Will this team ever get with the 21st century?
It's amazing how frequently this organization does things that make one think it is behind the times when it comes to understanding baseball.
Exhibit A: Melvin Mora continually batting 5th. Dave Trembley's rationale: "He's always been a second-half hitter. He's always been a guy who's hit very well with guys on base...I'm not considering [moving him] now."
Sorry to let the facts get in the way of a good story, Dave, but Mora's career first half OPS: .812; career second half OPS: .769. It doesn't matter that Melvin hit well last year in the second half - overall in his career, he hasnt done so, and he's just awful right now (slugging percentage last 28 days: .299). Can Dave or anyone who works for him look at a stat sheet?
Regarding the rest of Dave's statement...his career OPS with RISP is .769; with anyone on base, it's .816. Hardly anything here to justify leaving Melvin where he is. And yet Dave isn't even considering the move.
Exhibit B: The treatment of Luke Scott. Ever since he got here, we've had this idea that he can't hit lefties well and should sit against a lot of them (for the likes of Jay Payton much of the time). Luke's career OPS vs lefites: .841; career OPS vs righties: .875. Huge difference, huh? In 2007, Luke's last year before coming here, there was a .006 difference in his OPS vs lefties and righties. And yet we give Jay freakin' Payton tons of PT against lefties because Luke can't hit them. Can no one in the organization go to baseball-reference.com?
Obviously there's no Payton this year, but these problems certainly go beyond this year. Furthermore, sitting Luke against Bedard last week, when he was in the middle of a ridiculous hot streak, was absurd.
Exhibit C: Our attitude towards baserunning. From Tom Trebelhorn to Juan Samuel to Dave Trembley, we just love to give outs away on the bases. We don't seem to realize that such "aggression" costs more runs than it produces. We don't seem to care that we're last in the league in baserunning efficiency this year (as another poster here noted) - nope, whenever something boneheaded like hit-and-runs with Aubrey Huff and Mora don't work, Dave just basically says, "Welp, we tried, didn't work, that's the breaks," showing that he has no clue that his approach is wrong and that it will continue.
The fact that we can be worst in the league at CS at only 10th in SB would be comical if it wasn't so sad. And that doesn't even address all the other outs we've given up through "aggressive" baserunning. Maybe one day we'll have a manager--and a team-wide philosophy--that understands the value of your 27 outs at bat.
There are other things, both small (Dave occasionally batting Cesar Izturis and his sub-300 OBP 2nd), and large (our overall aversion to talking a walk, the first month of this year excepted) that further indicate that this organization is living in the past generation, that we can't look at a stat sheet, that we don't seem to grasp any of the revolutions in baseball analysis that have happened over the past 10-20 years.
The O's may have more concrete problems to solve right now, but these problems, I think, will continue to hurt us, perhaps even more so when the club is contending.
FanPosts are user-created content and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors of Camden Chat or SB Nation. They might, though.
1 recs |
34 comments
Comments
well, a couple things...
luke is now pretty much in the lineup regardless, no? too bad he seems to be cooling off, but hey.
first two times izturis batted second, he was in the midst of multigame hit streaks (from April 18-28, May 4-16), and was 3-9 w/ a double and 4 RBI. he’s done fuck all in three subsequent games where he’s batted 2nd, but as he hasn’t done so in almost a month, so i’d say it was hardly more than a passing fancy.
…and i don’t think there’s any sort of organizational or managerial aversion to taking a walk. in fact, being more selective was a mandate in the beginning of the year, especially wrt adam jones. i believe, however, when the offense was realy clicking early on, the team walk rate was top 5 in the league and now the offense sucks and it’s dead last. no coincidence, they clearly need to recommit.
"If they pitch to you, make them pay."
--Diamond Dave to the Phenom
by j.q. higgins on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
BB
It shouldn’t be a question if there’s an aversion to the walk though. Walking should be emphasized and it’s not. What is emphasized from Terry “Do Wutcha Like” Crowley is basically whatever the fuck the hitter wants, it seems. There is no semblance of an organizational approach and there should be. It can’t be totalitarian or anything but it needs to be there, and it needs to transcend the whims of particular coaches. Players with high OBPs need to be drafted. From Rookie ball on up hitters need to be taught to be selective with their pitches and to above all get on base. This is simple stuff, but these dinosaur VooDoo practitioners on the O’s still act like it’s anathema.
by Jonny Pops on Jun 12, 2009 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
word.
It's 4 in the morning. Too much to drink. All the girls look hot. So, the Nationals are Jennifer Lopez to me. —Julian Tavarez
by zknower on Jun 12, 2009 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
really, though?
this seems like an overstatement.
"If they pitch to you, make them pay."
--Diamond Dave to the Phenom
by j.q. higgins on Jun 12, 2009 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not by much
Plate discipline needs to become an organization-wide demand.
by U2boy417 on Jun 12, 2009 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Passing fancy? That's sort of the point...
You would never see a lot of teams throw a guy with a career sub-300 OBP into the 2 hole…especially when you have freakin’ Roberts and Jones and Markakis (especially when they were killing the ball earlier in the year). I have little doubt that Dave’ll do it again some time when Izzy comes back and it strikes him…the fact that it doesn’t happen often is only a small consolation. Why does it ever happen at all?
by U2boy417 on Jun 12, 2009 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trembley has never been a good manager.
He’s better on camera than the past two managers and he has a good life story of managing in the minors for all those years, but he’s only mildly better than Perlozzo and not much better than Mazzilli. He’s caught up in discredited, old school baseball, and those type of guys need to be run out of clubhouses across American in my opinion. They’re fun to have at backyard barbecues, but they have no business running baseball teams.
If I had it my way, the entire dugout would be lined with video monitors and computer systems for individual players to access and watch ABs, replays, past games, and check statistics right then and there. Baseball, like football, should be a high tech game across the board. No more spitting and picking your ass in the dugout. These guys get paid millions. When gametime comes it’s time to work.
by Jonny Pops on Jun 12, 2009 10:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I remember a story coming out a few years ago about the Rockies using iPods.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/18/sports/baseball/18ipod.html/partner/rssnyt/
The training staff can fit 5 seasons worth of at bats on a 60GB iPod, with players getting all their recent performances plus film of the upcoming opponents.
by kba26 on Jun 12, 2009 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You really....
….need a bigger screen than that though. I could envision flat screen HD monitors lining the ceiling of the dugout, hooked up to wireless laptops or some hardwired keyboards throughout.
We saw on the Orioles Blogger Night that the players actually have their own video guy who works in the MASN truck to log specific footage that they request. Now how fast they see this though, I don’t know. They could well be looking it during games right now, but I imagine that’s done back in the clubhouse, if it’s being done. My point is why waste time? This is a digital game in a digital world. Let the guys watch the shit in the dugout, with full access to stats and info.
by Jonny Pops on Jun 12, 2009 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously you would want to have a bigger screen at times for real film sessions
Although now with the video quality of the newer ipods, especially the touch, i m not sure its as big of a need. The point was that the player could take these everywhere. Any down moment they may have can be spent watching film, whether its on the plaine, in the hotel room, etc.
by kba26 on Jun 12, 2009 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trust me...
…I’ve edited plenty of film and video. You can’t see shit on those little things. Even the newer touches, which I own. For portable viewing, that might accomplish something, a laptop is essential, not only for the size of the screen, but also the processor you need to be able to toggle around with the video efficiently, slow it down, etc.
by Jonny Pops on Jun 12, 2009 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
taking it too far
give them access to larger screens, maybe right off the dugout just inside the clubhouse, but you don’t want a row of monitors on the ceiling of the dugout. c’mon. they need to be watching the dude on the mound during the game. they need to be watching the players who are out there today, and how they are playing today. is the LF playing a little shallow? how fast is that guy’s move to first? etc.
if someone wants to duck into the clubhouse to review their tape against a pitcher, that’s fine. but if masn cut into the clubhouse and i saw five guys staring at the ceiling looking at video, i’d go apeshit.
It's 4 in the morning. Too much to drink. All the girls look hot. So, the Nationals are Jennifer Lopez to me. —Julian Tavarez
by zknower on Jun 12, 2009 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They can see that too.
Don’t cut off visibility to the field. But have access to enhanced tools – video, stats, etc. – right on hand to see what’s happening on the field in an enhanced way. Be able to see five angles on a pitch in a matter of seconds, without all this running back and forth down the fucking hallway with a stop to take a piss thrown in. I’m talking state of the art. I’m talking about us being ahead of the curve…for once.
by Jonny Pops on Jun 12, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and....
….why would you go apeshit? Do you go apeshit when you watch a football game and they cut to the sidelines and show the QB and the receivers looking at video monitors to see what the defense was doing on the last series? I don’t. I love that shit. Shows me those guys are taking their jobs seriously. What I don’t like is when they cut to the dugout in baseball games and you see guys scratching their balls and picking chaw and sunflower seeds out of their mouths.
by Jonny Pops on Jun 12, 2009 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think football's different.
First of all, when the offense is off the field, there is no reason, NO REASON AT ALL, that they need to watch the defense fighting the other team’s O, beyond a rooting interest. Whereas in baseball, when you’re in the dugout, the actual guys you are going to be facing are on the field, and you have your best chance to see them.
Also, in football, seeing what specific plays a defense is running is a far more specific task than “seeing that pitcher’s throw from five arm angles”. Really? That’s gonna tell you something that you can’t tell by watching the dude live? Maybe. But then again, maybe it makes you obsessed about finding something that isn’t really there instead of relaxing and being confident in your abilities.
Look, I see your point—it wouldn’t hurt to have the baseball kids be more analytical. I just think the culture’s a little different there. Most baseball players strike me as being a little ADD.
It's 4 in the morning. Too much to drink. All the girls look hot. So, the Nationals are Jennifer Lopez to me. —Julian Tavarez
by zknower on Jun 12, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you know....
..you’re my man and all, but this is a ridiculous argument:
“Also, in football, seeing what specific plays a defense is running is a far more specific task than "seeing that pitcher’s throw from five arm angles". Really? That’s gonna tell you something that you can’t tell by watching the dude live? Maybe. But then again, maybe it makes you obsessed about finding something that isn’t really there instead of relaxing and being confident in your abilities.”
Fuck yes it will tell you more than you can see watching a dude live. Being able to slow down a pitcher’s delivery and pick out nuances that tell his changeup. Being able to isolate and analyze tendencies that a pitcher has when he makes mistakes so you know when to hop all over them. Listen, video works. That’s why almost everybody, except Aubrey Huff, uses it. Of course you need to be confident in your own abilities. That’s the basics. These are the tools you use to improve on all that. To know more. To be better. Not just this using The Force stuff.
by Jonny Pops on Jun 12, 2009 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ya know, you're my homey and all, but....
i’m not talking about using the Force.
Tendencies a pitcher makes is shit that should be digested WELL BEFORE first pitch. They should be studying video that day in the clubhouse, PRE-game, and a REAL batting coach, not the hackmeister we have, a REAL batting coach will tell EVERYONE ON THE TEAM, “look, he’s tipping his changeup!”.
But during the game, these guys need to be watching the game. Because what you don’t want is this:
Player A (coming back from being struck out): Did you see that? Dude’s throwing a LOT of sliders. From the plate, it looks like a fastball, but then it breaks.
Player B: What? I missed it. I was busy studying video to see if the pitcher has any tendencies I can pick up on.
It's 4 in the morning. Too much to drink. All the girls look hot. So, the Nationals are Jennifer Lopez to me. —Julian Tavarez
by zknower on Jun 12, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We can agree...
…that different pitchers try different approaches and have different problems on different days. Players strengths and weaknesses are often, if not always, in a state of flux.
We can also agree that the most significant model you can look at to see how a player is performing on a given night is to look at ABs from that very same night. Now of course the team should be studied up on a pitcher or batter already. That’s what goes on before the game. But gametime should be a constant analysis inside the dugout and outside of what a pitcher is doing that very night and how he can be gotten to.
The exchange between Players A & B above that you put forward as a reason not to do this has nothing to do with technology, it has to do with time management. Player B could just as easily be scratching his bum or rummaging around for some more chaw as he could be using video to miss what’s going on around him. A professional who’s dedicated and knows how to use tech tools won’t have these problems.
by Jonny Pops on Jun 12, 2009 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd prefer better talent lining the dugout.
I’m not being flip. I just don’t see the need for a bunch of gadgetry. Some nerdlinger in a team box can convey info, a la football, instead of having the manager/coach staring at a screen during the game. Sure, put a monitor or two if players want to see a particular at bat.
The central issue adopting a statistical approach instead of some old school notion of “fundamental baseball”. That too is useless without better players. Better talent throughout the lineup will hit pitching without the need “at your touch” stats and video analysis. Lots of other teams continually kick the O’s ass via this “better talent” approach.
by drj on Jun 12, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The talent...
…is on the way. I’m talking about utilizing technology. And sure we can have a “nerdlinger”, as you so eloquently put it, helping to point things out. But a lot of players in the league are very, very into using video already. I’m sure they wouldn’t mind the extra tech support of having the equipment on hand. Plus Luke needs to be typing his ABs into a laptop already. I cringe every time I see that fucking notebook.
by Jonny Pops on Jun 12, 2009 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You really need to be posting via a mobile device
and that PC you’re using, what the hell year is it from? I’m looking at your processing speed and it’s making me gag.
Your ideas would be better absorbed if you were posting them to a dedicated blog with RSS.
And why aren’t you on Twitter?
It's 4 in the morning. Too much to drink. All the girls look hot. So, the Nationals are Jennifer Lopez to me. —Julian Tavarez
by zknower on Jun 12, 2009 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have a stone tablet...
…and an obsidian chisel for you to use for expressing your thoughts going forward. Let me know how it works out for you.
by Jonny Pops on Jun 12, 2009 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That notebook seems to be working though.
Just sayin’.
1933 was a bad year
by Senatorrosewater on Jun 12, 2009 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed.
a 36 inch plasma will show MelMo exactly why his average is .260. It will not raise that average.
1933 was a bad year
by Senatorrosewater on Jun 12, 2009 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This comment is only in response to the title of the post, not the content.
But if we’re talking about the Orioles not getting with the program of 21st century baseball, I’m thinking of pounding out an exploratory article about the latin americans in our system.
Seems like we don’t have many. Seems like we don’t have two coaches at each level who are bilingual. WHen was the last time our farm system produced a good latin american player? On our team, we have Izturis and Mora, but they were not developed here.
I’ve just been thinking of writing something up ever since BP did that North/South article in the end of their 2009 edition. Some teams are really doing a lot to help them.
The stock market will never recover, our armies will never again be #1, and our children will drink filthy water for the rest of their lives - HST
by the fix is in on Jun 12, 2009 11:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I completely agree
We seem to have been the last team to recognize that talent existed outside of the US…even though a host of great players have come from Japan, the DR, etc.
We seem to have been the last team to recognize the value of OBP (I’m not sure if we’re there yet)
We seem to be one of the last teams, if not the last, to recognize the stupidity of dumb hit-and-runs and other such “aggressive” baserunning that costs outs and runs.
The list goes on.
by U2boy417 on Jun 12, 2009 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This team is very whitebread
and really needs to ramp up international scouting. There have been recent small steps to do this, but there needs to be a HUGE push on it. Bilingual coaches are a great start, but we need a heavy presence in several Latin American countries, as well as spots on other continents.
"Take on Me" - a-ha
by exitfare on Jun 12, 2009 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
progress is slow
Well, in defense of the Orioles rather abysmal record in Latin America, they do finally have an academy in the Dominican. It still irritates me to no end that we have virtually no presence in Venezuela despite having a prominent Venezuelan on the team. Hopefully this will be changing soon enough.
The flip side in all this is to see how efficient it is to be sign those bonus babies from Latin America compared to guys who I don’t recall being highly sought after like Johan or Felix. Essentially what I am wondering is for every Alfonso Soriano, how many Jose Petts are there?
Librarians are hiding something
by dfa on Jun 12, 2009 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It still irritates me to no end that we have virtually no presence in Venezuela despite having a prominent Venezuelan on the team.
Lets hope that isnt a problem for much longer. the lack of presence, or the prominent Venezuelan.
by kba26 on Jun 12, 2009 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was just thinking about this yesterday
when I saw that pic of the tides pitching staff. As white a a bag of wonder bread.
1933 was a bad year
by Senatorrosewater on Jun 12, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please view the Boston Red Sox (Pink Hat Crew)
Other than Ortiz they have no minority players.
Brandon Snyder, 1B. Remember that name.
by Baysox39 on Jun 12, 2009 5:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Huh? Off the top of my head, they have Dice-K- Oki, and Lugo.
"Your wife told you to play in New York.
Well, my wife told me you look like a dork." Boo Teixeira guys.
by birdman on Jun 12, 2009 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bay is a Canuck
Does that count?
Librarians are hiding something
by dfa on Jun 13, 2009 2:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The point is that the O's havent been availing themselves of avenues for talent
If one good team happens to not have a lot of int’l players, that doesnt refute the main point. And as birdman pointed out, the Sox have notable minority players. They blew away the competition for Dice-K, for one thing.
by U2boy417 on Jun 12, 2009 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs















