Mazzone let go

[geschinger]

I see this got turned into a poll....I voted yes but only because i think DT should be able to pick his own coaches.

I didn't want Mazzone gone but if DT and AM believe this to be the right move, then i will back them on it for now.

I can sort of agree with this although I hope DT knows what he's doing. I've always been a believer that good leaders want to surround themselves with people the smartest/best people possible. I'm not so sure that is the case here when you decide to replace the best. Not that my opinion matters any but I'm a bit more skeptical of his decision making today then I was a couple of days ago.

[NoVaO]

The mistake you make is to hold Murton's lack of opportunity against him. He doesn't fill out the lineup card or decide on the roster, so his small number of ABs is completely outside his control.

You compound that error by assuming that a smallish number of ABs is indicative of a talent deficit or a modest ceiling or "he is what he is" or whatever. No such conclusion is warranted.

The only thing I'm doing is showing that Markakis played everyday against every type of pitcher. I doubt you would see Murton's numbers improve if he was put in the line-up to face Cain, Lincecum, Penny, and Snell, who I noticed he sat out against during his time in August and September. This makes Markakis' second half much more impressive.

Look, Markakis was in a much better situation than Murton in 2007 -- Markakis got regular ABs all year and didn't have to deal with being in and out of the lineup, up and down from AAA, pinch-hitting, etc.

He was in a better situation in terms of playing, but he also faced more difficult pitching. And I don't like this argument because there are too many hypotheticals. I still don't think he would have matched Markakis' level this year.

Not surprisingly, Markakis blossomed while Murton stagnated.

How would Murton have done in Markakis' situation (or visa versa)? Impossible to know exactly, but I'd sure be curious to know. It's hardly a stretch to say Murton would've done just as well as Markakis did, considering that's exactly what happened in 2006: under similar circumstances, the guys put up nearly identical numbers.

Again, all I can look at is what actually has happened. You have too many hypotheticals here. I will go back to age and projection, but you seem to be putting little stock into that.

Looking ahead to 2008, how will things turn out if the Cubs are smart enough to make Murton their everyday RF? Your guess is as good as mine, but you'd be foolish to think there's good reason to believe one guy will hit significantly better than the other.

I don't think the Cubs should make him an everyday OF unless they have no better option. He should be used like he was in 2006. His numbers will go down if he is used in an everyday role.

Give him 650 plate appearances. 450 will come against RHP and 200 will come against LHP. You're looking at a .750 - .780 OPS against RHP, maybe worse and an .870 - .900 OPS against LHP, maybe better. That comes out to somwhere in the range of an .780 - .810 OPS. Murton will be 26 years old next year. I don't see him getting much better than he is right now. I think most unbiased observers will agree with me. The opposite holds true for Markakis.

The projection thing is easy to argue either way. Markakis is younger, but he's been a regular for 2 years now, getting consistent ABs all along the way.

Murton is only 25, and has plenty of room to grow if he'd just get that same chance at consistent ABs.

FWIW, I think both guys will settle in as mid-800 OPS guys.

The projection thing I don't think is debateable. It's something you continue to look over but it is significant. Two years is a significant difference.

And like I said, if you expect Murton to be a mid-800 OPS player you would have to expect Murton to either absolutely destroy lefties or hit right handers, even the best ones, at a much better rate than he has even shown to be able to do.

To wildcard:

I don't put any faith into RISP because it isn't a skill the correlates from year-to-year. His RISP in 2006 was .806, almost right in line with his overall numbers.

[Sports Guy]

I can sort of agree with this although I hope DT knows what I'm doing. I've always been a believer that good leaders want to surround themselves with people the smartest/best people possible. I'm not so sure that is the case here when you decide to replace the best. Not that my opinion matters any but I'm a bit more skeptical of his decision making today then I was a couple of days ago.

Yea...We have to be skeptical.

[RShack]

I can sort of agree with this although I hope DT knows what I'm doing. I've always been a believer that good leaders want to surround themselves with people the smartest/best people possible. I'm not so sure that is the case here when you decide to replace the best. Not that my opinion matters any but I'm a bit more skeptical of his decision making today then I was a couple of days ago.

If their decision proves to be flawed, you've pointed out the likely flaw. Part of our problem is that there's so much about this that we just don't know.

On a more positive note, at least we won't be complaining about half-measures. At least decisions are being made, and the manager is getting to pick his coaches, just like God intended.

ps: Here's what I *wish* DT thought-and-said:

As we proceed to fix this organization under Andy's leadership, we are very fortunate that Leo Mazzone is here. I really lucked out about that, because it's Sam's fault, not mine. But, I'd rather be lucky than good any day. Leo has agreed to stay, and boy am I glad. In fact, both Andy and I are so glad that we're going to make sure that we get the full benefit. So, after talking about it during the meeting, Andy and I agree that we're going to implement Leo's program throughout the entire organization, and we will be kicking butt and taking names to ensure that it gets implemented top-to-bottom. We're through fooling around. Leo will be spending time on a regular basis with pitching coaches at all levels. We definitely want our pitching coaches to use their knowledge, wisdom, and their own personal style to "get through" to players, and to fix the problems they see. But they will all be expected to implement the goals and priorities that Leo favors. There will be an Oriole Way of developing pitchers, and the goal of that will be to have young pitchers arrive in Baltimore ready to be here.

That's what I *wish* he thought-and-said. But evidently that's not what he thought. So, here we are, just waiting to see what will happen... both with the O's and with Leo...

[El Gordo]

No question about this. Anybody who makes an argument that Murton is at the same level as Markakis is....biased. Or that person does not take into account half the game, defense.

But make no mistake about it, Murton is a good player. I would love to have Murton as our LFer next year. I would say that Murton, Pie and Theriot would be a fair trade for Miggy and Fiorentino. Pie is a risk, with a high ceiling. Theriot is not exactly high ceiling. Murton is a sure thing, though he will never be an all-star caliber player. I want no part of Cedeno. He has almost zero value to me.

The O's are a bad team and they can't find any use for Fiorintino; why should the Cubs who made it to the playoffs be able to? If you want to include Murton in the Tejada trade your going to have to give up a lot more than Fio.

[davearm]

NoVaO --

This thing is really just at the point where what you think and what I think diverge, which is fine.

I think both guys showed a lot of potential in 2006, which for all intents and purposes was each guy's rookie year. Their numbers were very similar.

Markakis made nice, gradual improvement in his second year. Murton never really got a fair chance to build on his 2006. But despite that, I don't think the window for him to develop is anywhere near shut. You think it is.

Heck IMO Murton doesn't really even need development so much as he just needs consistent PT, which he's responded well to every time he's gotten it. You think his numbers will go down with more PT. And while I can follow the reasoning, I disagree strongly with it, especially since the empirical evidence we have shows otherwise.

Only time will tell, but frankly I don't see much reason to think Murton can't be better (and possibly significantly better) than his 2006 version with more experience and a regular, everyday opportunity.

[RShack]

NoVaO --

This thing is really just at the point where what you think and what I think diverge, which is fine.

This seems like a lower-stakes version of the timeless argument about DiMaggio vs. Ted, etc. It's the kind of argument that always has and always will go on about 2 players who are kinda-comparable. We just have more numbers now...

Kinda hard to vote about it in the Mazzone poll though...

[scOtt]

I can sort of agree with this although I hope DT knows what he's doing. I've always been a believer that good leaders want to surround themselves with people the smartest/best people possible. I'm not so sure that is the case here when you decide to replace the best. Not that my opinion matters any but I'm a bit more skeptical of his decision making today then I was a couple of days ago.

I would just ask, what is better? To have the best PC that you can't agree with? Or to have a still good PC that is in sync with you?

I mourn Leo's loss too, but like SG said, if DT and AM think this is best, I'll take their word for it, for now. Both guys represent change for the org. Change is good after the last ten years.

[geschinger]

I would just ask, what is better? To have the best PC that you can't agree with? Or to have a still good PC that is in sync with you?

I mourn Leo's loss too, but like SG said, if DT and AM think this is best, I'll take their word for it, for now. Both guys represent change for the org. Change is good after the last ten years.

I agree that if they think it's best it's a move they should of made. And maybe there is a really good reason for it that we're not privy too. On the surface w/the (lack of) information available to a fan like myself it seems like a boneheaded decision but of course I hope it doesn't turn out to be.

I'd also buy more into it's a change move if they go further and replace guys who represent the status quo for the organization such as Crowley. Again, there may be good reasons to keep a Crowley and let a guy like Mazzone go but on the surface it seems to me at least that DT's decisions are questionable at best so far.

[scOtt]

I agree that if they think it's best it's a move they should of made. And maybe there is a really good reason for it that we're not privy too. On the surface w/the (lack of) information available to a fan like myself it seems like a boneheaded decision but of course I hope it doesn't turn out to be.

I'd also buy more into it's a change move if they go further and replace guys who represent the status quo for the organization such as Crowley. Again, there may be good reasons to keep a Crowley and let a guy like Mazzone go but on the surface it seems to me at least that DT's decisions are questionable at best so far.

I also agree it seems a "change" move. Like you say, we're not privvy to a lot. I read and see that DT really seems to have AM's confidence. DT really seems to have a strong voice with AM. Maybe it's past history, I don't know. Anyways, AM does have a reason for this confidence. I'll (full of hope) back them both til they give me a tangible reason not to.

And of course keep praying and chanting that Crow is the next casualty...

[eric0668]

Sorry if this was posted in this thread already, but didn't want a thread based on this if already covered.

Do you think the possibility of signing Bedard (if you are one who wants to make that attempt and I do) changes at all with Mazzone considering the relationship they were said to have

[NoVaO]

NoVaO --

This thing is really just at the point where what you think and what I think diverge, which is fine.

I think both guys showed a lot of potential in 2006, which for all intents and purposes was each guy's rookie year. Their numbers were very similar.

Markakis made nice, gradual improvement in his second year. Murton never really got a fair chance to build on his 2006. But despite that, I don't think the window for him to develop is anywhere near shut. You think it is.

Heck IMO Murton doesn't really even need development so much as he just needs consistent PT, which he's responded well to every time he's gotten it. You think his numbers will go down with more PT. And while I can follow the reasoning, I disagree strongly with it, especially since the empirical evidence we have shows otherwise.

Only time will tell, but frankly I don't see much reason to think Murton can't be better (and possibly significantly better) than his 2006 version with more experience and a regular, everyday opportunity.

Fair enough. We'll see how it plays out.

[TGO]

Sorry if this was posted in this thread already, but didn't want a thread based on this if already covered.

Do you think the possibility of signing Bedard (if you are one who wants to make that attempt and I do) changes at all with Mazzone considering the relationship they were said to have

I don't think so. I think extending Bedard will depend on how much money we offer and whether we show some evidence of having a plan to compete. I think any affinity to a particular coach is going to be secondary to getting paid and winning games.

[RShack]

Sorry if this was posted in this thread already, but didn't want a thread based on this if already covered.

Do you think the possibility of signing Bedard (if you are one who wants to make that attempt and I do) changes at all with Mazzone considering the relationship they were said to have

What you're looking for can be found here: http://www.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54115

[scOtt]

I don't think so. I think extending Bedard will depend on how much money we offer and whether we show some evidence of having a plan to compete. I think any affinity to a particular coach is going to be secondary to getting paid and winning games.

I even think the money is rather secondary. Erikkkk is gonna get paid, regardless. I think the plan and actually moving toward that plan is the most important.