Phillies' playoff push a credit to Manuel's plan

With Wednesday night's win, the Phillies are tied with Houston in the NL Wild Card race.  It's time to give Charlie Manuel the credit he deserves.

Three-quarters through the season and I still haven’t read a profile on manager Charlie Manuel written by a member of the Philadelphia media, aside from a piece or two when he first got the job.

Besides the rah-rah pad quotes woven into game coverage, has anyone bothered to sit down with the first-year boss to really pick his brain on strategy, personnel, the decisions that worked and those that didn’t?

Has anyone really talked to this man, you know, the one whose team has the third-best record in the National League? It would make a good story, I bet.

The media’s small-town bias of Manuel is a total joke for a city that prides itself on progressive thinking. Isn't it about time to finally realize the guy’s not the disgraceful goon everyone thinks he is?

No. He wasn't part of the 1980 championship team. Yes. He's from North Fork, W.Va. Yes. He listens to George Thorogood and the Destroyers. Yes. It's time to get over it.

I’m not sure what others look at, but the overriding factor should be results, and the Phils have now clawed into a tie with Houston for the NL wild card. They weren't supposed to do that.

In doing so, the team has overcome injuries to their highest-paid starter, Randy Wolf, and highest-paid player, Jim Thome, leaning on a supporting cast few people picked to go anywhere.

Think back for a minute the last time you truly believed Manuel cost them a game. It’s been a while, hasn’t it? If you can, I’ll top it with a number of occasions his decisions have led to a win – small but substantial moves like using Todd Pratt to catch Jon Lieber, sticking with Vicente Padilla instead of using Ryan Madson in the rotation, and having enough faith to hand the ball to a rookie, Robinson Tejeda, to replace Randy Wolf.

Those decisions count, too.

Most of the fuss early this season centered on the platoon, and that was resolved in just over two months. It also netted a top-flight setup man, and as fans realized tonight, having a rock-solid bullpen is crucial during the stretch.

There were also early struggles in the bullpen, but that was true for almost every team in baseball. Once Tim Worrell and Terry Adams were put out to pasture, the Phils' pen became downright scary. There are plenty of teams still experimenting with their bullpens, and Manuel deserves credit for stabilizing his so soon.

All over ESPN.com, analysts are respecting the Phils’ chances. From Jerry Crasnick's piece this afternoon on ESPN Insider:

Two scouts told Insider that they think the Phillies have the goods to make a run at the wild card, in part because of a bullpen that's close to airtight with Wagner, Urbina and Madson. In the last 35 games, the Phils' pen is 9-2 with a 2.45 ERA. "I'm sure Charlie goes into every game just thinking, 'Let me get to the seventh with my starter,'" one scout said.

Before the season, there was a sickening amount of talk about the new, relaxed atmosphere, but has it worked?

Predictably, Manuel has been an easy target for ridicule in Philly, with his "Charlie from Mayberry" demeanor and occasional head-scratching dugout strategy. It's hard not to chuckle when he makes a reference to Ugueth "Oo-bina" or "Don-telle" Willis.

But ol' Charlie sure is sharp when it comes to human relations. He's coaxed a productive season (.307 with a .365 OBP) out of 38-year-old Kenny Lofton and managed to make things work when Placido Polanco was complaining incessantly about a lack of playing time in April and May. General manager Ed Wade spun Polanco to the Tigers for Urbina in June, and Chase Utley has blossomed as the Phillies' regular second baseman and No. 3 hitter.

When rookie starter Robinson Tejeda was miffed after being pulled in the sixth inning of an 8-5 win in Colorado on July 28, Manuel refused to let the problem fester. He spent the better part of an hour sharing a postgame meal with Tejeda, explaining his decision and emphasizing the value of team goals over individual performances.

I made a deliberate decision to use the word “plan” in my headline. Contrary to popular belief, he has one. I seem to recall the previous skipper fiddling with the lineup at this late stage of the season. Not Manuel. His current lineup, featuring Utley in the elevated three-spot, has been a fixture since the all-star break. What manager doesn’t need room to experiment early in the season?

I was recently interviewed for a piece on Manuel currently in the works over at "Philadelphia Weekly." I’m not sure whether writer Dan McQuade is talking to the man himself, but he talked to me, and I was very conscious about giving the Phils’ skipper the benefit of the doubt.

At the end of the interview, I gave Manuel a grade, and I believe it was a C- or a D. If I was asked again today, I'd be fair. He deserves no lower than a B- for what he's done to get them to this point.

A manager should be measured by results, not press conference eloquence. It’s funny because his harshest critics are the ones that gave the team “no shot” at a playoff birth.

And here we are.

Comments

[Tom Goodman]

Jason: I take CM to task today for some of his moves last night. I also think he used his entire roster better in the first half of the season than he does now. Check it out.

[J. Weitzel]

A note on last night: I wouldn't have lifted Lieber to pinch hit with two outs. The last time this situation happened, he allowed the pitcher to bat.

But here we are, once again, second guessing Manuel on a move that actually worked out. That happens a lot. I guess we'll find out if the bullpen has enough juice left for the double header today.

Forget the 70 pitches with Lieber. The moment he gets tired, he drops his arm and it's all over. Maybe taking him out early was a good thing.

But getting back to my post, are we still not giving him any credit?

[Tom G]

You mean you want us to stay on point Jason? Tall order. Seriously though, being a manager is like being president. Usually a lot of good is done behind the scenes, but all eyes are on you and we only remember the bad stuff. I tend to agree, he has done a good job overall. I'd give him a "B", but yet if you search my archives, I bet you'll find more negative stuff than positive. Humans are jerks, plain and simple.

[Tom G]

By the way, in terms of pinch hitting for Lieber, Bill has a good comment at Phillies Foul Balls: Maybe Lieber is now an option to start over the weekend.

[J. Weitzel]

Boy .. I hadn't thought of that. Good point.

Does anyone know how badly I want to be at the ballpark, eating a Schmitter, watching Vinny Pads pitch this afternoon? How bout that fastball lately?

[Tom Goodman]

George S. sent me the following Word Doc regarding Jason's post on Charlie Manuel and said it was too long for him to copy and paste so I am posting it here for all to read: (By the way, George was watching the Phillies day game when he emailed it to me. It was only 1AM in Vietnam)

CHARLIE

You are correct in saying that the local media (and others) often mistake sophistication for intelligence, style for substance. It’s a national media trait in fact.

What’s my take on CM?

Let’s forget tactical performance. As any manager will tell you, when your switch works you look like a genius, when it doesn’t you look like an idiot. Monday-morning quarterbacking by fans and media goes with the territory, especially when a hunch doesn’t pan out. Someone once said that a wife spends 90% of her time focused on the 10% of your habits that are bad, and 10% of her time praising the 90% that are good. So it is with baseball managers and their critics.

Now for CM’s positives:

1) I cannot overemphasize how important this is, but CM (and Ed Wade) have managed to keep the players, fans and media focused on what’s happening on the playing field, and not in the clubhouse. If you can do that in this town, you are doing something. And that has the Phillies mentally well-positioned for a final push.
2) As of this writing, the Phillies are tied for the WC, and I think they still have a shot at Atlanta. Results matter, and the Phillies are playing competitive, winning baseball. As the team goes, the manager goes.
3) Generally, CM handled the Jim Thome situation very well. It had to be very tough for him as well as Thome, given their personal friendship.
4) Although I think he was partially responsible for creating the problem in the first place, he managed the Polanco/Utley situation fairly well.
5) Charley Manuel keeps things in perspective, the wins and the losses. He’s smart enough to understand that even the best teams lose 60-70 games a year, so manage with that in mind. I’m calling it a positive, as long as that view doesn’t allow you to forget the importance of the game at hand.

CM’s negatives:

1) He tends to stay with veterans too long when they are not performing. While veterans do deserve respect, there is a point where the welfare of the team dictates changes, even if temporary. I thought CM was slow to take action in those cases. You can debate whether they directly cost the team any wins, but I think the handwriting was on the wall for some time for Adams, Offerman, Worrell and Jim Thome before anything happened to deal with those situations. The corrollary to that is that I don’t think he gives the younger players much chance to play unless forced.
2) I feel he basically sacrificed games to allow players to work out their problems. This is my single biggest criticism of Charley Manuel. It was clear early on that the NL East was going to be a dogfight, where the difference between 1st and last was 1-2 games, where every team in the division was above .500. In that case, you cannot afford to throw away any games at all. So, for example, in the case of Padilla, I don’t think he or Dubee brought Padilla around by keeping him in the rotation (at the cost of 4-5 losses). Padilla didn’t need to work himself into shape. I think you could mark the Padilla turnaround the day the Phillies said (pretty much in public) “This is it. We want a solid outing this time out or you’re done”. Amazingly, Vicente focused and has remained so since. That could have and should have been done sooner.
3) The Worrell situation should never have happened as it did. Both Wade and CM should have been aware sooner, and addressed the issue long before Worrell’s performance completely disintegrated. This was surprising given the generally high marks CM gets for communicating with his players. Lidle was a similar case on a much smaller scale, and I think how that was handled showed that CM learned from the Worrell affair.

Other factors to consider when evaluating CM, neither positive nor negative:

1) CM did not come in as manager from another organization. He was with the Phillies all of last year. So he should have had a solid idea about the roles and abilities of the players he was getting right from spring training. Plus, the Phillies did not undergo any significant roster changes over the winter. So I do not think he should get undue credit for defining roles a quarter of the way through the year.
2) For every Robinson Tejeda, there’s a Gavin Floyd. The handling of both should be considered, not one or the other.
3) The Phillies have a talented team. On paper many consider them to have the best everyday lineup in the NL East. CM did not turn a bad team into a good team, and perhaps more importantly, he hasn’t let a good team turn into a bad one.
4) CM has had 100% support from Wade and Montgomery, even when Wade’s head was rumored to be on the chopping block. So although I think he had the authority all along, this reinforced it in the clubhouse if/when changes needed to be made. That makes your job easier.
5) Although both Thome and Wolf are key players to lose, overall the Phillies have not been hurt by injuries as much as they were the past few years. It’s basically a non-issue. Last season saw Wagner, Burrell and several starters go down for extended periods.

My personal take on CM is that he (and his coaching staff) has evolved over the season. Far from being old-fashioned, stubborn or set in his ways, as he may want people to think, CM has adjusted his approach and has made many of the changes that others have suggested if he felt they were valid. After all, some of the criticisms were valid.
CM seems smart enough to realize some of that and flexible enough to make those adjustments, being careful to disguise the changes so they did not look as if they had been made under pressure from fans and media. The mid-August CM is not the May 1 CM by any stretch. He adjusted to the NL, and he adjusted his strategy to his players, not demand that they adjust to him.
I think you can see the changes in approach with the early-season Floyd experiment and the current Tejeda one. I think he learned from what happened with Floyd. Perhaps Lidle’s personal problem was picked up earlier based on what was learned from the Worrell situation (obviously guessing there). I don’t have the data, but it seems that even things like the one-batter situational pitching changes have been fewer, as he realizes what that does to your bench in the NL, and perhaps realizes that his pitchers are not well-suited to such a strategy, no matter how much he might believe in it.
If I’m right in that, then CM deserves high marks indeed. And any success the Phillies might enjoy from here on out would not be a testament so much to a single management philosophy or blueprint, as much as the willingness (and controlled ego) to learn and change as you feel necessary. This is understanding that you don’t already have all the answers and that if someone suggests a better way, it’s not a threat or a sign of weakness to adopt it. You don’t see that very often in veteran managers.

I’d give Charley a B- right now, trending a bit upward.

[Deanna]

Great articles there. I was delighted to see the Phillies catch the wildcard. Let's hope they get both of the games today; they'll need it with Clemens on the mound in Houston.

Also, weirdoes from West Virginia who have poor taste in music have been great for the Phillies in the past. Just look at John Kruk.

[J. Weitzel]

You did it again, George. Best point I didn't touch on was your first positive:

"1) I cannot overemphasize how important this is, but CM (and Ed Wade) have managed to keep the players, fans and media focused on what’s happening on the playing field, and not in the clubhouse."

CM hasn't been spotless, and the early problems in the bullpen shouldn't have happened as long as they did. I had more patience with Worrell than the average fan, simply because he was a darn good setup man heading into the season. But forcing a fat, ineffective Adams into games was horrendous. He should have been given a chance, maybe two - that's it. You let those guys go, and don't turn them into projects.

Manuel has learned from the mistakes of April-May, and has figured out a way to make it work.