Who deserves the credit?
A few years back, I was at a minor league baseball game with my nephew. The Portland Seadogs were losing and the middle-inning promotional entertainment had lulled by the fifth.
My nephew asked me who 'the fat guy in the suit' was? I was about to answer Santa Claus, when I realized he was pointing at the manager. I realized he was referring to the players' uniforms as suits; and then I had a hard time explaining to him why a guy who didn't play was wearing a suit. Kids say the darnedest things.
My answer to him was that he helps them win. Now, three years later I wonder if that is really true. How much does the manager actually do? What does a manager really do? It came to my attention, when for the first time in a while, a few fellow citizens of Jay Gibbons Boulevard here in the Cheap Seats have been questioning Dave Trembley's performance.
It's not the first time I've heard this kind of talk. Last year, it was Sam Perlozzo who was run out of town. And at the time, most of the O's woes were stapled squarely to Sam's ticket out of town.
The Orioles seemed to turn it around for the skipper who for the time was labeled the "interim manager." So they made it official about a year ago, signing Dave Trembley; and then they began rummaging through the toolboxes of other teams and their own farm system for tools to rebuild the rickety structure that was Birdland last September.
MacPhail made some big trades, exchanging salary and age for youthful prospects and emerging talents. Adam Jones straight up for Erik 'Bum Arm' Bedard would have still been a success at this point. Even for pre and postgame sound bites, Jones is Bedard's equal, but for drastically different reasons.
Now, with the lowest expectations of any club in the MLB coming into this season, murmurs of distain for the skipper are surfacing, while the Orioles are four games better than last year.
They have a steady offense and dismal pitching. (I think it might be fun to have an open tryout to gain a spot in the rotation. A thousand dollars to attend the tryout, the money going toward a good charity or money to sign a Major League pitcher.) But to what has Trembley contributed to the success and failure of this team?
Personally, I don't think a manager makes a whole lot of difference. I watched Grady Little get the boot when he stuck with Pedro Martinez in 2003. Grady stuck with his guy and in effect stuck himself with all the blame. If Pedro gets the outs he needs, then Pedro gets the praise. When he serves it up to the Yankees, Grady gets gone.
Terry Francona inherited the same team with a slightly better rotation and a clubhouse of self proclaimed 'idiots' and won the World Series the next year. Did Francona make the difference?
Managers manage a game, mostly by putting players in positions in which they will best succeed. And if they don't, they feel the scorn.
Stat Boy is often angered by the fact that Trembley always manages by the book. Frederick is upset when the skipper pulls Randor Bierd (who had gotten two outs rather easily) for Alberto Castillo (who hits batters with amazing ease) for match-up purposes. No one yelled at Alberto Castillo.
Right now, Jim Hunter is 'wondering aloud' why Trembley is pulling Garret Olson. But when the Skipper does something unconventional, like walking Ken Griffey, Jr. and putting the winning run on second base to get to a batter who's hitting more than thirty points higher than the sure to be Hall of Famer, the same scorn is waiting in the weeds. Even when his decision ends up working out.
When asked about it, Trembley gave that stare out of the corner of his eyes, gave the scruff on his chin a few audible strokes, and claimed it was a 'no brainer.'
From putting the line-up card together, to using the bullpen, to selecting pinch-hitters, there are only so many decisions a manager can make that have an effect on the game. And after most of them, there is more often than not a chorus of 'Why' that erupts in the office. So what is a manager supposed to do? What is he supposed to not do?
I think managers of baseball clubs are no different than a lot of managers at offices around the country. They don't do the majority of the work; rather they have people who do the work for them. But they are often those who have demonstrated that they are capable of doing it, i.e. former players who manage.
When the work gets done well, they get praise. When the work isn't getting done, they are the ones who are held responsible, even when they are not responsible.
That is the burden of every manager from big leaguers to bus drivers.
So how much does the manager matter? Can a manager help a team win?
When the guy at the plate or on the mound is getting paid at least half a million a year to get a hit or an out, why do we yell at the manager when that player fails and applaud the player when he succeeds? How many wins is a manager worth a year? What makes a good manager, and does Dave Trembley qualify?--Let us know in the comment box below. Mahalo.
-Frenchy
Great article Frenchy. I think you summed it up best when you compared baseball managers to office managers. They do they're job best when their employees (or the players) perform well. When they don't the managers take the heat. I think people are frustrated with Trembley because this season showed a lot more hope than people had originally expected. We can't forget that the Orioles have just one consistent starter and are depending on some incredibly inexperienced pitchers. Despite managing by the book, which plenty of managers do now-a-days, I think Trembley has done gone job well with a tough team to work with. While I would like to see him throw the book out every now and then or keep a young pitcher in the game when he gets in a jam I'm not about to call for his job. We did that in Baltimore already across the street from Camden Yards with Brian Billick. We'll see how that move pays off. Keep Trembley, he's doing just fine because it all boils down to the players.
Personally, my main problem with Trembley as a manager is exactly what you eluded to in your blog Frenchy, when he takes out a pitcher for pitching match ups just because that is what is supposed to happen. We are not contending for a title right now, and as much as it hurts, our main objective isn't even winning ball games. Right now we have to develop pitchers. And if that means we (God forbid) leave an Olson or a Liz in during the 7th inning when they just gave up a bloop single to teach them how to go deeper into games, I don't see anything wrong with that. And for crying out loud, since when did 100 pitches become the mason dixon line for pitchers anyway. And seriously, if Trembley brings in Randor Bierd to face a right handed batter, then, after an easy out, pulls him for Jamie Walker to face a left handed batter one more time, (which of course Walker will probably serve up a HR) I'm going to pull my freakin hair out. So, my advice to Trembley, think outside the box, or even better, think for yourself for once, and stop managing like a GD robot.
Dave Trembley has done a great job as manager and should be given a decent 2 or 3 year contract. The team wasn't going to win too many games this year with the talent on the ballclub. Sure their are questionable pitching changes but that is always the case with a manager. Sign him up and put some more talent on this team. MacPhail has done a great job...but there is still work to be done.