Acta Fired
Talk about a guy who never had a shot at succeeding.
He'll be at the top of my wish list come October, you know, if...
almost 3 years ago
Manhattan Tribe Fan
219 comments
1 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I agree, he was saddled with mediocre talent and a dysfunctional FO, but I’m not convinced he is a good manager. Nat’s fan’s complained he was reluctant to argue with umps or show anger.
If you believe it's just a game, you're also probably wondering why Santa keeps skipping your house every year.
he was saddled with mediocre talent
dude, I think he wished he had mediocre talent…..as Ryan notes just above, the Nats are a very bad team talent wise and are most certainly below mediocre talent wise.
So how does mediocre vs. bad have any bearing on my concern about whether he is a good manager or not? His Nats are 8 games below X W-L (expected 34-53 vs actual 26-61). I would love to see him in our organization but I’m not ready to take on a manager with .385 record (.299 this season) without some solid reasons why he is better than, say, Skinner.
If you believe it's just a game, you're also probably wondering why Santa keeps skipping your house every year.
by LeftyCatcher on Jul 13, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
for the record, i’m right with you on acta. i’d love to see him in cleveland next year.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Jul 13, 2009 9:11 AM EDT reply actions
“It’s normal for the manager to pay the price when the team is not doing well,” Acta said.
Someone needs to tell Shapiro this.
everyone does it isn’t an argument for firing Wedge
by world dictator on Jul 13, 2009 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions
or “Wedge sucks”
I just wanted to believe.
by mjmarble on Jul 13, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
No, but considering the fact that:
a) consistent slow starts pointing to a lack of preparedness in spring training
b) lineups where players are playing all over the diamond on any given day
c) blaming last year’s failures on the bullpen coach who had been employed by the team for 40 years and then bringing in a new guy & the bullpen (which looked better on paper than last year) gets even worse
Since these reasons don’t seem to persuade Shapiro, maybe “everybody does it” is the one that will finally do the trick.
by one two seven on Jul 13, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions
along with up, reply, flag, and rec, there needs to be a “sigh” button.
by Brick. on Jul 13, 2009 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
This is what’s called dumbfanspeak ’round these parts.
Try harder.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Eh, does anyone really take issue with b)?
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on Jul 13, 2009 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Unless you mean Garko playing the outfield, there is no problem with moving guys all over the field.
That’s what I took it to mean. And Barfield playing outfield. And Valbuena playing short, honestly, though I suppose with Droobs out that’s defensible.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on Jul 13, 2009 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions
DeRosa at first.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 13, 2009 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah I’m okay with Valbuena playing short. I don’t think I saw any games that Barfield played in the outfield, so color me ignorant there.
Steel Nick
hey, that’s right… I think it was a late-game replacement when there was a better way Wedge could have aligned things. And I’m pretty sure there was a ball that Barfield didn’t get to that cost us a couple runs.
Proud Fan of the Worst Baseball Team I've Ever Seen
Regardless, we’re not in the AL Central basement because Garko occasionally plays OF or because we like to emphasize versatility in players. More importantly, the emphasis on versatility is organizational and not a Wedge creation. If we fired Wedge tomorrow you I guarantee you that we would still move players around the diamond.
by world dictator on Jul 13, 2009 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions
No single action or quirk or treatment of a single player itself causes any significant amount of losses. But you know, all this little stuff could, possibly, accumulate on itself and on errors in roster construction in a way that manifests itself in a place in the cellar.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 13, 2009 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions
yes it could possibly , I don’t doubt that. But I wonder how many runs translated into wins it costs us. That’s why I said I wish we had a tool that could translate manager effectiveness like FIP does with pitchers.
by world dictator on Jul 13, 2009 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions
i would bet you money that all this ridiculous “versatility” has SOMETHING to do with our AL-worst UZR. of course, as you said, whether playing garko in the outfield and such has been exclusively wedge’s call is up for debate. i would say that in the two areas where managers traditionally exert the most influence—coming up with who is playing and where on any given day, and managing the bullpen—we have done very, very poorly. besides, he certainly isn’t helping anything, and nobody is entitled to a MLB manager job.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Jul 14, 2009 7:32 AM EDT up reply actions
DeRo can play five positions. Garko can barely play one.
Actual versatility is a good thing. Imagined versatility is a bad thing.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Jul 14, 2009 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Garko has started 9 games in the OF. There’s quite a bit of overreaction here
by world dictator on Jul 14, 2009 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions
THAT’S TEN GAMES TOO MANY.
"Some days are better than others, but it's a long season."
— The Inestimable Eric Wedge
because he sucks and is costing our team runs with his poor defense when if you really wanted to play him, you could play him at 1B or DH. Particularly when he is playing the outfield behind a rookie pitcher with FB tendencies.
This would be a general argument for why Garko shouldn’t play the outfield. It is not however an argument for why we should go into long tirades about the fact that he started ten games in the outfield.
How many runs did Garko cost during those ten games? How many runs did he produce?
Freak outs about SSS = much higher bar of proof
That’s my only point
by world dictator on Jul 14, 2009 8:26 PM EDT up reply actions
The biggest issue for me is having him play out there behind a rookie pitcher who the Indians are obviously high on with FB tendencies. From what I have seen from Garko in the outfield, it has been a complete disaster particularly when Huff is the pitcher. How much of Huff’s poor start have come from being backed by a bad defense? I think these are issues we need to think about and correct.
We could have Tomo Ohka DH for one game, and it wouldn’t cost us a large number of runs. But it would be stupid. So why play Garko in the outfield, ever?
by cleveland teamer on Jul 15, 2009 9:28 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
actually, you’re wrong.
the question shouldn’t be simply whether garko produced more runs than he cost.
the question should be whether garko’s net run production is better than the next best alternative in the outfield.
and, at least in my estimation, that would be laporta.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Jul 15, 2009 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Is LaPorta in Cleveland? Nope, end of discussion.
by world dictator on Jul 15, 2009 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions
But he could be if the FO chose to make it that way. Just because he isn’t there doesn’t mean he isn’t the better option.
Besides, I don’t really care who is going to be better over the next month, I want the player with the higher upside taking his lumps in the big league now so that he is ready to go for 2010.
Could be on the roster is not the same as actually being on the roster.. I’m sorry but Garko playing in the outfield for 10 games spread out through the 1st half isn’t holding LaPorta in AAA. Let’s not conflate two subjects.
by world dictator on Jul 15, 2009 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
And there’s still no reason to believe that LaPorta automatically produces more net runs than Garko. Is LaPorta the better player in the long run? Yes. Is he a better player in the sample size of ten games, possibly, but not probably.
by world dictator on Jul 15, 2009 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
It’s “probably.” Of course there’s no guarantee, especially over ten games.
But the evidence does in fact support that LaPorta would be better. He’s projected to be the better hitter; their numbers this year (LaPorta’s MLE) are nearly identical; and LaPorta is certainly the better defender.
by dgcambridge on Jul 15, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
The randomness of the small sample size makes it hard to conclude that a LaPorta would “probably” be better.
Again, we’re talking about 10 random games spread out through the first half. In the 49 random AB LaPorta received earlier in the season he barely hit.
Anyways, like I said above LaPorta isn’t in the major leagues. Blame the front office for not calling him up, but don’t blame Wedge for not putting LaPorta in the lineup when he’s in AAA.
…you’re of course free to blame Wedge for sitting LaPorta while he was in Cleveland.
by world dictator on Jul 15, 2009 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions
probably = greater than 50% = more likely than not
Regardless of the variance, unless the guys have identical median performance projections, then one is probably going to be better than the other. That probability may not be much more than 50%, but it’s still “probably.”
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
i would bet you money that all this ridiculous "versatility" has SOMETHING to do with our AL-worst UZR
We’re not the only team the heavily emphasizes versatitlity. STL is infamous for move players around the diamond any given day. Their defense seems fine.
by world dictator on Jul 14, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions
maybe that’s because they actually have versatile players?
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Jul 14, 2009 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions
We have several, but not as many as management thinks we do.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 14, 2009 8:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Garko in the outfield absolutely has cost us runs, and runs mean wins.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I’d have to look closer at the game logs, but I believe Garko started playing a lot more OF once we were eliminated. Though to be fair, we’d also have to subtract runs Garko costs us to the runs Garko creates.
I’m not saying I agree with Garko playing in the OF as often as he has, especially in RF, but I’m skeptical that Wedge’s mistakes cost us as many games as people typically claim.
by world dictator on Jul 13, 2009 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions
The only Indians with a higher RC/G are Vic, Choo, and Hafner
by world dictator on Jul 14, 2009 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions
Your second comment answers the first — only six runs over replacement. The reason it’s so low is that when Garko plays, he’s always playing a non-skill position. He may have a higher RC/G than Asdrubal, Shoppach or even Grady, but that doesn’t account for replacement value.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Unless you mean Garko playing the outfield, there is no problem with moving guys all over the field.
Has anyone wondered if the real problem has been playing Shoppach too much this year? His hitting is abysmal this season.
I’m not familiar with a statistic that measures a catcher’s ability to call games, but I’d be surprised if the gap between Shop’s and Victors game calling, and defense outweighed Garko’s good hitting and acceptable 1B defense this year.
Does that make any sense?
by world dictator on Jul 14, 2009 1:38 AM EDT up reply actions
Part of the benefit to playing Shoppach more is that Victor can pretty much be in the lineup every day. If he catches more, then he’ll need more time off.
Shoppach has been pretty abysmal, and while his arm is much better, his accuracy hasn’t been good since 2007. That said, I think you have to hope for him to get better based on last year’s numbers. I think the days of Victor catching 4 out of 5 games are over.
I’ve tried to figure out what the “lack of preparedness” is that so many fans complain about. Would the team arrive in Cleveland with nostrils flaring, chomping at the bit? Are they supposed to burst from the lockerroom and run onto the field like something out of a college-football halftime motivational speech? The preparedness I know of would consist in having pitchers’ arms strong and having the hitters see enough game pitching.
What, in this realm of complaint, was supposed to have been done to prepare the Indians for the start of the season?
Whatever the teams are doing whose first half records correlate roughly with their second half records.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 13, 2009 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
for the first half, anyway…. then imitate Wedge for the second?
by Logodaedalus on Jul 14, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
How is bringing in someone who won’t get angry at umps, backs his players above all else, preaches patience and doesn’t show emotion making any changes. I’m not saying get Ozzie in here, but that sounds a lot like bringing Wedgie-lite in, only without the outlier of one year of playoff success.
I just wanted to believe.
Let’s trade Garko and Benfran for Ozzie.
Proud Fan of the Worst Baseball Team I've Ever Seen
by westbrook on Jul 13, 2009 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
How is bringing in someone who won’t get angry at umps, backs his players above all else, preaches patience and doesn’t show emotion making any changes
People are going to be surprised to hear this, but managers are actually in charge of things other than kicking dirt at umps. Before these games the managers put together what they feel is the optimal lineup for that game fitting with the best defensive alignment, and during the game they make substitutions and hand over the ball to situational relievers as they see fit. These things have more of an influence on the won-loss record than his penchant for dramatic red-faced shouting (or lack thereof).
The suggestion here is that we should focus on Wedge being a bad manager because his in-game strategy is found wanting, not because his post-game sound bites are found boring. We should then assume that a new manager would bring in new strategies.
And this has nothing to do with Acta. I have no idea how he coaches. Except for the preaching patience part. If that’s true I don’t see any reason to discourage that.
Steel Nick
You can tell I’m grumpy if my post is longer than two lines and doesn’t include any pictures or youtube links.
Steel Nick
I agree.
That said, I too have no knowledge about Acta’s managerial skills, but for some reason I like him. I also like Jose Oquendo. Has he ever managed a team outside of the WBC? I know he’s a 3rd base coach now and he “managed” in the Futures game, but has he ever done anything in the minors?
Just 1 year … 1998 … in short-season ball.
Been on the major league coaching staff from 1999 onwards.
by FallsTribeFan on Jul 13, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I love Oquendo too, but I don’t see him ever leaving the Cards. He always struck me as the likely replacement once TLR was done.
These things have more of an influence on the won-loss record than his penchant for dramatic red-faced shouting (or lack thereof).
There’s probably a solid argument to be made that this is wrong. I’m too lazy.busy to do it, though.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on Jul 13, 2009 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d be open to it. It would be damn impressive if one could make the argument because I’m pretty convinced that the people batting/pitching and when/in what order weighs far more on the final score of the game than managerial temper tantrums.
Steel Nick
Sure there are “optimal” lineups, but as we’ve discussed ad nauseum with the whole Grady batting 2nd thing, even the most optimal lineups are only worth a few more runs over the course of a season. And that’s assuming you can run the same nine guys out there for 162 games. To me, both lineup construction and managerial flip-outs are psychological tools, and it seems possible given that that managerial flip-outs are more useful.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on Jul 13, 2009 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
There’s also the issue of how managers can influence the effectiveness of bullpens. We’ve discussed it here and there with regard to Bob Melvin and Wedge’s 2007, without really concluding anything. It’s worth noting, though, that Washington’s bullpen has been worse than Cleveland’s this year in terms of ERA and RA, and in a pitcher’s park in the NL to boot. (Don’t have the more sophisticated numbers at hand.) Of course, the Indians bullpen looked a hell of a lot better on paper before people like Mike Gosling got involved.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 13, 2009 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions
That last sentence is a little unclear. What I was implying was basically that we had better relievers to work with than Washington, based on track record.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 13, 2009 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s what I read from it. I don’t think the best bullpen manager in the game is going to do a whole hell of a lot with Washington’s relievers. Not even Luis Isaac could right that ship.
Steel Nick
Yeah, but give the man a Kangol and at least he’d look good doing it.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 13, 2009 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I know the difference from one lineup to another in terms of batting order is minimal over the course of a season, but I was getting more at who starts when and against whom.
Steel Nick
For example: A love affair with Francisco could really be costing this team some runs scored. That’s a very direct outcome a manager is having.
Steel Nick
A love affair with Garko could really be costing this team some runs allowed. This is fun.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 13, 2009 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions
There is… another…
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 13, 2009 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
My point was specifically to play off the article in the link and it’s comment about ‘fans’ complaints. I kinda get that managers do a bit more than get “red faced and kick dirt on umps.” My point was to look at some of the similarities in criticism of Wedge and Acta. I sincerely feel that if Wedge thinks that playing Dellucci (or Michael’s before him) constantly until the FO releases them, puts Garko in the OF or plays Peralta at SS when its clear he shouldn’t be there any more — then this shows Wedge to be a rotten manager. (OF course we could just mention a few other examples – benching LaPorta endlessly during his first ‘cup o’ coffee’, mishandles Phillips, gets out-managed every time he steps foot in a NL park (and most AL parks), complete inability to see when his starters are out of gas and thus properly manage a ’pen, etc, etc, etc — but the point was to focus on Acta).
On a completely shallow and theoretical level, if these criticisms of Acta hold true and he is similar to Wedge, I want nothing of him. There’s nothing wrong with patience, or it being preached by a manager to his team and to the bored press/fans.
I have no idea how Acta coaches, either. I’ve seen two Nats games in the two years I’ve lived in DC. To go out on a limb here, one would assume he knew more than Wedge after coaching in the NL.
I just wanted to believe.
by mjmarble on Jul 13, 2009 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
All that stuff in your first paragraph is what I’m getting at, the honest “strategic” blunders. That’s really the only difference I care about. Or more accurately, that’s the most important and foremost care when I’m stacking another manager against Wedge. The differences there are going to be far more important than temperament (IMO).
And one small nitpick, but I don’t really think Wedge did a lot wrong with Phillips. I think like Bradley there was only so much Phillips was open to. And he got plenty of ABs.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 13, 2009 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
WD posted a lot of similar stuff down below that I agree with, but I couldn’t pass up replying to this…
I sincerely feel that if Wedge thinks that playing Dellucci (or Michael’s before him) constantly until the FO releases them, puts Garko in the OF or plays Peralta at SS when its clear he shouldn’t be there any more — then this shows Wedge to be a rotten manager.
Dellucci and Michaels both underperformed what they previously done. I’ll give you that Wedge could commit to the youngsters a bit earlier. Peralta, eh. They had two very good teams with him being the everyday SS.
(OF course we could just mention a few other examples – benching LaPorta endlessly during his first ‘cup o’ coffee’
Been discussed before. He played about the same amount as they said he would when he was called up. Maybe even more.
mishandles Phillips
Maybe. Maybe not. You wouldn’t be in a position to know.
gets out-managed every time he steps foot in a NL park (and most AL parks),
Lots of data provided there…
complete inability to see when his starters are out of gas
OK. I’ll take your word for it over a guy who caught at the major college level, caught in the minors, caught in the majors, managed in the minors, and now is in his 7th year in the majors. Knowing what to look for in tiring pitchers has probably never come up.
and thus properly manage a ’pen, etc
That’s a little simplistic. I will say that in three of the last four years, the bullpen came badly off the tracks and he has been unable to get it back on track, at least until it was too late. He deserves criticism for this.
Overall, I like Wedge’s professionalism and overall demeanor. But I’ll be disappointed if he’s back. The bullpen issue is one thing. Another is that sometimes you just need a change, especially if the team has not met expectations. When you experience enough losing with a guy it’s just better off if you make a change.
MJ – no snarkiness for the rest of the post, just some advice. With your list from above, I’ll just warn you that you won’t like the next guy…or the next guy after that. With so many decisions made by a manager, you’re going to disagree with a number of them no matter who it is. Unless you’re actually doing the managing yourself. Once I figured that out, I stopped driving myself nuts when watching games.
by TribeJay on Jul 13, 2009 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
TribeJay, I’ll just touch on the last paragraph of your post. I’ve rooted for teams with a critical eye for over 20 years now (I’m in my 30’s). I’ve never detested a manager before, I’ve always given them the benefit of the doubt and taken the position that many Wedge apologists take here. Granted, this is the Indians and I’m much more passionate about them. Overall, I might grumble with this move or that, but never before have I felt that a manager was completely incompetent or should be fired.
I’ve felt this way about Wedge for years now – ever since about 2006. Yes, that includes the 2007 team. I kept my mouth shut for the end of 2007 because the team was doing well. Heck, I even took pride that he won MoY because he was an Indian. But I never though he was a good manager.
I may be an exception to the rule, and you’ll be hard pressed to find a more adamant “Wedge-must-go” poster on here, but I’ll promise you that I won’t simply hate the next guy when he doesn’t do what I want. Or even after a full season of him not doing what I want.
I just wanted to believe.
That team was so good that every time he did something stupid the players succeeded despite it.
Proud Fan of the Worst Baseball Team I've Ever Seen
The suggestion here is that we should focus on Wedge being a bad manager because his in-game strategy is found wanting, not because his post-game sound bites are found boring. We should then assume that a new manager would bring in new strategies.
I’m not a Wedge lover, but I think the “Wedge is a bad manger” arguments are overstated. There are lots of decisions Wedge makes that I disagree with. But I can’t think of a manager or a coach or a GM in any sport that I always agree with. If we fired Wedge today and hired a new manager we’d complain about him the same way.
There are good arguments for firing Wedge, but 90% of the Wedge related frustrations realistically have little to do with our overall record this season. I wish there was a FIP statistic for managing that would allow us to evaluate how good a manager really is instead of merely relying on chance and randomness.
by world dictator on Jul 13, 2009 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
My complaint has always been about the overall quality and seemingly large underperformance of a talented team. This coupled with multiple slow starts leads me to wonder if Wedge has the ability to coach our team to its true talent level. The in-game stuff, I actually think he is pretty strong about, except maybe not enough focus on our best defensive alignment.
There seems to be a lot of revising going on that suggests maybe the Indians weren’t as talented as we all thought. I still don’t fully buy that theory. When I look at the talent on the team, I see that there is no way we should be the second worst team in baseball or close to that. This goes for 2006 and 2008 as well.
Comparing a manager against his X W-L seems like a poor way to evaluate a manager.
—You
My complaint has always been about the overall quality and seemingly large underperformance of a talented team.
I always thought when people talked about under-performing they were alluding to Pythag record.
Steel Nick
Why would you think that?
There are many types of underperformance, and it isn’t clear that that even is one of them.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I’m just saying that a lot of people here always complain specifically about underperforming our Pythagorean W-L as a sign that Wedge is not utilizing this team properly.
Steel Nick
Like so many “saber” innovations … it’s just one way of looking at the data, not a particularly definitive or important one. It has been vastly over-emphasized. The fact that it gets 40% of the virtual ink in manager debates is atrocious … it’s rightful share is somewhere around 2%.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Jul 14, 2009 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Asking out of curiosity, are their other statistical measures that attempt to assess real team performance against the W-L record?
Love this
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on Jul 15, 2009 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
But do you know what I meant?
This is my whole point. It’s great to understand the correlations, but the confusing of raw run-scoring or aggregated PA results with “real performance” is the disease, not the cure.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
OK. Let me rephrase. How about statistics that might offer some insight into the performance of the manager?
I think there is a difference here which I am not prepared to debate. Basically in short, I don’t think the X W-L is the best indicator of a team’s talent level.
X-W-L is not the best indicator of a team’s talent level but I believe there has been proven to be some predictive value.
However, there might be certain types of teams that could be more prone to underperforming their X-W-L than others. Whether the manager is a component of that is probably open to debate.
Predictive of what? Future wins? I mean, it’s fairly obvious that there would be a correlation between runs scored and allowed at one point, and runs scored and allowed at another (and therefore with wins), no? That doesn’t mean it separates player talent from managerial skill in any kind of clean way. Nor does it mean (as you acknowledge) that the difference between W-L and X W-L isolates the managerial skill in any clean way.
by Logodaedalus on Jul 14, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
As far as I know, X-W-L is predictive of future wins and that it doesn’t prove anything about managerial skill.
I feel like there might be something more to our near constant underperfroming than just bad luck, though it’s hard for me to see how managerial skill would play that much of a factor in it, if at all.
It sounded like you were citing XW-L’s predictive power as evidence that it was a measure of talent, divorced from management. I just don’t see how that follows — the fact that it’s predictive seems obvious, but that includes both player talent and management variability.
by Logodaedalus on Jul 14, 2009 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m buying on this idea that we shouldn’t abandon our original projections. There are plenty of managers now and throughout history who failed to extract as much from their teams as they should. And it’s easy to sell short on displays like getting thrown out of games, because psychology is a soft science. Psychology plays a significant part in motivating groups. I’m not implying that Wedge should have tried to get thrown out, but his apparent inability to motivate players may have contributed to some degree of underperformance.
Yeah, I understand Acta comes across as a smart guy in interviews, I’m just not sure how much that tells us about how good he is at being a manager. He’s in a bad situation, for sure, so who knows.
For what it’s worth, PECOTA had the Nationals close to .500 this season. But that’s just another team in a long list of teams that PECOTA wasn’t even close on this year.
It had the White Sox, Rangers, Marlins, Astros and Mariners each losing at least 90 games.
It had the D-Backs, Cubs, and Mets each winning at least 90 games.
The Indians and A’s were both projected to a few games over .500.
Season isn’t close to over so maybe some of this will be corrected.
To whomever rec’d this: Was it because you’re happy Acta’s available, or that the sum’bitch got what he deserved?
Steel Nick
Happy he’s available. I mean, I have no argument that he’d be better than Wedge. But if Wedgie is going, I mean, like Jay said – no negative indicators. Heck, maybe the indicators are good ones!
Gotchya. Just wondering.
I like Acta. But they’re a lot of the same reasons I don’t mind Wedge, and they’re all in one way or another superficial: He seems well-reasoned when he speaks, he takes it one day at a time*, he is an on-field extension of the front office. But if it comes down to Acta as a candidate I should really inspect how he actually manages.
And I’m not going to lie and say I’m not biased towards a guy who frickin’ reads sabermetric analysis.
*I think I like robots and words like “the system” and “process” if I’m being honest. I respect Belichick. But in the end I like wins. So whatever works.
Steel Nick
I also like Wedge’s Wedge-like qualities, and see them in Acta. And he doesn’t come with the side effect of being boring in his public appearances. With Wedge, if it weren’t for what Roger describes above—the consistent disparity between talent and on-field results, I wouldn’t want him fired at all. Hell, I thought they should keep him on May 18th.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 13, 2009 8:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Belichick could manage a baseball team better than Wedge after a 1-year learning period. Good thing he isn’t gonna need a job any time soon.
Proud Fan of the Worst Baseball Team I've Ever Seen
Not sure that I want one of my least favorite Cheaters managing my favorite baseball team.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jul 13, 2009 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I was referring to Bellechik. Not sure why Ankiel is considered a cheater. If it’s that HGH thing I’m fairly positive that was proven to be not a big deal. But no Rick Ankiel wouldn’t be a good manager either. He’s kind of selfish and he’s been snarky with Albert lately. Not cool.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jul 14, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
I just recall you hating on Belichick in another thread too because he was a cheater. I figure PEDs was a little more serious than sign stealing considering baseball’s been stealing signs since at least Bobby Thompson’s home run.
But I heavily digress.
Steel Nick
All teams to what NE does. They just didn’t do it against a revenge-seeking rat of a former employee.
Proud Fan of the Worst Baseball Team I've Ever Seen
Sign stealing in baseball is not an accurate comparison at all. There was a rule directed specifically to the use of video cameras in that context. Sign stealing by watching from the dugout is as unethical as stealing bases.
by dgcambridge on Jul 14, 2009 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the video camera rule is on par with the rule that no contact can take place between an NBA team and a free agent before the signing period begins.
Anyway I’m not arguing whether or not it’s forbidden, I’m asking whether Belichick really deserves the Scorn of Ultimate Cheater when you really consider the NFL culture. But again, I’m digressing.
Steel Nick
I’m with you on this one, nick
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on Jul 14, 2009 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Why? Other than “cheating,” what makes the guy any more of a “scumbag” than anyone else?
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on Jul 14, 2009 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: the NBA rule – I’m not familiar with the context. Is the idea that it’s a rule routinely ignored? Accepted behavior even?
That’s my understanding. Unless parties admit to it there’s not much way of getting caught.
Steel Nick
Oh, so it’s not so much that it was accepted, but that teams routinely got away with it because there was no proof unless one team turned in another. (not trying to be sarcastic. I’m not with or against you here.)
No, sports media would never do that!
Trade Cliff.
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 14, 2009 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m not really a huge Rick Ankiel fan. But Bellechik is a cheather and I guarantee he cheats in more ways than he was caught for. He’s also just a scumbag.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
You can’t tell me you don’t do this. I won’t believe you. Everyone does it to people they have never met. People come off certain ways to certain people and he comes off as a scumbag.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
Well, OK, but you can say all day long I think he’s a scumbag and I wouldn’t quibble with it. But when you say he is a scumbag, that’s where I , and many others, take issue. The only absolutes we deal in here are the facts that the Yankees suck and anyone who plays for them is a jackass.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on Jul 14, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Didn’t you once say that we should assume everything written on this site is inherently prefaced with “I think…”? That there’s no point in stating that over and over.
Also assume sarcasm. Which was definitely used in this case since no one can call anyone they have never met especially anything at all with any real certainty and expect no one in the world to disagree with them.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jul 15, 2009 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions
He took practices when he wasn’t supposed to so he could find out what the rams were doing. Just because everyone else steals signs doesn’t make it right. I am not a real big NFL fan and that’s a lot of it. Also if you’re going to cheat don’t be stupid enough to get caught. Also in the Superbowl against the Rams he committed penalties every single passing play because he knew the refs wouldn’t call them because it’s the Superbowl. That’s making a mockery of the game. There are tapes to prove that too.
Also I have never met him. If I ever did meet him I would be sweet as sugar and give him the benefit of the doubt. All of you can disagree with me on this but this is why I feel I can say he is a scumbag, at least when it come to football coaching.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
The Patriots used that aggressive should-be penalty tactic against most teams during their run. I do think the NFL recognized that the officials weren’t calling the game properly and they amended the rules and made sure the officials were enforcing them. I do not blame Belichik for pushing his players to take advantage of lax officiating.
I do. And I think I have the right to. If you don’t that’s fine but it is making a mockery of the game because you are purposely breaking the rules constantly. I may be naive and stupid or something for thinking that everyone should follow the rules even if they aren’t being enforced but I do think that.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
Sports rules, like the law, always come down to enforcement. A gentleman’s agreement to play a certain way never lasts over the long haul, and there will always be teams pushing the envelope.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
And those are usually the teams that are winning. If we need to “Belichick” to win a World Series, I’m all for it.
I’m not because I’m fairly sure we can do it without him or his baseball equivalent since it’s been done before.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jul 14, 2009 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions
This is complete irrelevant anyway. If we needed him, if it was the only possible way, then obviously I would accept him as the manager. However I would not like it.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jul 15, 2009 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions
I never said I think that they do play by the rules, I just think they should and I think it’s fair to not like people who take way too much advantage of rules not being enforced.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jul 14, 2009 11:54 PM EDT up reply actions
this is why I feel I can say he is a scumbag, at least when it come to football coaching.
So, you’re okay with his being hired to manage the Indians?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I assume he would be the same managing/coaching anything. Just a hunch. I mainly meant, maybe not personally since I don’t know him.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jul 14, 2009 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I think most Indians fans would have the same problems with TLR that they do with Wedge. The people over at VEB would gladly give him to the Tribe though.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jul 14, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Fans will always complain about the coach/manager, even when they shouldn’t. The fact that folks complain about TLR is mind-boggling to me. In his career, he’s won five pennants and two WS rings. His teams almost never underachieve, whether you want to base that on pythag or preseason expectations. He’s innovative.
He almost has to be considered one of the greatest managers of all time, right?
Ugh, I am just sick of Tony LaRussa. Call it bias if you want. There’s the fact that his Oakland team practically invented steroids, the 6 pitching changes per game, and the drunk driving to consider. Is Tony LaRussa a Hall Of Fame manager? Yes. Did he just happen to run into one and win five pennants? More than luck I assume. Do I have to like him? No.
Steel Nick
I do like Farrell.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 13, 2009 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions
i would say, if not acta, then either luvollo or fryman.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Jul 14, 2009 7:38 AM EDT up reply actions
Clearly it is time for the Indians FO to let the LGT community manage the team via gamethread “Choose Your Own Adventure” voting. Wedge can stay, but he will be stripped of decision-making power. Obviously we’ll still need someone to visit the mound, argue calls, etc. and it seems there is agreement here that he is sufficiently skilled at those things.
by cleveland teamer on Jul 14, 2009 11:12 AM EDT reply actions
If only we could build an LGT-controlled robot to do those things too….
Would anyone notice?
by Logodaedalus on Jul 14, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Sounds like someone needs to hack into the Wedge 3000.
"Actual versatility is a good thing. Imagined versatility is a bad thing."
Jay Levin
by woodsmeister on Jul 14, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe
Related FanShots on Let's Go Tribe
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Citi Field All-Star game has finally been made official for 2013
- Brett Lawrie receives four-game suspension, fined for ‘aggressive actions’ toward umpire
- PNC Park security guard loses finger in struggle with fan during Pirates game
- Create-a-Caption: Partying like it’s 1988
- The Ron Washington puppet is watching you while you sleep — and has possibly jinxed the Rangers
