Jump to content

Who is filling out the lineup?


wildcard

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, eddie83 said:

Maybe it’s just me but if I am Elias the last thing I am worried about is lineup construction. Let Hyde learn  on the job. A benefit of not expecting to be any good is that it allows for more growth on the job without cost.  

I agree. I do not expect Hyde to be micro managed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

What has always been the nadir of a good manager was how he built relationships with his players.  How he communicated there roles and prepared them for the upcoming game or series.  This was Buck’s biggest asset.  I don’t believe Elias and the front office will do anything to hamstring the manager from building this relationship with his players.  I believe with Hyde , Elias believes he has an individual who can balance information up and down the chain without damaging those relationships.  Time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

I don't have time to post what I want to now but...

The O's had a organizational framework when Earl was managing.   Dalton, Cashen or Peters as GM acquired that players and Earl played them. 

Earl's index cards were part of why he was ahead of the game in his day.  On a certain level, Sig is just making really good index cards here.

Maybe even so good that faces are turning to alabaster because, well, Sting said it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Woody Held said:

What has always been the nadir of a good manager was how he built relationships with his players.  How he communicated there roles and prepared them for the upcoming game or series.  This was Buck’s biggest asset.  I don’t believe Elias and the front office will do anything to hamstring the manager from building this relationship with his players.  I believe with Hyde , Elias believes he has an individual who can balance information up and down the chain without damaging those relationships.  Time will tell.

U8e38EI.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, OrioleDog said:

Earl's index cards were part of why he was ahead of the game in his day.  On a certain level, Sig is just making really good index cards here.

Maybe even so good that faces are turning to alabaster because, well, Sting said it.

I think most sabermetricians would reject Earl’s cards on the “small sample size” theory.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Earl didn't interact with his players.

He wasn’t friendly with and in Palmers and some others he was  confrontational with them, but he definitely interacted with.   The makeup of today’s players is much different than those in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Woody Held said:

He wasn’t friendly with and in Palmers and some others he was  confrontational with them, but he definitely interacted with.   The makeup of today’s players is much different than those in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s

Doesn't a quote exists where he states he barely talked to Frank and Brooks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think most sabermetricians would reject Earl’s cards on the “small sample size” theory.    

I guess I see that improvement as a byproduct of the new possibilities today.  I think in general SABR types revere him as a pioneer, even if he was only approximately correct.  There was a lot of precisely wrong out there.

I would be fascinated to know in detail just how much the Orioles knew about Koufax in his last game - I imagine reports from several advance scouts, subjectively compiled, and plenty of notes from Frank.

Then I imagine if Kershaw's last game is Game 1 of the 2024 World Series against us, what kind of knowledge will be available to Mullins leading off another 5 years from now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, OrioleDog said:

I guess I see that improvement as a byproduct of the new possibilities today.  I think in general SABR types revere him as a pioneer, even if he was only approximately correct.  There was a lot of precisely wrong out there.

I would be fascinated to know in detail just how much the Orioles knew about Koufax in his last game - I imagine reports from several advance scouts, subjectively compiled, and plenty of notes from Frank.

Then I imagine if Kershaw's last game is Game 1 of the 2024 World Series against us, what kind of knowledge will be available to Mullins leading off another 5 years from now?

koufax-scouting-report-1966

However, there’s one more thing to consider. Jim Russo, a co-writer on the report, was a legendary scout for the Orioles. He is considered one of the all-time greats. He had a high track record for being right.

So what he and fellow scout Al Kubski filed on Sept. 16, 1966 contains some telling clues about Koufax.

Specifically, it looks as if Koufax was beginning to lose his legendary curve ball. They wrote:

It now lacks its former velocity and sharpness. Still has his sharp breaking curve ball but has not thrown this pitch for strikes. His big breaking curve has been hanging and this is why he has stayed with his fastball more.”

Throwing a curveball puts the most strain on the elbow. So it is telling that Russo notes that Koufax only threw two curves in the last three innings of the game he scouted. Perhaps throwing the curveball was getting to be too much for him?

Russo also wrote that Koufax’s fastball only was a “TWO.” Not exactly sure what this means, but they noted that it often rises out of the strike zone. He thought batters were helping out Koufax by swing at the high fastball that otherwise would have been balls. He implored the Orioles to lay off the high fastball.

http://jewishbaseballmuseum.com/spotlight-story/fifty-years-ago-final-scouting-report-koufax-provide-clue-decision-retire-30/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...