Dave Trembley: Early Leader for Mis-manager of the Year.

[Mackus]

Rule, there is no rule. I believe Weaver would only have not sent him on a ball to Longoria but he would have shot Lugo (who should have been on 3rd) if he would have been very far off 3rd and made an out.

This, avoid the double play stuff, forgets who was running. Izturis was on first and Brian was batting. The chances that they double Brian is poor. And Longoria dropped the ball while going away from third to field the ball anyway.

Longoria booting the ball was the only reason it looks like a poor move.

If he fields it cleanly, and Atkins doesn't go, then its an easy double play, even with Roberts running (and he's not at top speed right now). It was the right play to put on. And if you disagree, then its one of those 55/45 type calls, there was obviously a lot of sound baseball logic behind the move.

[Tony-OH]

Atkins is so slow you'd have to time him with an hourglass. Plus he made a lame attempt to score. I'm wondering, did a player make the decision not to pinch-run for Atkins? If so, I guess DT is off the hook for this one.

Trembley can't help that Atkins wussed out at the plate. If he trucks the catcher and the runners move up to 2nd and 3rd, we're looking at 2nd and 3rd with one out most likely. Regardless, sending Atkins is a sound baseball decision and even if there were other possible options, it doesn't make it a poor managerial decision.

Trembley is far from the problem in these games although I would have taken Millwood out the second Longoria hit the bomb off him in the 6th. After that, he managed things perfectly from the pen standpoint. Gonzalez blew it.

I might have pinch ran Lugo for Atkins in the first game, but I don't think it would have mattered.

[wildcard]

You are right about the first and third thing. It was the right play and as hard as that ball was hit, Longoria would have been able to easily double up Roberts had he fielded the ball correctly. Trembley explained it well and it was the right move, it just didn't work out when the Orioles failed to get a key hit and Atkins failed to run over the catcher (perhaps he jars the ball loose of the runners get the 3rd and 2nd on the play if he does).

Either way, I'm not saying using another strategy would be terrible, but the strategy used was solid.

I heard what you and Trembley have said on the subject and I don't agree. I believe that Weaver had it right. He made the runners accountable for knowing the game. He would read them the riot act if they made outs. I don't believe Weaver would have thought that Lugo should have taken much of a lead with Longoria even with the bag. And I think it would have had to have been an great turn by Tampa to double up Roberts.

There are many people that do not believe in Weaver's base running philosophies but I think they were sound. And I do think Weaver would have had Lugo running for Atkins.

[wildcard]

Longoria booting the ball was the only reason it looks like a poor move.

If he fields it cleanly, and Atkins doesn't go, then its an easy double play, even with Roberts running (and he's not at top speed right now). It was the right play to put on. And if you disagree, then its one of those 55/45 type calls, there was obviously a lot of sound baseball logic behind the move.

I haven't notice that Brian is slower. His timing is off at the plate but slower, I have not seen that so far.

[Mackus]

I haven't notice that Brian is slower. His timing is off and the plate but slower, I have not seen that so far.

He's not the fastest guy in the world to begin with, though, plus he's got the back concerns. Longoria fields that ball cleanly and its as routine of a double play as there is.

Roberts isn't Kenny Lofton, he's not some guy who never hits into double plays. He has hit into 7-8 of them a year for the past 3 years and hit into 16 in 2006. Its not some miracle for a defense to roll pair on him.

[ChesterPeake]

OK, so I see two people have picked up on the word usage there, so I apologize for writing "rule" there, because obviously not.

My real point in all of this was to contradict what the OP was saying, because I think he was being overcritical on Trembley through the first two games.

I'm not going to say that I know every small kink in what to do in a baseball game because I don't know them all, and there are always exceptions. I was basing it off of what I have read, heard, and understood.

FYI, he's been the manager for over two years now and I think that he's been a poor decision-maker that entire time. I consider the first two games of this season to be a continuation of his poor managing of the past two years. So, I'm not talking about two games, I'm talking about hundreds of games. The first two games of this season are merely a case of "Here we go again!", in my view.

Besides, I'm just getting a head start on the rest of you.

[tvz1997]

We're only two games into the season and Dave Trembley has already mis-managed 100% of the games.

Oooooh! You're THAT guy. Gotcha.

I mean this question seriously, for those just a little older than myself: Has the game changed sufficiently since the glory days of Weaver to outdate some of his philosophies on management? Obviously, player salaries have ballooned and that would probably rule out some of his tanrums, but I mean his between-the-lines ideas?

Somebody (no offense meant here Wildcard) often brings up Weaver when we talk about how far our managers have strayed away from what should be done. Should somebody send Trembley a What-Would-Weaver-Do? bracelet? (I know he's a HOFer, maybe we should).

[Mackus]

Somebody (no offense meant here Wildcard) often brings up Weaver when we talk about how far our managers have strayed away from what should be done. Should somebody send Trembley a What-Would-Weaver-Do? bracelet? (I know he's a HOFer, maybe we should).

I think Weaver probably would have sent Atkins as well. Weaver's top priority on offense was to avoid making outs. Running once you see its a grounder assures you of no worse than one out. Holding there until the ball is through will result in 2 outs on anything other than a slow grounder. With the heart of the lineup coming up, I think the obvious choice is to prefer 1st and 2nd with 1 down to 3rd with 2 down. Even if there is a slight chance you might get into a 1st and 3rd w/ 1 down situation if Roberts can beat that out, I don't think the odds of that are good enough to overcome the advantage the 1st and 2nd situation has over the 3rd and 2 out situation.

[Sports Guy]

Not playing Scott over Reimold last night, in LF, was a pretty dumb decision...No real fault in anything else thus far...That being said, I do not think he is the manager to take us to another level....but I do want him to be because he is so damn likeable and the players seem to really like him.

[wildcard]

He's not the fastest guy in the world to begin with, though, plus he's got the back concerns. Longoria fields that ball cleanly and its as routine of a double play as there is.

Roberts isn't Kenny Lofton, he's not some guy who never hits into double plays. He has hit into 7-8 of them a year for the past 3 years and hit into 16 in 2006. Its not some miracle for a defense to roll pair on him.

7or 8 DPs in 700+ plate appearances is about a 1% chance of him being doubled up.

[Mackus]

Not playing Scott over Reimold last night, in LF, was a pretty dumb decision...No real fault in anything else thus far...That being said, I do not think he is the manager to take us to another level....but I do want him to be because he is so damn likeable and the players seem to really like him.

That's one thing I agree with, especially if Reimold is still a bit shaky physically. Scott is underrated around here for his defense, and while I don't think he would have gotten to the Longoria double, I do think keeping Reimold off of that turf might have been a good idea.

[Mackus]

7or 8 DPs in 700+ plate appearance is about a 1% chance of him being doubled up.

How many of those PAs does he hit a firm groundball right to an infielder? The odds of doubling up in that situation are much higher.

That was a layup double play ball, the out at home was a better outcome than them turning a pair. Longoria bobbling it doesn't really change the decision-making process for me. Crap like that happens.

[Orioles West]

I heard what you and Trembley have said on the subject and I don't agree. I believe that Weaver had it right. He made the runners accountable for knowing the game. He would read them the riot act if they made outs. I don't believe Weaver would have thought that Lugo should have taken much of a lead with Longoria even with the bag. And I think it would have had to have been an great turn by Tampa to double up Roberts.

There are many people that do not believe in Weaver's base running philosophies but I think they were sound. And I do think Weaver would have had Lugo running for Atkins.

I agree Earl may have brought in a faster runner, but sending the player on third on ground contact is the right call.

Imagine if you saw a double play with Atkins standing on third and not moving at all. That is something that would have angered Mr. Weaver.

-Don

[Sports Guy]

That's one thing I agree with, especially if Reimold is still a bit shaky physically. Scott is underrated around here for his defense, and while I don't think he would have gotten to the Longoria double, I do think keeping Reimold off of that turf might have been a good idea.

Right now, bad heal or not, Scott is a better defensive LFer than Reimold IMO. Now, I could see that change very quickly but right now, Scott is better.

On top of that, you say the organization didn't want Reimold to play on the turf...So, what do you do with all of that info? You play Reimold.

Totally stupid on every level.

Agree that I am not sure Scott makes the play or not...but he certainly would have had a better chance to make the play.

[tvz1997]

Right now, bad heal or not, Scott is a better defensive LFer than Reimold IMO. Now, I could see that change very quickly but right now, Scott is better.

On top of that, you say the organization didn't want Reimold to play on the turf...So, what do you do with all of that info? You play Reimold.

Totally stupid on every level.

Agree that I am not sure Scott makes the play or not...but he certainly would have had a better chance to make the play.

This is dead-on. I'm really hoping we see Reimold at DH, Scott in LF, Lugo at 2B, and Wiggington at 1B tonight. Any other lineup and I will be furious. :cussing: