Does Trembley really believe this?

[Frobby]

"We had guys on third two or three different times, and it didn't happen," Orioles manager Dave Trembley said. "You're coming in here, you're facing a team like the Yankees, they find a way to get it done and they did."

Held by nemesis Andy Pettitte to just a first-inning solo homer from Nick Markakis, the Orioles had a great scoring opportunity in the eighth inning wasted on the base paths. With Cesar Izturis on first base and one out, Brian Roberts hit a shot off the right-field wall. Izturis, who was running on the pitch, never picked up the ball as he slid into second and eventually headed back to first base.

He finally turned around and started running, but he had to settle for getting to third base with one out. Nolan Reimold suffered the same fate in the fifth, making it only to third despite running on Matt Wieters' single off the wall to right field.

Trembley defended Izturis and Reimold, saying neither had "opportunities" to score on the play because both balls hit off the wall and bounced right to the Yankees' right fielder.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/bal-sp.orioles21jul21002022,0,4837148.story

I heard Trembley say essentially that to Gary Thorne on the post-game interview. But when MASN showed him in the dugout after Izturis didn't score, he looked irritated and totally non-plussed. So either Trembley is going to extremes not to criticize his players in public, or he wasn't watching the same game I was.

When Trembley was talking to Thorne, he partially defended Reimold and Izturis because the plays were hit-and-runs so they didn't have an opportunity to see where the ball was. Excuse me? Isn't the point of a hit-and-run to try to pick up an extra base here and there? If you are fortunate enough that someone gets a hit while the hit-and-run is being executed, that's exactly when you should expect the runner to achieve an extra base out of it. Otherwise, what's the frigging point of a hit and run?

Honestly, I like most things about Trembley, but I'm really starting to wonder if he understands the running game at all. It is a huge blind spot for him so far as I'm concerned, one that may end up costing him his job.

Or, maybe he understands it but doesn't want to criticize his players in public. I understand that to some extent, but to make excuses on plays where any average fan can see that the runner didn't do his job correctly (and all the announcers are pointing it out) just undermines his credibility and makes it seem as if the players are unaccountable for their mental mistakes. He doesn't need to throw players under the bus, but he does need to call a spade a spade.

[Fan4Life]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/bal-sp.orioles21jul21002022,0,4837148.story

I heard Trembley say essentially that to Gary Thorne on the post-game interview. But when MASN showed him in the dugout after Izturis didn't score, he looked irritated and totally non-plussed. So either Trembley is going to extremes not to criticize his players in public, or he wasn't watching the same game I was.

When Trembley was talking to Thorne, he partially defended Reimold and Izturis because the plays were hit-and-runs so they didn't have an opportunity to see where the ball was. Excuse me? Isn't the point of a hit-and-run to try to pick up an extra base here and there? If you are fortunate enough that someone gets a hit while the hit-and-run is being executed, that's exactly when you should expect the runner to achieve an extra base out of it. Otherwise, what's the frigging point of a hit and run?

Honestly, I like most things about Trembley, but I'm really starting to wonder if he understands the running game at all. It is a huge blind spot for him so far as I'm concerned, one that may end up costing him his job.

Or, maybe he understands it but doesn't want to criticize his players in public. I understand that to some extent, but to make excuses on plays where any average fan can see that the runner didn't do his job correctly (and all the announcers are pointing it out) just undermines his credibility and makes it seem as if the players are unaccountable for their mental mistakes. He doesn't need to throw players under the bus, but he does need to call a spade a spade.

This is a good summary as to why I started my "Ready for new Leadership" poll. I like Trembley as well. At some point the results speak for themselves. Either he doesn't understand some parts of the game that are costing us wins, or, he is unable to convey this information to the players in such a way that the results show up on the field. On both plays, each runner failed to look to 3b coach for help, instead, spent sountless seconds trying to locate the ball while retracing their steps back towards 1b. I don't mind losing to a far superior team as SG points out, I just hate giving away game, after game, after game.

[TonySoprano]

Izturis, for sure, could've scored on the play. He rounded second, three times, one of which was back toward first. Stuck at third, Samuel gives him the green light, and a certain first baseman shows why he's a gold glover, and Izturis is dead to rights at home.

ETA: I don't know who Dave thought he was fooling with that remark. When Izturis made it into third, Dave was incredulous, shouting "what? what?" as if he couldn't believe what had just happened.

[The Wedge]

Of course he doesn't.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I'm a full believer that Trembley PC's like Billick. He intentionally says or does things to make people talk about him, and not the players (the majority of the time anyway), and then in private, he talks (in whatever way he chooses) to the players about what happened.

It was quite clear by body language that the Izturis play really grinded his gears, so no, no I don't believe he for one second actually believes that. He's simply playing the role.

[Burg]

Regardless of what he said, DT was obviously mad at Itzuris. You could see it in his facial expression when he didn't score on the Roberts double and you could really see it after Itzuris was thrown out at the plate. When Itzuris was headed into the dugout you could see a closeup of DT not even acknowledging his presence. I think the presser is just coach-speak and bending over backwards to not call Cesar out.

[Hank Scorpio]

What I don't get is why these guys don't look for help when running on contact.

That's why they pay Juan Samuel, isn't it? My first instinct would be to immediately look at the third base coach.

Meh, whatever. They're just not a very intelligent baseball team, especially on the bases.

[Satyr3206]

Of course he doesn't.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I'm a full believer that Trembley PC's like Billick. He intentionally says or does things to make people talk about him, and not the players (the majority of the time anyway), and then in private, he talks (in whatever way he chooses) to the players about what happened.

It was quite clear by body language that the Izturis play really grinded his gears, so no, no I don't believe he for one second actually believes that. He's simply playing the role.

I'd be happier if he would play the role of a Manager that gets his team to play sound baseball. Acting like there isn't a problem or not attacking it head on is only going to make it harder to correct in the future.

[The Wedge]

What I don't get is why these guys don't look for help when running on contact.

That's why they pay Juan Samuel, isn't it? My first instinct would be to immediately look at the third base coach.

Meh, whatever. They're just not a very intelligent baseball team, especially on the bases.

That's what pissed me off the most, especially with Izturis. He had to hear the ball make contact, so why didn't he look to Samuel who was clearly giving him the sign to stay up? Had he seen that sign, he could have rounded and Samuel could have directed him from there. But he just kept his head down as if it were going to be a straight steal. I'm sure after Trembley's 24 hour rule (if he really does that and doesn't simply say it to be politic) he's gonna hear it for that.

[Dwight Schrute]

Of course he doesn't.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I'm a full believer that Trembley PC's like Billick. He intentionally says or does things to make people talk about him, and not the players (the majority of the time anyway), and then in private, he talks (in whatever way he chooses) to the players about what happened.

It was quite clear by body language that the Izturis play really grinded his gears, so no, no I don't believe he for one second actually believes that. He's simply playing the role.

Thats not the only thing that reminds me of Billick.

[The Wedge]

I'd be happier if he would play the role of a Manager that gets his team to play sound baseball. Acting like there isn't a problem or not attacking it head on is only going to make it harder to correct in the future.

As I said in another thread, sometimes you have to acknowledge that you can lead a horse to water but you can't get him to change his stripes. Some of these guys are simply never going to get any message. It's the paradox of the modern day athlete. They need a manager to do most of the organizational stuff, but they mostly do what they want out there. So many of them think rarely of the team, but rather what I'M GONNA DO for the team. Subtle, yet profoundly different. We have a lot of those types of vets. Mora is one. He's a team guy, but when he makes decisions you can almost tell what he's thinking. "How am I going to do this." Not, "what can I do for the team here?"

[Satyr3206]

As I said in another thread, sometimes you have to acknowledge that you can lead a horse to water but you can't get him to change his stripes. Some of these guys are simply never going to get any message. It's the paradox of the modern day athlete. They need a manager to do most of the organizational stuff, but they mostly do what they want out there. So many of them think rarely of the team, but rather what I'M GONNA DO for the team. Subtle, yet profoundly different. We have a lot of those types of vets. Mora is one. He's a team guy, but when he makes decisions you can almost tell what he's thinking. "How am I going to do this." Not, "what can I do for the team here?"

I agree to a point and if this is the issue there has to be consequences. It might be old fashioned but the Team comes first.

[Fan4Life]

As I said in another thread, sometimes you have to acknowledge that you can lead a horse to water but you can't get him to change his stripes. Some of these guys are simply never going to get any message. It's the paradox of the modern day athlete. They need a manager to do most of the organizational stuff, but they mostly do what they want out there. So many of them think rarely of the team, but rather what I'M GONNA DO for the team. Subtle, yet profoundly different. We have a lot of those types of vets. Mora is one. He's a team guy, but when he makes decisions you can almost tell what he's thinking. "How am I going to do this." Not, "what can I do for the team here?"

This makes a lot of sense. However I have a question.

Why don't most other teams have the same problem? They have players that get paid well as well. I realize there are some bone headed plays by some teams thoruhgout the season and since we primarily watch ours, we see all of ours. However, we do get to see our opponents when we're playing them, and while they do make mistakes from time to time, they don't appear to be of the same nature (mental errors). Or am I kidding myself? Every team has a bunch of guys that mostly do what they want out there and we're largely no different than the rest?

[The Wedge]

I agree to a point and if this is the issue there has to be consequences. It might be old fashioned but the Team comes first.

But again, especially in the modern baseball era, what consequences? Fines? You do it too much, and the MLBPA gets in your grill. Benching? What do vets making mils care? With contracts the way they are, and in this economy, eating them via outright release is not a prospect you look in to lightly. So, I ask, if you agree to a point about this, what the heck can be done? I'm honestly asking, because I've asked myself and have come up with zipperino.

[The Wedge]

This makes a lot of sense. However I have a question.

Why don't most other teams have the same problem? They have players that get paid well as well. I realize there are some bone headed plays by some teams thoruhgout the season and since we primarily watch ours, we see all of ours. However, we do get to see our opponents when we're playing them, and while they do make mistakes from time to time, they don't appear to be of the same nature (mental errors). Or am I kidding myself? Every team has a bunch of guys that mostly do what they want out there and we're largely no different than the rest?

You want me honest answer? Talent levels. Or maybe we attract the player that thinks the way I described somehow. Or both. That's my best guess/honest answer.

[Satyr3206]

But again, especially in the modern baseball era, what consequences? Fines? You do it too much, and the MLBPA gets in your grill. Benching? What do vets making mils care? With contracts the way they are, and in this economy, eating them via outright release is not a prospect you look in to lightly. So, I ask, if you agree to a point about this, what the heck can be done? I'm honestly asking, because I've asked myself and have come up with zipperino.

I have thought about this a lot this season. Fines are tiny compared to their salaries so that won't make a difference. Benching might work to a degree. But I do have another idea and I'll probably get slammed for it but I honestly think this is the best option.

Trembley needs to come out at his next press conference and say that poor fundamentals and mental mistakes won't be tolerated, that it will result in discipline. Then when it happens again bench the player for 2 games and continue to do it no matter who it is. No player likes the spotlight on them for bad play.

The only other option is to trade them.