Craig Albernaz Hired; My Thoughts

The Orioles hired Craig Albernaz as their new Manager.

I think Albernaz is a decent bet to be named as next year’s American League Manager of the Year.

I also find the Manager position largely irrelevant as the calendar approaches 2026.

That’s not a knock on Albernaz; that’s just my take on the importance of a Manager.

 

Everything I’ve read about Albernaz and heard from him directly since the announced hire is good.

He’s well-liked, respected, and seems competitive.

First impressions are all positive.

I do question hiring a first time Manager.

As much as I lampoon the importance of a Major League Manager; I could get behind the idea of there being something to the collective psyche (players and fans alike), of having a guy that you know can do the job, because he has done it before.

That doesn’t mean I don’t think Albernaz will have success.
I expect he will, because I expect the Orioles to rebound, and he’ll get credit for that.

I just think in this game of retreads, it’s surprising that Orioles President of Baseball Operations Mike Elias couldn’t find one guy with the experience of a ‘proven winner’, that he could put in the seat.

One guy with experience who has won. So everyone could simultaneously pretend that guy, “Knows how to win.”

Bringing in a first time Manager outside of Tony Mansolino invites more questions.
After going through 119 games with Mansolino, the players have to get used to another Manager.

Someone reading this is wondering why I’m discounting the value of a MLB Manager.

And that would be because this isn’t the hire of a NFL Defensive or Offensive Coordinator, or a College Basketball Head Coach.  There is no tactical advantage for any MLB Manager in 2026.  These guys aren’t making impactful decisions.  They aren’t even making decisions on Pinch Hitters, Fielding Changes, or Bullpen usage on their own.  These are decisions being made as organizations with the Front Offices of every Major League team providing their Managers with a waive of analytics before every series, and every game.

“If you face this situation, here will be your choice.  These are guys available tonight, and sequentially how we want you to utilize.”

So, if a MLB Manager isn’t making in-game decisions of consequence; what is the job?

The job is finding someone that communicates effectively to the Team, the Front Office and Ownership, and the Media.

Presumably, Elias has found a guy he believes he can work well with (and better with than Mansolino); so, that’s good.

You need a guy that holds players accountable but doesn’t throw them under the bus in public.

You need a guy that has attention to detail.

Everything we’ve read and heard about Albernaz since the hire, points to him being detailed oriented and someone that will demand accountability.

So again, good there.

You need a guy that has a mentality for a 162 game season, where you can’t be too high or too low on any individual night.

Most of the job we will never see.
It’s just relationships.

Even with me not highly valuing the position, I do think you could make a bad hire.

A poor choice, would be bringing on someone with low emotional IQ, or an inability to communicate effectively.

If I was Elias, that would have brought me back to known commodities vs. a first time hire.

How Mansolino was at the above criteria is known internally.
Did he communicate effectively with the team and the Front Office?
They know the answer there whatever it is.

That the O’s moved on from Mansolino, does give you a clue there.

 

The O’s underachieved in the second half of 2024 (33-33 after the break).
The O’s were 15-28 when Brandon Hyde was fired May 17th here in ’25.

Why did the O’s underachieve in the 2nd half of ’24, and to begin ’25?

Many pointed at Hyde and looked at him as the primary culprit.

I was always indifferent on Hyde, and didn’t mind him being replaced.
I also didn’t think he was the primary cause of that play over that 109 game stretch.

When evaluating why the ’24 team faded, and the ’25 team started off poorly; I would have pointed at:

2024: 

1) Rutschman not producing.
2) The bullpen.
3) Somewhat just a law of averages… they were on a 98 win pace through the initial 96 games of ’24.
4) Holliday didn’t hit the ground running in the opportunity he had in ’24.
5) Westburg’s injury.
6) Rodriguez’s injury.

2025: 

1) 24th in runs scored, 24th in on-base %, 19th in slugging %
2) No Burnes.
3) Having two players who played more than 95 games.
4) Rutschman not hitting, Cowser regressing, Holliday improving (but not enough). Kjerstad being horrible, TON being unavailable and not productive…
5) Henderson producing like an All-Star, and not like an MVP.
6) Morton imploding to begin the season before finding some level of competency
7) Bautista not being right, Cano not being good
8) Kremer and Sugano being the two O’s with the most innings pitched
9) Eflin being ineffective and not available, Rodriguez not being available.
10) Using 70 players.

Hyde won 91 games in ’24 after winning 101 games in ’23.
So, if he was a completely ineffective feckless leader; the O’s still won at a decent clip with him providing no leadership.

There’s a thread on our message board here at BSL, with a large percentage of posters believing Albernaz will provide a 4+ game advantage over Mansolino.

That feels like crazy talk to me.
We have a bunch of informed posters as our site, but I don’t think many of us knew anything about Albernaz prior to his hire.
So that voting is solely about people believing Mansolino was in over his head.

If Mansolino provided zero leadership to the point he was a detriment or at-least provided nothing; he was still able to guide the O’s to a .500 record over 120 games, despite the adversities faced above.

If Albernaz gets a healthier roster, with some external augmentation; and the players you are counting on, produce more as you would expect, then the team will be better.

That’s it, that’s the bottom-line.

Leadership matters in all facets of life, including baseball which is just another job featuring humans.

I wouldn’t pretend that leadership has no value.

If Albernaz provides some leadership to the O’s, and he’s widely credited with their lift next year, that’s fine.

My take is that what gets attributed as poor or quality leadership from a MLB Manager isn’t something we can see, nor do I think particularly fair.

They were 60-59 with Mansolino under trying circumstances.
The team should be better next year.

A 60-59 record is a .504 winning percentage.
In the American League, a .504 winning percentage for the season would have had the O’s 5.5 games outside of the 3rd Wild Card.

Going from .500 ish to Wild Card contention doesn’t take much.

Going from .500 ish to 95 wins and a division championship isn’t going to be about the Manager.  At-least imo.

For the record, I don’t have any opinion on Mansolino other than he was just there for 119 games, and you were over .500 with him in a bad situation. And now you are replacing him with another question mark.

Again, Albernaz is a great bet for Manager of the Year.
He’ll be fine, and lauded as somewhere between great and transformational.

The team will rebound because the talent and health figures to be better.
The team doing better will be attributed to him.

Having the best players do better and be available more (plus receiving an influx of help) will be the reason the team does better.

When the team performs better, and is winning more; the attention to detail will improve (tightened defense, better baserunning) because focus improves when you are winning and enjoying ‘coming to the office’ each day. The improved focus will be attributed to him, and that will be seen as why the play improved.

If the O’s are better in ’26, they won’t have 70 different players wearing an O’s uniform as happened in ’25. More continuity (with better talent), with better results will equal better focus.

I’m not down on the Albernaz hire.
Lots of positives in what we’ve heard and read so far.
If the O’s improve next year as I suspect they will, I’m sure his leadership will be attributed as a leading reason why.
If he adds value in the things we never see, great.