Jump to content

Rosenthal: Holt had trouble communicating with pitchers


Moose Milligan

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I just found the whole "struggled to communicate" thing a bit weird.  I don't know how much I believe that, but I don't think Rosenthal reports stuff if he doesn't think the source is credible.  He's pretty good at what he does.

The Orioles had good results last year, better than expected...and as pointed out, they got really good performances from a number of guys that weren't expected to do much.

I guess the way I'm looking at it is that I'm glad that Holt is still with the organization and I'm assuming whoever they hire for the ML pitching coach will be someone that's been thoroughly vetted by Elias, Holt and Hyde and shares philosophies on how things should be done.  

The voice of reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like anything else, there were probably pitchers Holt got along with and others they didn’t.

Coaches don’t tend to hang around for long for many reasons. That’s just the way it is.

I have zero doubt something was up with Holt but I also have zero doubt that he is very good and I’m glad he’s still here. He’s not what wildcard thinks he is though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's just never going to be one nerd fluent in English, Spanish and Japanese with active day-to-day expertise in all the different arm angles the Clubs are cultivating in the Arm Barn so Gunnar Henderson sees something different in all 694 of his plate appearances, including the other guy's Danny Coulombe twice a night.     

I'm a little surprised we got to Page 2 without the tinfoli hat process beginning in earnest who Rosenthal's "anonymous for candor" sources were.

Nobody cares if it was Jack Flaherty or Shintaro Fujinami.     It probably wasn't Grayson Rodriguez, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

When Holt walked to the mound to give advice to the pitcher, 9 times out of 10 the pitcher did better.   That does not look like a communication problem to me.

#data

57 minutes ago, Just Regular said:

There's just never going to be one nerd fluent in English, Spanish and Japanese with active day-to-day expertise in all the different arm angles the Clubs are cultivating in the Arm Barn so Gunnar Henderson sees something different in all 694 of his plate appearances, including the other guy's Danny Coulombe twice a night.     

I'm a little surprised we got to Page 2 without the tinfoli hat process beginning in earnest who Rosenthal's "anonymous for candor" sources were.

Nobody cares if it was Jack Flaherty or Shintaro Fujinami.     It probably wasn't Grayson Rodriguez, right?

We need to add a special rep button for Just Regular. It stands for "up vote, but I'm not quite sure what it meant, I just know I liked it" post.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

When Holt walked to the mound to give advice to the pitcher, 9 times out of 10 the pitcher did better.   That does not look like a communication problem to me.

That sounds like some really in depth analysis.  Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Holt got a demotion.  I think Holt is good at the analytics and identifying issues.  And he seems good at the how-to solutions/paths to improvement (conditioning, pitch mix, spin, angle, IVB, adding a pitch, etc.) for specific types of pitchers.  There's a ton of science, physics, math, biomechanics, etc. involved in taking the pitchers into the realm of analytics.  I think Holt has a solid grasp on that stuff.  

Plus, I wouldn't be shocked if Elias comes to him with scouting/trade options.  Stepping in the new role would free up more time for that type of thing.

Based on what Gibson said and even the new role itself, Holt may struggle communicating 'why' all the nerdy stuff matters in a way that connects with people/pitchers.  And that's a big piece of hands-on coaching.  Especially when we're integrating next level analytics.  And then toss in a few different native tongues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Just Regular said:

There's just never going to be one nerd fluent in English, Spanish and Japanese with active day-to-day expertise in all the different arm angles the Clubs are cultivating in the Arm Barn so Gunnar Henderson sees something different in all 694 of his plate appearances, including the other guy's Danny Coulombe twice a night.     

I'm a little surprised we got to Page 2 without the tinfoli hat process beginning in earnest who Rosenthal's "anonymous for candor" sources were.

Nobody cares if it was Jack Flaherty or Shintaro Fujinami.     It probably wasn't Grayson Rodriguez, right?

Cough cough Hyde cough...  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Let’s put it this way…the Os aren’t making a change here unless something is going on.

We saw that results were good…so why would you change?!

I don't know exactly, but reading the tea leaves here a bit, perhaps they want Holt to use his skills with the younger prospects coming up and feel that now guys are a bit established and may not benefit as much.

 

Quote

The Orioles’ goal, according to a source briefed on the club’s thinking, is to provide different messaging to their younger pitchers as they mature.

Reading that also may indicate that Holt may be better at developing than sustaining. I honestly don't know, but the fact he was moved to the director of pitcher rather than fired indicates to me they just think he's more valuable in the other role.

I thought Gibson's comments were interesting as well. He said he thought everyone had his back but maybe not everyone liked him. The only situation that jumps out to me is how Grayson Rodriguez failed so miserably during his first stint with the Orioles, and seemed to get fixed in AAA under Ramsey. 

Overall though with pitchers like McDermott, Povich, DeLeon, and Baumeister having high ceiling arms, along with the fact the Orioles drafted more arms in the top ten rounds, maybe they just want him to focused on development rather than sustaining the arms that have arrived?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I don't know exactly, but reading the tea leaves here a bit, but perhaps they want Holt to use his skills with the younger prospects coming up and feel that now guys are a bit established and may not benefit as much.

 

Reading that also may indicate that Holt may be better at developing than sustaining. I honestly don't know, but the fact he was moved to the director of pitcher rather than fired indicates to me they just think he's more valuable in the other role.

I thought Gibson's comments were interesting as well. He said he thought everyone had his back but maybe not everyone liked him. The only situation that jumps out to me is how Grayson Rodriguez failed so miserably during his first stint with the Orioles, and seemed to get fixed in AAA under Ramsey. 

Overall though with pitchers like McDermott, Povich, DeLeon, and Baumeister having high ceiling arms, along with the fact the Orioles drafted more arms in the top ten rounds, maybe they just want him to focused on development rather than sustaining the arms that have arrived?

I think every coach likely has their own strengths and weaknesses.

What you describe is very possible. Maybe his way of doing things is better for development but not the ML level?  
 

Either way, it’s good that’s he’s staying here but I wouldn’t just discount anything that is being said here. Probably some truth to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Posts

    • I don’t think this matters. I think you get value where you can. The Rays have been willing trade partners in the past when it was clear they weren’t contending. Right now they are 4 games out of the last slot but have like 5 teams above them. Can they get it? Sure but it’s not that likely and in the past they’ve been realistic in their down type seasons.
    • I think Norby is going to be a very good MLB offensive player. I’m ok trading him but not for 1/2 season rental types.
    • Yeah I think they need to staggar the lefties in the rotation order. R-R-L-R-L like that.
    • Trading Mayo Kjerstad and Povich for one guy to become a relief pitcher is nuts.
    • We don't need starting pitchers. We need Relief Pitchers. We don't need average Relief Pitchers, we need consistent high leverage/high K Relief Pitchers.
    • If you feel comfortable putting Aiken and Baker (or even Tate) in during an elimination series, that's your prerogative. But I do not. Too inconsistent, which is the same reason why Mike Baumann pitched himself off the active roster. when spot was needed for returning starters off the IL. Currently Coulombe is on IL so we can't even count on one of our best. Cano has regressed from last season. We've also witnessed last season how Webb broke down from over use and was ineffective in the playoff series against Texas. Perez goes in streaks of either really good or concernedly bad (he loses his command). Akin's problem is he leaves the ball over the heart of the plate and he doesn't have good enough stuff to get away with it. They're meatballs. We might get some good times from Baker now that he's up, but I would only expect a month or 2 at best from him before he returns to old habits. And Suarez is a starter who wants to be a starter. Who knows if he will go back to the bullpen? He'll have to go deeper into games if he wants to stay in the rotation, otherwise, I think he should be in the bullpen. But that's not what he is right now in this moment. He's a starter with a ERA in the 1s.
    • It's pretty hard to say definitively that the bolded is true.  It might be, but there's also the loss in ability you have to account for.  30 year olds are slower than 26 year olds too.  Maybe their game knowledge and practice have made it so they can overcome the meager loss in bat speed/athleticism over that time span.  But the picture is a bit muddy.   I also don't think the aging issue is limited to people in their mid-late 30s.  Bat speed peaks at like 24 or 25 based on the data we have right now on it, and after 31 starts falling off fairly fast.  Obviously this is population data and individuals are likely to see different curves.   But outside of the stars that have a lot of ability to lose, it's becoming pretty clear that once you hit your early 30s it's pretty hard to maintain your skills without all the "help" that is extensively tested for.   I think that even for early-30s players teams are much more willing to drop them over giving them expensive market-rate deals, especially since they can abuse young talent so readily.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...