So... why DID they let the contracts run until the end?

[Cumberbundy]

16 hours ago, weams said:

The industry talk was that both Dan and Buck were given consideration until the team absolutely tanked. I think after taking a macro view that they felt the need to clean house. At 85 or 95 losses. Or even less than 100, they may have kept Dan at the least. Buck was too expensive really to have been considered and that is what you could question them on if you wish. Why not cut him loose at the All Star break.  I'm happy enough the way it worked. 

When we win it all, we need to make sure that each member of the August/September 2018 Orioles gets a ring for their service. 

 

#NeverForget

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, weams said:

I read somewhere that it was touch and go with Duquette until the end. Dunno. 

May have been, but we needed a clean slate.   

[Cumberbundy]

1 hour ago, weams said:

Post Season is a crapshoot. 

That’s why you trade your best prospect for a couple months of a set up man. Difficult to reconcile those considerations. 

[JimGinSP]

I saw Tony post in another thread where he thought Brian Graham considered himself safe for another year.   I didn’t realize that meant he was under contract for another year.   Roch slipped that fact into his blog earlier this week.  So there was at least 1 person actually “fired”.

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2018/12/more-minors-hyde-and-mancini.html

14 hours ago, atomic said:

Keeping them until the end destroyed their careers.  I cant see either getting a similar position again.

It Is more likely, in the current MLB environment, that Buck and Dan’s ages (62 & 60) will have more impact on their future career growth than the Orioles 2018 performance. However I have a feeling that if the Nationals get off to a slow start, Buck might be a top choice for replacing Martinez.  

[Frobby]

24 minutes ago, JimGinSP said:

I saw Tony post in another thread where he thought Brian Graham considered himself safe for another year.   I didn’t realize that meant he was under contract for another year.   Roch slipped that fact into his blog earlier this week.  So there was at least 1 person actually “fired”.

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2018/12/more-minors-hyde-and-mancini.html

It Is more likely, in the current MLB environment, that Buck and Dan’s ages (62 & 60) will have more impact on their future career growth than the Orioles 2018 performance. However I have a feeling that if the Nationals get off to a slow start, Buck might be a top choice for replacing Martinez.  

The Nats have done well under crusty older managers.    I think Buck would be a great choice for the Nats if Martinez isn’t getting it done.    But I think they’ll be patient with Martinez.   

[Number5]

36 minutes ago, Frobby said:

The Nats have done well under crusty older managers.    I think Buck would be a great choice for the Nats if Martinez isn’t getting it done.    But I think they’ll be patient with Martinez.   

Perhaps, but I think an argument could be made that they have actually underperformed.  They sure had a boatload of talent, but ended up with not a whole lot to show for it.

[Frobby]

10 minutes ago, Number5 said:

Perhaps, but I think an argument could be made that they have actually underperformed.  They sure had a boatload of talent, but ended up with not a whole lot to show for it.

Put it this way: other than Matt Williams’ first year, the Nats have always struggled or underperformed under younger managers.   And interestingly, their hires have basically alternated between younger and older (Robinson, Acta, Riggleman, Johnson, Williams, Baker, Martinez ).  

[Just Regular]

I'm rooting for Buck to the Nats just for the spectacle of it all both here and there, and imagine there will be an enormous drumbeat from the Nationals fandom if Martinez flunks again.  But the owners don't like to pay managers, and I believe Rizzo is solidly on Team Middle Manager in his view of the role.  Buck is not...like that.  It would be great theater seeing the interplay.

I would not be sad if Buck got a ring with the 2020 Nats as we came towards the end of our Strasburg-Harper path. 

[hoosiers]

It is difficult to get too critical of how things played out because of who we ended up with - Elias is best case scenario IMO.  I don't mind the deliberate search or hiring guys after some other teams have acted.  And, especially with Buck, if we were to hire a manager with time left on Buck's contract, well, just carry them both and you don't have to officially fire Buck - which is really IMO what everyone wanted.

I do have an issue with what appears to have been a PA policy to let the GM work until the end of the contract.  If the GM were okay and performed at least competently, then perhaps not so bad to let the guy work until the end of the term. However, the Os have had some bad GMs like Thirft and IMO Duquette who should have been fired long before the contract was to end.  This is really poor policy that would be considered a bad practice in most every place in the business world and similar places.  Underperformed need to be cut loose and better replacements hired asap.  It is mind-boggling that PA allowed Thrift to work that final year with a poor major league club and a mediocre farm system and I feel the same way about last year with DD - the major league team was light years behind (in the AL at least) the Astros, Red Sox, Cleveland and NYY at least (and it was known on OD) and, in retrospect, we are way behind Tampa on the major league roster and minor league systems as well.

Anyway, I hope this policy doesn't continue - poor performers need to be cut loose asap.

[Obando]

The Astros didn’t hire Jeff Luhnow to be their GM until early December 2011, and he officially hired Sig Mejdal & Mike Elias in early January 2012.  Those were his only true outside hires in his first year as GM (with a few exceptions, such as Mike Fast in Analytics) and then starting in 2013, he began clearing out the old Astros front office personnel and bringing in his own people, including David Stearns to be his assistant GM.  That’s what I expect to happen here as well.  Elias has already brought in Sig to be his assistant GM, but otherwise, I don’t expect him to make any wholesale front office changes until next offseason, when he’ll have a full offseason to conduct business.  Getting off to a late start doesn’t help, just as it won’t help Hyde with putting together his ideal coaching staff, but this is not unprecedented by any means, with the 2012 Astros being the perfect example.

[weams]

7 hours ago, Cy Bundy said:

That’s why you trade your best prospect for a couple months of a set up man. Difficult to reconcile those considerations. 

A total the time, they did not think he was the best at all  had had quite a tough year  also  stars do make a difference   At that time Miller was a star  

 

[Can_of_corn]

8 minutes ago, weams said:

A total the time, they did not think he was the best at all  had had quite a tough year  also  stars do make a difference   At that time Miller was a star  

 

At the time of the trade would anyone have ranked him above Bundy and Harvey?

[Orioles West]

When Dan tried to bolt to the Jays, I recall Peter Angelos emphasizing a deal was a deal. My thought was, the only reason the family kept him around to the last day was to honor their side of the deal.

There were plenty of reports about them scouting around and 'researching' the best way to rebuild. 

Based on the size and scope of the changes underway, it made sense to me either way. Whether it was to buy more time to figure out their next move or simply to finish the contract they required him to finish.

I'm more surprised Buck made it to the end, but am fine with that too. It wasn't like an interim manager was going to make a dent in the win column with that roster.

[weams]

59 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

At the time of the trade would anyone have ranked him above Bundy and Harvey?

No. Not. He had a very tough season in 2014. Even in the Spring. A lefty named Tim was ahead of him.