36 replies to this topic

[mweb08]

I'm just going with what's been reported and quite frankly, what is very obvious. It's not particularly believable that an incredibly analytical and meticulous front office would be cool with a manager consistently going against their thoroughly put together lineup and in game decision guidance.

So it seems pretty clear to me that Elias doesn't align with those on here that think the lineup and in game decision making is atrocious. If somehow it reached that point though, that would have been on Elias as the person that hired and oversees Hyde, and it would be on him to fix it.

*I certainly haven't twisted anything in the strawman way you're writing, but in game decision making is not so complex to keep the front office from providing detailed guidance for a wide array of decisions. Sure though, Hyde has final say as you mention but it would be very odd for him to consistently reject that guidance and very odd for Elias to accept that.

[BSLChrisStoner]

If we don't get to every other aspect of the job...   and we ignore the FO influence...  how much do we think the best tactician would be worth over a season vs. knowledgeable guy on their couch (or better said, vs. an 'average' Mgr.)?

[makoman]

I'm just going with what's been reported and quite frankly, what is very obvious. It's not particularly believable that an incredibly analytical and meticulous front office would be cool with a manager consistently going against their thoroughly put together lineup and in game decision guidance.

So it seems pretty clear to me that Elias doesn't align with those on here that think the lineup and in game decision making is atrocious. If somehow it reached that point though, that would have been on Elias as the person that hired and oversees Hyde, and it would be on him to fix it.

*I certainly haven't twisted anything in the strawman way you're writing, but in game decision making is not so complex to keep the front office from providing detailed guidance for a wide array of decisions. Sure though, Hyde has final say as you mention but it would be very odd for him to consistently reject that guidance and very odd for Elias to accept that.

Yes. Elias clearly is not on the phone with Hyde telling him to bring in so and so right now. Maybe Elias would not have specifically brought in Jake Webb to a one run game or pinch hit Adam Frazier in the 4th. But I have no doubt that the entire FO+Hyde come to a consensus on lineups, platoon usage, bullpen roles, when, generally, a starter should come out, etc. Hyde is implementing the plan, and his decisions are certainly generally in line with the plan. 

[makoman]

If we don't get to every other aspect of the job...   and we ignore the FO influence...  how much do we think the best tactician would be worth over a season vs. knowledgeable guy on their couch (or better said, vs. an 'average' Mgr.)?

This article is a little old and I have no idea if it's right, but states 95% of managers are worth -2 to +2 wins above average. Generally I think everyone seems to think they don't matter all that much so this is in line with that. If that's the case the soft skills like managing the clubhouse are probably just as important as anything else.

 

https://fivethirtyei...-of-mediocrity/

[makoman]

^ To add to that though, everyone does definitely manage differently in the playoffs. It may be the case that, say, a guy like Bochy is big difference over a guy like Hyde in October, even if it doesn't matter a ton over 162. No idea.

[Mackus]

Yes. Elias clearly is not on the phone with Hyde telling him to bring in so and so right now. Maybe Elias would not have specifically brought in Jake Webb to a one run game or pinch hit Adam Frazier in the 4th. But I have no doubt that the entire FO+Hyde come to a consensus on lineups, platoon usage, bullpen roles, when, generally, a starter should come out, etc. Hyde is implementing the plan, and his decisions are certainly generally in line with the plan. 

 

100%.  Baffling for anyone to think otherwise than this.  

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Whats baffling is thinking its not some broad outline when it comes to in game decisions. Thats not making lineups or lineup construction btw. Lineups are pregame stuff where I do think the FO has more influence. You think that hit and run he put on with Hicks and Gunnar was something that is thrown down from the FO. Lets get specific here if you really want to do this. Otherwise like what are we talking about. Pitching/hitter matchups. Or pinch hitting/ platoon type things where that info is readily available and has been for 30+ years. Davey Johnson didnt need Pat Gillick telling him how to read matchup numbers and deciding how to proceed. Why are you suggesting Hyde is so incapable of doing the same. Or that the FO is so hands on that they are peppering him with info that Im sure every manager is going over with his coaches every afternoon regardless. There is obviously nuance. What is not being acknowledged by you guys or if it is its being glossed over is the stuff that cant be played out in OOTP sims. How is this guy feeling tonight. Is the life not on the fastball tonight. Does he have no feel for the breaking pitch. Do I take him out an inning early. Another batter or no. Of course if everything is going well you can follow a script. It rarely goes by the script. These are things that the manager and his coaching staff have to wade through almost every single night but its absolutely being minimalized here. I feel led to believe there is some 50 page manual being send down every night that tries to map out every scenario. Its clear the managers job is being extremely undervalued

[TwentyThirtyFive]

If we don't get to every other aspect of the job... and we ignore the FO influence... how much do we think the best tactician would be worth over a season vs. knowledgeable guy on their couch (or better said, vs. an 'average' Mgr.)?

Hows the season going? Playing a lot of tight games? Is your run diff a big number either way. If it is then the managers tactics are going to have less impact. Opposite is true if there are a lot of close games and the run diff is tight

[Mike B]

I'm not a Hyde fanboy, but it is wild to me that a team that was projected to win games in the low 80s just won 101 along with the East and he gets zero credit.

Clearly something he's doing is working.

It is amusing to read some of the anti Hyde stuff.  What is even more amusing is how we are supposed to assume that Hyde is terrible , but the poster(s) is spot on.  

[ivanbalt]

It is amusing to read some of the anti Hyde stuff.  What is even more amusing is how we are supposed to assume that Hyde is terrible , but the poster(s) is spot on.  

Yeah I don't know how his performance is considered terrible when the Orioles went from 52 to 83 to 101 wins as the roster went from AAA to big league caliber quality.  Isn't that what any sane person/team would want?  If the expectation is WS or bust at this stage, people are going to be miserable.

[mweb08]

Hows the season going? Playing a lot of tight games? Is your run diff a big number either way. If it is then the managers tactics are going to have less impact. Opposite is true if there are a lot of close games and the run diff is tight

So if a team excels in close games and significantly outperforms their pythagorean record, what would that suggest about the manager's tactical impact?

[TwentyThirtyFive]

So if a team excels in close games and significantly outperforms their pythagorean record, what would that suggest about the manager's tactical impact?

Over enough time it would say something. Its a game of %s. If you make decisions that lower the chances your team wins vs moves that raise the chances the results are not guaranteed either way. The lower % move will work out at times and the higher % will fail at times.


In the meantime why dont you acknowledge that managers have to read game flow and game situations in real time almost every night and have to make real time decisions. Its insulting to these managers/coaches how much most of you want to minimize their real time in game responsibilities and skills.

[mweb08]

Over enough time it would say something. Its a game of %s. If you make decisions that lower the chances your team wins vs moves that raise the chances the results are not guaranteed either way. The lower % move will work out at times and the higher % will fail at times.


In the meantime why dont you acknowledge that managers have to read game flow and game situations in real time almost every night and have to make real time decisions. Its insulting to these managers/coaches how much most of you want to minimize their real time in game responsibilities and skills.

Yeah, so the Elias/Hyde duo got great measurable results with their tactics.

I don't think I've ever said anything that would result in your last paragraph needing to be said. It's already been acknowledged.

[makoman]

So if a team excels in close games and significantly outperforms their pythagorean record, what would that suggest about the manager's tactical impact?

Say, something like 7 games over their pythagorean and around 30-16 in 1 run games?

[mweb08]

Say, something like 7 games over their pythagorean and around 30-16 in 1 run games?

Lol yep!

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Im firm in my belief that Hyde made the lower % move many times this year that still came up roses. He was lucky. Well until he butchered the Division Series. Which prob still doesnt go our way even if he optimizes all of his his decisions but he clearly pushed the wrong buttons. The funny thing is no one here during his run has ever proclaimed him a good in game manager or more specifically a good bullpen manager. Most have been lukewarm on him at best in that regard. Yet here we are I guess after reading the above.

[mweb08]

I'll just sum up my position on Hyde:

- I'm not a huge fan of the observable decisions (lineup and in game), but it's clear that the front office has a substantial role in that and I think the negativity on this site in this regard is way over the top and the results suggest that I may be onto something

- I think Hyde is likely doing a very good to great job with the rest of what comes with managing a baseball team