A few nuggets....

[BaltimoreTerp]

Don't you see how different what you've typed here is from what you're advocating? Never mind. Clearly you don't. I made it very, very clear in several different responses here but you refuse to see it. Lets just agree to disagree.

All you've made clear is that you don't agree with the assertion that as fans of the team we have the right to know what is being done to fix mistakes made by the team.

So, yeah, let's agree to disagree, I guess.

[Lucky Jim]

I don't agree. I think we find out changes have been made when Tejada gets traded. I think we find out changes have been made when Hernandez is benched for several games as he was last September. Same with Mora.

I think DT can give us information, but it shouldn't be personalized. I just think that is off limits. We covered this earlier and we were on the same page.

"I'm going to play Ramon less often because he looks tired to me" is OK.

"Ramon isn't playing because he is lazy" isn't OK.

I just don't think we have the right to know the inside workings of the team JUST because we pay admission to see them play. We can demand changes, but we can't demand insider knowledge of how these changes occur. We're not entitled to that much IMO.

Honestly, this is ridiculous. We obviously [edit: don't] disagree enough to keep this up. Personal insults are uncalled for. Objective discussion of performance? Part of the managers job. Everything falls along a continuum. Can't judge it before it happens.

[BaltimoreTerp]

I'll try... although, since you're a lawyer, and since one factor that helped shape standard legal language is that lawyers used to charge by the word, I'm not so sure why you care about the word count ;-)

Since I know you're a lawyer, and since you used words like "client" and "firm" (rather than "John" and "prostitution ring ;-), I assumed you were referring trying to equate our relationship to the Orioles with a client's relationship with a law firm. Now, the latter relationship is a matter of somebody paying fees for professional legal representation and related work that the client has a lot of stuff riding on. So, if a lawyer screws up, it can cost the client years in jail, or a zillion bucks, or the loss of access to his kids, or whatever might be at risk.

Being a baseball fan is nothing like that. Most folks here were watching the game on TV. So, it's kinda like saying we're "clients" of The Daily Show, or Letterman or Leno, or whatever. So, let's just say we're "clients" of Seinfeld. You wanna draw comparisons between whether or not Kramer's being funny and whether you screw up a contract you're writing for a client and thereby leave him open to God knows what? I don't think so...

As for this whole idea of "being accountable", I think that's just used around here as a code word for "punish the bastards". If we take "accountability" at face value, then I think DT is all about accountability. I don't know any other manager who seems more about that than him. But punishment? Not so much.

ps: 275

You are forgetting that there were plenty of fans at the game, that most of us get to games at least a couple times a year, that we spend money on licensed items (some of which makes it back to the team), etc. Not to mention that the reason the games are even on TV is to make money through advertising (with us as the target demographic). We are all patrons of the business that is the Baltimore Orioles.

I think that accountability and punishment go hand-in-hand. Now, that doesn't mean that players should be publicly whipped, literally or figuratively (through the media), but if all a player will get for a mistake is a good talking-to, then what incentive do they have to not repeat the mistake?

Especially guys with long-term deals like Mora and Hernandez, who also seem to be the ones making the more-egregious errors.

[Lucky Jim]

I'll try... although, since you're a lawyer, and since one factor that helped shape standard legal language is that lawyers used to charge by the word, I'm not so sure why you care about the word count ;-)

Since I know you're a lawyer, and since you used words like "client" and "firm" (rather than "John" and "prostitution ring ;-), I assumed you were referring trying to equate our relationship to the Orioles with a client's relationship with a law firm. Now, the latter relationship is a matter of somebody paying fees for professional legal representation and related work that the client has a lot of stuff riding on. So, if a lawyer screws up, it can cost the client years in jail, or a zillion bucks, or the loss of access to his kids, or whatever might be at risk.

Being a baseball fan is nothing like that. Most folks here were watching the game on TV. So, it's kinda like saying we're "clients" of The Daily Show, or Letterman or Leno, or whatever. So, let's just say we're "clients" of Seinfeld. You wanna draw comparisons between whether or not Kramer's being funny and whether you screw up a contract you're writing for a client and thereby leave him open to God knows what? I don't think so...

As for this whole idea of "being accountable", I think that's just used around here as a code word for "punish the bastards". If we take "accountability" at face value, then I think DT is all about accountability. I don't know any other manager who seems more about that than him. But punishment? Not so much.

ps: 275

Here's the wikipedia post for Class Action.

Get back to me when you've finished reading it. (Or don't.) But, before you want to lecture me on the ins-and-outs of litigation, make sure you actually know what you're talking about.

[Lucky Jim]

OK, cool, I wasn't trying to get you upset. I think we actually mostly agree. We just don't concur on the public vs private argument. We can let it go. I was honestly just enjoying the discussion.

Yeah, but Shack is here now. So Godzilla needs to stop fighting your pesky fighter jets and turn his aggression onto Mothra. (I'm kidding.)

[Lucky Jim]

OK, cool, I wasn't trying to get you upset. I think we actually mostly agree. We just don't concur on the public vs private argument. We can let it go. I was honestly just enjoying the discussion.

I do get fired up - but not upset (usually). It's amazing how the only time I can focus on anything is in a meaningless argument over subtle distinctions. Thank God I found my calling.*

*Post on message boards, obviously. Though maybe the law, too.

[Guest rochester]

Here's the wikipedia post for Class Action.

Get back to me when you've finished reading it. (Or don't.) But, before you want to lecture me on the ins-and-outs of litigation, make sure you actually know what you're talking about.

Ughhhh... after 11pm on a Friday night... I feel like I just went back a few years, sitting in a crappy bar in DC with either staffers or lawyers surrounding me.....:cussing:

[Sports Guy]

Just got home from the game and read through this thread...Here are my thoughts:

Things I dislike about DT:

1) He is all talk IMO...He says things, values things but doesn't back them up through his actions.

2) BP usage still isn't that good IMO.

Those are my 2 biggest issues....I think people treat him on here as if he is some kind of incredible manager and when you question him, the normal response of "you think you know better?" comes out, which is of course an idiotic thing to say.

That being said, he is overall an excellent manager and it would be incredibly stupid to choose someone else over him right now. He is the biggest difference in this team IMO.

I am ok with not extending him but you have to bring him back next year.

On Sherrill:

2 ML ready guys is doable IMO but I would hope the Orioles would be flexible on that...For example, if the Dodgers offered DeJesus and LaRoche, i would hope they would take that deal.

Hernandez:

Offer him to the Marlins..Pay 75% of his deal.

On Bradford and Hall:

End of the day, I would prefer Hall on this team over Bradford but I would prefer something else instead of MelMo Jr.

[RShack]

Here's the wikipedia post for Class Action.

Get back to me when you've finished reading it. (Or don't.) But, before you want to lecture me on the ins-and-outs of litigation, make sure you actually know what you're talking about.

Well, aren't we touchy?

Touchy, touchy, touchy...

(In sailor parlance, they call that being "tender".)

Leave it to a lawyer to bring up class action lawsuits re: how DT does or doesn't talk about Ramon.

This is getting better and better ;-)

[allstar1579]

Wow...long thread. Things you miss when you actually go to the game I suppose.

If DT is gone, the only person I will accept as replacement is Davey Johnson

Hall +1 for Bradford is a good deal, better if MelMo wasn't blocking where he would play here, but the LAD can offer MUCH better from their deep farm system.

[Mad Mark]

Jesus Christ himself couldn't manage this collection (OR lack) of talent to a .500 season. I don't know why it is so hard to comprehend. This last thing AM needs to be worrying about is his manager. We are about 10 major leaguers away from having a competitive team, and until he gets those players or some develop, that is what he needs to be focused on. All this bickering about DT is kind of crazy. We just don't have that much talent.

JC had trouble with the curveball, as well.

[Mad Mark]

What I want to know is why he's calling out the rookie pitcher on the pitch selection and not the veteran catcher who was also involved in other poor plays in the game? I don't have a real strong opinion about calling Hernandez out publicly... I do kind of think that in his case some of the issues have risen to the level where it might need to be escalated to public humiliation, but on the other hand at times I think Trembley has made a bit too much of a public thing about it when what he really needs to do is quietly play Quiroz more... but I can't for the life of me understand why he frequently tears down young pitchers for throwing the wrong pitches and doesn't mention their veteran catcher who is calling them.

My guess? The organization isn't trying to trade these young pitchers, and after a full season (or thereabouts) with them, DT knows who can take it and who can't. Olson strikes me as a guy who is smart enough, and grounded enough, to take it...and likely had worse things to say about his own performance after Thursday's game.

[RShack]

What I want to know is why he's calling out the rookie pitcher on the pitch selection and not the veteran catcher who was also involved in other poor plays in the game?

Beats me, but I'd guess maybe part of it is that he and Olson agree about it, he's not saying anything Olson wouldn't say. But I'm just making that up, I don't know. However, I have seen Olson do a good job in other situations of nailing exactly how he screwed up. (Which is one reason I'm confident Olson's gonna get over the hump before too long.)

I bet DT feels more comfortable cuffing the kids around, and I bet the kids are more comfortable taking it from him. (I'm making that up too ;-)

[Lucky Jim]

Well, aren't we touchy?

Touchy, touchy, touchy...

(In sailor parlance, they call that being "tender".)

Leave it to a lawyer to bring up class action lawsuits re: how DT does or doesn't talk about Ramon.

This is getting better and better ;-)

You're so predictable. Thinly-veiled insult. Change subject rather than acknowledge own limitation.

You're a class act. Your actions are - needless to say - chock full o' class.

[TGO]

Beats me, but I'd guess maybe part of it is that he and Olson agree about it, he's not saying anything Olson wouldn't say. But I'm just making that up, I don't know. However, I have seen Olson do a good job in other situations of nailing exactly how he screwed up. (Which is one reason I'm confident Olson's gonna get over the hump before too long.)

I bet DT feels more comfortable cuffing the kids around, and I bet the kids are more comfortable taking it from him. (I'm making that up too ;-)

Trembley has consistently been very hard on Olson specifically, probably because he thinks that's what Olson needs.