering why I'm negative?  Dude, was anything in that list I just rattled off not true?  Is there any reason to be positive about this dumpster fire of a franchise?  

 

[mdbdotcom]

8 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm pretty stat happy but I don't even agree with that.

There's a new generation of managers and coaches that work closely with their front office personnel, using data to analyze and improve player performance. They translate the raw numbers into information the players can grasp, often in the form of video. The coaches work directly with the players to effect positive change based on the findings of the data. Managers who have not embraced the use of data to improve performance in this way have been left behind by guys like Hinch, Kapler and Cora. Buck's time is over. I see no reason to fire him now or during the season, but I also see no reason to bring him back.

[VaBird1]

10 hours ago, atomic said:

Why?  I don't think Buck will get another managerial job.  The game has passed him by.  First Full year last place finish.  Last two years last place.  That will lead to a losing record overall.

I think the game has caught up, not passed him by.  The whole league is the 2014 Orioles now.  High strike out, high home run.  Pull your starter early and rely on your bullpen.  The Orioles didn’t look for something new and others now do it better.  But it was him who did it first and the Orioles were mocked for it by the national media.

[Can_of_corn]

36 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

There's a new generation of managers and coaches that work closely with their front office personnel, using data to analyze and improve player performance. They translate the raw numbers into information the players can grasp, often in the form of video. The coaches work directly with the players to effect positive change based on the findings of the data. Managers who have not embraced the use of data to improve performance in this way have been left behind by guys like Hinch, Kapler and Cora. Buck's time is over. I see no reason to fire him now or during the season, but I also see no reason to bring him back.

I understand all of that.  

Actually being able to manage all the personalities and lead is still important.  At certain junctures you will have to put aside the numbers for the human element since the numbers are often tiny gains at the margins.

[Dark Helmet]

You live by the sword...you die by the sword.

[Moose Milligan]

30 minutes ago, birdwatcher55 said:

If he doesn't step down for health or family reasons, I see him getting kicked upstairs or kept on like the Sox are doing with LaRussa. Either way, Russell runs the last six weeks of the season.

He doesn't deserve to be upstairs if he's going to vouch for guys like Davis and Tillman.

[wildbillhiccup]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

I understand all of that.  

Actually being able to manage all the personalities and lead is still important.  At certain junctures you will have to put aside the numbers for the human element since the numbers are often tiny gains at the margins.

I think you sort of inadvertently made an argument against keeping Buck. Yes analytics comes into play, but I think a lot of these teams are hiring younger managers because they can better relate to (and manage) younger players. Best of both worlds. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, wildbillhiccup said:

I think you sort of inadvertently made an argument against keeping Buck. Yes analytics comes into play, but I think a lot of these teams are hiring younger managers because they can better relate to (and manage) younger players. Best of both worlds. 

I'd not look to retain Buck's services after this season.

My point was, as much as I'd like it to be otherwise, you do have to have someone that can deal with the players on a personal level and adjust strategy with the players in mind.  If you best player is going to sulk if he's not hitting third, just let him hit third.

[mdbdotcom]

2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I understand all of that.  

Actually being able to manage all the personalities and lead is still important.  At certain junctures you will have to put aside the numbers for the human element since the numbers are often tiny gains at the margins.

Managing the personalities and leading is still essential, and players seem to have embraced their new-generation managers, for the most part.

[wildbillhiccup]

30 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'd not look to retain Buck's services after this season.

My point was, as much as I'd like it to be otherwise, you do have to have someone that can deal with the players on a personal level and adjust strategy with the players in mind.  If you best player is going to sulk if he's not hitting third, just let him hit third.

I agree, but I'd also be fine with them firing Buck, and installing an interim manager, just to send a message. Much like we criticize Chris Davis for not making adjustments, the same can be said for Buck. 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

I agree, but I'd also be fine with them firing Buck, and installing an interim manager, just to send a message. Much like we criticize Chris Davis for not making adjustments, the same can be said for Buck. 

I wouldn't go on a tirade about it.  I just don't think whomever they named now would be the manager next year so I don't think there is much point to it.