Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: Sounder At Heart for Seattle Sounders Fans!

Closing the Book on Buddy Bell

Its been a bizarre twenty four hours on planet Royal. Since Tuesday morning we've witnessed the trade deadline, the Bell resignation announcement and now, the postponement of Thursday's game with the Twins. Because of the utterly stunning bridge collapse in Minnesota, tonight's game with the Twins was one of the odder baseball games I've ever followed. As Royals fans we're used to irrelevant games, but tonight's in-an-alternative-universe-it-was-thrilling 5-3 Royal victory is in a class by itself. Not surprisingly, we barely had anyone commenting during the game thread.

Adding to the irrelevance of tonight's game was the certain fatigue we're all feeling following the annual trade deadline drama, a holiday of sorts which produces a kind of madness that induces 400+ comment debates about the relative merits of Hiram Kyle Davies. Davies is, I'm sure, a delightful young man, but at this stage he's the John Freeman to Mac Suzuki's Wordsworth. Of course, this site owes its very existence to our evidently insatiable need to ponder baseball minutiae, but that doesn't mean we should do so without self-awareness.

Which brings us, obliquely, to the curious timing behind Bell's announcement that this season will be his final tour of duty with the Royals. Bell's non-urgent resignation seems odd alongside the trade deadline hyperactivity and, totally accidentally, the horror of the random chaos which unfolded just outside the Metrodome shortly before tonight's game. For his motivation, Bell gave what has become our society's de facto answer: he wants to spend time with his family, although in this case, he seems sincere. Why make the announcement now? According to the man himself it was a matter of honesty, a need to set the record straight with his players about his intentions, lest he appear, retroactively, a hypocrite. Again, fair enough.

Don't Look Back in Anger

Still, the speculation will be that Moore played some role in this decision, either as a backroom initiator or as a passive non-beggar for Buddy's return. Buddy was someone else's hire, and, to tell the truth, a fairly uninspired, is not nonsensical one at that. Presiding over a wildly varied collection of parts, Bell is over 70 games below .500 as the manager of the Royals.

As I thought about Bell tonight, it occurred to me that Buddy Bell was the first baseball player I hated seeing in the lineup. Growing up in Graham, Texas, my first baseball love was the late-80s Texas Rangers. In 1989 the Rangers brought in Buddy Bell for what would become his final season.  In my memory he was ancient, but looking back his stats he was "only" 37. Nevertheless, he had absolutely nothing left, hitting .183/.247/.232 in    89 plate appearances. That doesn't sound like much, but from the end of April through Jun 17th Bobby Valentine played Buddy just about every day at third base. The Rangers went 17-5 in April that year, and spent most of May and June as a relevant team in the old AL West. Still, their worst month of the season was a 10-17 May. During that month Buddy played in 19 games and hit .152/.235/.196, which was absolutely killer.

In my young mind, it was criminally stupid that the Rangers were wasting good at bats with Buddy Bell. At bats that could more properly be utilized with some combination of Steve Buechele, Jeff Kunkel, Scott Coolbaugh (Mike's brother) and Mike Stanley. In hindsight this is both inaccurate and embarrassing: the best of the bunch, Buechele, was actually finding his way into the lineup in a myriad of ways, and while Mike Stanley had his moments (187 career HRs and a lifetime .458 SLG while being nominally capable of catching) it wasn't as if George Brett was losing playing time.

As such, looking back on it, this was the baseball wiseguy blogger equivalent of thinking back to those female cartoon characters you found pretty as a kid. Watching Robin Hood in college I was stunned to realize that not only was Maid Marian an anthropomorphic fox, she also looked identical to Robin himself. You can put this memory in that category.

Nevertheless, its strangely fitting because Buddy's slow march to oblivion in 1989 was the exact scenario he repeatedly reenacted as a manager. Just in his brief time with us, Buddy has managed to be the last Major League skipper to give Terrence Long, Doug Mientkiewicz and Jason LaRue, to name a few, regular playing time. Worse still, while Buddy Bell was actually a helluva player at one point, the Royals have consistently chased the past's not-even-glory with the Elartons and Berroas of the world. In 2005, Terrence Long  went to plate 485 times for absolutely no reason.

Still, theres something to be said for all managers having a weak spot for players like themselves, but its possible that in Buddy's case, the inverse is also true. Quietly, he's turned into an able manager of the pitching staff, a staff thats been one of the best in the American League for the last three months. Buddy's rarely left his weaker starters (especially Perez) in the game for too long and has diligently protected the workloads of Bannister and Gil Meche. Under Buddy's watch the Royals have enjoyed two adequate seasons of relief work from Jimmy Gobble, while inching closer to developing a 1970s style stopper/long-man in Zack Greinke. While Moore certainly deserves some credit, the Royals have gone from having one of the worst pitching staffs of all-time (no hyperbole) to having a team ERA right in the middle of the pack in the AL. As mentioned above, in June and July, the Royals were one of the best run prevention teams in the AL.

The bottom line is that the Royals have been playing good baseball with Bell as their manager.  In a sport without plays or the ability to funnel at-bats to the same player over and over again, the manager is never more than a marginal part of the team's performance. Nevertheless, the Royals followed a 15-12 June with a 13-12 July. Even during the miraculous 2003 season, the Royals only managed to post three winning months, so don't take consecutive successes too lightly.

So while Buddy's tortured us with way too much LaRue and perhaps too much Ross Gload, he's also stayed patient with Alex Gordon and Mark Teahen, while finding ways to get Esteban German into the lineup as regularly as possible (although, admittedly, this took awhile). By most accounts his players like working with him and his reputation as a "good baseball man" remained intact even as he repeatedly lost in Detroit, Colorado and Kansas City. Moreover, as Rany Jazayerli pointed out in this year's BP, Bell's handling of last year's Greinke situation was both gentle and compassionate.

I don't think a good case can be made that Bell would have been the right man to lead this team  as its talent matures and the real, honest to God, goal becomes winning now (or, winning then, as it were). Nevertheless, while I would have been positively thrilled to hear that Bell was leaving for the first 200 games of his tenure, I must admit I feel a touch of sadness now. Retirement is a kind of death rehearsal in our capitalist culture, even for the most anonymous of jobs, and there's certainly something chilly about the fact that Bell's diagnosis is the spur here. Moreover, we don't know -- and likely won't know for a very long time -- who Buddy's successor will be. Do you trust Alex Gordon's pre-arbitration years to Terry Pendleton anymore than you did Buddy? What about Joe Girardi?

The central fact remains the same as it was the day Dayton Moore was hired: it is not guaranteed that baseball in Kansas City can survive another decade of losing. If the Alex Gordon/Billy Butler era turns out like the Johnny Damon/Jermaine Dye or Mike Sweeney/Carlos Beltran era's it is not certain that the Royals can recover. The Royals have the smallest population base to work with in the game, and thats not going to change.

The next three years is the franchise's most critical period since the mid-70s. Under the pax Seliga there is no rest until all possible public monies are exhausted. Should a better stadium deal appear in Portland or Charlotte or wherever, the Royals, with their non-super-deluxe renovated K will not be immune to relocation. Even if the Royals stay in KC and stay the Royals, this might be their last chance to actually build a cost-effective contender.

Lets hope the next man is the right man for the job.

For now, its a final summer with Buddy, weirdly a pleasure trip, chance for appreciation and a dirge.

------

Related: Unpacking the Bell Hire (posted on May 31, 2005)

0 recs  |  Comment 99 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Around SB Nation

Daily Roundup

Nov 2009 from MLB Daily Dish - 0 comments

Marlins file for free agency

Nov 2009 from FishStripes - 2 comments

Comments

Display:

Great piece
Well said- thanks.

by cookierojas73 on Aug 2, 2007 7:05 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Tangental
Joe Torre gave Dougie DoNothing 144 PA in 50 games (37 starts) this season before Mike Lowell kicked him in the teeth.
If you're in love with the game, you can't turn it on and off like a light. It's something that runs so deep it takes you over." ~Billy Martin.

by jscape2000 on Aug 2, 2007 7:08 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Great writing....
Sorry, if I don't shed a tear for Buddy's leaving.  The improvement of the pitching staff has more to do with the new people Moore brought in than the way they were handled by Fuddo.  So now we have a lame duck manager for two months, I hope this "honesty" resignation doesn't back fire and retard this young team's improvement.  

I am like a kid a Christmas when the presents first show up under the tree.  I can't wait to rip into them and find out what is there.  The new managerial hunt leaves me feeling that way again.  So for the remainder of the season I will focus on the team and try to ignore the fumbling managerial style of one Buddy Bell.

Good bye Buddy, don't let the door it you in the ass.

by grudz69 on Aug 2, 2007 8:52 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Nice piece Will,
I was also a bit sad to read that Buddy was stepping down even though I am one of the many who think that it will be best for the team.  

I do like Buddy Bell and he has been a part of my life since 1984 when he was traded back to his hometown Reds.  I was a student at Moeller High School at the time.  Moeller was also Buddy's alma mater.  On the day of the trade the school put a sign up, "Welcome Home Buddy!"

Buddy was not much of a player for the Reds during his two years with the club and I grew tired of seeing his name in the line-up as well.  But he was always popular for his plus defense and his "scrappy" type of old-school approach to the game.

I got back to the States a couple of days ago and am starting to get back in the swing of things.  The Royals did amazingly well during my two months away.  You were out of town most of that period as well.  Maybe we are part of the problem?

by James Quinn on Aug 2, 2007 8:59 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

agreed
its always nice to get back from abroad, you really come to miss stupid sports sites like this one

when i got back i even started hitting ESPN.com regularly for awhile

by royalsreview on Aug 2, 2007 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Timezones
Since the Royals games would start at 4AM where I was I was never able to listen live.  And since I had to go to Wifi hotspots or internet cafes to be on-line, even if I was awake at 4AM I was unlikely to be tuning into MLB.com.  Websites were all I had to keep me in touch with the Royal's building mo.  I rarely had time to comment but I read Royals Review at least a few times a week while I was away and studied the box scores pretty closely.

The only other baseball fan I met while I was in France was another grad student from CUNY.  She was a Yankees fan.  What is worse, having no one to talk baseball with, or  having only a Yankees fan to keep you company?

by James Quinn on Aug 3, 2007 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Great writing RR
It's been a crazy couple of days.  I really feel for the people of Minneapolis.  I used to live in KC and drive over the bridge everyday to Northtown that could have just as easily happened there.  It really reminds us that life is short and that there are things we really have no control over.

On to baseball, it's bittersweet to see Buddy go, but at least he's leaving on his own terms and not being canned.  It will be interesting to see who the Royals pick, because I really believe the next manager they choose is the one that will lead us back to the playoffs.  I think GMDM has made the right decisions so far for this franchise, and I just hope the new manager will receive more support from the fanbase than Buddy did.  It'll be a fun offseason to see what happens to build our next winner.  

by lordbyronk on Aug 2, 2007 9:20 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

i'll admit it
Bell hasn't been half bad this year, but in no way am I worried about Moore replacing him.
What hath Bell wrought?

by FireBell on Aug 2, 2007 10:36 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Absolutely fabulous article.
You are one hell of a writer. Couldn't have said it better.

by RTC Fan on Aug 2, 2007 10:58 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Great job
We need more people to quit the team so you can do this kind of piece more often. Terrific article. Now I have one hell of an act to follow. :)

SB should be up later today. It took waaaaaaaay too long because I looked at too many trades. Sorry in advance.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Aug 2, 2007 11:09 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

it'll be interesting to hear
the first few trickles of rumor regarding the next manager, etc etc

by royalsreview on Aug 2, 2007 11:24 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

drip, drip...Girardi...drip, drip.... Pendleton...
on and on until the flood....

by grudz69 on Aug 2, 2007 11:29 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Our last 162 games
73-89
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Aug 2, 2007 11:38 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Maybe we should actually give some thought
...to the issue of who should be manager.  Girardi is a train wreck who isn't a good in-game tactician, doesn't know how to handle pitchers and loves vets over young players.

And I keep hearing Pendleton's name come up.  He's on the list for obvious reasons.  But does anyone think he'd make a good manager?  He might, but I know nothing about his baseball philosophy or managerial style.  Do anyone of you know something about him that I don't?  If so, please share.

If anyone has a favorite candidate, can you tell me why you think he'd be a good manager.  Hopefully something more than "he was a good player".

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 11:41 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Pendleton
I think he's a very good hitting coach.  He really has helped the Braves offense tremendously. I think he could help our young offense progress.  I don't know how he would handle a pitching staff, but with the right pitching coach maybe.  He used to play in our organization, so there is some familiarity to our system.   I think he's a solid choice, but right now there's really not an obvious one.  

by lordbyronk on Aug 2, 2007 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Question on Pendleton
You say he's a good hitting coach and that he's helped the Braves offense a lot.  What makes you say that?  I'm not being critical.  I don't know much about him as a coach.  But what evidence is there that his work deserve signifiant credit for the Braves improved offense?  Have Braves players been raving about him?  Any info you have would be greatly appreciated.

I am skeptical that any hitting coach has much effect on his team's offense.  I'm also concerned that a hitting coach might not necessarily know how to handle a pitching staff, which I think is an extremely important element of a manager's job.  I'd rather have someone who knows pitching better, like Leo Mazzone.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Re: Pendleton
He worked with Andruw Jones on his batting stance which led to his big season in 2005.  His bio on MLB.com had this to say, "In 2005, Pendleton was instrumental in outfielder Andruw Jones' MVP-caliber season, as Jones adopted a new batting stance and established a Braves franchise record with 51 home runs."  I thought I had remembered Andruw saying something about his coaching during the season just wanted to verify.  I tend to think to view coaches the way I view my profession, teaching.  In that you try to reach every student, but in the end you'll reach some students more effectively than others.  Pitching coaches and hitting coaches are the same way.  They might not be able to help every player, but they may make a significant difference for individual players.  As far as handling pitchers, I do think he'd need a good pitching coach maybe a Mazzone or Hershiser.  Other than that I just know how he played the game, he's been the Braves hitting coach for 5 years and their offense has been near the top of the NL every year during that time span.  

by lordbyronk on Aug 2, 2007 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good endorsement
But shouldn't he receive demerits for Jones' year this year?

.218/.319/.425

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Aug 2, 2007 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good point
but Jones is starting to come around and hit like he used to July .263/.370/.566.  He's too good of a player to slump all season.

by lordbyronk on Aug 2, 2007 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fair point
And if I'm going to make a guy manager, he's going to need more on his resume than changing Andruw Jones batting stance.

Plus, I really don't think hitting coaches deserve a lot of credit or blame.  JS and company brought in a lot of good talent.  It is no surprise that they have hit well.  I really can't say it was because of Pendleton's coaching.  Most player development happens in the majors.  Did he really "fix" a lot of Braves hitters?  Maybe, but I'm skeptical.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

pitching coach
Just throwing this out there, but there is a widely held belief that Leo Mazzone is going to be out of Baltimore at the end of the year. Not sure if he is a manager possibility, but I think getting him as a pitching coach would be great. If TP is more of a hitter's manager, it might be a good fit.  

by nkkc on Aug 2, 2007 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

TP
I think I read once that TP likes his hitters to be "aggressive." I really don't know much about him at all.

One guy I like initially is Trey Hillman. He managed in the Yankees minor league system and was a "big inning" kind of manager. He then took a job in Japan. He learned that the game there is much different and learned to adapt to small ball.

I'm not a small ball guy, but I like a guy who is willing to adapt his philosophy to the situation he is in. I have read that Hillman thinks outside of the box, and he's a former pitcher, so he could help out our pitchers.

I don't know a lot about him, but what I've read thus far I like.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Aug 2, 2007 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

"Aggressive"
I hate this hitting philosophy.  That's one of the things I didn't like about Bell.  He keeps talking about how hitters need to be aggressive, and at the same time the team leads the league in strike outs.  I prefer patience and plate discipline.  Wait for a good pitch and then hit it.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

right there with you NY
please no Pendy

please

by FlintHillsRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

No Girardi!

Saberhagen for life!  

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Why?
He should be pretty good about pitching management given that he blames the Royals for shortening his career.
"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

George Brett could be his bench coach
I don't think Brett would be interested in that job, but it would be fun.

Of course, I don't have any reason to believe they would be good at those jobs, but it would be fun for a few weeks.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I may be wrong...
but isn't/wasn't Sabes already a pitching coach somewhere?  
"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

FWIW
I checked his wikipedia entry and it talks at length about his career (including his sports entertainment facility called "Bret Saberhagen's Hit & Fun") but made no mention of ever coaching at any level.

I did find this disturbing entry:

In 2006, Saberhagen was named to the 2007 ballot for the Baseball Hall of Fame. He stated if he were voted in, he would not attend the ceremony because he believes Pete Rose should be inducted.

egads

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I thought
he was a college coach somewhere in California.  I could be mistaken.  

by lordbyronk on Aug 2, 2007 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think I'm ready
...to call a high school coach up to the bigs.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I was actually thinking...
of maybe promoting within the org.  Promote our pitching coach and then hire Sabes to take his place.
"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

McClure to manager?
McClure to manager and then Saberhagen as pitching coach?

I don't know if McClure is a manager.  I guess I don't know that he isn't either.  And I also don't know about Saberhagen.  I know all about him as a pitcher, but would he make a good coach?  What is his pitching philosophy?  Is he one of these guys who really "knows pitching"?  Just because one was a great pitcher, doesn't mean one was a great student of the game, or even of pitching.

Nostalgia says he'd be a great choice.  But I'd like to know more about him.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm in the camp...
where I think that being a great pitcher (emphasis on pitcher, not thrower) would be an indication of being a good pitching coach (though not the end-all be-all of being a good pitching coach).

He is very much an unknown (that is true), but McClure is still there if something bad happens.  Further, he has acknowledged the value of not-overworking a pitcher...which to me is the main thing of importance for a manager/coach.  See Dusty Baker.

However, I totally get what you are saying...but I like him better than who I have heard so far.  I'm rooting that we go for someone fresh.

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sounds reasonable
I definitely err on the side of pitching, so I like the idea of a pitching coach becoming manager.  And I can see Saberhagen becoming a good pitching coach.  I just hope in this scenario the Royals would bring in a good, substantive bench coach to help McClure.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm worried
That our staff would only perform in odd numbered years.
-- Royals Delegate to the land of the Salmon and Moose (Seattle)

by RoyalsFanInMarinerTown on Aug 2, 2007 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

ZING!
Nice!
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Aug 2, 2007 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ken Macha is my man
I know I've said Frank before and I'd still be cool with that. But, Macha has a great tack record with a small market team. I have no idea why Billy Beane fired him. He'd be great for the young guys. My longshot guy is Kirk Gibson. He's a firey SOB and he won't take no crap. I don't know if he'd be all that great, but I do know he won't be playing small ball.

by royaldaddy on Aug 2, 2007 11:59 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Macha
really got a raw deal in Oakland.  It would be good to see what he could do with a young team again.  

by lordbyronk on Aug 2, 2007 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't like Macha
IMO, Beane is much smarter about how baseball should be played than Macha is.  Macha wouldn't follow Beane's philosophy (which is about what actually works), so he got fired.

That small market team didn't succeed because of Macha.  It succeeded because of the talent Alderson and Beane brought into the organization.

Macha is a traditionalist manager who would make a lot of Buddy Bell-like moves, including sacrificing bunting and bringing the infield in in the second inning.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Good god no. I live here and got to see Macha coach the A's. First off he is a terrible manager who blew  with bullpen usage, but he also got all the players to really hate him.

dont ever say that name.

by wildthang on Aug 2, 2007 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Btw, great write-up RR
I haven't heard the names Jeff Kunkel and Steve Buechele in forever. Bell is a good man and I think he'll be much better in his new role.

by royaldaddy on Aug 2, 2007 12:05 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Remember Starting Lineup?
Those little miniature figurines of baseball players that came out in the late 80s? I asked for them for Christmas one year. The first one I ever got was from my aunt from Cincinnati - Buddy Bell. I had no idea who he was since he was playing in the NL and was really at the end of his career.

I also got George Brett, but his arm fell off.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Aug 2, 2007 12:13 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I still have some of mine...
including the first series Ripken and Brett still in the packaging.  They're worth a couple hundred, I think.
"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I've got....
Seitzer and Brett. :)
-- Royals Delegate to the land of the Salmon and Moose (Seattle)

by RoyalsFanInMarinerTown on Aug 3, 2007 2:49 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Some crtiticism too harsh.
The bottom line for evaluating Bell, should be whether or not if "the kids" have developed.

Gordon - Yes.
Butler - Yes.
Teahen - Yes.
Greinke - Likely.
Buck - Yes.
Soria - Yes.

That's what matters.  It's not important whether or not Terrence Long got too many at bats in 2005...or if Jason Larue has recieved 40 more at-bats than some would've preferred.  The important point, is that every player (other than maybe Burgos) with so-called potential improved in the last two seasons under Bell and are primed to be contributors for a long time.  I'm not even counting a guy like Tony Pena who looks like he could be an unexpected keeper.  Other managers would've looked at Pena's physical limitations in spring training, and suggested more Angel Berroa.

I'm just not sure what more anyone could've asked for from Buddy.  Did he make some odd in-game tactical moves?  Probably.  But his job wasn't to ALWAYS make the best move to win on any given day...his job was to develop players and get this team to where they can consider competing again.  There hasn't even been 5 minutes since he got there that contending was a legitimate possibility for this club.  Casey Stengel wouldn't have won 70 games with the kinds of rotations that he had to work with in 2005 and 2006. They were historic in their awfulness.

Did Buddy ever lose control of the personalities on this club?  Not at all.

Does this team bust their butt every night?  Yes, without exception.

Did he ever embarrass the franchise with his comments or behavior?  Not that I know of.  

Here are a couple of other facts when considering Buddy's awful managerial record...since it constantly gets used as evidence against him.

Colorado was over .500 in 2000 which was Buddy's first year, and hasn't had a .500 season since he was fired in 2002.

Detroit hadn't had a .500 season until winning the American League last year after Buddy's departure in 1998.  

The Royals haven't been to the postseason since 1985.

I think you can see my point.  He managed franchises who spent a long time being bad years before, and years after his tenure.  It's not fair of those who make a "results oriented argument" against him, without conisdering all of the facts involved.

by bsp1973 on Aug 2, 2007 12:16 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Not to be negative...
Most of those kids developed in the minors or on other teams.  He hasn't been in a position to lose control of personalities, because we haven't had any that were worth playing.

Did the team bust its butt?  I might say they they haven't...I don't think either of us are right.

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fair enough...
Although, if you take the last 60 game sample, every single one of those players I named has been playing well and trending upwards...and other than Butler they've all been in Kansas City (not Omaha) continuously.

Not to imply that their minor league time had nothing to do with preparing them for what appears to be successful careers...but Buddy's done a nice job of keeping these guys on track.

by bsp1973 on Aug 2, 2007 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Trending upwards in the last 60?
Greinke isn't starting before (not a good development...though that's hardly Buddy's fault).

Teahen is down from last year where he improved over his previous stats (which coincided with being away from Buddy)

Gordon's a wash...he'd have to improve if he's as talented as we all thought he was...

Soria was an unknown...so maybe he didn't improve...maybe that's just how good he was...

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ok, but...
All are better than they were at this time in 2005, and all are producing now in the majors at a rate that is acceptable for players ther age.  You can make the case that you expect MORE (which is what you are in essence doing) from these guys at this juncture, and I respect your opinion.  But Buddy didn't set the baseline.  That was done before they got to Kansas City.

I really don't know how you attribute none of Teahen's rebound from last April & May to Buddy and his staff.  I'm puzzled as to how others get all of the credit.  Teahen has turned into a very servicable outfielder...which had nothing to do with the minor league instruction.  

Bottom line, none of these guys are giving any indication for serious concern.  They're maturing, and for the most part, doing it without a lot of back and forth between KC and Omaha.  If you look at other teams that have been in the midst of total rebuilding with high draft picks (Tampa Bay, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh) it's not working out quite so well for them.  The Royals appear to be doing something right, and I'm not sure how the manager escapes kudos altogether from as many as he does around here.  

by bsp1973 on Aug 2, 2007 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hey
even Kruk was showing the Royals/Buddy Bell some love on Baseball tonight last night.  He said that the Royals are moving in the right direction and a lot of that has to be due the way Buddy Bell has got his players to play the game.  How often do you see ESPN give credit to the Royals for anything?  File Under: Small victories (for what it's worth).  

by lordbyronk on Aug 2, 2007 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

If Kruk says anything
I tend to believe the exact opposite of what he just said.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Aug 2, 2007 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Credit and blame
It is exceptionally difficult to say how much credit or blame a manager deserves for the good play or bad play of various players.  Similarly, it is very difficult to say how much credit or blame a manager deserves for wins and losses.  But I think it is insufficient to look at player stats or W/L record and say, "See, that proves the manager was good/bad".  Buddy Bell hasn't made Soria a good pitcher.  Buddy Bell didn't give the Royals a losing record.  

Those who point to Bell's career winning percentage and attempt to show this as proof that he's a bad manager need to go a little more than one millimeter deep in their analysis.  I think the talent on those teams had a lot to do with the wins and losses.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree with you on the short term...
but Bell's W/L record is not the result of a small sample...its a pretty big sample.  Obviously, that is not completely his fault...but it can't just be completely ignored.  Why does he only get offered jobs where there isn't much talent or prospect of getting talent (remember, Bell is Baird's baby, not Moore)?  As we often hear from you, we gotta trust that baseball people see something in him that screams "placeholder."
"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not good not bad
W/L record must be viewed in light of the quality of talent he's had to work with.  I don't think any of those teams had the talent to win.  But you have a point about him getting jobs with bad teams.  That's because he's not particularly good.  But he kept getting jobs because he's not particularly bad.  He's a workmanlike manager, like most managers.  Neither spectacular nor awful.

We have to trust that baseball (multiple organizations) have seen something in him that says he's a legit major league manager.  He keeps getting hired.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I may be wrong...
but I don't think so.  

I think that most (if not all) of those non-talented teams still finished below their Pythagorean win totals.  As was mentioned above in another comment, the Royals 2005 finished 56-106 (PR 59-103), but the 2006 finished 62-100 (PR 61-101) which is a net result of -2 wins.  Not a huge, stinging slap...but still, we should be happy he's gone.

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

What does the manager have to do with that?
I am familiar with Pythagorean win expectancies.  For the most part, not meeting those expectancies is about luck.  There is some evidence to show that the quality of a team's bullpen can help push them over their Pythagorean win expectancies.  But I haven't seen anything which has shown that the quality of a team's manager affects that.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Out-managed?
Fair point.

I'm a reader of both Baseball and Football Prospectus and in the latter, a record that is different from the Pythagorean win expectancies is often used as a measure of coaching skill.  So, I was just sort of extrapolating here.

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Never seen it used like that
As you know, the Pyth Theorem just uses RS and RA and figures on average how many wins should result from that.  Typically they say if you're not meeting this expectancy it is because of good or bad luck.  More recently (in the last few years) there has been some research which has shown that bullpen quality can help you exceed your expected wins by the Pyth Theorem.  I haven't read them pinning this on managers.  If some have suggested that, I doubt they can back it up with data.  But if they have data, I'd like to see it.  If it is an unsupported theory, then I don't see how you can blame underperforming the expected win totals on Bell or any other manager.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Again...
I've seen it used that way only in football, so it was a bit of extrapolation.  However, if the findings are consistant from year to year, and if it has something to do with bullpen quality, then it doesn't seem a stretch to blame some of that bullpen stuff on the manager.  

My argument is less about calling Bell a bad manager based on the Pyth Expectancies and more about how we can't call him a good or average manager when the only stats that we have suggest otherwise.  

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think that stat tells us about him
If that is the only stat we have on him, then I think we don't have any stats which tell us anything meaningful about him as a manager.  It is a huge leap to say that if bullpen quality affects how a team does with regard to their Pyth expectancies, then we can assume the manager did a bad job with the bullpen.  One can have a bad bullpen and handle them well.  One can have a bad offensive team and still put together the best possible lineup, pinch hitting, etc.

Bell looked very average to me.  Some good, some bad, lots of traditional, by-the-book managing.  That is, of course, completely subjective.  But in the absence of any meaningful stats (and so far, I see no evidence that Pyth win totals tell me anything about the manager), subjectivity is all we have.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

My counter argument about that...
The Pyth Win Expectancy takes into account the relative quality of the bullpen when making their expectant number of wins...that's why its an expectancy.  So in terms of bullpen quality, that should be normalized.  This would mean that the difference in wins are luck or manager quality...which may still be in the luck spectrum...but it may not.  Thus, I see your point, but I don't think it is as big a leap as you say it is...in fact, it's a fairly logical leap.  

That being said, I agree with you that there are really no true stats to judge manager quality...but subjectively...he seems a bit below average to me (not horrible, but not replacement level either) and the one stat we do have (good or bad) seems to agree with me.

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Our win total being below expectation
is a function of the fact that we've won more games by a large margin than we have lost by a large margin. Probably nothing more nothing less.

I expect the correlation to "having a good bullpen" is that teams with good bullpens seldom lose the really big game, as they are able to recover and bail out a starter that gives up early runs on a consistent basis.

Think back. We've won a bunch of games 17-3, 10-1, etc. But we haven't lost a similar number of games by big margins. That skews our RS/RA, meaning the formula expects us to have won more games than we did. Now, if we could only store up some of those runs for the close games, we'd hit our Pyth expectation.

by Big Guy on Aug 2, 2007 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's only true this year...
and I was talking about 2005 and 2006 where that wasn't true.
"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 3, 2007 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

My argument for Teahen...
is that his offensive stats increased during and right after his time in AAA.  This season, all of which has been with Bell, his offensive stats have declined...I will admit this is probably due to injury and has nothing to do with Bell; however, you can't use him as a Bell success either...because he is noticably worse than he was in 2005.  Also, there is no way that Teahen is better now than he was in 2005 as all of his stats make are on the decline from 2005.  
"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Small quibble
there is no way that Teahen is better now than he was in 2005 as all of his stats make are on the decline from 2005.

2005 - .246/.309/.376
2007 - .280/.351/.398

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

My bad...
I was talking about his performance after being called up from AAA...which was in 2006, not 2005.  Once corrected for that, I think my point stands.

2006 Post AS Break .318/.392/.582

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That was a thoughtful and well reasoned
...analysis of Buddy Bell.  Prepare for an onslaught of criticism by those who don't like how he eats sunflower seeds or that he's not "fiery" enough.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Have to agree
a manager is only as good as the talent he is given.   Buddy did the best he could with what he had.  

by lordbyronk on Aug 2, 2007 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not when
he kept sending Ambiorix Burgos to close games last year.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Aug 2, 2007 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Apparently it built up his trade value
And now we have Brian Bannister.

Actually, I'm  half joking.  I don't know if that helped his trade value.  But it's not like the Royals had good, legitimate closer options.  Bell had a bunch of poor pitchers to choose from.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

He had a bullpen full of relievers
plus there had to be some guys in Omaha who could have done a better job of closing games.

I don't blame him for initially making Burgos the closer in Macdougal's absence. His 2005 seemed decent. But how many save situations does one pitcher need to blow before you realize he can't be trusted with a lead ar a tie?

The Indians game last year - you all know the one I'm talking about - our pen was insanely leaky, and I don't think anyone did a good job - but it wasn't until he brought in Burgos in the 9th that I said, "forget it, the Indians are going to win it." And what do you know, it happened.

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Aug 2, 2007 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Does this team
"bust their butt every night?  Yes, without exception."

Emil Brown = exception.

by howserfan on Aug 2, 2007 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Excellent points
Also keep in mind that Pena had completely lost control by 2005.  Bell inherited a major mess.

by jbrocato on Aug 2, 2007 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

One question though
seriously why announce this, publicly, in Minnesota on a Wednesday night

just weird

by FlintHillsRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:31 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

He didn't want to keep lying to his players
about being there with them next year.  He figured out he didn't want to come back next year and so he announced it.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Why keep it private?
Why tell them privately, but not make it public?  If you inform the whole team, then it is going to get out anyway.  And what does he or the team gain from keeping it quiet?

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

too much negative in this entry
baseball will always be in kc...even if it is bad baseball.  the new stadium renovations will keep the franchise in town through another lease period.  while it is true that we aren't immune to relocation, the butler/gordon era and the next hire will not determine the entire future of the royals franchise in kansas city, just the next 5-10 years of it.
pat

by kcisbetterthanstlateverything on Aug 2, 2007 1:08 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

That last bit smacked of alarmism
I don't think there is much to worry about with regard to the team relocating.  Revenues are starting to go up and the team has a good, solid core of young talent.  The future is bright.

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Rob Neyer's ESPN column
from yesterday is about Buddy's departure. Are any of us ESPN Insiders that can post it here? From what I'm able to see, though, I'm guessing it's about the trend toward travel burnout amongst career baseball men (Hargrove having preceded Bell in this) rather than about the Royals per se.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Aug 2, 2007 3:05 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

He posted on Baseball Primer
Just a short note criticizing JoPo for being overly optmistic on the impact Buddy had.

http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/kc_star_posnanski_in_many_small_ways_ bell_made_royals_better/

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Aug 2, 2007 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Is that what he wrote for ESPN?
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Aug 2, 2007 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good riddance Bell/Sanders at it again
I, for one, am glad to see Bell gone.  Moore should've fired him after last season.  Joe Girardi, Ken Macha, Bobby Valentine, Trey Hillman, etc.-Come on down!

How come no one here is commenting on Reggie Sanders' latest "injury?"  The Royals should've released Sanders a long time ago and played Gathright instead of playing of Sanders the last month or so.

Now that Sanders is out for the season, we're stuck with his contract anyway.  

Last year and this year, Sanders always got "hurt" when the trade deadline came around.  Last July, he got hurt and then he got hurt again in August.  

Now he gets hurt again at the trade deadline.  What a crap free-agent signing he was.  Another reason why I'm glad that Allard Baird is gone.  

Worst free-agent signings in Royals history?  Let's see: Juan Gonzalez, Chuck Knoblauch, Benito Santiago, Scott Elarton, and Reggie Sanders.  Who signed all these guys?  You got it-Allard Baird.

by royalsfan on Aug 2, 2007 4:07 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I agree
that Mark Davis is the worst-ever Royals FA signing - possibly the worst by any team.

BTW, the Royals would have been responsible for his salary if they had released him as well.

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Aug 2, 2007 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Santiago was not a bad signing
He was hitting .278 when his hand was broken by a pitch.  The same injury could just as easily happen to Billy Butler tomorrow in New York.

Santiago was the last Royals catcher I did not dread watching bat.

by jbrocato on Aug 2, 2007 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I prefer Buck...but yeah
...that $2million for Santiago would have been worth it if he kept that production up for the whole year.  It's not his fault that he got a fluke injury.  He's hardly that bad signing that some of those other guys were.
"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 3, 2007 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Forgot Mark Davis
I forgot about Mark Davis...  but you get my point.  

I know that the Royals would've been responsible for his salary if they had released him.  That's what I meant when I said that they have to pay his salary anyway.  I had a feeling that he would get hurt again, so releasing him and cutting their losses would've been better than keeping him and playing him while Gathright rots away in Omaha.

If the Royals thought that there were going to be any takers for Sanders, they're more delusional than I thought.  Thinking that anyone would be dumb enough to trade for Sanders is dumber than thinking that Buddy Bell would take this team anywhere but down.

by royalsfan on Aug 2, 2007 5:17 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Gotcha
I thought you meant that by not releasing him, we're stuck paying his salary despite his being injured.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Aug 2, 2007 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

In an article on the royals website...
It states the Billy Doran will get a look at manager.  He is currently our bench coach.  So, add him to the list of possibles.  Doran states that he and Buddy are best friends. If Buddy was really a friend he would have left now and let Doran show what he has as interim manager.  

I hate long goodbyes and I hate people that give eight weeks notice in leaving a job when a week or nothing would have done.  Just say goodbye and leave.  What are you doing taking a sympathy lap just for old timesake.  

I for one wish Buddo would have gone the Hargrove route and left after the last homestand.

by grudz69 on Aug 2, 2007 5:18 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

It is good to give notice when you quit
That gives your employer a chance to find someone to fill your position and not be stuck with an interim person.  And I think this young team benefits from the continuity.  They have started playing well as of late May.  Why screw that up by changing managers in mid-stream.  Bell's going.  Isn't that enough?

by NYRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 5:25 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I hope they hire Girardi so we can
listen to you complain about the manager.  Still IMO Buddo should have said goodbye and ducked out the backdoor.  As for continuity, Doran has been bench coach sense Buddo took over.  Why would he not make a good interim manager.  We still would have all the other coaches and the only part we would be missing would be Buddo.  Remember, you said the manager doesn't make that much difference anyway.  So, say goodbye and be done with him.  

by grudz69 on Aug 2, 2007 8:26 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

As always Grudz
...your logic is impeccable.  Keep up the good work.

by NYRoyal on Aug 3, 2007 12:35 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think jbrocato makes a GREAT point
that none of us until he mentioned it really took into consideration.  As much as we want to bag on Bell, he's right, the team and it's chemistry was a COMPLETE DISASTER after Pena quit on the team.  That's not easy to fix and you don't fix it over night.

And the roster really didn't change until GMDM came in and turned it over and gave Bell some pieces to work with.  Retro's 73-89 in the last 162 is probably the most telling of Buddy's work with this team if you ask me.  And given how young a lot of his key talent is, i'd say that's not terrible.  And probably indicates his ability to be an average manager....nothing more, nothing less.  

But for me, even though he was probably only an average manager, his previous background in Player Development was important given the young core the Royals are trying to develop and win with.  Who knows if he would have been the right guy in 2009 when we're ready to chase a pennant, but right now, I think there would have been a lot worse options out there than Bell.

by powderblue on Aug 3, 2007 9:32 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The Royals were a complete
disaster before and during the Pena era too...his quitting didn't have that much of an effect.  
"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 3, 2007 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.
Start posting about the Royals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Questions about Analyzing Defense
Glencoco_small
Mike Moustakas in the AFL Futures game
Small
JT20 Dynasty League
Royalsreview_small
KU-KSU Links: Battle for Mt. Sunflower!
Small
Royals ownership...how'd it happen?
Royalsretro_small
Royals trade Mark Teahen to the White Sox for 2B Chris Getz and 3B Josh Fields
Royalsreview_small
Rays Send Aki Iwamura to Pirates for Random Prospect
Glencoco_small
One Fan's Vision for the Royals
Img_0208_2_small
World Series Poll
N1309620122_30067195_1714_small
Offseason time

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Royalsreview_small royalsreview