Second guessing Hyde

[Frobby]

I can’t judge Hyde yet.   I like his demeanor and I think he’s forthright with the media without throwing guys under the bus.    He keeps the focus on the positive and the clubhouse atmosphere seems pretty good.    I do see some questionable strategy at times, and more mental errors by the club than I’d like.   But some of that is a byproduct of having a lot of guys who never played together before, a constantly shuffling roster, inexperience and numerous players playing at positions that are suboptimal.   

I think I will judge Hyde more keenly next year when he has more familiarity with the players and has had an offseason to analyze how to improve things.   He doesn’t get a complete free pass now, but he gets every benefit of the doubt.  

[Redskins Rick]

48 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I can’t judge Hyde yet.   I like his demeanor and I think he’s forthright with the media without throwing guys under the bus.    He keeps the focus on the positive and the clubhouse atmosphere seems pretty good.    I do see some questionable strategy at times, and more mental errors by the club than I’d like.   But some of that is a byproduct of having a lot of guys who never played together before, a constantly shuffling roster, inexperience and numerous players playing at positions that are suboptimal.   

I think I will judge Hyde more keenly next year when he has more familiarity with the players and has had an offseason to analyze how to improve things.   He doesn’t get a complete free pass now, but he gets every benefit of the doubt.  

very rational post and I agree totally.

No free pass, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt, and let him enjoy the honeymoon phase of the job,.

[Sessh]

I am pretty far from calling for Hyde's head, but I don't think he is always reading situations well or his players in the case of Givens. Look, maybe Hyde's way of motivating players is to just keep throwing them in the fire and that certainly works for some guys. Givens is clearly not one of those guys. He has never done well when given the chance to close games. It can take some time to get used to pitching in such a role and seems to take guys a few tries before they get comfortable in that role. Givens has been awful. I don't care that he pitched multiple innings in the past. If you keep sending a guy out there to not only fail, but repeatedly lose games for his team at the last minute is crushing and will destroy confidence, not build it in his case. I don't know why he would send Givens out there for the eighth last night after such a strong seventh. That's the perfect time to take him out on a positive note, but Hyde does the same thing Buck did constantly in leaving guys in for a batter too long.

I also don't care how bad the bullpen is. It's irrelevant to Hyde's ability to manage the guys he has effectively. It's not his fault if he brings a guy in and he implodes, but it starts to become his fault if he continues putting that guy into the same situation over and over despite continued failures. It's not like Givens is an established closer and it's not like this team is going anywhere this year except down. I am interested in how he manages his players. He had a great opportunity last night to let Givens end his night on a VERY high note. Instead, he ends it on a low note and the Orioles lose the lead and ultimately the game. Maybe we would have lost anyway, but he still made the wrong decision with Givens.. again.

I can agree with the sentiment that next year will say a lot more about Hyde than this year, but I don't think it's unreasonable to point things out along the way and see how they develop as time passes.

[Philip]

4 minutes ago, Sessh said:

I am pretty far from calling for Hyde's head, but I don't think he is always reading situations well or his players in the case of Givens. Look, maybe Hyde's way of motivating players is to just keep throwing them in the fire and that certainly works for some guys. Givens is clearly not one of those guys. He has never done well when given the chance to close games. It can take some time to get used to pitching in such a role and seems to take guys a few tries before they get comfortable in that role. Givens has been awful. I don't care that he pitched multiple innings in the past. If you keep sending a guy out there to not only fail, but repeatedly lose games for his team at the last minute is crushing and will destroy confidence, not build it in his case. I don't know why he would send Givens out there for the eighth last night after such a strong seventh. That's the perfect time to take him out on a positive note, but Hyde does the same thing Buck did constantly in leaving guys in for a batter too long.

I also don't care how bad the bullpen is. It's irrelevant to Hyde's ability to manage the guys he has effectively. It's not his fault if he brings a guy in and he implodes, but it starts to become his fault if he continues putting that guy into the same situation over and over despite continued failures. It's not like Givens is an established closer and it's not like this team is going anywhere this year except down. I am interested in how he manages his players. He had a great opportunity last night to let Givens end his night on a VERY high note. Instead, he ends it on a low note and the Orioles lose the lead and ultimately the game. Maybe we would have lost anyway, but he still made the wrong decision with Givens.. again.

I can agree with the sentiment that next year will say a lot more about Hyde than this year, but I don't think it's unreasonable to point things out along the way and see how they develop as time passes.

Yes exactly

[Frobby]

Less than two weeks ago, Givens was carrying a 2.75 ERA, hadn’t allowed an inherited runner to score, and had 4 saves in 5 total chances, the only blown save coming in a multi-inning appearance.    He was perfectly fine in the closer role for the final two months last year after half our bullpen got traded.   

Two bad weeks doesn’t mean Givens can’t close.   I’m in complete agreement with giving him a break until he regains his equilibrium, but in the long run he’s the best option for closer that we have, and can do a respectable job.  

[Sessh]

25 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Less than two weeks ago, Givens was carrying a 2.75 ERA, hadn’t allowed an inherited runner to score, and had 4 saves in 5 total chances, the only blown save coming in a multi-inning appearance.    He was perfectly fine in the closer role for the final two months last year after half our bullpen got traded.   

Two bad weeks doesn’t mean Givens can’t close.   I’m in complete agreement with giving him a break until he regains his equilibrium, but in the long run he’s the best option for closer that we have, and can do a respectable job.  

It's more than two weeks. He went 8-for-10 in saves down the stretch last season which means a 20% failure rate. That is not "perfectly fine" as a closer. and he is 13-for-28 in save chances up to this point in his career. He's failing 50% of the time this year, so I am not as confident as you are in his ability to close. I will agree that he has the best shot among the guys we have now, but that's not saying much. He does have a chance, but ... I don't know. I'm not sure he has the mentality for it, but we'll see.

[Philip]

25 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Less than two weeks ago, Givens was carrying a 2.75 ERA, hadn’t allowed an inherited runner to score, and had 4 saves in 5 total chances, the only blown save coming in a multi-inning appearance.    He was perfectly fine in the closer role for the final two months last year after half our bullpen got traded.   

Two bad weeks doesn’t mean Givens can’t close.   I’m in complete agreement with giving him a break until he regains his equilibrium, but in the long run he’s the best option for closer that we have, and can do a respectable job.  

The closer or non-closer debate is a different subject, but I strongly feel that it’s silly to have a designated closer. You use your best guy in the highest leverage situation, on the grounds that you have a need NOW, and you may not have one later. 

Having said that, whether he is mentally fit for the task or not, givens is obviously scuffling Terribly right now, and it is highly questionable to put him into one stressful situation  after another.

A wise manager may have no choice but to throw him into the fire, because the other members of the bullpen are so bad, but he should be planning his bullpen usage from the start so to avoid Givens in a high-pressure situation. Last night was great, Givens pitched A good inning, in a reasonably low stress situation, and There was no reason to push him.

[foxfield]

4 hours ago, Sessh said:

I am pretty far from calling for Hyde's head, but I don't think he is always reading situations well or his players in the case of Givens. Look, maybe Hyde's way of motivating players is to just keep throwing them in the fire and that certainly works for some guys. Givens is clearly not one of those guys. He has never done well when given the chance to close games. It can take some time to get used to pitching in such a role and seems to take guys a few tries before they get comfortable in that role. Givens has been awful. I don't care that he pitched multiple innings in the past. If you keep sending a guy out there to not only fail, but repeatedly lose games for his team at the last minute is crushing and will destroy confidence, not build it in his case. I don't know why he would send Givens out there for the eighth last night after such a strong seventh. That's the perfect time to take him out on a positive note, but Hyde does the same thing Buck did constantly in leaving guys in for a batter too long.

I also don't care how bad the bullpen is. It's irrelevant to Hyde's ability to manage the guys he has effectively. It's not his fault if he brings a guy in and he implodes, but it starts to become his fault if he continues putting that guy into the same situation over and over despite continued failures. It's not like Givens is an established closer and it's not like this team is going anywhere this year except down. I am interested in how he manages his players. He had a great opportunity last night to let Givens end his night on a VERY high note. Instead, he ends it on a low note and the Orioles lose the lead and ultimately the game. Maybe we would have lost anyway, but he still made the wrong decision with Givens.. again.

I can agree with the sentiment that next year will say a lot more about Hyde than this year, but I don't think it's unreasonable to point things out along the way and see how they develop as time passes.

I don't think anyone disagrees per se, I think the issue...and let's use Givens, if he has a clean inning and you pull him, you still need to have someone else.  If you are not going multiple innings with Givens because he is struggling, which struggling pitcher besides Givens is he supposed to use.  Chris Davis?  Im being facetious of course, and again, I think no one really disagrees with your point.  The counter point is what else could he do.  And yes the options are pretty bad regardless, but if we use the logic you and Phillip are using, were almost at position players as closer.

[Sessh]

1 hour ago, foxfield said:

I don't think anyone disagrees per se, I think the issue...and let's use Givens, if he has a clean inning and you pull him, you still need to have someone else.  If you are not going multiple innings with Givens because he is struggling, which struggling pitcher besides Givens is he supposed to use.  Chris Davis?  Im being facetious of course, and again, I think no one really disagrees with your point.  The counter point is what else could he do.  And yes the options are pretty bad regardless, but if we use the logic you and Phillip are using, were almost at position players as closer.

I was thinking about that, too. I guess my answer is that this year (and probably next year) are more about finding out what we have and where they will slot into the future if at all. If we want to see if Givens can be the closer, then we need to look after him and groom his confidence over the next year or two and see what we can get out of him. I am not concerned with trying to squeak out every little win because.. what's the point? These years are about figuring out who is going to be part of our future and who isn't. For the ones that are, how do we want them to fit and can we make them fit? With Givens, I guess the question is can he be a reliable closer at some point? I don't really think so, but this is the time to find out.

Use the other guys in the pen is what he can do. I know there's not much to work with now, but to me, this year and probably the next two at least are about building the future. Maybe one or two of those guys will surprise us.

[foxfield]

Its a fine line and we all hope to see change for the better.  My hope is that as this group goes forward we see that from both players and coaches.

[Aristotelian]

16 hours ago, Sessh said:

I am pretty far from calling for Hyde's head, but I don't think he is always reading situations well or his players in the case of Givens. Look, maybe Hyde's way of motivating players is to just keep throwing them in the fire and that certainly works for some guys. Givens is clearly not one of those guys. He has never done well when given the chance to close games. It can take some time to get used to pitching in such a role and seems to take guys a few tries before they get comfortable in that role. Givens has been awful. I don't care that he pitched multiple innings in the past. If you keep sending a guy out there to not only fail, but repeatedly lose games for his team at the last minute is crushing and will destroy confidence, not build it in his case. I don't know why he would send Givens out there for the eighth last night after such a strong seventh. That's the perfect time to take him out on a positive note, but Hyde does the same thing Buck did constantly in leaving guys in for a batter too long.

I also don't care how bad the bullpen is. It's irrelevant to Hyde's ability to manage the guys he has effectively. It's not his fault if he brings a guy in and he implodes, but it starts to become his fault if he continues putting that guy into the same situation over and over despite continued failures. It's not like Givens is an established closer and it's not like this team is going anywhere this year except down. I am interested in how he manages his players. He had a great opportunity last night to let Givens end his night on a VERY high note. Instead, he ends it on a low note and the Orioles lose the lead and ultimately the game. Maybe we would have lost anyway, but he still made the wrong decision with Givens.. again.

I can agree with the sentiment that next year will say a lot more about Hyde than this year, but I don't think it's unreasonable to point things out along the way and see how they develop as time passes.

If it was Buck, Givens would still be closing through end of July, at least.

[Redskins Rick]

10 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

If it was Buck, Givens would still be closing through end of July, at least.

He was quick to pull the plug on the Tommy Hunter closing experiment.

[DrungoHazewood]

16 hours ago, Sessh said:

I am pretty far from calling for Hyde's head, but I don't think he is always reading situations well or his players in the case of Givens. Look, maybe Hyde's way of motivating players is to just keep throwing them in the fire and that certainly works for some guys. Givens is clearly not one of those guys. He has never done well when given the chance to close games. It can take some time to get used to pitching in such a role and seems to take guys a few tries before they get comfortable in that role. Givens has been awful. I don't care that he pitched multiple innings in the past. If you keep sending a guy out there to not only fail, but repeatedly lose games for his team at the last minute is crushing and will destroy confidence, not build it in his case. I don't know why he would send Givens out there for the eighth last night after such a strong seventh. That's the perfect time to take him out on a positive note, but Hyde does the same thing Buck did constantly in leaving guys in for a batter too long.

I also don't care how bad the bullpen is. It's irrelevant to Hyde's ability to manage the guys he has effectively. It's not his fault if he brings a guy in and he implodes, but it starts to become his fault if he continues putting that guy into the same situation over and over despite continued failures. It's not like Givens is an established closer and it's not like this team is going anywhere this year except down. I am interested in how he manages his players. He had a great opportunity last night to let Givens end his night on a VERY high note. Instead, he ends it on a low note and the Orioles lose the lead and ultimately the game. Maybe we would have lost anyway, but he still made the wrong decision with Givens.. again.

I can agree with the sentiment that next year will say a lot more about Hyde than this year, but I don't think it's unreasonable to point things out along the way and see how they develop as time passes.

Fans always have a much shorter rope than the manager.  The fan managers would pull a guy out of a role after two or three bad games.  The manager realizes that on most teams that means you'd be shuffling guys in and out of key roles, and using inappropriate players in key roles, constantly.  And you'd also be killing clubhouse morale.  Players have to know that management has faith in them to work through inevitable slumps.  Yes, sometimes that means losing a game.  But it's also a big part of why a team stays united behind a manager.

[DrungoHazewood]

15 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

If it was Buck, Givens would still be closing through end of July, at least.

And Givens would probably run into a burning building for a manager like that, instead of dreading each day knowing that two earned runs probably means a demotion and being replaced by some guy who was pitching the seventh for the Tides two weeks ago.

[Redskins Rick]

27 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

And Givens would probably run into a burning building for a manager like that, instead of dreading each day knowing that two earned runs probably means a demotion and being replaced by some guy who was pitching the seventh for the Tides two weeks ago.

Very good point!!!