Baltimore Baseball: O's rebuild should include Buck

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Wow.  That is a big declaration by you.

What if Buck was told in late May, early June to lose to position the O's in the draft?

I'd say he's been doing a hell of a job and there is the door.

[Frobby]

Just now, wildcard said:

Wow.  That is a big declaration by you.

What if Buck was told in late May, early June to lose to position the O's in the draft?

I don’t believe that happened.   And I would have fired Buck by late May, early June.

I want to make it clear, it’s nothing against Buck.    Sometimes teams just get tired of their manager’s approach after a while.    Buck’s been here 8 years.   That’s a long run, and I think the team has tuned him out.    Time to shake things up.  

[wildcard]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I don’t believe that happened.   And I would have fired Buck by late May, early June.

 

The O's were 10 games out of the wild card on May 2nd.  It got worse from there.  By late May it was obvious that the O's were not going going to turn in around in 2018.   If they were not going to win then wouldn't it have been a smart move tell Buck to lose to get the better draft position.

If Buck was told to lose, you can't blame him for that.  He is following orders.

[Roll Tide]

8 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I don’t believe that happened.   And I would have fired Buck by late May, early June.

I want to make it clear, it’s nothing against Buck.    Sometimes teams just get tired of their manager’s approach after a while.    Buck’s been here 8 years.   That’s a long run, and I think the team has tuned him out.    Time to shake things up.  

You could argue that the roster turnover would serve the same purpose, No?

[Frobby]

15 minutes ago, wildcard said:

The O's were 10 games out of the wild card on May 2nd.  It got worse from there.  By late May it was obvious that the O's were not going going to turn in around in 2018.   If they were not going to win then wouldn't it have been a smart move tell Buck to lose to get the better draft position.

If Buck was told to lose, you can't blame him for that.  He is following orders.

You are really clutching at straws.   Managers aren’t told to lose.   

[wildcard]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

You are really clutching at straws.   Managers aren’t told to lose.   

So there is not such thing as tanking?

[Frobby]

12 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

You could argue that the roster turnover would serve the same purpose, No?

Yes, it’s occurred to me that with Jones, Manny, Schoop, Gausman, O’Day, Britton and Brach all gone next year, as well as some other spare parts, Buck would be preaching in part to a new audience.    That’s why I won’t totally freak out if he is retained.    But, personally I’d change the messenger.   

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

So there is not such thing as tanking?

Tanking is accomplished by putting together noncompetitive rosters, not by sabotaging the team in games.

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, wildcard said:

So there is not such thing as tanking?

Tanking is not accomplished by the manager trying to lose games.

[maybenxtyr]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Tanking is accomplished by putting together noncompetitive rosters, not by sabotaging the team in games.

Right. They assembled this roster with the intent on being competitive. They're not going to switch gears in a month and a piece and say, "go on and lose as many as possible". 

If they did say that and Buck didn't step down right away, I would lose respect for him and the organization.

[wildcard]

14 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Tanking is not accomplished by the manager trying to lose games.

What?

Leaving starters in to allow 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 even 10 runs.

Putting rookie relievers in key innings with the game on the line.

Having rookie relievers pitch back to back games for the first time in key innings.

Sending your most experienced  catcher to the minors just as he is hitting for an 808 OPS in his last 8 games.  Replacing him with a guy would is fresh off the DL and is not hitting well yet.

Knowing that the team needs runs and that the Trumbo hits for an  850 OPS in right field and a 700 OPS at DH but seldom playing him in right.  Instead playing Santander, Peterson and Valencia in right.

[maybenxtyr]

Just now, wildcard said:

What?

Leaving starters in to allow 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 even 10 runs.

Putting rookie relievers in key innings with the game on the line.

Having rookie relievers pitch back to back games for the first time in key innings.

Sending your most experienced  catcher to the minors just as he is hitting for an 808 OPS in his last 8 games.  Replacing him with a guy would is fresh off the DL and is not hitting well yet.

Knowing that the team needs runs and that the Trumbo hits for an  850 OPS in right field and a 700 OPS at DH but seldom playing him in right.  Instead playing Santander, Peterson and Valencia in right.

Somebody has to pitch. Rookies, or starters...they have to cover 9 innings regardless.

Trumbo provides zero value as a fielder. 

This isn't this hard. 

Caleb is a good backup catcher. That's it.

[wildcard]

1 minute ago, maybenxtyr said:

Somebody has to pitch. Rookies, or starters...they have to cover 9 innings regardless.

Trumbo provides zero value as a fielder. 

This isn't this hard. 

Caleb is a good backup catcher. That's it.

Trumbo hitting 850 has value.  Especially when Santander, Peterson and Valencia are playing right.

Its not that the rookies pitch.  Its when the rookies pitch.

Leaving starters in the give up that many runs?

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Trumbo hitting 850 has value.  Especially when Santander, Peterson and Valencia are playing right.

Its not that the rookies pitch.  Its when the rookies pitch.

Leaving starters in the give up that many runs?

Trumbo's play in the outfield severely diminishes any value his bat provides.

[foxfield]

11 minutes ago, wildcard said:

What?

Leaving starters in to allow 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 even 10 runs.

Putting rookie relievers in key innings with the game on the line.

Having rookie relievers pitch back to back games for the first time in key innings.

Sending your most experienced  catcher to the minors just as he is hitting for an 808 OPS in his last 8 games.  Replacing him with a guy would is fresh off the DL and is not hitting well yet.

Knowing that the team needs runs and that the Trumbo hits for an  850 OPS in right field and a 700 OPS at DH but seldom playing him in right.  Instead playing Santander, Peterson and Valencia in right.

Im not sure exactly what you are angry about.  Starters that cannot pitch 3 innings?  Rule V guys that don't work?  Rookie pitchers getting experience when the club is 40 games out?  Sending Caleb down?  You are actually arguing the team is better off with Trumbo playing everyday as a RF.  I honestly don't get it.

Trumbo is certainly better if he plays and hits.  The fact that he cannot is a reason to move him.  And of course now that the season is ruined he should play and hit everyday because it increases the chances that he can be moved if the Orioles pay most or all of his salary.

The team has under performed almost across the board.  Bad roster, bad injuries, bad weather bad...just bad.  Here is the thing...I don't care who pitches.  I dont care who plays RF.  I mean of course I do care.  But what I want is to know what are we trying to do?  When we "were going for it" it looked like a pretty half assed attempt to me.  Sort of let's give it a shot since we have everyone here anyway.

But now, honestly the only thing I care about is who is in charge of a plan.  Period.  The Orioles have done some good things and its pretty easy to get behind the idea that can nd will get better from here.  But honestly, I cannot tell what you want.  But Im pretty sure that whatever it is, Caleb Joseph and Mark Trumbo are not getting it for you.