Grading Jerry

[Guest Edgy DC]

Grady Little excepted.

[Ceetar]

="John Cougar Lunchbucket":2tdcmpvy] ="Ceetar":2tdcmpvy]Here's my rant on why we need to fire this bum. http://www.ceetar.com/optimisticmetsfan/2009/05/fire-jerry-manuel/ Easily the worst manager we've had in at least 15 years.[/quote:2tdcmpvy] Managers rarely get fired for making dumb game decisions. It's when the players tune him out that he has to go.[/quote:2tdcmpvy] That's only a matter of time. I'd hard to think Murphy and Church, and even Reed and Reyes think he's a good manager. Gwreck May 19 2009 10:47 AM History tells us otherwise. It took an awful long time for Randolph to get fired and he wasn't exactly a master strategist. (And, of course, he wasn't really fired for his game decisions, either). LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 19 2009 12:42 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":1cp3q3jf]Ryan Church is actually fourth on the team in at bats. Only Beltran, Wright, and Reyes have more.[/quote:1cp3q3jf] Everyone but Beltran, Wright and Reyes has been hurt, 40 years old, or Daniel Murphy. Benjamin Grimm May 19 2009 12:51 PM True, but it's kind of hard to argue that he's been buried when only one outfielder has had more playing time than he has. Edgy DC May 19 2009 12:59 PM Nah, I don't think so. He played a lot the first three weeks before the trend began. Since the trend began, he's been (1) frequently bumped in lieu of his apparent lessers, (2) seemingly drawn more lefthanders while Murphy and Reed draw the righties, and (3) slid down the batting order. Gwreck May 19 2009 01:03 PM April ABs Beltran 80 Murphy 68 Church 67 Sheffield 30 Tatis 23 Reed 11 May ABs Beltran 67 Church 49 Tatis 47 Sheffield 40 Murphy 40 Reed 18 Benjamin Grimm May 19 2009 01:03 PM Okay, but in May, he's fifth in at bats: Carlos Beltran 67 David Wright 63 Luis Castillo 54 Jos� Reyes 53 Ryan Church 49 Fernando Tatis 47 Gary Sheffield 40 Daniel Murphy 40 Ramon Castro 37 Alex Cora 30 Elster88 May 19 2009 08:27 PM Pagan had four hits yesterday. Reed threw a ball from the first base position to the backstop. So naturally Manuel starts Murphy in left and Reed at first. Seriously what the fuck is wrong with him? If you have to play Reed and Murphy (and sit Pagan) than at least switch the positions. And as I'm typing this I see Murphy commits a two-base error in left. This is comical. Ashie62 May 19 2009 08:38 PM Jerry Manuel...I think he's probably not much better or worse than anyone else out there. In game managing doesn't get people hired or fired. 41-41 at the break could be a breaking point Personally C- Edgy DC May 20 2009 11:15 PM Letting Murphy start at first. A-. The team was desperate for this. I'd give it a higher grade, but it's so overdue. Pinch-hitting for Churchie, but not Murphy. D+. If you want to pull one of your lefties, pull the first one, because then Torre can't change pitchers. Sending Tatis up there instead of Sheffield. D+. Tatis is your last shortstop in a game where pinch-hitting for your struggling current shortstop needs to remain an option and would eventually happen. Sheffield's position is a hitter, and we needed one of those. Lifting Livan. C-. I suppose it's defensible. But good God. Just once, let a starter at least hint at losing it. Edgy DC May 21 2009 08:25 AM And to clarify, pinching Tatis (the mnorst versatile guy left on the bench) in for Church doesn't have to be a problem, except that he was then double switched out. Why, oh why, do managers persist in double switching when they have seemingly no intention of letting their relievers pitch beyond the one inning? Benjamin Grimm May 21 2009 08:35 AM This push-button managing gets frustrating to watch. I yearn for a manager with above-average intelligence. I think the Mets have only had two guys who fit that description: Davey Johnson and Bobby Valentine. If I was hiring a manager I'd look for a smart guy who dared to be unorthodox. Edgy DC May 21 2009 09:20 AM The problem is that so many of them present as such. And because they are mostly old middle infielders and catchers, they supposedly have a broader understanding of the game. And as unconventional as they may fancy themselves, they end up under siege and paranoid from day one --- ripped if they do something out of the ordinary and it doesn't work, despite the fact that most moves dont' work and most games are won or lost by players no matter what the manager does. They get one tenth the salaries of their stars and maybe one third the contract length, they are utterly disposeable. In the end, they all end up like Willie --- acting inperturbable and above it all while inside you're clearly terrified. You bunt like crazy because you know you're one blown rally away from getting fired. Here's a crazy thought: If I found the guy who fit your description --- smart and daring enough to trust his smarts --- I'd pay him as much as I pay my richest player. Hopefully, knowing that it would be as hard for me to part with him as with Beltran --- harder, actually, as he would have no trade value --- he would be unafraid to act outside the box or discipline his players. Of course, then I might get a Tony LaRussa situation --- a detached freak who wears sunglasses at night, moves his pitchers up in the order, and drives drunk after the game. Benjamin Grimm May 21 2009 09:32 AM Yeah, I thought of LaRussa too. As the ugly downside of a guy who, at first glance, might appear to fit my description of the ideal manager. metirish May 21 2009 09:50 AM I'm not liking Jerry a lot this week , that as always is subject to change. John Cougar Lunchbucket May 21 2009 09:54 AM The thing that bothered me most was going to Putz like a kneejerk. Turns out he had a stiff neck ("the elbow is fine" he lied). I've about had it with Putz and with Jerry leaning on him like he has when it's obvious there may be better choices to be made. Nymr83 May 21 2009 09:59 AM ]Sending Tatis up there instead of Sheffield. D+. Tatis is your last shortstop in a game where pinch-hitting for your struggling current shortstop needs to remain an option and would eventually happen. Sheffield's position is a hitter, and we needed one of those Although i wanted him up there for Muphy, no Church, i have no problem using Tatis over Sheff. Tatis is the better hitter to me, especially a pinch-hitter (if the numbers dont back me up on that then maybe i'm wrong, this is just based on my perception) Edgy DC May 21 2009 10:24 AM I understand lifting Murph istead of Church (he could have lifted 'em both), but I'm trying not to make a deal over C decisions. It's spending his most versatile player that slayed us. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 21 2009 12:22 PM ="Nymr83":1fs6xos9] Although i wanted him up there for Muphy, no Church, i have no problem using Tatis over Sheff. Tatis is the better hitter to me, especially a pinch-hitter (if the numbers dont back me up on that then maybe i'm wrong, this is just based on my perception)[/quote:1fs6xos9] Sadly, the numbers seem to do great violence to you on that (although Tatis, in a teeny-tiny sample size, is doing a touch better, and putting the ball in play more): Tatis: 2009: 8 PA, 2 H, 1 BB, 2 R, 2 RBI .400a/.500ob/.400ops, 6 balls in play Career: 57 PA, 49 AB, 5 R, 5 RBI, 1 XBH, .204a/.281ob/.224ops Sheffield: 2009: 17 PA, 1 H (HR), 6 BB, 3 R, 1 RBI .091/.412/.364, 9 balls in play Career: 51 PA, 36 AB, 10 R, 11 RBI, 3 XBH, .278/.471/.444

[Gwreck]

History tells us otherwise. It took an awful long time for Randolph to get fired and he wasn't exactly a master strategist. (And, of course, he wasn't really fired for his game decisions, either).

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

="Benjamin Grimm":1cp3q3jf]Ryan Church is actually fourth on the team in at bats. Only Beltran, Wright, and Reyes have more.[/quote:1cp3q3jf] Everyone but Beltran, Wright and Reyes has been hurt, 40 years old, or Daniel Murphy.

Benjamin Grimm May 19 2009 12:51 PM

True, but it's kind of hard to argue that he's been buried when only one outfielder has had more playing time than he has.

Edgy DC May 19 2009 12:59 PM

Nah, I don't think so. He played a lot the first three weeks before the trend began. Since the trend began, he's been (1) frequently bumped in lieu of his apparent lessers, (2) seemingly drawn more lefthanders while Murphy and Reed draw the righties, and (3) slid down the batting order.

Gwreck May 19 2009 01:03 PM

April ABs Beltran 80 Murphy 68 Church 67 Sheffield 30 Tatis 23 Reed 11 May ABs Beltran 67 Church 49 Tatis 47 Sheffield 40 Murphy 40 Reed 18

Benjamin Grimm May 19 2009 01:03 PM

Okay, but in May, he's fifth in at bats: Carlos Beltran 67 David Wright 63 Luis Castillo 54 Jos� Reyes 53 Ryan Church 49 Fernando Tatis 47 Gary Sheffield 40 Daniel Murphy 40 Ramon Castro 37 Alex Cora 30

Elster88 May 19 2009 08:27 PM

Pagan had four hits yesterday. Reed threw a ball from the first base position to the backstop. So naturally Manuel starts Murphy in left and Reed at first. Seriously what the fuck is wrong with him? If you have to play Reed and Murphy (and sit Pagan) than at least switch the positions. And as I'm typing this I see Murphy commits a two-base error in left. This is comical.

Ashie62 May 19 2009 08:38 PM

Jerry Manuel...I think he's probably not much better or worse than anyone else out there. In game managing doesn't get people hired or fired. 41-41 at the break could be a breaking point Personally C-

Edgy DC May 20 2009 11:15 PM

Letting Murphy start at first. A-. The team was desperate for this. I'd give it a higher grade, but it's so overdue. Pinch-hitting for Churchie, but not Murphy. D+. If you want to pull one of your lefties, pull the first one, because then Torre can't change pitchers. Sending Tatis up there instead of Sheffield. D+. Tatis is your last shortstop in a game where pinch-hitting for your struggling current shortstop needs to remain an option and would eventually happen. Sheffield's position is a hitter, and we needed one of those. Lifting Livan. C-. I suppose it's defensible. But good God. Just once, let a starter at least hint at losing it.

Edgy DC May 21 2009 08:25 AM

And to clarify, pinching Tatis (the mnorst versatile guy left on the bench) in for Church doesn't have to be a problem, except that he was then double switched out. Why, oh why, do managers persist in double switching when they have seemingly no intention of letting their relievers pitch beyond the one inning?

Benjamin Grimm May 21 2009 08:35 AM

This push-button managing gets frustrating to watch. I yearn for a manager with above-average intelligence. I think the Mets have only had two guys who fit that description: Davey Johnson and Bobby Valentine. If I was hiring a manager I'd look for a smart guy who dared to be unorthodox.

Edgy DC May 21 2009 09:20 AM

The problem is that so many of them present as such. And because they are mostly old middle infielders and catchers, they supposedly have a broader understanding of the game. And as unconventional as they may fancy themselves, they end up under siege and paranoid from day one --- ripped if they do something out of the ordinary and it doesn't work, despite the fact that most moves dont' work and most games are won or lost by players no matter what the manager does. They get one tenth the salaries of their stars and maybe one third the contract length, they are utterly disposeable. In the end, they all end up like Willie --- acting inperturbable and above it all while inside you're clearly terrified. You bunt like crazy because you know you're one blown rally away from getting fired. Here's a crazy thought: If I found the guy who fit your description --- smart and daring enough to trust his smarts --- I'd pay him as much as I pay my richest player. Hopefully, knowing that it would be as hard for me to part with him as with Beltran --- harder, actually, as he would have no trade value --- he would be unafraid to act outside the box or discipline his players. Of course, then I might get a Tony LaRussa situation --- a detached freak who wears sunglasses at night, moves his pitchers up in the order, and drives drunk after the game.

Benjamin Grimm May 21 2009 09:32 AM

Yeah, I thought of LaRussa too. As the ugly downside of a guy who, at first glance, might appear to fit my description of the ideal manager.

metirish May 21 2009 09:50 AM

I'm not liking Jerry a lot this week , that as always is subject to change.

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 21 2009 09:54 AM

The thing that bothered me most was going to Putz like a kneejerk. Turns out he had a stiff neck ("the elbow is fine" he lied). I've about had it with Putz and with Jerry leaning on him like he has when it's obvious there may be better choices to be made.

Nymr83 May 21 2009 09:59 AM

]Sending Tatis up there instead of Sheffield. D+. Tatis is your last shortstop in a game where pinch-hitting for your struggling current shortstop needs to remain an option and would eventually happen. Sheffield's position is a hitter, and we needed one of those Although i wanted him up there for Muphy, no Church, i have no problem using Tatis over Sheff. Tatis is the better hitter to me, especially a pinch-hitter (if the numbers dont back me up on that then maybe i'm wrong, this is just based on my perception)

Edgy DC May 21 2009 10:24 AM

I understand lifting Murph istead of Church (he could have lifted 'em both), but I'm trying not to make a deal over C decisions. It's spending his most versatile player that slayed us.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 21 2009 12:22 PM

="Nymr83":1fs6xos9] Although i wanted him up there for Muphy, no Church, i have no problem using Tatis over Sheff. Tatis is the better hitter to me, especially a pinch-hitter (if the numbers dont back me up on that then maybe i'm wrong, this is just based on my perception)[/quote:1fs6xos9] Sadly, the numbers seem to do great violence to you on that (although Tatis, in a teeny-tiny sample size, is doing a touch better, and putting the ball in play more): Tatis: 2009: 8 PA, 2 H, 1 BB, 2 R, 2 RBI .400a/.500ob/.400ops, 6 balls in play Career: 57 PA, 49 AB, 5 R, 5 RBI, 1 XBH, .204a/.281ob/.224ops Sheffield: 2009: 17 PA, 1 H (HR), 6 BB, 3 R, 1 RBI .091/.412/.364, 9 balls in play Career: 51 PA, 36 AB, 10 R, 11 RBI, 3 XBH, .278/.471/.444

[Benjamin Grimm]

True, but it's kind of hard to argue that he's been buried when only one outfielder has had more playing time than he has.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Nah, I don't think so.

He played a lot the first three weeks before the trend began.

Since the trend began, he's been (1) frequently bumped in lieu of his apparent lessers, (2) seemingly drawn more lefthanders while Murphy and Reed draw the righties, and (3) slid down the batting order.

[Gwreck]

April ABs
Beltran 80
Murphy 68
Church 67
Sheffield 30
Tatis 23
Reed 11

May ABs
Beltran 67
Church 49
Tatis 47
Sheffield 40
Murphy 40
Reed 18

[Benjamin Grimm]

Okay, but in May, he's fifth in at bats:

Carlos Beltran 67
David Wright 63
Luis Castillo 54
Jos� Reyes 53
Ryan Church 49
Fernando Tatis 47
Gary Sheffield 40
Daniel Murphy 40
Ramon Castro 37
Alex Cora 30

[Elster88]

Pagan had four hits yesterday. Reed threw a ball from the first base position to the backstop.

So naturally Manuel starts Murphy in left and Reed at first. Seriously what the fuck is wrong with him? If you have to play Reed and Murphy (and sit Pagan) than at least switch the positions.

And as I'm typing this I see Murphy commits a two-base error in left. This is comical.

[ashie62]

Jerry Manuel...I think he's probably not much better or worse than anyone else out there.

In game managing doesn't get people hired or fired.

41-41 at the break could be a breaking point

Personally C-

[Guest Edgy DC]

Letting Murphy start at first. A-. The team was desperate for this. I'd give it a higher grade, but it's so overdue.

Pinch-hitting for Churchie, but not Murphy. D+. If you want to pull one of your lefties, pull the first one, because then Torre can't change pitchers.

Sending Tatis up there instead of Sheffield. D+. Tatis is your last shortstop in a game where pinch-hitting for your struggling current shortstop needs to remain an option and would eventually happen. Sheffield's position is a hitter, and we needed one of those.

Lifting Livan. C-. I suppose it's defensible. But good God. Just once, let a starter at least hint at losing it.

[Guest Edgy DC]

And to clarify, pinching Tatis (the mnorst versatile guy left on the bench) in for Church doesn't have to be a problem, except that he was then double switched out.

Why, oh why, do managers persist in double switching when they have seemingly no intention of letting their relievers pitch beyond the one inning?

[Benjamin Grimm]

This push-button managing gets frustrating to watch.

I yearn for a manager with above-average intelligence. I think the Mets have only had two guys who fit that description: Davey Johnson and Bobby Valentine.

If I was hiring a manager I'd look for a smart guy who dared to be unorthodox.

[Guest Edgy DC]

The problem is that so many of them present as such. And because they are mostly old middle infielders and catchers, they supposedly have a broader understanding of the game.

And as unconventional as they may fancy themselves, they end up under siege and paranoid from day one --- ripped if they do something out of the ordinary and it doesn't work, despite the fact that most moves dont' work and most games are won or lost by players no matter what the manager does. They get one tenth the salaries of their stars and maybe one third the contract length, they are utterly disposeable.

In the end, they all end up like Willie --- acting inperturbable and above it all while inside you're clearly terrified. You bunt like crazy because you know you're one blown rally away from getting fired.

Here's a crazy thought: If I found the guy who fit your description --- smart and daring enough to trust his smarts --- I'd pay him as much as I pay my richest player.

Hopefully, knowing that it would be as hard for me to part with him as with Beltran --- harder, actually, as he would have no trade value --- he would be unafraid to act outside the box or discipline his players.

Of course, then I might get a Tony LaRussa situation --- a detached freak who wears sunglasses at night, moves his pitchers up in the order, and drives drunk after the game.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Yeah, I thought of LaRussa too. As the ugly downside of a guy who, at first glance, might appear to fit my description of the ideal manager.

[metirish]

I'm not liking Jerry a lot this week , that as always is subject to change.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

The thing that bothered me most was going to Putz like a kneejerk. Turns out he had a stiff neck ("the elbow is fine" he lied).

I've about had it with Putz and with Jerry leaning on him like he has when it's obvious there may be better choices to be made.

[nymr83]

]Sending Tatis up there instead of Sheffield. D+. Tatis is your last shortstop in a game where pinch-hitting for your struggling current shortstop needs to remain an option and would eventually happen. Sheffield's position is a hitter, and we needed one of those

Although i wanted him up there for Muphy, no Church, i have no problem using Tatis over Sheff. Tatis is the better hitter to me, especially a pinch-hitter (if the numbers dont back me up on that then maybe i'm wrong, this is just based on my perception)

[Guest Edgy DC]

I understand lifting Murph istead of Church (he could have lifted 'em both), but I'm trying not to make a deal over C decisions.

It's spending his most versatile player that slayed us.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

="Nymr83":1fs6xos9] Although i wanted him up there for Muphy, no Church, i have no problem using Tatis over Sheff. Tatis is the better hitter to me, especially a pinch-hitter (if the numbers dont back me up on that then maybe i'm wrong, this is just based on my perception)[/quote:1fs6xos9] Sadly, the numbers seem to do great violence to you on that (although Tatis, in a teeny-tiny sample size, is doing a touch better, and putting the ball in play more): Tatis: 2009: 8 PA, 2 H, 1 BB, 2 R, 2 RBI .400a/.500ob/.400ops, 6 balls in play Career: 57 PA, 49 AB, 5 R, 5 RBI, 1 XBH, .204a/.281ob/.224ops Sheffield: 2009: 17 PA, 1 H (HR), 6 BB, 3 R, 1 RBI .091/.412/.364, 9 balls in play Career: 51 PA, 36 AB, 10 R, 11 RBI, 3 XBH, .278/.471/.444