Buck praises Davis for error allowing 2 runs to score

[Why Not?]

There is zero benefit to trashing Davis or any other player in a post-game presser. 

[DirtyBird]

Just now, Why Not? said:

There is zero benefit to trashing Davis or any other player in a post-game presser. 

There is some place in between "trashing" and "making excuses for".

[Why Not?]

Just now, DirtyBird said:

There is some place in between "trashing" and "making excuses for".

True. But nothing on that spectrum is going to help the team win more games, which is Buck's job. 

[DirtyBird]

1 minute ago, Why Not? said:

True. But nothing on that spectrum is going to help the team win more games, which is Buck's job. 

You can say that for pretty much any single decision or comment by a manager. But the comment is a reflection of how Buck handles "his guys" and a big reason the team is in a free fall.

[Uli2001]

8 hours ago, Aglets said:

Buck certainly seems to very rarely criticize his players in public.  And I'm sure that's probably why the players seem to usually like him.  It also makes the few times he does openly criticize players (Mountcastle or recently Tillman) more notable.

If Chris Davis went 0-5 with 5 K's and an error and Buck was asked about it in post-game I would expect him to point out some other play that he made in the game that was 'super important' or whatever to try and build him up.

It's just the way he is, and the way he always will be.  Get ticked off about it if you choose.

The problem with this approach is that it generates a lack of accountability. And the other players notice it. That's not how a leader operates. 

[Why Not?]

14 minutes ago, DirtyBird said:

You can say that for pretty much any single decision or comment by a manager. But the comment is a reflection of how Buck handles "his guys" and a big reason the team is in a free fall.

I disagree wholeheartedly. What Buck says to the press and how he deals with players in the clubhouse are not the same. If Buck thought hanging a guy out to dry in the papers would make somebody play better, he would probably do it. But that's fantasy. I disagree with the notion that the Orioles would be playing better if Buck said different things in his press conferences. 

[Why Not?]

3 minutes ago, Uli2001 said:

The problem with this approach is that it generates a lack of accountability. And the other players notice it. That's not how a leader operates. 

You don't know what conversations are going on in the clubhouse. Neither do I, but I'm pretty sure Buck addresses things differently in his office than in the press room. 

[DirtyBird]

2 minutes ago, Why Not? said:

I disagree wholeheartedly. What Buck says to the press and how he deals with players in the clubhouse are not the same. If Buck thought hanging a guy out to dry in the papers would make somebody play better, he would probably do it. But that's fantasy. I disagree with the notion that the Orioles would be playing better if Buck said different things in his press conferences. 

What part do you disagree with? Do you know how Buck deals with players in the clubhouse? 

[theocean]

2 minutes ago, Uli2001 said:

The problem with this approach is that it generates a lack of accountability. And the other players notice it. That's not how a leader operates. 

I think the entire clubhouse knows they're all gone in a month. I'm fine with Buck sweet talking Davis if that means it keeps his confidence up enough that he won't look down the third base line when he's at bat.

But once the Trade Deadline sell-off happens and the kids are up on the MLB team - Buck, or whoever is in charge, better damn sure they start a new culture of accountability. They cannot let the current apathetic clubhouse culture rub off on the new players. Chris Davis' attitude and play is the biggest representation of what is wrong with the clubhouse right now.

 

[foxfield]

1 minute ago, Uli2001 said:

The problem with this approach is that it generates a lack of accountability. And the other players notice it. That's not how a leader operates. 

I think this is what bothers most everyone here.  The fact that there seems to be no one holding anyone accountable.  The Yankees and Redsox fired their managers last year after success.  Some teams when things go the other way fire a pitching coach or a hitting coach or a bull pen coach.  Hell we keep comparing this year to 1988 and in 1988 the Orioles fired their manager after 6 games.

 

All of that said, I don't think Buck was making excuses as much as he was trying to deflect.  Of course, I wish he could have said it better:  "Chris' play hurt but it was a tough play and he made other plays that helped us out there.  Of course if we cant score any runs what difference does it matter if we play defense or pitch.  Baseball requires you to hit, play defense and pitch and we just don't do all three well enough to have success.  We have to do better in almost every aspect of the game." 

[Why Not?]

10 minutes ago, DirtyBird said:

What part do you disagree with? Do you know how Buck deals with players in the clubhouse? 

I disagree with the notion that criticizing players publicly is helpful. 

None of us know what goes on in Buck's office. But I think it's safe to assume the conversations are different than what we see post-game. I don't think you manage at the highest level for 20 years otherwise. 

[atomic]

A lot of plays the press questions Buck about he says he didn't' see. Whatever management ability Buck had is gone.  The guys in the bullpen used to say they liked how Buck used him and didn't warm them up unless he put them in the game.  He warms them up two or three times now without putting them in the game.  Guys who we are trying to showcase so that they can be traded.  He doesn't care. Pitch them 3 out of 4 games and the game they dont' get in warm them up 3 times. And then you wonder why the guy has a bad night on the 4 game.

 He is so fixated on I can't put this guy in unless we have a lead.  Or is it a save situation. 

[DirtyBird]

Just now, Why Not? said:

I disagree with the notion that criticizing players publicly is helpful. 

None of us know what goes on in Buck's office. But I think it's safe to assume the conversations are different than what we see post-game. I don't think you manage at the highest level for 20 years otherwise. 

I never said it was helpful. I said that you can point to just about every single comment or action, and say that the single action doesn't impact wins/losses. But, those individual comments are likely a reflection of the culture as a whole.

[pastorfan]

13 hours ago, amdcpus said:

 “It was a ball off the end of the bat. It had a funny spin to it. Last second, I had a good look, it dipped down. Tribute to Chris, he came back and made a real nice play on another tough ball. Balls up here, when you’re looking at defenders, Manny and Jon talked about it when they first came up, about balls having more topspin, there’s a lot more. That’s a play that Chris normally makes, but you can see how it would happen. What really cost us was not scoring any runs.”

I'm speechless. . . i guess it is true that "you have what you tolerate."

[O's84]

12 hours ago, Bonecrusher52 said:

This has to be one of the funniest things posted on OH.