Jump to content

A question for the replace the manager people


El Gordo

Recommended Posts

What would this new guy do to significantly improve this team, besides wait for the young SP to grow into their potential, hope that Markakis, Jones and Wieters will have better years, and the GM will provide him with a couple of decent bats at 1B and 3B, and a few decent arms in the bullpen? Since the ASB the team has been playing pretty decent defense and making far fewer funda"mentals", and the baseruning is no longer costing outs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply
What would this new guy do to significantly improve this team, besides wait for the young SP to grow into their potential, hope that Markakis, Jones and Wieters will have better years, and the GM will provide him with a couple of decent bats at 1B and 3B, and a few decent arms in the bullpen? Since the ASB the team has been playing pretty decent defense and making far fewer funda"mentals", and the baseruning is no longer costing outs.

I think it's the wrong question. By not extedning DT, AM has put the franchise in the position where they don't have to fire DT. The org can evaluate the situation and the question shouldn't be what can a new guy do differently. The question that should be debated is "Who is the best person to manage this franchise in 2010 and beyond". If the conclusion in DT then hire him for 2010 and beyond. If the conclusion is someone else, hire someone else. If the feeling is the decision could be put off, rehire DT for one year and reevaluate next offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rest his players regularly, be more in tune with his players' strengths and weakness, especially for the lineup.

Hold players accountable for their actions no matter what their status (rookie or veteran) on the club.

Losing is unacceptable, period.

Just a new attitude coming in and a breath of fresh air could make a world of difference IMO. I think the players have been too comfortable with the status quo, so it's time to shake things up a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's the wrong question. By not extedning DT, AM has put the franchise in the position where they don't have to fire DT. The org can evaluate the situation and the question shouldn't be what can a new guy do differently. The question that should be debated is "Who is the best person to manage this franchise in 2010 and beyond". If the conclusion in DT then hire him for 2010 and beyond. If the conclusion is someone else, hire someone else. If the feeling is the decision could be put off, rehire DT for one year and reevaluate next offseason.
It is the right question. What do you expect the new manager to do to significantly improve the team? Besides cosmetic stuff like, rah, rah pressers and rearranging the batting order? I'm niot asking about DT, I am saying significant improvement IMO, will come from the GM and the development of the young talent.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rest his players regularly, be more in tune with his players' strengths and weakness, especially for the lineup.

Hold players accountable for their actions no matter what their status (rookie or veteran) on the club.

Losing is unacceptable, period.

Just a new attitude coming in and a breath of fresh air could make a world of difference IMO. I think the players have been too comfortable with the status quo, so it's time to shake things up a bit.

And those things will result in how many additional wins next season?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is the right question. What do you expect the new manager to do to significantly improve the team? Besides cosmetic stuff like, rah, rah pressers and rearranging the batting order? I'm niot asking about DT, I am saying significant improvement IMO, will come from the GM and the development of the young talent.

Do you think anyone really disagrees with this?

Do you think people think if we get rid of DT that we will win 20 more games just because he is gone, even if the young players don't improve?

By this logic, a manager or coach should never be fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think anyone really disagrees with this?

Do you think people think if we get rid of DT that we will win 20 more games just because he is gone, even if the young players don't improve?

By this logic, a manager or coach should never be fired.

Of course not. A manager accounts for a small number of wins and when that number of wins will be significant, then it makes sense to change. But in the O's situation what do you want the new manager to do to improve the team since he is not going to account for 20 wins. Do you really think stuff like moxie, grit, and fire are that important, if they exhist at all? A lot of people seem to want a change. If it is not just change fror change's sake, what tangible things do they expect the new guy to do?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course not. A manager accounts for a small number of wins and when that number of wins will be significant, then it makes sense to change. But in the O's situation what do you want the new manager to do to improve the team since he is not going to account for 20 wins. Do you really think stuff like moxie, grit, and fire are that important, if they exhist at all? A lot of people seem to want a change. If it is not just change fror change's sake, what tangible things do they expect the new guy to do?

I expect someone who rests his regulars more...I expect someone who knows how to use a bench.

I expect someone that can handle a staff...That doesn't send a young pitcher out for the 7th inning when they are over 100 pitch, watch them give up a homer on the first pitch and then run to the mound to take them out.

I think DT is terrible at these things.

Also, there is something to be said about a different voice.

Improvement is ALWAYS going to come from improvement of the players on the field and what players the GM gives to the manager...That is obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course not. A manager accounts for a small number of wins and when that number of wins will be significant, then it makes sense to change. But in the O's situation what do you want the new manager to do to improve the team since he is not going to account for 20 wins. Do you really think stuff like moxie, grit, and fire are that important, if they exhist at all? A lot of people seem to want a change. If it is not just change fror change's sake, what tangible things do they expect the new guy to do?

Obviously we won't get this answer until it actually happens, but if MacPhail fires Trembley why do you think he would?

I think he expected this team to be bad but probably not this bad. I also don't think he hopes to replace Trembley and add 4-5 more wins.

I won't use the terms moxie or grit, but I would imagine AM probably wants a different personality or at least one who is able to get his message to his players a little better.

If it was solely about the talent on the field, I don't think his job would be in jeopardy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect someone who rests his regulars more...I expect someone who knows how to use a bench.

I expect someone that can handle a staff...That doesn't send a young pitcher out for the 7th inning when they are over 100 pitch, watch them give up a homer on the first pitch and then run to the mound to take them out.

I think DT is terrible at these things.

Also, there is something to be said about a different voice.

Improvement is ALWAYS going to come from improvement of the players on the field and what players the GM gives to the manager...That is obvious.

These things you complain about are largely insignificant quibbles, that real world GM's would laugh at. Whomever you get as a replacement will have different things, of a magnitude like this, that will irritate you as much. The question for me is; is now the time to make the change? We will be struggling next season to transition from rebuilding to competing, not to contending. The manager will have a team comprised largely of young developing players. What manager will be better suited to deal with those circumstances than DT?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just admit it. You have no idea what a major league manager does. Therefore, since you can't identify how a ML can help, you've concluded that there's no sense in replacing the likable guy in there now.

Go ahead and admit this.

And you have a better idea? Well then enlighten me. Tell me what this new manager will do, specifically.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These things you complain about are largely insignificant quibbles, that real world GM's would laugh at. Whomever you get as a replacement will have different things, of a magnitude like this, that will irritate you as much. The question for me is; is now the time to make the change? We will be struggling next season to transition from rebuilding to competing, not to contending. The manager will have a team comprised largely of young developing players. What manager will be better suited to deal with those circumstances than DT?

Why is DT suited for it at all?

How are you even determining that he isn't over his head as a ML manager?

The benefit of the doubt that you and others give to DT is hysterical...he has proven NOTHING.

Yes, he is a nice guy...Yes, he is good with the media but at the end of the day, he has shown NOTHING that he is the guy to take us to the next level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously we won't get this answer until it actually happens, but if MacPhail fires Trembley why do you think he would?

I think he expected this team to be bad but probably not this bad. I also don't think he hopes to replace Trembley and add 4-5 more wins.

I won't use the terms moxie or grit, but I would imagine AM probably wants a different personality or at least one who is able to get his message to his players a little better.

If it was solely about the talent on the field, I don't think his job would be in jeopardy.

I think the main reason AM will fire DT will be for PR. To make a show for the fans that we are improving, when we won't be in a way that will sell tickets.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • I don't think we really disagree about much. There is wide array of ticket prices. And I think even Fan Price Index shows the Orioles being particularly fair, and if I recall correctly their family of four number for 2022 was $156 You're reading my comments as if they were directed at the Orioles. They were not. Nor were they a criticism, as much as an identification of one of the factors that is feeding the decline of generational popularity in baseball. Many of us have a love for the game. For me that love was cemented by two things. My Dad taking me to the ballpark as a kid... and my Little League experience as a kid.  Affordability was a big part of that. When I was a kid we didn't have two nickles to rub together. My father worked two jobs to make ends meet. Mom delivered newspapers to keep us ahead of the bills. But we could still afford to go to 33rd St a couple times a year... Saw Mark Belanger hit a home run...  that was a rare feat.. and I had a ratty old mitt and some fish-heads to play Little League with. I found old deposit bottles in the woods and took 'em to the 7-11 to buy baseball cards. That's where I fell in love with the game. Eventually my father built a very successful business. and we didn't have to worry about that kind of thing.. But I kept my love for the game that was built in those early experiences. Baseball was once literally the cost of a matinee movie...  stands were packed... all the time... but slowly.. generationally.. this has changed... the last generation to FULLY embrace baseball were boomers...  I guess there's a part of me that thinks selling out every game ...and families embracing is early might change the trajectory baseball is on... wishful thinking maybe      
    • The same thing happened in San Francisco when Roman was there.   They had one truly great season with Kaepernick, and then nothing.   Not that I'm comparing Lamar to Kaepernick, but at their best under Roman, they are pretty similar. I don't know if they are using this system because they think Lamar can't handle a more complex system, or because Roman is stuck using the same stuff over and over.    Roman needs to be gone regardless of what happens with Lamar.  They need to get rid of Ricard and start running a real pro-style offense.   
    • I guess I’ve reached the point of the off-season where I’m at do we really need to add a bat?  Stowers and Vavra spent the last 1/3 of the season up. Westburg is ready. Cowser could be ready are June.    Is Brantley, Voit, or Mancini worth even a one year deal?  I could see us rolling with what we have, figuring out what we have, and signing a vet depth bat like Jesus Aguilar to a milb deal with a ST invite. If we need a bat, we can always get a rental at the deadline. 
    • Interesting to see these numbers in such black and white. It's a huge problem and from what I can tell, its a problem with the calls not coming in quickly. I don't know if the play calls are too complicated, but Jackson rarely gets to get back there, look at the defense, and then snap it early  instead of at zero when you know the defense can get good jumps. This has been a constant problem with Roman, and the fact it hasn't been fixed tells me a it's a limitation of Roman's play calling ability.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...