Roch: Hitting Coach Terry Crowley is coming back

[DrungoHazewood]

Can you point to any post, made by myself or someone else, that has said Crow has had a ton of talent to work with?

Drungo pointing that out is pretty meaningless when EVERYONE acknowledges the same thing. That's not exactly some kind of brilliant revelation.

So you'd just regularly fire all the coaches as long as the organization keeps bringing in poor talent? Otherwise I'm not sure why you're bringing this up.

Seems to me that if you have a bright, talented, hard-working guy who gets .220 hitters to hit .240 that's irrelevant to you. If they're not hitting .280 you'd just fire the whole lot on principle.

[Sports Guy]

Look, SG, I am not a Crowley supporter, but this logic makes no sense. If the front office sees fit to go sign Cesar Izturis at the SS, is that Crowley's fault?

I suspect that if I had 48 hours to do nothing else, I could come up with a detailed analysis of players who either came through our system and then went elsewhere, or players who were somewhere else and then came here, and come up with some correlation to how they were coached. But short of doing something like that, I don't think it's a simple as saying "the Orioles offense has been consistently bad while Crowley has been the coach, and therefore Crowley must be a bad coach." If the talent has been bad, Crowley can't control that.

I'm not saying this to support Crowley. Frankly, I've been ready to see a change for at least 3-4 years, just to see if it helps. But it is not as simple as bad results = bad coach.

Read this very carefully:

I AM NOT SAYING CROW IS A BAD COACH!

I have acknowledged, SEVERAL TIMES, that he is good with swing mechanics..That the players seem to like him(at least the few that have commented on him)..That tells me he is good with them.

All of that is fine..Its all well and good.

But after years of pathetic performance and years of basically the same issues..poor OBP, little power being shown, I think it is time for a new philosophy and change.

Hell, the minor leaguers have this issue as well.

I think its an organizational problem...Now, how much input does Crow have on the whole philosophy? I have no idea..However, I do find it interesting that these 2 things seem to go hand in hand.

With Crow's obvious influence with PA over the years, it wouldn't surprise me at all if he has input on the way the hitters in the organization should be brought up...what to look for in a hitter, etc...

Either way, I am a big believer(in all sports) of the need for a new voice and a new philosophy.

So, you combine all of that with poor results and I see no intelligent, logical reason out there as to why he should be kept.

The players and Buck liking him isn't good enough for me. Maybe that's unreasonable and if it is, so be it..I am fine with that. but I don't see how it is unreasonable to want a new voice and get rid of a guy that hasn't given us good results for years and years.

BTW, this is the first anager that probably really had the ability to name who he wants, so the fact that the other guys kept Crow around is pretty meaningless.

What you guys are saying is that you think it is ok for PA to make the coaching decisions...I find that laughable.

[DrungoHazewood]

Maybe what we need to do is design a statistical test to measure how Crowley has done. Here is a possibility:

Take every player who either joined the Orioles from another team or left the Orioles for another team from 2006-10. Compare their actual performance in the year the joined/left the Orioles to their PECOTA for that year. Then do a cumulative analysis for all those players and see if there is a statisitically significant trend.

My guess is, if you did this, you'd find a trend that wasn't strong enough to prove anything one way or the other. You'd also have the issue of needing to make adjustments for league and run environment.

Yes. This is what someone needs to do. The issue I see is getting the historical projections. I know PECOTA is undergoing a major revision, and they are doing historical projections as a baseline to tweak the system. Maybe they'll eventually release the data to the public.

[Sports Guy]

So you'd just regularly fire all the coaches as long as the organization keeps bringing in poor talent? Otherwise I'm not sure why you're bringing this up.

Seems to me that if you have a bright, talented, hard-working guy who gets .220 hitters to hit .240 that's irrelevant to you. If they're not hitting .280 you'd just fire the whole lot on principle.

No, I would fire everyone involved in the organization outside of Buck and start completely over. Everything is screwed up. Crow is likely just a very small part of that but I see no reason to think he is a solution to the problem either.

[Frobby]

Yes. This is what someone needs to do. The issue I see is getting the historical projections. I know PECOTA is undergoing a major revision, and they are doing historical projections as a baseline to tweak the system. Maybe they'll eventually release the data to the public.

I have the hard copy of BP's annual going back several years, so I probably have these. However, I think the hard-copy is an early run of the projections, that usually hasn't adjusted the projections if a player has been traded.

[DrungoHazewood]

So, you combine all of that with poor results and I see no intelligent, logical reason out there as to why he should be kept.

I've yet to see any objective evidence that he's not doing a good job and shouldn't be kept.

And yes, I agree that the change of scenery argument holds some water, but that's not a logical argument that someone else will likely do better.

The players and Buck liking him isn't good enough for me. Maybe that's unreasonable and if it is, so be it..I am fine with that. but I don't see how it is unreasonable to want a new voice and get rid of a guy that hasn't given us good results for years and years.

It's certainly reasonable to want a new voice, but again, you've not shown me anything that suggests Crowley hasn't done his job well. You've shown me instead evidence that the Baltimore Orioles organziation has done a poor job signing and developing hitters.

What you guys are saying is that you think it is ok for PA to make the coaching decisions...I find that laughable.

Your arguments would be a bit more convincing if they weren't so totally over-the-top. Of course none of us think Angelos should pick the coaches, but maybe if you paint us as really insanely outrageous, you can convince someone that, in reality, we're only garden-variety outrageous.

[Moose Milligan]

Can you point to any post, made by myself or someone else, that has said Crow has had a ton of talent to work with?

Drungo pointing that out is pretty meaningless when EVERYONE acknowledges the same thing. That's not exactly some kind of brilliant revelation.

But that's the reality of the situation. So why are you screaming for results when there isn't any talent to work with? You're essentially rolling up to the mcdonalds drive thru and demanding why you weren't given a Ruths Chris filet mignon.

[Frobby]

Read this very carefully:

I AM NOT SAYING CROW IS A BAD COACH!

I have acknowledged, SEVERAL TIMES, that he is good with swing mechanics..That the players seem to like him(at least the few that have commented on him)..That tells me he is good with them.

All of that is fine..Its all well and good.

But after years of pathetic performance and years of basically the same issues..poor OBP, little power being shown, I think it is time for a new philosophy and change.

Hell, the minor leaguers have this issue as well.

I think its an organizational problem...Now, how much input does Crow have on the whole philosophy? I have no idea..However, I do find it interesting that these 2 things seem to go hand in hand.

With Crow's obvious influence with PA over the years, it wouldn't surprise me at all if he has input on the way the hitters in the organization should be brought up...what to look for in a hitter, etc...

Either way, I am a big believer(in all sports) of the need for a new voice and a new philosophy.

So, you combine all of that with poor results and I see no intelligent, logical reason out there as to why he should be kept.

The players and Buck liking him isn't good enough for me. Maybe that's unreasonable and if it is, so be it..I am fine with that. but I don't see how it is unreasonable to want a new voice and get rid of a guy that hasn't given us good results for years and years.

BTW, this is the first anager that probably really had the ability to name who he wants, so the fact that the other guys kept Crow around is pretty meaningless.

What you guys are saying is that you think it is ok for PA to make the coaching decisions...I find that laughable.

I certainly interpreted your earlier posts to be saying that Crowley is a bad coach -- maybe not with respect to swing mechanics, but overall.

My feeling is, I would have been fine with it if Buck had decided to replace Crowley, and I'm somewhat surprised he didn't. But, I have confidence that if Buck decided to keep Crowley, that it's because Buck thinks he's a good hitting coach, not because Crow is somehow being protected. And I think Buck has showed enough acumen in his 2 months here where his decisions get the benefit of the doubt, for now.

Now, if 2011 comes and goes and the young players aren't getting better, I think at that point Crow's head really has to roll. And I expect Buck willl feel the same way.

[DrungoHazewood]

No, I would fire everyone involved in the organization outside of Buck and start completely over. Everything is screwed up. Crow is likely just a very small part of that but I see no reason to think he is a solution to the problem either.

Fair enough. My position is that I'd do a thorough independent review of the entire organization and only fix the parts that need fixing. It's hard enough to deal with that.

[makoman]

Lots of people say or imply that Crowley is protected by PA, that he's not firable. While I have no idea if that's true, it makes me wonder, if that's so why is it that we've never heard a quote to that effect?

Thrift, Beattie, Duquette, Hargrove, Perlozzo, Trembley...lots of people have come and gone since Crowley's been here. Those guys have no reason to cover up for PA. I could see Perlozzo or Mazzone or Duquette complaining that they were hamstrung, forced to keep Crowley around. Why would 10 years worth of coaches and execs keep quiet?

I don't remember if Tony said anything about Crowley in his piece, but plenty of damning things were said, and it just seems odd, seems like if he was being kept on because of PA somebody who was here would have said something after they left.

[Frobby]

Lots of people say or imply that Crowley is protected by PA, that he's not firable. While I have no idea if that's true, it makes me wonder, if that's so why is it that we've never heard a quote to that effect?

Thrift, Beattie, Duquette, Hargrove, Perlozzo, Trembley...lots of people have come and gone since Crowley's been here. Those guys have no reason to cover up for PA. I could see Perlozzo or Mazzone or Duquette complaining that they were hamstrung, forced to keep Crowley around. Why would 10 years worth of coaches and execs keep quiet?

I don't remember if Tony said anything about Crowley in his piece, but plenty of damning things were said, and it just seems odd, seems like if he was being kept on because of PA somebody who was here would have said something after they left.

Even Dempsey, who is said to be a PA favorite (and who has a much bigger place in Orioles history) was shoved out of a coaching job by Trembley. I can't believe Crowley has some silver bullet that protects him.

[hoosiers]

Maybe what we need to do is design a statistical test to measure how Crowley has done. Here is a possibility:

Take every player who either joined the Orioles from another team or left the Orioles for another team from 2006-10. Compare their actual performance in the year the joined/left the Orioles to their PECOTA for that year. Then do a cumulative analysis for all those players and see if there is a statisitically significant trend.

My guess is, if you did this, you'd find a trend that wasn't strong enough to prove anything one way or the other. You'd also have the issue of needing to make adjustments for league and run environment.

I thought I did this a few months ago with OPS+ and it showed that a large majority of hitters did better with Crow than not.

I think Crow has done fine with the talent he has had. If Buck had wanted a change, then I would have been fine with that.

I am never one eager to see the baby thrown out with the proverbial bath water however. Assuming the decision to retain TC has been based on some qualitative analysis, player feedback and input from scouts, I have little problem supporting this decision. In fact, if the decision were merit based, it is encouraging to see the organization step up and reward a quality employee who has been working with sub-par hitters generating poor overall numbers.

[Goop]

Not the biggest fan of Crow, but if that's who Buck wants, I support his decision.

Gotta agree with you Lex.

[Bradysburns]

Sorry SG, but this is an awful argument on your part here. While Trea is the master of ducking posts, you're the master of selecting/picking parts of posts and ignoring other valid points.

Drungo has correctly explained just how pathetic the O's talent has been over the past decade and what Crowley has been able to do with it. Of course we suck at getting on base...we have hitters who, at their core, traditionally have sucked at getting on base. Crowley can't fix that. Crowley can't, as Drungo explained, take 650 run talent and somehow make it produce 750 runs.

So I ask you, under what circumstances would you agree to part ways with TC? By what specific criteria would YOU judge him? Is it just kind of a groovy "feel" thing, and that the players seem to like him? (I'm sure the players like their mothers, too, but I wouldn't want old Mrs. Wigginton as our hitting coach).

So far I have heard nothing from the pro-TC crowd as to how an ignorant rube like me SHOULD judge a hitting coach. I can't do it based on data and statistics, or team hitting trends, or how our young hitters have performed at the MLB level overall.

I'm just wondering how you do it. What information do you use to apologize for the same hitting coach who has been the ONE common thread in this culture of losing for the past decade or so.

What would he have had to do in order to win your disapproval?

[Bradysburns]

Even Dempsey, who is said to be a PA favorite (and who has a much bigger place in Orioles history) was shoved out of a coaching job by Trembley. I can't believe Crowley has some silver bullet that protects him.

As far as I know, Maz, then Perlozzo and then Trembley all "inherited" Crowley - in other words, it was understood by these three that they would have to use him as their hitting coach. This is the mark of an imbecilic leadership structure - reminds me of the Redskins hiring an offensive coordinator before finding a head coach. Then once they realized that no head coach would accept hand-me-down coordinators, they... made Jim Zorn the head coach! Kind of like us making Dave Trembley the manager!