baltimoresun.com

« Can Orioles rock Cleveland? | Main | Orioles: Draft order debate »

August 10, 2010

Agree with "Z": Cut Trembley a little slack

trembleyap2.jpgJust finished reading an extended blog entry by Jeff Zrebiec on Orioles Insider and I've got to chime in and back him up. There's no question in my mind that the arrival of Buck Showalter has been an elixir for this team -- though it's hard to pinpoint the exact reason -- but it's not like the Orioles never came back to win a game in the late innings.

They've had other junctures in this lost season when they delivered a quick burst of adequacy, but this is definitely the most dynamic indication that there is more talent here than has been reflected in the won-loss record.

I don't think it's necessary to use Showalter to support a turn-back-the-clock argument for hiring someone else to start the season. Obviously, the team didn't play well for Trembley during the first couple of months, but I don't think they were in a position to play well for anyone at that point. Suddenly, Brian Roberts is back and starting to play like Brian Roberts. Felix Pie is starting to look comfortable again, and Michael Gonzalez is a different pitcher since coming back from the disabled list.

Throw in seven straight quality starts and that 6-1 record wouldn't have been such a stretch of the imagination.

That said, I do believe that the hiring of Showalter has been catalytic for a number of possible reasons -- from an increase in overall intensity to a much higher level of confidence in what is going on inside the organization.

Trembley was at a huge disadvantage. It's tough to earn and maintain the respect of the players when the team is not having success...and Trembley never managed a team that had a legitimate chance to play .500 ball in the American League East. Showalter already earned that respect elsewhere, which makes a world of difference coming into such a difficult situation.

Let's leave it at this. Dave did what he was asked to do by the organization, but the poor results make it tough to measure his contribution. If you doubt that, I have to ask one question: Do you think that Showalter called all the young starters into a room last Tuesday and taught them how to pitch?

Associated Press photo

Posted by Peter Schmuck at 3:44 PM | | Comments (87)
Categories: Just baseball
        

Comments

You will always be better off when you replace a nobody with a somebody!

I was never a DaveT basher and I don't want to credit all the winning to Buck. But Buck talks about "proactive vs. reactive" and that's exactly how I'd describe his managing vs. Dave T's.

Two images from last night's game were what I take away from the new Buckland:

*Josh Bell running down a pop up that was extremely difficult after nearly blowing a pop up in the previous inning. You know Buck took him aside and read him the riot act and he responded. Even though he overcompensated, he didn't make the same mistakes over and over (a la Dave T's Orioles). I don't think Adam Jones would've spent three months chasing sliders away if Buck was here from the start. If he did it two games in a row, he'd have sat in the third.
*Buck talking to Matusz after he wormed out of the 6th inning jam. Buck was talking for an extended time and Matusz was listening, hanging on every word. When Matusz was pulled in KC (prematurely, if you ask me), he sat there alone in the dugout stewing and learning nothing. Here, Buck took him aside and made sure the lesson stuck (after he showed confidence by leaving him in there). Kranitz has done the "lesson thing" at times, but I rarely saw either of the previous managers really take pitchers aside and teach. And that's what this team needs.

Chalk me up as another who says to cool it with the blame Dave talk.

The guy was never given a chance to win. He was given a young team and was told to babysit them while they learned. He might very well have made different decisions if he had a different type of team.

Many people around here make it seem like the guy was a nothing, same with Samuel. The fact is, they were given nothing to work with and were expected to show results.

Not gonna happen.

The thing with Dave T, as bad as the Os were, they NEVER had a 10 game stretch where they played over their heads the way they are now. Give Buck 162 games with this crew and they'd win what, maybe 76 games even if healthy (the pitchers are YOUNG)The Os need some talent in here.

I'm not a DT basher however beleive he and the entire coaching staff (maybe not Kranitz) should have been let go at the end of last season...guilty by association with a big time losing culture. And didnt hold player accountable...you dont have to yell or be a dick to do that...just pull someone aside and tell them what needs to change. If they do it again, take em out.

I'm not fixing my believe misspelling

I'm not going to bash Dave Trembley, but let's face it, how many times did we all watch or listen and common sense said it was time to make a move where none was made and the inevitable result occurred.

Buck Showalter knows when to make a move and makes it and doesn't let the personalities, or salaries, or personal feelings get in the way of his decision.

Unfortunately, the Orioles have not had the guy on the bench for years with these basic baseball skills.

Successful managing in baseball is no different than successful managing of any other type of business. You have to know when to move forward and you have to have the conviction to live with the decisions you make. That is the difference in the Orioles over the last seven games.

I'm not going to bash Dave Trembley, but let's face it, how many times did we all watch or listen and common sense said it was time to make a move where none was made and the inevitable result occurred.

Buck Showalter knows when to make a move and makes it and doesn't let the personalities, or salaries, or personal feelings get in the way of his decision.

Unfortunately, the Orioles have not had the guy on the bench for years with these basic baseball skills.

Successful managing in baseball is no different than successful managing of any other type of business. You have to know when to move forward and you have to have the conviction to live with the decisions you make. That is the difference in the Orioles over the last seven games.

I'm not going to bash Dave Trembley, but let's face it, how many times did we all watch or listen and common sense said it was time to make a move where none was made and the inevitable result occurred.

Buck Showalter knows when to make a move and makes it and doesn't let the personalities, or salaries, or personal feelings get in the way of his decision.

Unfortunately, the Orioles have not had the guy on the bench for years with these basic baseball skills.

Successful managing in baseball is no different than successful managing of any other type of business. You have to know when to move forward and you have to have the conviction to live with the decisions you make. That is the difference in the Orioles over the last seven games.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Kornerko claims that on the big play from last night he originally headed towards first base, but did not actually tag the base. The umpire saw this and ruled Weiters safe, but later called Wieters out for running out of the baseline (apparently Weiters thought he was out and headed to the dugout). That was the cause of both Kornerko and Pierzinskys continuing discussions with the umpires. Does anybody from the sun have any follow up on the play?

I was about to comment that even after Trembley's firing Schmuck is still a Dave Trembley apologist. But then I read the post and it's not as bad as I thought because it gives Buck Showalter the credit he deserves for these last seven games. This reminds me of the quote from Goodfellas in which Henry Hill talks about how the kids from the neighborhood carried his groceries all the way home for him, and you know why they did that. IT WAS OUT OF RESPECT. Respect means something in professional sports and Buck commands respect. Dave Trembley commanded no respect and did not deserve any. Schmuck calls this hindsight but his bullpen decisions and his failure to get through to his players about fundamentals was pathetic. I actually don't think it is irrational to believe that Buck could have done more with this team from the beginning of this season than Dave Trembley did. Schmuck talks about how Trembley didn't have Brian Roberts, well Buck never had Miguel Tejada who was a pretty decent bat for this team during the first half of the season. I said it about Trembley before and I will say it again, GOOD RIDDANCE.

Uhhh,,,no. Peter it is what it is,,,,Trembley sucked. There was no sense of urgency, no competitive spirit....Trembley was awe struck just being on the MLB level, he was no leader.

Moral of this story? Nice guys (Dave) finish last, nuff said!

I think it is always hard for a career minor league manager to transition to the majors bc they manage in the minors to develop the players, not necessarily win. In the majors, it's all about the wins, nothing else matters. Trembley seemed never to break out of that minor league mentality; the players seemed to be satisfied that they gave it their all even when they lost. Lombardi once said winning is not a sometime thing, it's an all the time thing. That is Showalter and that is why the Orioles seem to be playing with a greater sense of urgency and determination under him.

I think it is always hard for a career minor league manager to transition to the majors bc they manage in the minors to develop the players, not necessarily win. In the majors, it's all about the wins, nothing else matters. Trembley seemed never to break out of that minor league mentality; the players seemed to be satisfied that they gave it their all even when they lost. Lombardi once said winning is not a sometime thing, it's an all the time thing. That is Showalter and that is why the Orioles seem to be playing with a greater sense of urgency and determination under him.

I think it is always hard for a career minor league manager to transition to the majors bc they manage in the minors to develop the players, not necessarily win. In the majors, it's all about the wins, nothing else matters. Trembley seemed never to break out of that minor league mentality; the players seemed to be satisfied that they gave it their all even when they lost. Lombardi once said winning is not a sometime thing, it's an all the time thing. That is Showalter and that is why the Orioles seem to be playing with a greater sense of urgency and determination under him.

Of course I don't blame Trembley. He never deserved to be chosen to manage the team in the first place. (And that's the only time you'll ever here "first place" and "Trembley" in the same sentence.

Of course I don't blame Trembley. He never deserved to be chosen to manage the team in the first place. (And that's the only time you'll ever here "first place" and "Trembley" in the same sentence.

Of course I don't blame Trembley. He never deserved to be chosen to manage the team in the first place. (And that's the only time you'll ever here "first place" and "Trembley" in the same sentence.

Gotta disagree with you, Pete. The more distance we get from the Trembley era, the more apparent it is that he just wasn't a good fit for the job. Trembley always came across as a guy who was just thankful to have the job, while Showalter is a guy who can take the job and run with it. He has a confidence that Trembley lacked, and the team seems to be feeding off of that.

True, it does help that a lot of the injured guys are back, buy you'll never convince me that the team would have taken off on this kind of run with Trembley at the helm, even if he had all the horses.

I will rag on Dave Trembley and it has nothing to do with the small sample size of success that Buck has had.

Dave didn't have much to work with, but he also did a poor job handling what he had.

He was a bad manager. It doesn't matter how nice he was, or how little he had to work with... he made bad decisions. He was stubborn and often lost out there. He had no kind of feel for the game and was slow to fix problems.

He suggested that Adam Jones was in some way a leadoff hitter. Jones currently has an OBP at .315. I wonder sometimes if Dave has ever watched a baseball game let alone managed one.

No excuses... he was not a good manager. Sorry it didn't work out, but I'm really, really glad he's gone.

If Wiggington was still playing 2nd and Patterson was still in left, the O's could be 1 and 6 in the last few games. I was never a DT supporter, but, his job was to hold things in line until the team was healthy. The starters were learning on the job and they have learned. Period. Are they the staff that will take this team to glory? Only time will tell.

He was a nice guy so everyone apologizes for him, he should have never been the manager of this team.

You, Tom Davis, Mr. Johnson, and Scott are correct. Managers don’t make a bit of difference. It’s the players. You have convinced me that there is very little reason for hiring one manager over another. They don’t make that much of a difference. You make a great case for doing away with managers period. I’m not sure as to why we keep hiring them. Leaders in every profession are overrated. If Roberts and Pie weren’t hurt Dave would still be here. Managers in the hall of fame are a joke. Go guys great insight! Thanks for the sanity check.

I can't think of any topic I care less about.

Instead of telling us to stop ragging on Trembles, who's sitting on his back porch drinking gin & tonic all day while collecting a free paycheck, let's focus on the present.

Arrieta looks like he's on top of his game again tonight. Discuss...

Jake looks gooooooooooddd tonight.

(and Luke at first is like Simon in the 9th)

Pete,
While I know DT is a nice guy and a baseball lifer, you can not tell me that this team, under Buck from day 1, would not be miles ahead of where they are right now. This does not mean Buck is some kind of miracle worker, it means he is a quality Major League Manager. To say we are being hard on Dave is to say that he was showing signs of something before he was let go. He had every opportunity to be more organized, command the clubhouse, and set expectations for his players. I think he failed in all 3 aspects. Classic case of a nice guy with a lot of baseball knowledge who is not fit to be a major league manager. I am not saying that he had to be a no nonsense manager or rule with an iron fist. There are plenty of successful managers who go about there business in a quiet, player friendly manor. Maddon in Tampa is a great example, I think Tito up in Boston is pretty low key as well. The difference is that they know how to manage games through every aspect and every situation. They have a feel for their players and earn their respect through preparation and the knowledge of what to do in every game situation. There is no excuse for not being prepared. Now, we all know very few people are as prepared as Buck, so it would be unfair to compare them. The problem is Dave T was out-managed by EVERYONE. There was no series where the O's went in with the managerial advantage. They had no instance where DT was going to make the difference in the outcome, at least not in a positive way. Players know and feel these things. It is hard to muster up the effort and fire when you know they guy in charge is not equipped to lead.
Is the team Buck has that much different than DT's? Yes Roberts is back, but to be honest he hasn't exactly been lighting up the stat sheet since he's been back (before last night of course). Yes Gonzalez is healthy, but do you think that Buck would have had that guy start the season anywhere but the DL? There was obviously something wrong with him in Spring training and a manager with control of his locker room would have made the tough call to get that guy checked out before the season started. Instead, because we shelled out some cash for him, we decided to let it ride and probably made it much worse. Tejada is gone, replaced by Josh Bell who has not done much to impress yet. The pitchers are the same, the pitching coach is the same, the catchers are the same... so why are the results drastically different? Probably because the players know there are repercussions to not being focused and prepared to go out there every 5th day.
Again, all I am saying is that Dave T had no business starting this season. He got us through the growing pains, but he wasn't doing anything so extrordinary with the team at the end of last year where someone could have said "He's ready to take us to the next step". A change needed to be made and shame on Andy MacPhail for not only ruining this season for the fans, setting back the development of the young guys, but also ruining Dave Trembley's rep as a manager. If he had been let go after last year, people would have chalked it up as the O's needing a more experienced manager to take the next step. Instead we all know what happened. I would be shocked if we ever see Dave T as a Manager in the Majors, at least not for a long time. Bench Coach, maybe, but not the head guy.

Given the MAJOR RESPONSE of #1, it simply states that the organization whould have been more knowledgable and replace a stupid reporter with one from the internal Baltimore Sun Staff an individual that meet the qualificatiosn for the positions. Instead what position was given to the biggest "NO BRAINER" of the staffr, "MR. SHMUCK". That would have been the BEST resolution

Given the MAJOR RESPONSE of #1, it simply states that the organization whould have been more knowledgable and replace a stupid reporter with one from the internal Baltimore Sun Staff an individual that meet the qualification for the positions. Instead what position was given to the biggest "NO BRAINER" of the staffr, "MR. SHMUCK". That would have been the BEST resolution

Jake looks gooooooooooddd tonight.

(and Luke at first is like Simon in the 9th)

Posted by: paulie | August 10, 2010 7:51 PM

Whoopsie :)

Jake doesn't look so good anymore. Terrible job to give it all back (and more) after the team gives you a cushion.

Pi-AYYYYYYY!

Leather jacket... thumbs up!

I find it interesting all the thoughts by the various writers and bloggers regarding what Buck has done to change the "way" the team plays. I don't know and don't pretend do, but thank God it is happening. I have been on the "Fire Crowley" bandwagon, but have been more hesitant regarding Kranitz probably because I watched what he did with the Marlins young staff. It is interesting that with essentially the same players and the same coaches the team is playing so much better. Of course, given the way they were playing I would have been in favor of Edgar Allen Poe's ghost as a manager if it meant some wins.
Question for Not Brooks: listening to MLB radio today and all the talk about the Wakumatsu (sp?) firing in Seattle, does Buck try to get Wak or do they make a play for a very unhappy Figgins and drop him in at 3rd base? Just thinking while driving.

Trembley was an AWFUL manager. It had nothing to do with a comparison to Buck or B-Rob being out or Mike Gonzo not being able to get my 6-month old out.

He was awful this year, the year before, and the year before that. He couldn't manage a game or a pitching staff to save his life.

And he couldn't light a fire if he had a box of matches and a can of kerosene.

He was awful. Period.

You know how you would respond to a post like this if you were on the anti-DT side... well, it'd be something like this:

"Move on buddy, the rest of us have already"


I called for a new manager in the offseason. I was highly disappointed when we started the year with Trembley. I hope that doesn;t make me a basher.

The team record under Buck has nothing to do with Dave. Dave's performance as a manager is the only measure we should judge him by. For once, can we judge his performance as a manager as it relayed to W-L, developing the young players, and how well the team played fundamental baseball, during his entire tenrue as manager. When we start talking simply about 2010, and injuries, Buck's performance, or fan sentiment, then you start distorting the real reason why we should be upset with Trembley.

I'm really tired of everyone coming to his defense. His firing this season was too late. He should have been relieved at the end of last year, place in a different capacity within the organization, and a new manager in place to start the year. We knew last year he couldn't manage at the big league level. Do you really think Trembley can manage a big league team? Take out the 2010 Orioles - can he manage elsewher? If that's the case, I'd love to know why you feel that way, and when we can expect to see Trembley managing again. He's not Manny Acta, who was highly regarded before and after the Nats job.

Let's not confuse bashing with a fair performance review. I have nothing against Trembley. Likeable guy, well intended, loyal, and really a great guy to have in your franchise in the right capacity. Those who are saying "I told you so" now because of "Buck's results" are not seeing the big picture. They're not bashers - they're fair weathered "fans".

Please though, bashing the man and holding him accountable are two totally different things. I'm fine holding him accountable to his job. I wish more people were...

nb,

I simply thought CIH's post was excellent in that it was informative and helped take the conversation to a debate level. Does it make the case for hoping for the #1 pick? No. But besides you, I'm thinking not everyone has the #1 picks from the last 10 years or so memorized.

As for Pete's Blog subject on Trembley.... I thought that was excellent as well. While I may not always be in Pete's corner, his task on the Blog is to create conversation. He did that with this subject.

Sorry if we don't always discuss what you want to discuss, when you want to.

Now THIS is something the O's have never done this year. BLOW up a pitcher!!!

(sorry Jake, I'll take the "jink" blame.)

and then the NEXT pitcher...

and the one after that...

come on Manny Acta, got anyone else in the pen? lol.

Dave who? Oh yea that guy.

Look. I'm sure he tried all he could, but he is not an MLB worthy manager. Keeping Trembley as a the manager for 3 years was the biggest mistake of Andy MacPhail's career. That decision alone may have cost Peter Angelos millions of dollars.

Trembley was a clown. I don't miss his idiotic post game comments. And I know that Buck has only been a manager for 8 games, but so far it looks like the only difference was the manager. B-Rob being back has very little to do with the success of the team. What is he hitting, 250?

Buck has this team playing lights out, every game. I don't remember one game in 3 years where the team put as much effort as they are putting in right now. And believe me, I watch 95% of the games. They are playing like they're in contention for the AL East.

Many people, including the Baltimore Sun and sports media in town, didn't fault Trembley for the misery we experienced. Even know that is more obvious than ever you can't admit that you were wrong? Dave Trembley stole paychecks from Peter Angelos for 3 years. He had a good run.

Hey Peter: Suck it.

Listen, it's okay to be embarrassed because you posted nothing except Trembley apologist BS right up until the weeks before Trembley was finally axed. It's okay to be embarrassed because your entire argument hinged on the belief (inexplicable for a sportswriter!) that a manager does little else than take the players he is given and simply write a line-up card. You were wrong. Admit it.

Showalter has now won 7 of 8 as manager, which neither Trembley nor Samuel even sniffed at this year (previously, the O's best eight game stretch this year was 5 of 8, barely cracking .500). I myself posted on these pages last week that it was too early to draw any statistical conclusions after 2 and 3 wins; but if you ever paid attention in math class you would understand that 8 games IS enough to start making some statistical observations, albeit with a wide margin of error.

I realize that insightful statistical analysis is about as foreign to this blog as actual journalism- and that what passes for "news" here is too often simply gut judgments about so-and-so being a stand-up guy or a losing streak being just dumb luck. But for pete's sake please stop defending tired arguments that were as weak the first time you wrote them as they are now that they have been conclusively proven wrong.

You would think someone with such a deeply-ingrained hippie ethos would be able to admit when he is wrong, but apparently the Schmuck stops there.

Is this the same Schmuck that said don't hire Showalter until Sep 1st? Why should we listen to you? Alot of us said don't bring Trembley back but were mocked so don't deny us the chance to gloat. The O's were too cheap to hire a quality manager last winter and paid for it.

Andrew, your point would be perfectly clear without the childish slurs. Please desist.

Maybe the tide has finally turned. My son and I watch every game with extra interest now...they do look like at least a .500 team.

Next thing we will start hearing is that Boller wasn't that bad of a quarterback.

Look the bottom line is that Trembley did not produce, the young hitters regressed, all up and coming players from last year disappeared and the exciting young pitching talent has been disappointing at best. My wife told me she doesn't want to hear about baseball again this year because of how sick she was watching such a sorry team. Trembley did not do of what was asked and just failed. It is his fault and every fan has accepted this and moved on to the next era. Remember Trembley's first game as a manager against Texas, the most runs in a game since 1900. He should have been fired the next day.

Good game tonight... would have liked to see the Bullpen do a better job of mopping up, but other than that, no complaints.
One thing I have noticed about this team since Buck got here... they never think they are out of it... give up some runs, no problem we'll get them back. Give up the lead, no problem we can grind out a few more runs... blown save in the 9th?... we'll get them in extras... and even today, when they didn't get the "quality start", the batters had Arrieta's back.
Good team baseball being played by these guys...

Thanks Buck! Whatever you are doing is working so keep up the good work... you have helped make this team fun to watch again... looking forward to 2011 and seeing a full season of this kind of effort from our O's!

As a side note... I know people on here don't like to give andy much credit, but how great was the Patterson pick-up? Not an earth shattering move, but it has worked out quite well for us...

Meso, I thought it was wins-losses, end of conversation? What's this other stuff you're babbling about?

Tony P,

I agree Patterson has been a pleasant surprise. I'd still like to see him steal more. As a matter of fact B-Rob, Marakis, Jones, Pie, and Izturis are all capable of stealing. I miss those double steals B-Rob and Markakis used to pull when Perlozzo was the manager. Has the team had a double steal this season?

At the poster, or impostor "not wayne". Perhaps I would pay you the time of day if you were asking something coherent.

Pleeeeeze,
As a confirmed Trembley basher, I find your revisionist efforts to rehab DT's pathetic reputation pathetic. Face it, Trembley was a hopeless sad-sack who wallowed beyond his depths.

The very fact that Trembley was at the helm to start the season was an immense concession to failure. Showalter is a professional, with a well-earned reputation for meticulous preparation. Trembley should never have been a manager. I am not surprised that the O's are playing much better baseball under Showalter.

Are we still talking about Dave Trembley?

Here are some facts.

2010 Trembley with Roberts: 1-3 (.250)
2010 Trembley w/o Roberts: 14-36 (.280)

2010 Samuel with Roberts: 2-5 (.286)
2010 Samuel w/o Roberts: 15-29 (.341)

2010 Showalter with Roberts: 7-1 (.875)

Not enough? Apparently for one-time Oriole pitcher, Dave Johnson, and I do mean one time, he is still clinging onto the notion this is "95% coincidence" -- at least a notion Peter abandoned and reiterated on WBAL with good ol' what's-his-name.

Dave Trembley managed 470 games. How many 6-1 stretches did Trembley coincidently have? For the math impaired, that is 67 separate seven-game stretches not counting overlaps which is (I'm pretty sure) more than 450.

Trembley had two. One was July 22-29, 2007. The other opened the 2008 campaign (my tribute to Fred Manfra who says campaign a million times).

That means Trembley didn't coincidently have a 6-1 stretch since April 8, 2008. That means he didn't have a 6-1 stretch for his last 360 games. Not one.

And now since we are talking 7-1, that is a stretch Trembley never had. Never ever. Not once.

And tonight's game didn't feature a starting pitcher who improved or kept pace with a 1.89 ERA -- the caveat the "other" Dave Johnson and his sidekick, Giggles, maintained as being the only reason for this coincidence.

I fully understand the Orioles will not play .875 baseball from now on. If only. I also fully understand Trembley wasn't given a good team or was the only problem.

But please for the love of having an open mike, let's not pretend Trembley took the fecal sample and willingly tossed it into the blades of the fan night after night as he made his nightly four or more treks to the mound and placed players in position to fail.

Trembley would never had have had an opportunity to manage in the majors with any other organization, much less for 470 games (91 more games with the O's than Joe Altobelli for crying out loud).

Let's not pity him. Let's not defend him.

Let's be glad when the Orioles fall back to earth this time, there isn't a trench waiting for them. Just good ol' solid ground.

Peter,
Why should we cut him some slack now? The more Buck wins, the worse it makes DT look.
If the O's go back to losing 6 out of every 9, then I'll cut DT some slack.

Meso,
I think you will see the offense get more and more aggressive under Buck. I think he is taking a "one step at a time approach". Once he gets a good feel for this line-up, he will start pushing the envelope more and more... Right now, I think he is more concerned with changing the attitude and culture on this team, then the fundamentals... once those are more under control, I think he lets the dogs loose on the basepaths...
Heck, after watching some of the baserunning mistakes over the last week, I think he still has some work to do before we see the stolen base count start to climb... can't afford to give away any more potential runs than we already do.

Pete,

I agree to cut him slack as in lets call off that tar and feather parade of DT.

Lets take tonight's game as a example of a difference in Managerial style.

Trembs pulls Jake in the middle of the fourth and starts the bullpen merry go round.

The difference between Tremb's and Buck is that Buck expects his players to be major league quality and treats them that way.

He (Buck) manages not by the book but by what is expected of major league players.

Fran In Baltimore

wayne -

1. I must have misunderstood your response to Chris then. Apologies.

2. Regarding Trembley, see waspman's post. Obviously, people can talk about whatever they want whenever they want and I'm not going to stop anyone from doing so. But, at the same time, am I not allowed to speak my mind when I feel that a topic is stale and has no place in the current conversation that we should be having about this club?

Geez, wayno. You usually take any abuse in stride, not caring one bit about what people here think of you. But you've been a little touchy over the past few days. Are the 7-1 Baltimore Bucks starting to melt away the hard exterior, revealing the soft center inside?

PS - It may have been ugly tonight, but a win is a win.

Meso, I thought it was wins-losses, end of conversation? What's this other stuff you're babbling about?
Posted by: not wayne | August 10, 2010 10:55 PM

I can see how that can be quite the brain twister. Sorry you're so confused. Does this help?

You are what your record says you are. Everything else is an excuse.
Posted by: Mesotheliangelos | August 9, 2010 3:25 PM

I look at wins and losses. That is the only thing you can measure. All the other stuff can be twisted either way
Posted by: Mesotheliangelos | August 9, 2010 4:49 PM

So why are you still on here talking about things other than wins-losses? And which way are you twisting it?

OK peanut brain. As if Trembley's record is not common knowledge to support my argument above. Let me simplify it to a level that you maybe, just maybe, can understand. Trembley's wins and losses record speaks for itself. Any attempt to justify his record is simply an excuse. And those doing so are simply apologists. Does that do it for you? Want me to explain further, perhaps with some images and colors?

You, Tom Davis, Mr. Johnson, and Scott are correct. Juan Samuel really is the unsung hero here. He set it up for Buck. But again no manager is a difference maker. Nope. It’s the players. You guys are so right. AM might take the manager’s cash and get more great players. Manager smanager. We don’t need no stinkin manager. Again you guys are right. We have got to stop giving Buck any credit. It’s all in the great lineup we have.

Trembley was terrible this year and every other year he managed the Orioles. No slack needed..

I could care less about your arguments. It's all moot, because the only thing that matters.....wins and losses. Why are you on here talking about anything other than wins-losses?

It's awesome that you get mad and start calling names so easy. You're as entertaining and mature as Jason.

Peanut Brain!
Genius!

Hahahaha

39-74.

Like James Hetfield said:
"And nothing else matterrrrrrrrrrrs"

Pete,

Sometimes you write a comment like this and I just shake my head in disbelief. So allow me to answer your question, post my own comment and then conclude with a question for you.

IF Buck Showalter would have called all the young pitchers in a room last Tuesday, he probably would have said something like this: "You're all major league pitchers and that's why you're here. I have confidence in your ability to get the job done and you will continue to have my confidence unless and until you prove otherwise. When you're pitching in trouble, I expect you to work yourself out of it while keeping us in the game. Don't look over your shoulder for a quick hook because you'll never gain experience and mature as players if I don't stand with you at those times. [Remember the adage, 'That which doesn't defeat you makes you stronger'.] Finally, when we take the lead in the 6th or 7th inning, you had better believe you're going back out there to try and protect it rather than me relying on 3-4 relievers to each be on his game that night to save the win for you."

Pete, the only true measuring stick of any manager---baseball or business--is did he get the most out of the resources given to him? Think of it this way. Who would have more of your admiration for getting the most out of his charge, a tutor who gets a "C" capable student to get "C" grades, or a tutor who gets an "A" capable student to get "B" grades?

No doubt Dave Trembley was dealt a bad hand. Not enough talent to compete.
The injuries only exacerbated the problem. However, that being said, it still comes down to this (my question for you)---Do you honestly believe that Dave Trembley got the most out of the players during his managerial career?
If your answer is YES, then you are also saying that no other manager would have done a better job....because one can't extract more from a team than getting the most out of their collective talents.

I never liked DT as the manager. He always talked about respecting the game and if you didn't, there would be consequences. He (not Andy) let the guys walk to first like the old folks do at the mall with no punishment, no benching so it became the norm. Guys didn't want him to leave because he was the boss that didn't care if you came in late or left early. I am glad his reign is over. He is one lucky SOB in my opinion, as how many BP coaches get a chance to manage in the bigs?

I loved that Buck left Jake in the game to show him that even when you don't have your good stuff, you can have success.

I agree with Tony in that Corey has been a big surprise this season. I would love to see him back here next year in a backup role. He has energy, enthusiasm plus he's played better in the field this season and he's not going to cry if he doesn't get his AB's. Injuries will always be part of the game so he's a good guy to have on the team.

I was never a Koji basher, as I thought this guy could be a setup man or closer, but I was frustrated that every time he showed a glimpse of what he could do, he would get hurt, but after the game on Monday, I would love to see him back here. He's shown a lot more emotion lately on the mound, as maybe that neon glove or the sideburns has injected some positive vibes into him. It will be a tough call and I have no clue if they will even try to re-sign him, but you can't ignore what he's doing out there.

PS any truth to the rumor that Jim Hunter had his son's name legally changed from Jimmy Hunter to Buck Hunter?

How about those Orioles?

7 out of 8 ain't too bad--where have they been all year?

Trembley gets no slack.
He proved time and again that the only thing he knew about fundamental baseball was how to say it.

The Orioles hit into more double-plays than at any period I can remember and then, more often than not, ended up losing the game by a run or two.
Just stupid baseball.

Trembley was a terrible manager.

Juan Samuel was a better manager.

Showalter has winning intangibles about him just the way Weaver did.
Not every player liked Earl.
But liking your manager isn't a prerequisite to winning.
RESPONDING to your manager is.

Between 1968 and 1983 Weaver was the right man with the right team at the right time.

In 1985-86, that was not the case.
This proves that the manager is only one of three factors.
As great as Earl had been in his first go-round, he was also the same Earl his second time.... but the team and the time was not.

Perhaps Showalter is the right man for the right team at the right time in 2010 and beyond. There is a lot of talent here and it's just now beginning to mature, blossom, and come together.
Maybe with a key acquisition or two, as well as adjustments to the staff, the man, the team, and the time will all be in tune with each other and the glory days of Baltimore Oriole Baseball will return once more.

Pete

I agree. Dave was as good a manager for the team as anyone could have been in his position. Perhaps Showalter's experience has yielded wisdom to him that Trembley never possessed. However, Trembley never received the 3.5 year contract and support from the front office that Buck has in just a very short time. This has influenced and increased the players' level of accountability to their current manager and I believe that has made a greater difference than anything else.

You sound completely like a Republican now, Pete. "The old days were better," even when they weren't. I just don't get it.

Progress is OK. Really it is.

SandyK - nice comment!

Dave Trembley was a nice man who didn't want to hurt feelings; thus, when players did things wrong he didn't let them know in uncertain terms. He wanted to be their friend, not their manager. In this business you have to kick some butt and let these over-paid cry babies know who the boss is and what their responsibilities are. Buck seems to be doing all the things that Dave didn't do and he's having some success.

Peter,

You really need to cut all the rest of us some slack. If you guys don't want to hear negative feedback about Trembley then stop writing articles about him.

Trembley could not motivate this team because he was not and will never be major league management material.

This has nothing to do with liking or disliking Dave Trembley.

End of story.

Having Pie and Roberts back and Gonzalez pitching well is a significant difference, but it's not the difference between 1-16 and 7-1. Dennis is absolutely right. Trembley never should have been brought back this year. A manager is judged by what he gets out of his team. Trembley made the thumbs up or thumbs down pretty clear cut in that regard.

What I really don't understand about the cadre of MASN and Sun apologists is, why are they so ready to defend the poor managing of Trembly at the expense of the players? Why is it preferable to them to say that all of the players were terrible, rather than say what should have been obvious in the middle of last season? Dave Trembly was a bad manager. He was a nice guy, but a terrible manager. It was forseeable that we would get the old excuse that now Showalter has a better roster of players, or finally the pitchers are pitching better, but look at the stats. The Orioles have improved in EVERY facet of the game since Showwalters arrival. Some of that is just the realization that they can't slide by with Showalter. Much of it has to do with the fact that Showalter is a MUCH better in game strategist than Trembly. Some of it is, that the players feel better that their efforts on the field will not be wasted by an inexplicably stupid move, or non-move by their manager. It is a new era in Baltimore baseball. The local sportswriters, and announcers need to get on board. Maybe you guys are so conditioned by over a decade of losing that you have forgotten how a succesful team looks. Maybe you are just unable/unwilling to accept that success is not a happy coicidence, but can actually be engineered. Maybe you guys need a Showalter kick in the pants, or a ride out of town.

You know I have to say I am not looking forward to the next losing streak, when all of these guys will probably start to attack Showalter, and we'll hear, "I told you so." The thing is, it will only be temporary. The team will play much better overall than it did under Trembly. The next losing stereak will actually be one more chance for the MASN apologists to stick their feet in their collective mouths.

When was the last time the Orioles were playing playoff baseball?? When they had a Major League experience, successful manager, aka Davey Johnson. Go forward about 13 years, that is how long it took ownership to hire another Davey Johnson level manager. No offense to Trembley, he had issues with the team, but look at the immediate results with Buck, and it ain't just luck. he is instilling confidence, aggressive baserunning, and agressive hacks at the plate. These are things Trembley and others failed to do.

What, did Trembley have dinner at Schmuck's regularly or something? DT was in way over his head. If anything he was the best actor on the post game shows with all the head and face scratching and eyebrow raising, trying to fool everyone with his answers. The Buck really does stop here, it didn't with DT.

Pete you are a joke. Cut dave t some slack. He should have never been brought back this year to begin with. He never held the players accountable, the players never respected him. And you have the gull to write something saying that it wasn't dave t's fault that he hadn't won anywhere, so how did you expect the players to respect him. Pete you need to stay on vacation if you write stuff like that. Buck came in here and made this players accountable and told them just how it is going to be.


...............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Sometimes, Bob, I think you're the character from "Memento" who has no short-term memory. I'm a joke, but you were the one on July 14 who stated unequivocably that the Orioles would never hire Showalter. I think it might be time for you to boycott us again.

I am not a DT basher, but let's face the facts. He didn't have a track record in the Major Leagues and the Orioles suffered while he learned on the job.

Some of the best moves that Showalter have made so far are when he doesn't make a move. For instance, he let Arrieta stay in the game last night after allowing a 5 run inning. The confidence he had in Arrieta will in turn give Arrieta confidence in himself. Go O's!


Whatever. All's well that ends well.

It's just as well that things went as poorly under Trembley this year. I doubt that the FO would've felt compelled to replace him had the O's played .400+ ball under him.

I think the need to hire a proven major-league manager only became apparent to the FO because of the team's laughingstock status.

Also, while Samuel did a little better than Trembley, he didn't yield enough of an improvement to keep him as manager.

From my perspective, if all of the team's earlier problems were necessary to bring Showalter here, then it was all worth it.

Pete must really be on vacation, as he has yet to answer anyone in almost 20 hours, since he found time to blog this newsbreaking story.

..............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Yes, I really am on vacation, but I still stop by and put up an occasional entry. I can't leave you all completely alone. You'll just have a big party and drink all my booze.

I actually agree with Blancione (except for the gull v. gall part, and calling you a joke). Cancel Christmas!

I liked DT but he was NOT a leader or a GOOD manager. He relied WAY too much on "by the book" decisions and way way overused the bullpen and NEVER enforced his "play the game right, use the hammer," etc. Good guy, NOT a good manager! Same with Sauel! Buck is the REAL DEAL. Knows his SH*T, the players know he knows it and he says "F" the book, I care about wins"!!! YEAH!!! The players have a nice combination of fear of him and respect for him. THANK GOD we did NOT hire that egomaniac former Met manager Valentine clown!! Now we need a real 3rd baseman, Bell is also NOT the answer!! Way indecisive and weak on all things as far as I can see and he has shown or NOT shown!! BELTRE or trade for Ryan Zimmerman is who we need.

Sorry Pete. I didn't pay good money to watch a guy (nice or not) shrug and mutter game after game "we tried hard but it just didn't happen.")

The real issue was in McPhail's failure to install the new manager for the start of the season and thank Trembley for his service in a rebuilding, caretaking effort.
Having been a manager, Dave could then seek other positions.
No one would have been immune from the injury problems, but with a blank slate, it would have been HIS season.
McPhail put together some fine pieces, but failed to change captains at the right time.

Ole Pete is going to have a field day when he comes back from vacation. All you posters who blasted Pete or DT will be severely reprimanded. LOL


Trembley would've NEVER allowed Arrieta to work out of that jam last night, but Buck did and Jake pitched a couple more solid innings, picked up the 'W' and ended on a positive note.

From all indications, DT was a really nice guy, but he should have been replaced prior to this season, and failure to do so essentially flushed this entire season down the toilet from the git-go. The guys on the team probably really liked Trembley, but I have to wonder if the players (esp the young guys) wilted under the pressure of knowing that his job was on the line pretty much from the first week of the season.


I honestly think it was the players. As players, they underperformed under Trembley/Samuel. Guys like Adam Jones scare me to death when he says something about "stepping it up a notch when Showalter took over. I know it's a ways off when he's due for his big pay day (if it comes to that) and he exemplifies to me the type of player that will be a "slacker" once he gets his money. If you don't love the game and your job enough to want to do well and exceed when you have a laid back type of manager and need to have a fire lit under you w/the arrival of Showalter, I don't know about you, but I don't want those type of players on our team.

There's absolutely no reason to cut Trembley any slack. He was given a job and he didn't do it. Didn't do it well. At all.

Just because you think he's a nice guy, it doesn't mean the rest of us can't recognize him for what he was: Someone not fit to be a major league manager. The rest of us are going to judge these guys by how they do their job. Do you actually think Dave Trembley did a good job? If you say yes, you're lying.

.............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Ryan, if Tony La Russa had been the manager of this team the past 1 1/2 seasons, he would not have done much better.

Pete,

I with you. All the way.

Your comment: "Pete's reply: Ryan, if Tony La Russa had been the manager of this team the past 1 1/2 seasons, he would not have done much better" hit the nail on the head. Just needed to add Joe Torre, Tito Francona, and and Jim Leyland.

W/o Brob, Pie, Gonzalez, Atkins tanking, none of the above would have fared much better than Dave Trembley.

Call off the dogs on Dave folks.

You think Trembley would have left Bergesen in there last night to finish the 9th?

NOOOO he would have pulled him after 100 pitches and let Simon blow the save

You think Trembley would have left Bergesen in there last night to finish the 9th?

NOOOO he would have pulled him after 100 pitches and let Simon blow the save

Good call.... except he only had a total of 102 pitches for the entire game and was sitting at 82 when the 9th began, so DT wouldn't have been able to pull him out until the final batter of the night, if he was waiting until Bergy threw 100....

John

Thats exactly what I intended to say, guess I didnt frame my sentence correctly.
What I meant to say was. when Bergesen reached that 100 pitch count with 2 out and 1 on 9th, he would have gone to Simon who would automatically give up a 2 run HR to blow the save :)

Post a comment

Please enter the letter "p" in the field below:
About Peter Schmuck
Peter Schmuck wants you to know that, contrary to popular belief, he is more than just a bon vivant, raconteur and collector of blousy flowered shirts. He is a semi-respected journalist who has covered virtually every sport -- except luge, of course – and tackled issues that transcend the mere games people play. If that isn’t enough to qualify him to provide witty, wide-ranging commentary on the sports world ... and the rest of the world, for that matter ... he is an avid reader of history, biography and the classics, as well as a charming blowhard who pops off on both sports and politics on WBAL Radio. That means you can expect a little of everything in The Schmuck Stops Here, but the major focus will be keeping you up to the minute on Baltimore’s major sports teams and themes, whether it’s throwing up the Orioles lineup the minute it’s announced or updating you on the latest sprained ankle in Owings Mills. Oh, and by the way, that’s Mr. Schmuck to you.

Schmuck column archive

Upload a photo of yourself or a friend wearing the new Peter Schmuck T-shirt, which is on sale at gotschmuck.com
-- ADVERTISEMENT --

Most Recent Comments
Photo galleries

Search our new database for every home run hit hit by the O's and the opposition — home and away — since 1992.

Buy Sports Tickets from the Baltimore Sun Store

Sign up for FREE Orioles alerts
Get free Sun alerts sent to your mobile phone.*
Get free Baltimore Sun mobile alerts
Sign up for Orioles text alerts

Returning user? Update preferences.
Sign up for more Sun text alerts
*Standard message and data rates apply. Click here for Frequently Asked Questions.
Blog updates
Recent updates to baltimoresun.com sports blogs
 Subscribe to this feed
Stay connected