Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Rosenthal has taken his annual dump on the O's


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#41 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,083 posts

Posted Yesterday, 01:23 PM

I posted an article that proved Chiti was not telling the truth in the KR article. Should I re-post the link for you?
 
And responding to a request for proof, by repeating the request for proof, leaves me with the impression that you have no verifiable evidence to support your very strong accusation.

What does Chiti not telling the truth about wanting to come back to the O's have to do with the argument??? What proof is that of what we are discussing??? He got let go. Whats the reason is what we are discussing.

#42 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,083 posts

Posted Yesterday, 01:30 PM

I posted an article that proved Chiti was not telling the truth in the KR article. Should I re-post the link for you?
 
And responding to a request for proof, by repeating the request for proof, leaves me with the impression that you have no verifiable evidence to support your very strong accusation.

The proof on my side to some degree is right in the article. DD is quoted as saying he was tired of the internal strife between Brady and the pitching coaches. This was in context to why Wallace and Chiti are no longer with the team. OK, Brady might not of pulled the trigger, but he was the biggest reason Chiti is not with the team any longer. And Brady said he liked Chiti more than Chiti liked him. What does that mean. CHiti hated Brady so what Brady liked Chiti just a little bit?? You asked for it. There it is straight from DD.

#43 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,083 posts

Posted Yesterday, 01:37 PM

Oh and the O's replace Chiti with Alan Mills, Brady's teammate from the 90s. Oh what a coincidence. And I see that McDowell was a disciple of Dave Wallace. Chiti is a disciple of Wallace. Hmmm. Chiti seems like he was a better fit for McDowell thatn Mills. Plus Chiti was probably one of the best bullpen coaches we've ever had. But he didn't buy into Brady's meddling with the pitchers.

#44 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,574 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted Yesterday, 01:47 PM

Oh and the O's replace Chiti with Alan Mills, Brady's teammate from the 90s. Oh what a coincidence. And I see that McDowell was a disciple of Dave Wallace. Chiti is a disciple of Wallace. Hmmm. Chiti seems like he was a better fit for McDowell thatn Mills. Plus Chiti was probably one of the best bullpen coaches we've ever had. But he didn't buy into Brady's meddling with the pitchers.

Are you reading my posts at all? I already posted that RM was groomed by Wallace. 


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#45 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,083 posts

Posted Yesterday, 01:56 PM

Are you reading my posts at all? I already posted that RM was groomed by Wallace.

Yeah what about the Mills Brady connection is my point!!!! And that Chiti was probably a better fit. I'm pretty sure McDowell and Chiti worked together with the Braves. Shoots down your earlier theory. I'm pretty sure Buck picked Mills, not McDowell.

Edited by CROUSEMAN, Yesterday, 01:57 PM.


#46 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,574 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted Yesterday, 02:09 PM

Yeah what about the Mills Brady connection is my point!!!! And that Chiti was probably a better fit. I'm pretty sure McDowell and Chiti worked together with the Braves. Shoots down your earlier theory. I'm pretty sure Buck picked Mills, not McDowell.

You're saying Brady fired Chiti, through Pete and his sons, and then had Pete and his sons hire Mills, because they were teammates in the 90's.

 

So why go the long way to get what he wanted. If he has the unquestioned authority you think he has, he could have given Mills the PC job, instead of Wallace. Right? Mills was already in the org, back then. And along the lines of your theory, why wasn't Cal hired instead of Buck, Cal was and remains a very close friend with Brady. If, as you're asserting, he's just stacking the big club with former teammates.

 

You think Buck hired Mills? Isn't that contradictory to your previous assertion that Brady, through Pete and his son's hired Mills? and made all the other coaching decisions? 


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#47 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,083 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:19 PM

You're saying Brady fired Chiti, through Pete and his sons, and then had Pete and his sons hire Mills, because they were teammates in the 90's.
 
So why go the long way to get what he wanted. If he has the unquestioned authority you think he has, he could have given Mills the PC job, instead of Wallace. Right? Mills was already in the org, back then. And along the lines of your theory, why wasn't Cal hired instead of Buck, Cal was and remains a very close friend with Brady. If, as you're asserting, he's just stacking the big club with former teammates.
 
You think Buck hired Mills? Isn't that contradictory to your previous assertion that Brady, through Pete and his son's hired Mills? and made all the other coaching decisions?

Chiti was not fired!! I never said that he was. get your facts straight. Brady was the reason he was not retained, period!! Because of the internal strife there relationship caused. DD said it. Pete signed off on the final decision, but it was Brady's fault Chiti no longer with team. It was his meddling with the the puitchers , Mike Wright in particular. Its all in the article with quotes. I really don't even know what your argument is anymore. You are all twisted in knots.

#48 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,083 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:21 PM

Yeah Buck hired Mills after Pete approved it. Endorsed by DD and Brady.

#49 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,083 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:25 PM

You're saying Brady fired Chiti, through Pete and his sons, and then had Pete and his sons hire Mills, because they were teammates in the 90's.
 
So why go the long way to get what he wanted. If he has the unquestioned authority you think he has, he could have given Mills the PC job, instead of Wallace. Right? Mills was already in the org, back then. And along the lines of your theory, why wasn't Cal hired instead of Buck, Cal was and remains a very close friend with Brady. If, as you're asserting, he's just stacking the big club with former teammates.
 
You think Buck hired Mills? Isn't that contradictory to your previous assertion that Brady, through Pete and his son's hired Mills? and made all the other coaching decisions?

Seriously, do you really think Chiti would still be with the team if him and Brady saw eye to eye on the pitching and were good friends???

#50 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,574 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted Yesterday, 03:11 PM

Chiti was not fired!! I never said that he was. get your facts straight. Brady was the reason he was not retained, period!! Because of the internal strife there relationship caused. DD said it. Pete signed off on the final decision, but it was Brady's fault Chiti no longer with team. It was his meddling with the the puitchers , Mike Wright in particular. Its all in the article with quotes. I really don't even know what your argument is anymore. You are all twisted in knots.

I love when posters get so frustrated, that they start arguing semantics. Within this discussion, is there really a difference between "fired" and "not retained"? Either way, allow me to apologize for accidentally muddying the waters. Replace "fired" with "not retained". Does that really change anything?

 

I know what we're discussing. Let me recap for you. I think KR wrote an article that had facts that were then colored with speculation to paint the O's as a terribly run organization, with a terrible culture and a meddling owner who has created a dysfunctional organizational structure that further exacerbates the terrible culture.

 

To support this assertion, he had quotes from two former coaches who felt that Brady was interfering with their job. One of those coaches was retiring and decided not to take a p/t job with the O's, because he didn't want to deal with potential future differences in philosophy. The other said he left voluntarily, because of Brady. This contradicts an earlier article in which he said he wasn't offered an extension, and was really disappointed, because he wanted to stay with the O's. This is relevant, because it means that Brady wan't as difficult of a presence, as he now says he is. Otherwise, why would he want to stay with the O's, knowing that Brady will have the ability to override his authority? Those facts are contradictory to each other, and the idea that Brady has unchecked power that drove them out.

 

I suggested that Chiti wasn't retained, because they wanted to let the new PC hire his own guy. You disagree with that, and think that Brady used his influence to make sure Chiti didn't return. Either way, the O's aren't missing out, because RM is reported to be every bit as good a PC as Wallace, something that KR agree with, judging from his complimentary comments about RM. Whatever Chiti's positive influences were, it appears that the organizational brain trust, either collectively, or individual highest ranking members, saw Brady as more of an asset than Chiti.

 

Like any well run business, if there are two people who can't work together, you remove one of them. So I'll leave it by saying again, if Brady was so unbearable to work with, why did Chiti want to stay? If you can reconcile those two points, you might have a convincing argument.  


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#51 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,083 posts

Posted Yesterday, 05:43 PM

I love when posters get so frustrated, that they start arguing semantics. Within this discussion, is there really a difference between "fired" and "not retained"? Either way, allow me to apologize for accidentally muddying the waters. Replace "fired" with "not retained". Does that really change anything?
 
I know what we're discussing. Let me recap for you. I think KR wrote an article that had facts that were then colored with speculation to paint the O's as a terribly run organization, with a terrible culture and a meddling owner who has created a dysfunctional organizational structure that further exacerbates the terrible culture.
 
To support this assertion, he had quotes from two former coaches who felt that Brady was interfering with their job. One of those coaches was retiring and decided not to take a p/t job with the O's, because he didn't want to deal with potential future differences in philosophy. The other said he left voluntarily, because of Brady. This contradicts an earlier article in which he said he wasn't offered an extension, and was really disappointed, because he wanted to stay with the O's. This is relevant, because it means that Brady wan't as difficult of a presence, as he now says he is. Otherwise, why would he want to stay with the O's, knowing that Brady will have the ability to override his authority? Those facts are contradictory to each other, and the idea that Brady has unchecked power that drove them out.
 
I suggested that Chiti wasn't retained, because they wanted to let the new PC hire his own guy. You disagree with that, and think that Brady used his influence to make sure Chiti didn't return. Either way, the O's aren't missing out, because RM is reported to be every bit as good a PC as Wallace, something that KR agree with, judging from his complimentary comments about RM. Whatever Chiti's positive influences were, it appears that the organizational brain trust, either collectively, or individual highest ranking members, saw Brady as more of an asset than Chiti.
 
Like any well run business, if there are two people who can't work together, you remove one of them. So I'll leave it by saying again, if Brady was so unbearable to work with, why did Chiti want to stay? If you can reconcile those two points, you might have a convincing argument.

Yeah I guess there was a little frustration in you changing my words to fit your argument better. So I called you out on it. Yes the end result of firing and not retained are the same. But the process is much different. Firing leaves blood on the hands of ownership/mgt that will need explained and money out of Pete's pocket. Not retained is easy. just don't pick up the phone. Real easy to justify we have to let this guy walk because him and Brady don't get along. And you are right they picked Brady over Chiti. That's a no brainer for Pete its his boy, but why in gods name would it come to that?? Because Brady had unchecked power and stuck his nose where it didn't belong with the pitching. I'm sure the two guys with 40 years of successful coaching experience told Brady to pound a protein shake where the sun doesn't shine.
But its easy to reconcile your last paragraph. Chiti wanted to stay because there are only 30 of these plum big league bullpen jobs in the whole world. And by all accounts, Buck is good to work for and lets his coaches do their thing. And he had a great bullpen coming back with all the key players that he helped make successful. He turned Britton and Brach into all stars from fringe mop up guys. He turned Givens into a really good middle guy with an even higher ceiling from a failed shortstop. He had one of the best bullpens in all of baseball every year he was here. All that gravy was worth putting up with Brady's periodic stupid meddling. I'd say that should reconcile things for you.

#52 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,083 posts

Posted Yesterday, 06:00 PM

I love when posters get so frustrated, that they start arguing semantics. Within this discussion, is there really a difference between "fired" and "not retained"? Either way, allow me to apologize for accidentally muddying the waters. Replace "fired" with "not retained". Does that really change anything?
 
I know what we're discussing. Let me recap for you. I think KR wrote an article that had facts that were then colored with speculation to paint the O's as a terribly run organization, with a terrible culture and a meddling owner who has created a dysfunctional organizational structure that further exacerbates the terrible culture.
 
To support this assertion, he had quotes from two former coaches who felt that Brady was interfering with their job. One of those coaches was retiring and decided not to take a p/t job with the O's, because he didn't want to deal with potential future differences in philosophy. The other said he left voluntarily, because of Brady. This contradicts an earlier article in which he said he wasn't offered an extension, and was really disappointed, because he wanted to stay with the O's. This is relevant, because it means that Brady wan't as difficult of a presence, as he now says he is. Otherwise, why would he want to stay with the O's, knowing that Brady will have the ability to override his authority? Those facts are contradictory to each other, and the idea that Brady has unchecked power that drove them out.
 
I suggested that Chiti wasn't retained, because they wanted to let the new PC hire his own guy. You disagree with that, and think that Brady used his influence to make sure Chiti didn't return. Either way, the O's aren't missing out, because RM is reported to be every bit as good a PC as Wallace, something that KR agree with, judging from his complimentary comments about RM. Whatever Chiti's positive influences were, it appears that the organizational brain trust, either collectively, or individual highest ranking members, saw Brady as more of an asset than Chiti.
 
Like any well run business, if there are two people who can't work together, you remove one of them. So I'll leave it by saying again, if Brady was so unbearable to work with, why did Chiti want to stay? If you can reconcile those two points, you might have a convincing argument.

Everything that I have seen shows the O's announcing McDowell as the PC and Mills as the BPC on the same day. That blows a whole in your theory about the new PC picking his own bullpen guy.

#53 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,574 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted Today, 07:27 AM

But its easy to reconcile your last paragraph. Chiti wanted to stay because there are only 30 of these plum big league bullpen jobs in the whole world. And by all accounts, Buck is good to work for and lets his coaches do their thing. And he had a great bullpen coming back with all the key players that he helped make successful. He turned Britton and Brach into all stars from fringe mop up guys. He turned Givens into a really good middle guy with an even higher ceiling from a failed shortstop. He had one of the best bullpens in all of baseball every year he was here. All that gravy was worth putting up with Brady's periodic stupid meddling. I'd say that should reconcile things for you.

The argument that, "there are only X amount of those jobs" is a good one. But doesn't that usually only apply to marginal talents? An OK manager, coach, player, GM will tolerate a less than ideal situation, we know that. But the premium guys don't have that problem. Bumgarner, Kershaw, Trout, Harper, Machado types don't have to settle. Bochy, Maddon, Showalter types don't have to tolerate meddling. If Chiti is as great a BP coach as you believe he is, it stands to reason that, just like all the other names I mentioned, if they aren't happy, they will have their pick of openings. And there are always openings. When you're among the best in the sport, teams will make an opening for you. Just like they do for FA players. It happened for Maddon. The O's created an opening so that Mazzone could come over from Atlanta.    


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users