Jump to content

Even if you don't blame Trembley...


Frobby

Recommended Posts

I'm not the somebody who's gonna do that, but it's worth pointing out that Cal, Sr. lost his job after just 168 games, while Trembley's already lasted over 400.

Not saying that's right, as I think Cal, Sr.'s ouster a mere six games into the '88 season remains one of the most embarrassing episodes in club history, but he did pay for the lack of performance with his job.

Fairly or unfairly, that's how it works in professional sports. Baseball managers are not popes or government employees who get to stay on the job no matter what. Thank goodness for that.

Oh, I completely agree that anybody looking for fairness and justice in their career path should pick a job other than being a manager. Nothing new about that...

IMO, one big diff between how much time Cal Sr had vs. how much time DT has had is that Cal Sr was manager before it dawned on everybody that the Oriole Way (which Cal Sr played a big part in implementing) had been thoroughly destroyed via neglect from above. Before the internet, it was about impossible to know what the talent pipeline was like. Now, everybody can monitor it day by day. Back then, everybody was still acclimated to the team being good all the time and still thought that Oriole suckitude was just some temporary anomaly. People thought we oughta have a good team right away. Now, people who actually pay attention know better...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply
PA wasn't calling any shots in 1988, as it would be several years before he purchased the team.

Cal, Sr's early season firing was atypical, I'll grant you that. He'd lost the confidence of the brass however and had a losing ballclub and found himself out of a job. That part's not atypical at all. It's a story as old as dirt.

EDIT - I see you caught your own Angelos typo, but I stand by the rest of the above.

You picked a bad example. The Yankees and Torre would have proved your point, which has little to do with the O's current situation, more effectively. Fairness isn't the issue in the O's case, it's suitability to AM's current needs and plans that matters, and only he knows what they are.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it's gonna be subjective. So what? I wasn't saying otherwise.

I was simply pointing out that people just make up this idea about how much talent DT has had, and its based on nothing.

If you're gonna say DT had way more talent than last place, then you oughta have some basis for saying that.

What people are doing is just making up bogus claims out of thin air, and pretending that they're somehow insightful.

I think there is a difference between talent and results. Determining how much talent a player/team has is a subjective excercise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You picked a bad example. The Yankees and Torre would have proved your point, which has little to do with the O's current situation, more effectively. Fairness isn't the issue in the O's case, it's suitability to AM's current needs and plans that matters, and only he knows what they are.

Based on the vast majority of your posts and your last sentence above, I think we pretty much agree.

I remain "pro-Trembley" as long as he's on the job, but I've reached the point personally where I'd probably choose not to bring him back (Lucky for him I have zero say).

As for fairness, I get the sense that it's driving a lot of the keep Dave sentiment. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that way to me, and I agree with you that it isn't an issue that's going to sway MacPhail's decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wahtever AM's judgement turns out to be, I am pretty certain it will not be based on his gut. It will be based on an in depth knowledge of how DT manages a team, from the way he organizes a ST routine. drills, etc, to clubhouse management and dealing with players on a personal level, motivating them, disciplining them, preparation fo games, planning, evaluation of personell, and in game management philosophies, skills and strategies, among others. He will compare this knowledge to what he knows of other manager options available. These are all things we know next to nothing about.

I agree with everything you say here other than the 1st sentence. I believe he'll take in as much knowledge in as he can but when it comes down to decision time it'll be a gut call based on all of that information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with everything you say here other than the 1st sentence. I believe he'll take in as much knowledge in as he can but when it comes down to decision time it'll be a gut call based on all of that information.
I think he has already made his decision. IMO there are two reasons to make a change. One woud be if you thought the team was a few games away from the WC, and the difference between DT at that genius manager everyone seems to believe is out there, would nail it down, or that you needed a big PR splash to keep up fan interest, because you knew you were going to do little to improve the team in the off season. I don't think either is the case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the vast majority of your posts and your last sentence above, I think we pretty much agree.

I remain "pro-Trembley" as long as he's on the job, but I've reached the point personally where I'd probably choose not to bring him back (Lucky for him I have zero say).

As for fairness, I get the sense that it's driving a lot of the keep Dave sentiment. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that way to me, and I agree with you that it isn't an issue that's going to sway MacPhail's decision.

If it turns out that AM decides to not re-up DT, it will be interesting to see if his commentary about it drops any clues about when he actually decided. I say this because I fully agree with AM that decisions quite often are best made as late as possible. But that's hard to do. So, while I agree with it in principle, I myself have assumed that AM actually made up his mind way before his announcement is due. If we get hints that he really, really refrained from deciding until very close to the end of the season, that will say something about AM's own internal sense of discipline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure you can.

Now, I realize that people just say stuff without thinking about it.

I also realize that it's a waste of time to point out facts because some folks (not talking about you) will just ignore them.

But to say that DT hasn't had the worst talent is kinda silly. This is true if we simply look at the pitching and nothing else.

This is where the team's pitching ranked in the AL by team ERA:

  • Trembley-2009: Last (14th)
    ...
    ...

You do realize that one of your biggest underlying assumptions is that the manager has zero impact on team performance, right? And that a heavily-context dependent stat like ERA is probably one of the worst metrics to pick if you're trying to get a handle on pitching talent.

Quick and dirty is often good enough. But unless you happened to get lucky this is probably quite misleading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DT can't be held accountable for a lot of things considering the stuff he's had to deal with over his time here, but one thing that keeps bugging me is the continuously decreasing W-L record. The Orioles have gotten worse under Trembley. I am not saying that DT should have willed the Orioles to the playoffs or to a winning record, but when you take into account that the team has gotten worse each season under Trembley, I just can't jump up and say he needs to be back in 2010.

Each year the expectations were to improve upon the year before. It should have happened during DT's time here, even with some of the problems he's faced. We're not talking about winning 75 games, even. Just getting better. Trembley's teams haven't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he has already made his decision. IMO there are two reasons to make a change. One woud be if you thought the team was a few games away from the WC, and the difference between DT at that genius manager everyone seems to believe is out there, would nail it down, or that you needed a big PR splash to keep up fan interest, because you knew you were going to do little to improve the team in the off season. I don't think either is the case.

I disagree that there are only being two reasons. A third one is that if you thought there was a person out there who could get more out of the roster he is given to work with. If he has such a candidate in mind you honestly think he shouldn't do it because the team is not a few games away from the WC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that a heavily-context dependent stat like ERA is probably one of the worst metrics to pick if you're trying to get a handle on pitching talent.

Quick and dirty is often good enough. But unless you happened to get lucky this is probably quite misleading.

For a particular P for 1 season, sure. For a team over a stretch of a few games, sure.

Over a whole team for a whole season? I doubt it. It might not be exact, but I bet it's not misleading.

I'd be interested in some evidence demonstrating that looking at a whole team for a whole season is "probably quite misleading".

I bet there isn't any. I bet whatever examples there might be are anomalies, not typical. I bet you made this up based mainly on anti-std-stat bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize that one of your biggest underlying assumptions is that the manager has zero impact on team performance, right?

You do realize that's not true, right?

The underlying assumption is that the manager doesn't change things greatly.

Maybe the manager makes a diff of a few game per season, but not many. Same thing here: the manager might make a small diff, but not much of one.

If you have evidence to the contrary, I'd love to see it. I bet you don't have any. But I could be wrong...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a particular P for 1 season, sure. For a team over a stretch of a few games, sure.

Over a whole team for a whole season? I doubt it. It might not be exact, but I bet it's not misleading.

I'd be interested in some evidence demonstrating that looking at a whole team for a whole season is "probably quite misleading".

I bet there isn't any. I bet whatever examples there might be are anomalies, not typical. I bet you made this up based mainly on anti-std-stat bias.

No, I really just made an assumption that since ERA is a slipshod way of measuring pitcher performance it was probably a poor way to measure the true talent a manager has on hand.

Park effects can make a very good team in run prevention look quite bad. For example, this year the White Sox are 5th in the league in ERA, but 1st in ERA+.

Team defense can make a good pitching team look bad, or vice versa. The Rays had much of the same pitching talent in 2007 when they allowed 944 runs as they did in 2008 when they allowed 671.

A manager who is very poor at managing pitcher workloads can make a good team look bad, or vice versa.

As everyone here should certainly be well aware I'm very accepting of any and all types of stats that have some kind of logical and systematic foundation. I'm not as accepting of stuff like the 17-player theory or using ERA as a proxy for team talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize that's not true, right?

The underlying assumption is that the manager doesn't change things greatly.

Maybe the manager makes a diff of a few game per season, but not many. Same thing here: the manager might make a small diff, but not much of one.

If you have evidence to the contrary, I'd love to see it. I bet you don't have any. But I could be wrong...

I don't have any evidence that an average manager moves a team's W/L record more than a few games a season. But I'm also not making the assumption that you can use ERA as a proxy for talent on a team. For that to be true you'd have to be assuming that the manager's influence on said talent is negligible.

You have to see that when you're trying to get to the root of a manager's blame or blamelessness, you can't use a metric that can certainly be influenced by the manager himself. As well as any number of other things unrelated to talent or the manager.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • Posts

    • When’s the last time Urias played 2B?  We have Mateo and Westburg for 2B.    Mayo’s no lock.  Urias is a lock.  To be a .700 OPS guy give or take.  Mayo might be worse.  Might be the same.  Might be better.  Urias won’t be better.  You’re living in the past.  Urias was a plus 3B in 2022.  No matter how many times Kevin Brown calls him a gold glover he’s average at best.  At 3B, from  6 OAA in 2022, -7 in 2023, and a -2 so far this year.  And he’s so slow on the bases.  He’s not terrible by any means so hopefully we can get something.  Someone has to go for the future and the future is now.      Austin Hays is becoming a liability in LF.  He’s a -4 DRS and a -2 OAA.   Once you see Cowser out there and then compare it to Hays it’s like night and day.    He had 3 homers. 2 in one game and another when we were already winning by 20 runs.   He got some pinch hits.  Great.  He’s no threat in the lineup, brings minimal power, no speed, and below average defense.  Let’s get Norby up to play some LF/2B/DH. The time is now for Mayo and Norby.  The time has passed for Urias and Hays.  
    • We had the same formula in 2014 and only a white hot Royals team ruined that. This year we have to out homer the other team.
    • Love seeing all this new blood entering the list at 40 and above! Especially the newest .400 hitter on my (otherwise uninformed) radar, SS Elvin Garcia of DSL Black, age 17.
    • I get that. I just think the Orioles need a spark...and Coby Mayo is an option...as was Kjerstad...The Orioles need a more menacing lineup at the bottom of the order.
    • I think it’s your last point.    That said if I was a media member I would be asking Hyde about it. 
    • He isn’t up because of his defense.  The people running this team value defense.  That is why they are running this team and not the posters here at the Hangout.  He will get his chance eventually.
    • I understand fielding % is a small part of defensive evaluation but Mayo has a .931 FLD % at 3rd and has made 3 errors in 9 games at 1B.    Let’s bring him up in a pennant race and release a proven commodity with the glove so the team leading the AL in runs can get better. Let’s assume he magically improves at a higher level with the glove while also hitting the best arms on the planet. 
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...