Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



New Blog: Five For Howling - for Coyotes fans Bar-right-arrows



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 108 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Great piece
Well said- thanks.

by cookierojas73 on Aug 2, 2007 7:05 AM EDT   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   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   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   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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   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   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   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   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   0 recs

i think this goes a bit too far in terms of praise
Bell wasn't completely horrible for half a season. Hurraa!

His playing time distribution has been absolutely horrible. We can add Joe McEwing, Jeff Keppinger and Paul Bako to the list of scrubinies he played way too much.

Lets throw Emil Brown and Shane Costa in there as well.

Bell was a fossil who didn't understand one thing about offense. His nightly "we aren't being aggressive enough" comments were comical, then maddening.

Bye bye Buddy

I have Morgellons.

by DyeFan187 on Aug 2, 2007 11:26 AM EDT   0 recs

Thanks, I was getting lonely...
I was beginning to think that I was the only one not waxing poetically about the leaving of Buddy Bell.  Maybe he resigned this early to stem some of discontent that was surging into a tide against him and his fabulous managerial decisions.  I am sure that his flubs have cost at least 15 games this season in one form or the other.  

So, good comments... Dyefan187

by grudz69 on Aug 2, 2007 11:33 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

No way
unless they are themselves clubhouse cancers---not the case here, but think Dallas Green towards the end---managers only affect the outcome of a handful of games each year one way or the other.  While those handful of games can be the difference between glory and failure, they're still only a handful.

This team has lost 59 games this year, attributing fifteen of those to a manager---any manager---is just silly.  He'd have to be poisoning the pre-game meal to have that kind of an impact.

by howserfan on Aug 2, 2007 12:31 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

That CW is a bit misleading...
Managers have little impact generally means that an average manager has little impact on wins and losses; however, a truly bad manager can have a major impact on losses due to lineup choices (not putting their best hitters in a position to get more ABs over the course of a season...especially when there is a great disparity between the good and bad hitters).

This isn't to say that Bell was a truly bad manager...He was just below average and probably contributed to maybe 5 losses this season.

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 12:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

To say
"fifteen games" is to say we'd have won fifteen more with a different manager.

That would make the Royals 64-43 and put them a game behind Boston for the best record in baseball.

A lot more stands between us and the Red Sox than the difference between Buddy Bell and Francona.

Five is surely closer to the mark.

Based on the Bill James Pythagorean Theorem, the team should be 51-56.  They're three games beneath that so I'll say at most BB cost us three games this year versus an average manager.

by howserfan on Aug 2, 2007 12:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'd agree with that.
That's about where I thought he was...below average, but not horribly so.
"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 1:03 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Well
Pythag is based on runs scored...and with a decent lineup selection, the Rs would have scored more runs.

by BlueEyesAustin on Aug 2, 2007 6:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

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

by grudz69 on Aug 2, 2007 11:29 AM EDT   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   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   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   0 recs

right there with you NY
please no Pendy

please

by FlintHillsRoyal on Aug 2, 2007 12:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

No Girardi!

Saberhagen for life!  

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 2, 2007 12:01 PM EDT to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   0 recs

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

by RoyalsRetro on Aug 2, 2007 12:51 PM EDT to parent up   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   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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   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   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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 to parent up   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