BJ Surhoff Is Angry

[CallMeBrooksie]

2 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

The fact that they were swept by the Royals is really irrelevant.  

 

When you're using the word "championship".. it's very relevant. 

If we look back at the Elias era and find that they never produced a team to at least match the successes of 2012 and 2014... We will call it a failure.

I don't see how anyone could argue otherwise.

[tntoriole]

2 minutes ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

When you're using the word "championship".. it's very relevant. 

If we look back at the Elias era and find that they never produced a team to at least match the successes of 2012 and 2014... We will call it a failure.

I don't see how anyone could argue otherwise.

The phrase used was not “championship” but  “championship caliber”...plenty of championship caliber teams don’t win the actual championship.   Your post seemed to say that 2014 was not as good as past championship caliber Oriole seasons.  I just disagree with you having seen every Oriole season since 1965.  If Elias produces a team that wins the AL East one season and is in the playoffs two other years out of five seasons but no World Series appearance, will that be a success?  For me, it would be. 

[Win Column]

Guy who got fired is unhappy about being fired.

Not much to see here, IMO.

[tntoriole]

If that was how abruptly Elias dealt with BJ, then Mike was wrong.  Maybe he thought he was talking to Brady instead. 

 

 

[CallMeBrooksie]

7 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

The phrase used was not “championship” but  “championship caliber”...plenty of championship caliber teams don’t win the actual championship.   Your post seemed to say that 2014 was not as good as past championship caliber Oriole seasons.  I just disagree with you having seen every Oriole season since 1965.  If Elias produces a team that wins the AL East one season and is in the playoffs two other years out of five seasons but no World Series appearance, will that be a success?  For me, it would be. 

We have different definitions of success it seems. To me, getting the Gentlemen's Sweep in the ALCS doesn't rise anywhere close to say... the World Series squad of 1983. Not in the same universe. They were a really good team.. not a great team. Not a team that anyone outside of Baltimore will remember.

Context is important here. I'm fully on-board with Elias plan, which includes tanking. But if you tank.. and never get further than the ALCS as a result... that's a big failure. Tanking should result in more than just three seasons of postseason fodder, one of which was a wild card one-and-done. You're putting the fans through way too much to not come up BIG

[tntoriole]

1 minute ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

We have different definitions of success it seems. To me, getting the Gentlemen's Sweep in the ALCS doesn't rise anywhere close to say... the World Series squad of 1983. Not in the same universe. They were a really good team.. not a great team. Not a team that anyone outside of Baltimore will remember.

Context is important here. I'm fully on-board with Elias plan, which includes tanking. But if you tank.. and never get further than the ALCS as a result... that's a big failure. Tanking should result in more than just three seasons of postseason fodder, one of which was a wild card one-and-done. You're putting the fans through way too much to not come up BIG

We do have different definitions.  I have not seen a World Series team since 1983 and I may not see one again, ever.  I hope I do, but I still have had much enjoyment of any number of successful seasons since 1983, even with the losing. 

And still...you minimize the 2014 team just because they got swept in a short ALCS series by the hotter team at the moment.  The 1973 and 1974 Orioles won two AL East titles and lost to the As both years...that does not mean they were not a very successful team.   I look at the whole season or seasons in judging success.  That is what happens in most every season.  Only one team can win a championship..others are championship caliber, some are not and some are terrible.  The 1983 team was a very good team but nowhere near as good as the 1980 team that won 100 games and got left out altogether or even arguably the 1982 team that stayed home too.  The 1983 team had lots of things fall right for them to win just as they have to do for any championship caliber team in any season to win it all.  Elias can’t change that fact...he can’t keep a 1969 Mets type team from running over his future great assembled team in a short series.  He can just produce a championship capable team and then see if fortune falls our way. 

 

We both hope he gets us there...absolutely!  

[Ruzious]

3 hours ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

Surhoff comes off like the grumpy Old Guard of scouts as portrayed in the Moneyball film. I've always liked Surhoff, but I found it humorous.

As a younger fan who's never rooted for a championship caliber O's team, I've grown to lament the endless pumping up and promotion of the great teams and players of Baltimore's distant past, with post-prime Cal being the only one I have any personal memories of. I'm mostly jealous that there are no moments that are seen worthy of celebration that feel like I can call my own. Only exception would be the streak, which barely feels like a baseball accomplishment to me as time goes by.

What I'm trying to get at is.. the Oriole way died a long time ago, and it feels way past due to me for the franchise to start anew and stop clutching so tightly to a past that almost feels like a taunt to those of us who can hardly imagine such a successful baseball club. I get that these promotions are the only thing that gets the aging Orioles fanbase to come out these days given the on field product... And I do think that the club's history is important and worth celebrating ... But it feels so refreshing to see this regime come in and show a commitment to doing things a completely new way. I'm ready for my own Oriole Way. 

While I agree with most of what you say, I do take exception to using the word humorous there.  It's never humorous to see someone of Surhoff's stature to get fired and feel disrespected in the process.  I don't know whether or not Elias should have handled things better, but things like that can and should be done with some apathy for the people getting the axe.   

I'm also seeing things from a different lense than you - seeing that I remember fondly the O's teams going back to the late 60's.  Surhoff isn't the distant past form my pov. 

 

[Ripken]

50 minutes ago, Win Column said:

Guy who got fired is unhappy about being fired.

Not much to see here, IMO.

What he said.

[CallMeBrooksie]

13 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

While I agree with most of what you say, I do take exception to using the word humorous there.  It's never humorous to see someone of Surhoff's stature to get fired and feel disrespected in the process.  I don't know whether or not Elias should have handled things better, but things like that can and should be done with some apathy for the people getting the axe.   

I'm also seeing things from a different lense than you - seeing that I remember fondly the O's teams going back to the late 60's.  Surhoff isn't the distant past form my pov. 

 

I think I made it pretty clear what I found humorous.  I think there can be bits of humor found within unfortunate situations.

[LA2]

1 hour ago, SteveA said:

Jon Shepherd in Camden Depot insinuates in a Tweet that Surhoff has expressed "old-school" opposition to analytics dating back to when Duquette first started an anlytics department.

And in the Athletic article today, when asked if he thought he would be able to complexities of advanced, analytical approach to baseball, Surhoff said:  "Well, I"m not Bill Gates.  But I think I can pick up on stuff, when it comes to baseball, fairly quickly".

His choice of Bill Gates, a "computer guy" with no connection to baseball, probably gives an indication of his attitude towards some of the things that Elias is doing.

Bottom line is when someone is fired, they often can tell their side of the story to garner sympathy.   The team that fires them, however, often can't comment on a personnel decision for legal reasons, or they won't because even though Surhoff is criticizing them for the firing, they are too polite to publicly list what they believe Surhoff's shortcomings are.   So you will only ever hear one side of the story.

The other interesting thing is, the two players they quote in the article to defend Surhoff (Mancini and Hays) both note how they first disliked Surhoff the first year they worked with him, but they grew to appreciate the advice and guidance he gave.   Basically his two biggest character witnesses led with the fact that they initially didn't like him before they move on to defend him.

BJ is definitely Old School. But his toughness and dedication were exemplary. I ran into him years ago in a Timonium workout center. He wasn't interested at all in chatting with people or even smiling perfunctorily, but he did a lot as a player for the Orioles and a lot philanthropically for Baltimore. I haven't read the article and probably won't, but I'm glad he had a chance to express himself--and move on. He made some pretty good salaries for the time in his prime and I hope he's managed the wealth well. I feel for him and wish him great blessings in the future.

[Obando]

Whether you agree with letting Surhoff go or not (or really any others with long-time Orioles ties), it really comes down to this:  Would you rather Elias be forced to keep certain people, like Peter Angelos used to require of prior GMs, or would you rather he truly have full autonomy to make personnel decisions and build the baseball operation as he sees fit?  Look, I have a soft spot for Oriole players I grew up watching and rooting for, like Surhoff, Brady, etc., but does that mean I think they should be forced on the GM to be a part of the organization if, in the GMs purview, he has no real use for them or doesn’t think they fit his rebuilding vision?  Absolutely not.  So I commend John & Lou Angelos for doing the opposite of their father and giving Elias true autonomy to make the decisions that he thinks gives the Orioles the best chance to be successful in the long term.  That doesn’t mean every decision Elias makes is going to be correct, because everyone makes mistakes and has regrets, but ultimately, these are his decisions and no one else’s, and after years of meddling and mismanagement from ownership, this is extremely refreshing.

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, tntoriole said:

2014 was as good a season as any of the distant past 

Don’t want to derail a thread about Surhoff’s comments, but.....no.    Winning the AL East and one playoff series is not as good as winning a World Series or an AL pennant.    Winning 96 regular season games is not as good as winning 109, 108, 102, 101, and 98 and going to the World Series in each of those seasons.   

I enjoyed 2014 plenty, especially after going 17 years without an AL East title.    I’m glad I experienced that again, and it was very satisfying.    But not as satisfying as those others.   

[weams]

4 hours ago, TonySoprano said:

 

 

. “But our main focus and main goal is finding the best coaches and the best scouts and having an elite player-development apparatus. This, in my judgment and the judgment of objective measurements, has not been an area of particular excellence in recent years.”  That’s about all that need said. 

[Oriole1940]

Elias had a right to fire him and BJ had a right to be angry.  It happens everyday in the real world to people, who for the most part,  can not absorb the loss of a regular pay check.  Always a sad happening either way, but life in some way, shape, and form, goes on.  BJ was one of my favorites over the 70 plus years I have followed the Franchise. and I wish him the best for the rest of his life.  

[Frobby]

There are two issues here:

1.   Should these guys have been fired?

2.   How well were the firings handled, and how was communication before the firings?

Seems like the latter may have been a problem.    But people who get fired rarely like how it was handled.