Extend Dan and Buck... Now

[tntoriole]

18 hours ago, Satyr3206 said:

I don't want this to sound wrong so take it with a grain of salt. Analytics are stats. Most statistically oriented GM's have never played the game. There has to be a middle ground.

Not sure what you mean by “playing the game?”  I would be very happy with Andrew Friedman Dodgers who broke his hand playing in college baseball and that was the extent of “playing the game”  or Dan Duquette who played some at Amherst College and that was it.   If playing the game in college is all that is required, I would qualify too.    But I would rather the Orioles have a Houston Astros Jeff Luhnow who never played baseball ever but sure as heck did the best rebuild in recent history. 

  .

[foxfield]

I have always felt that whether Brady helps or hurts the O’s, there is absolutely no room to question his motive. He loves the Orioles and wants it to succeed. Of that, I have no doubt whatsoever. 

I do think a loosely defined role and reporting structure work against the team. I consider Brady and Buck the same way. I have no problem if they are gone and will be just fine If they stay. 

The issue is that they have to be hired by and report to a GM. I don’t think a new GM will keep both and we won’t get a good GM who has his top lieutenants supplied by ownership. I would not expect DD to retain both either. 

Of course I have read many things in the past 10 days or so about the Orioles that are a surprise. I am pretty optimistic about the future and can’t wait to see the possibilities unfold. 

And yes there is that feeling that says what could possibly go wrong...it’s the Orioles. But I am excited to see what’s next. 

So what’s next?

Imagine

 

[esmd]

I can't quite get on board with this - yet.  I want to see how Duquette handles any remaining trades this month and next, and I want to see if Mesa is signed.  If that that happens, by all means, bring DD back.

Buck (who I admire quite a bit), I'm not sure of.  I dunno, three months ago I was sure Buck would be back and DD had one foot out the door.  And I was fine with that.  Now what's up was down.  I still believe, as flawed as this team, is, their talent level isn't THIS bad.  Lose 90-100 games?  Sure.  Lose 110-115 (or more)?  Nope, not buying that.  Just about every single player on this team other than Manny has played well below what they should, other than maybe Gausman and Jones, not that they've been great by any means.  Davis, Schoop, Mancini, Beckham, Brach, Cobb, etc., have just been awful for all or a significant part of the season.  You can explain some of that away to injury, but in general, it's like they got off to the bad start, they saw the ship going down, and all collectively gave up.  At what point does at least some of that fall on the manager?  I dunno, like I said, I'm a big fan of the guy.  His hire legitimized this organization in a way that was lacking since Davey Johnson, and ushered in the best period of sustained success since they won the WS in '83.  I just don't know if he's the right guy to be in the dugout for this rebuild or not.

[Bradysburns]

7 hours ago, wildbillhiccup said:

I think you might be in the minority on this. If he had worked his way up through system (degree or no degree) I would have a much higher opinion of him. But he went straight from MLB player to Special Assistant to the Executive President of Baseball Operations and a year later Vice President of Baseball Operations. That's a pretty big leap. Going back to your Casserly comparison, he started out as a scout and worked his way up the ladder. Brady was gifted his position, he didn't earn it. He hasn't earned anything. 

The thing that REALLY irked me was when it sounded like Brady was whispering in players' ears, telling them the coaching staff was bad for them, and they should listen to... Brady! Why? Because he's Brady, dude! That's why! 

No thanks.

Again, if a real GM came in and decided he wanted to mentor Brady for a few years, etc., that'd be different. But it seems like Brady took the private Peter Angelos elevator to the top floor. 

Could I be totally off-base here? Could Brady really be a modest, lunchpail, grinder, my-entire-life-is-becoming-a-GM guy? Sure? I haven't seen evidence of that yet. 

Mind you, I loved Brady as a player. He was amazing. And he was here during our last truly dominant (if short-lived) run. But this is a whole different matter. 

[Bradysburns]

Thanks, mods, for the title change! 

[Bradysburns]

7 hours ago, wildbillhiccup said:

I know you're being sarcastic, but he didn't exactly work his way to the top. It's more like he took the express elevator. 

LOL - you beat me to that analogy. I just used the same analogy before having read your post.

Again, I'm the furthest thing from a Brady hater (hence my handle). 

But having abs and overseeing an MLB franchise in massive flux are two very different things. 

[Eddie_Murray33]

Assuming- as I do- there’s no one materially better available- that would also come to BAL- personally I would keep both DD and Buck. At least we would get some benefit from a continuity/stability POV- and both these guys have seen some champagne sprayed in our locker room (if not the be all end all party we all want). Are their reps dinged up a bit for what’s gone on the last 20 mos.? Sure- but at least they have reps to “ding”.