Charlie Manuel

Some additional thoughts on NL Manager of the Year

17 Comments

A couple people have said that I came down a little hard on Bud Black in my Manager of the Year post.  I certainly didn’t mean to, and if I did, I apologize. I have nothing against Bud Black and I think he did a great job.  I can’t argue with his winning, nor will I.  Really, I was just using his win as a means by which to explore the way in which managers are evaluated.  I could have easily used a devil’s advocate device — like  I did with the Padres’ 10-game losing streak —  in the cases of Dusty Baker, Bobby Cox, or Charlie Manuel.  All of them did things last year that at times made you scratch your head. Many of their moves, if cast in a certain light, could be shown to look bad.

But stepping back from that rather academic point, it’s worth noting that there were arguments in favor of all of the vote-garnering candidates in the NL.  Briefly:

  • Black: though maybe we undersold the Padres, even an optimist couldn’t have guessed them to be in it until the last weekend. Plus, I’ve always believed that a manager has his biggest impact on bullpen management, and Black certainly did a great job with the Padres’ bullpen, which ended up being the best in baseball;
  • Dusty Baker: the same expectation game applied to him, as not many people picked the Reds to finish highly. I had them a distant second before the season started, but I was drinking a little bit of the Reds Kool-Aid.  And while it may have stretched over two seasons, Baker deserves a lot of credit for Joey Votto’s development into an MVP candidate. His handling of Votto’s anxiety issues last year was expert, and I could easily see many managers screwing that up. There are few managers whose players speak more highly of them than Baker’s do of him;
  • Bobby Cox: Scratching away the “one for the road” considerations that I feel have no place in this award, a case could certainly be made for Cox on a “most with the least” basis. At least for the second half of the season when the Braves lost player after player, and still held on to a playoff spot thanks to duct tape and baling wire.  In all honesty, though, there was a lot of luck there and the Padres’ collapse helped a lot.  He’d maybe get a third place vote from me — maybe fourth — but I can see why he’s in the conversation;
  • Charlie Manuel: I don’t know that he should have won, but I thought he’d get more consideration than he did. The Phillies were injured all year, and Manuel did a great job keeping that operation together.  In the end, though, he was hurt by (a) the feeling that the Phillies were already the most talented team in the NL to begin with; and (b) the Oswalt trade. That trade and the Three Aces stuff ended up setting the narrative for the second half of the Phillies season, not Manuel’s genius. Though, obviously, it’s a lot more complicated than that.  Managers of the most talented teams have won the award. So too have managers of the team that has made the big trade. I think Manuel deserved better.
  • Brad Mills: they started so poorly and then traded off all of their veteran talent, yet after the first couple of weeks of the season, Mills’ Astros matched all but the very top teams in the NL.
  • Bruce Bochy: Some of the sharpest minds in baseball, ahem, wrote them off in June, but he rallied the troops, righted the ship, mixed six more metaphors and led the team to the NL West title (votes were in before the playoffs began).

So they all had their merits. And in the end, I’m back where I began: If given an MVP or Cy Young ballot tomorrow I’d have no problem filling them out. But I have no idea how to go about valuing candidates for the Manager of the Year Award. I look forward to reading some of the voters’ explanations — especially Christina Kahrl’s over at Baseball Prospectus, who had a MoY vote — to see how they went about it.

Miguel Sano criticized by his manager for dogging it on a defensive play

Screen Shot 2016-05-24 at 11.47.54 AM
Leave a comment

Sal Perez of the Royals had a nice night last night, going 5-for-5. One of those five hits was a triple. But it maybe didn’t have to be a triple, as Perez’s hit to right field went over the head of Miguel Sano and off the wall, bouncing back toward the infield.

Sano is no one’s idea of a gold glover so getting on him for not catching a ball at the wall is only going to have so much of an effect. But Twins manager Paul Molitor was rightly upset, it would seem, for how Sano reacted after the ball bounced off the wall. Specifically: he basically just stopped and watched it roll away as center fielder Danny Santana had to spring over and field it as the slow Perez lumbered around the bases. Molitor:

“I think maybe he assumed that [second baseman Eduardo] Nunez or Danny were going to be in better position after he positioned himself close to the wall to make the catch,” Molitor said. “But you want him to go for the ball even if you think there’s somebody else to help you out. Sometimes you get caught assuming out there and it doesn’t look too good.”

You can watch the play below. It starts at around the :37 second mark and is Perez’s third hit in the sequence:

Red Sox reliever Carson Smith to have Tommy John surgery

BOSTON, MA - MAY 09:  Carson Smith #39 of the Boston Red Sox looks on in the seventh inning during the game against the Oakland Athletics at Fenway Park on May 9, 2016 in Boston, Massachusetts.  (Photo by Adam Glanzman/Getty Images)
Getty Images
2 Comments

Last season Carson Smith was an effective and durable relief pitcher for the Seattle Mariners, appearing in 70 games. In the offseason the Red Sox traded for him and Roenis Elias in exchange for Jonathan Aro and Wade Miley. This year Smith has appeared in just three games. And he will appear in no more as the Red Sox just announced that he will undergo season-ending Tommy John surgery today.

Smith last appeared in a game ten days ago and, until today, it was believed that his injury was minor, like the flexor strain injury he sustained in spring training. Sadly, the news was much worse.

Bill “Spaceman” Lee is running for governor of Vermont

Screen Shot 2016-05-24 at 9.29.51 AM
7 Comments

Bill Lee pitched for the Boston Red Sox from 1969 through 1978 and for the Montreal Expos from 1979 through 1982. He’s far better known, however, for being a weirdo, in the best sense of the term. He was outspoken and controversial and funny and aggravating and above all else his own dude.

His most famous comment as a player was when he said that he sprinkled marijuana on his pancakes in order to immunize him from Boston bus fumes as he jogged to Fenway Park. Which is patently silly, as everyone knowns you can’t just sprinkle it. You gotta make butter out of the stuff and spread it on the pancakes. Or so I’m told.

In recent years Lee has alternated gimmicky and celebrity baseball appearances with political aspirations. His political aspirations, of course, have never been conventional either. In 1987, for example, he had announced plans to run for President of the United States for the Rhinoceros Party. Which would’ve been a neat trick as it was a Canadian political party. Still, we could’ve used it here, as its platform was fairly intriguing. The Rhinoceroses advocated, among other things, repealing the law of gravity, legalizing all drugs, privatizing Tim Hortons and giving a rhinoceros for every Canadian Citizen.

That campaign didn’t work out for Lee, sadly, but he is undeterred. And now he plans to run for office again. Governor of Vermont, to be specific. And he plans to soak the rich:

Now, he’s throwing his hat into the race to be Vermont’s next governor shaking off campaign contributions and decrying wealth inequality.

“You get what you pay for, if you want change, you vote for Sanders or me. I’m Bernie-heavy, I’m not Bernie-lite. My ideas were before Bernie,” said Lee. “If you want to see money come down from the 2 percent, we’re going to need umbrellas when I’m elected, because it’s going to be raining dollars,” he said.

This is no Rhinoceros Party joke, though. He’s a member of the Liberty Union party, which is where Bernie Sanders got his start. And his platform — legalization and taxation of pot in Vermont, single-payer health care, paid family leave — are all things which have no small constituency in a liberal state like Vermont.

Oh, he has one other platform plank: bringing the Expos back to Montreal. That may be a bit tougher for the governor of Vermont to do, but we’ll probably see some form of New Expos in Montreal in the next decade or so, and Lee will be proven to be on the right side of history. And that’s better than a lot of our politicians can say, right?

The Marlins have sued at least nine season ticket holders and vendors

MIAMI, FL - MAY 04: Miami Marlins owner Jeffery Loria looks on during the game between the Miami Marlins and the Arizona Diamondbacks at Marlins Park on May 4, 2016 in Miami, Florida. (Photo by Rob Foldy/Getty Images
8 Comments

Earlier this month we reported that the Miami Marlins had sued a season ticket holder, Mickey Axelband, alleging that he reneged on the second year of a two-year season ticket agreement. Axelband, who had been a season ticket holder with the Marlins since their inaugural season in 1993, claimed that the Marlins reneged first, eliminating amenities which they promised upon the move to Marlins Park and failing to deliver on others.

In that post we observed that it is uncommon for teams to sue ticket holders. It’s bad form to begin with as season ticket holders are a club’s most valuable and dedicated customers. But it’s also dumb in that there are virtually limitless options available to a club to resolve disputes with ticket holders short of litigation. Why would the Marlins sue in this situation? Maybe there was more to it than we knew? Maybe this was just an extreme outlier of a case?

Nope. The Miami New Times reports today that this seems to be pretty par for the course for Jeff Loria’s Marlins. The Marlins, in fact, have sued at least nine season ticketholders and luxury suite owners since 2013. They are also locked in litigation with two stadium vendors. The concessioners claim that the Marlins induced them to pay big rights fees in order to set up business inside Marlins Park by promising big, big crowds, only to fail to deliver on those promises and to see the vendors go out of business or be unable or unwilling to pay what the Marlins demanded.

The story goes deep on Axelband’s dispute with Miami and that of a pizza vendor. Overall it paints a portrait of a Marlins club which doesn’t seem to give a crap about fans or its business partners, only the bottom line. Unless, of course, it’s trying to pose as a civic institution so it can get tax dollars to pay for its big stadium and rights fees from potential vendors. Now that they have the stadium, however, and now that the ink is dry on those deals, they’re portraying themselves like any other company, entitled to enforce their business deals in any way necessary.

And, legally speaking, they are. But they’re certainly approaching things differently than most ball clubs do. And in a way that puts lie to the notion that sports teams should be given any extra leeway when it comes to giving them all of the things they ask for.