Part of

« Ugueth Urbina wants to return to the majors | Main | Brett Myers to sign with Indians »

Monday, December 31, 2012


Dear God, please, please, please.

Happy New Year, all! Enjoy and please be safe.

What does Vegas say about Charlie's odds of a contract extension?

What does the Andy Reid firing have ANYTHING to do with what the Phillies do??

I'm disappointed a filler article like this shows up on Beerleaguer.

Well its new year eve TKlol. I stopped watching Eagles football years ago. I refused as long as Reid was still here. Sure sometimes i caught a little of the game if i was at a bar or friends. However i made a decision sometime ago to ban the Eagles. I think Manuel is out either way. If they win or they dont win or make the playoffs or dont.

Vegas says Charlie gets fired, Mark Parent is brought back to manage, and Sandberg becomes the bullpen coach for life. Happy April Fools . . . . um, New Year.

I highly doubt that Charlie Manuel will replace Andy Reid as coach of the Philadelphia Eagles. Next thread.

I was about to make a Vegas joke here, but it looks like everyone else has that covered.

Allen Thornberg: "would you try to beat the Orioles to the punch and offer the Nats Bastardo, Diekman, and/or Savery in exchange for Morse?"

I'd do that in a heartbeat, but I also know what GM Mike Rizzo's response to that offer would be:

I love when people get indignant about the content of the thread header.

JW works for Comcast, and the majority of Phillies fans are also Eagles fans. I go on a lot of Eagles blogs and sites, and when the Phillies signed Halladay, Lee, Oswalt, Hamels...hell, even Pence, those sites mentioned it, and posters on those blogs didn't get all uppity.

I don't know when it happened the being a Phillies fan became more dignified then being an Eagles fan. Must truly be a baseball town these days.

Anyhow, Manuel is clearly the best manager in Phillies history. Since it's hard to quantify exactly how and to what degree managers influence the team on the field, you have to go by record and postseason performance.

Most wins in team history, never a losing season in 8 years, a WS victory, 2 WS appearances, 5 trips to the playoffs, managed 2 MVPs, the team's greatest SS, 2B and probably 1B, and maybe the 2nd best homegrown SP and the 2nd half historic comebacks.

I think it's pretty open and shut.

And I just realized it wasn't JW who wrote this header. Either way, the point still stands.

In the modern era, Cholly is probably the best manager the Phils have had.

I just hope he goes out on a better note than Reid did.

Just like the Phils don't have the pieces to trade for Stanton, there is no way Rizzo trades a RH hitting outfielder with power like Morse to the Phils when he knows that is just what they need.

Fatalotti: "And I just realized it wasn't JW who wrote this header."

The moving finger writes, and having writ, moves on.

Cholly won't get end until the end of the year if things head south or this team scuffles into the ASB.

If they lurch out to a really terrible start in early May or are in a position where they are several games under .500 at the ASB, I bet Amaro pulls the plug on him.

Get a strong sense there isn't a whole lot of love loss between those 2 guys and that they have some really different thoughts on how this team should have managed the last year or two.

In order to make the argument that Cholly is the best manager in Phillies history, you need to look beyond the team's record during his tenure. You would need to offer some nexus between their success and his decision making. An asteroid hit Shanxi Provence in 1490, was the Emperor of China responsible for that? I believe the Phils succeeded despite Cholly. Imagine their record over that period if Bobby Cox or Jim Leyland had been their manager. Let's not get sentimental about Cholly. If we were to take a half year off, we could chronicle hundreds of blunders. Simply put, he's an idiot and the sooner he goes the better. If my memory serves me, keeping Cholly on was a condition of employment for RAJ. Yes, Cholly is a players' manager for what that is worth. Anyhow, happy new year to all.

Hitman, until we are able to quantify how and to what degree a manager affects the performance of his team on the field, record and postseason success are the only measuring sticks.

You either have to plead ignorance on the whole issue, and remain steadfastly agnostic in regards to the question of "best manager", or use the best tools available to us. I laid out several of them that show that Manuel has been the best skipper the Phils have had.

And this is coming from a person who thinks that Manuel's in-game tactics are deplorable, especially in regards to this pitching staff. But I'm not naive enough to presume that the rest of the good qualities he possesses as a manager are irrelevant.

Fatalotti- I disagree. You can judge a manager's competence by the decisions he makes. Of course there are no objective standards inscribed in platinum at the Bureau of Standards. He was handed some very talented players and they did well. But to attribute that to him makes no sense to me. Anyhow, it's New Year's Eve.

I can't believe the phillie's have not tried to deal for 23 year old Stanton for right field.
least try. couple of minor league pitcher's and threw in D.brown in the deal ???????????????
Stanton is only 23 years old. His power numbers are very good right now. my guess is,he has not got to his peak years yet.
Blue Star

Like Utley has said, all these Phillies managerial records means is that CM has had some great players. Managers like LaRussa take 83-win teams to the WFC. Did he make the most of what he had? I have this nagging suspicion that these guys covered up a lot of mistakes, although we can throw in the obligatory tip of the hat to the environment he created. Lots of good managers bring that quality to the table. CM is the winningiest Phillies manager, but I'm not certain he is the best. Neither is Mauch or Green. Maybe it's somebody who wrung more out of his players, someone like Sawyer in 1950. Anyway, just not sure CM is the best, but he is the winningiest.

"And this is coming from a person who thinks that Manuel's in-game tactics are deplorable, especially in regards to this pitching staff. But I'm not naive enough to presume that the rest of the good qualities he possesses as a manager are irrelevant."

Interesting logic. So if we're going to judge Charlie - something which is intrinsically difficult to do - we should judge him by results but note that his in-game tactics are "deplorable," despite the demonstrably productive outcome, in balance, of his in-game tactics.


Because it is clear, if he had made the decisions that Fata thought he should have made, the outcome would have been better. And we know this, just because.

Phlipper/Ross, it looks I can't even praise Manuel without incurring your wrath. Keep up the shtick, man. I called the guy the best manager in Phillies history, and noted that his good qualities far outweigh his bad qualities.

But of course, that's not enough for you.

Happy New Year kids!

Nothing like a good old "is Charlie the best manager in Phillies history" post to generate traffic.

It's possible that his in-game tactics cost the Phillies wins. And think of the goofy decisions overcome by a late three-run homerun. It would take some time (going through scorebooks), but I'm sure we would find a few. The answer to this is, of course, that he added wins by the positive environment he created. I get that, but that's not a quality unique to CM.

Maybe the best manager is Doc Prothro. The guy managed the near worthless Phillies at the start of World War II, winning some 40 games a year. Holding that job took real courage. My guess is that he got more out of those stiffs than CM got from his all-stars, which was plenty. In fact, CM has had the greatest accumulation of Phillies talent (probably) ever and, in the league, access to one of the greatest pools of talent by any team in a long time. The results of September and October 2011 will always temper enthusiasm for him, I think.

The thread's question is a legitimate one: If the Phillies finish under .500 and miss the playoffs like the Eagles did this year - Is Charlie gone?

I personally like Charlie and think he's been a great manager for the collection of talent the team has had during his tenure - but I hardly think theres not someone else ready to do a better job if Manuel indeed doesn't get this team into the playoffs or at least in a serious hunt.

Charlie is done at the end of this year regardless of what the Phillies do. I think with turnover coming to the roster and Sandberg being on the major league coaching staff this year the tea leaves are pointing in that direction.

However, he is easily the best manager in team history.

lorecore: yes, because there's no way they should or can finish below .500 with the Mets and Marlins in the division. So, if they do, he's toast. The real problem is if they compete effectively with the Nats and Braves. That's not a problem, of course, but CM might decide not to go out on a high note and ask for an extension. It's just a guess, but I think the Phillies want RS managing in 2014. So, then what? Managers dislike being lameducks, although that's what he is at the moment.

I agree with TTI. I think the decision has been made already.

Best case scenario is Charlie retires, would end much more neatly. I sure hope it means he 'goes out on top'.

It's an easy ber that this core will do everything possible to make that happen, lorecore. It might be pure fantasy, but the stars could line up right, turning this swan song transition to RS/2014 year into going out on top in a grand way for CM year.

If they reclaim the NL East with this team, then unquestionably CM would have to be considered the team's best manager all-time--because that means outmanaging Johnson and outperforming a better Nationals team.

Crap article. This something I expect from Disney ESPN

There's no way Hitman is BAP's father.

Sure, the twisted logic he uses in bashing Cholly certainly seems like a trait he could've passed on to his son, but he called the players Manuel managed 'talented.' BAP thinks 99% of players in baseball are garbage, and he certainly wouldn't call anyone on the Phils 'talented,' let alone multiple players on the team.

The numbers don't add up.

Crap article. This something I expect from Disney ESPN
Posted by: GTownDave | Monday, December 31, 2012 at 05:49 PM

Crap comment. This something I expect from a fake commenter.

Having coached high school teams,both good and bad,the same applies to Cholly as it did to me. Good players make good coaches and managers.The opposite is not true.

Fata: great post at 3:42. It echoes my feelings on both subjects entirely.

It happens on every blog, but if you start ripping on the topics of an article because they don't fit your standards, then just stop coming to the blog, or don't read it. People act like they are forced to read certain things. JW and his staff don't owe you anything. They are providing this site for free. If you don't like the content, move along.

And Manuel is, without question, the most decorated and successful manager in Phillies history. People can quibble with the term 'best,' but when it comes to results, there simply is no counterargument.

Genius post - is Charlie Manuel the greatest manager in Phillies history? Hell, this site isn't even in agreement that he should have stayed more than a season. Weitzel wallowed in minor league minutae but, the new blood throws meatballs to the commentariat.

Iceman- Yes, I am baps dad. He is visiting here in San Diego as we speak. My grandson, so-bap (son-of-bap) is 8 years old and is being groomed to replace bap, which is scarey.

The effectiveness of coaching will always be a mix of good decision making with luck and talented players.

What really seems to determine 'good coaching' is expectations. I think many teams are labeled as 'most talented' and therefore have high expectations. For example if the Nationals stink this year will it be a) due to injuries, b) due to bad players, c) due to poor coaching, d) is there another choice?

How Manuel won in 2008 with that starting pitching staff was surprising to me. How he lost in 2011 with THAT pitching staff was also surprising to me.
Does Manuel get credit for the development of Howard, Victorino, Werth, Ruiz, Madson, Hamels or were those guys just talented players who would have excelled wherever they went?

Since I do not follow any other MLB teams daily, I have no idea how poorly other managers perform during game situations with the collection of talent (or lack thereof) they are given. It would be interesting to have commenters critique another team's manager daily and see just how much better they manage in-game compared to Manuel. I tend to agree that those are not Charlie's strengths and that Maddon, Leyland, and LaRussa are better.

Charlie in the past was able to win games strictly on talent and didn't have to manage much. The tide has turned and now the Nationals and Braves have at least equal talent, but probably better talent at least younger talent. If the Phil's are going to remain relevant Charlie is going to have to manage the Phil's to some wins rather than strictly relying on talent!

The plural of Phil, Phil, is Phils. Just add the s, as if there were more than one Phil. Get it, Phil?

You've probably had your fill with my attempt at levity, Phil, but I know you get my drift.

Happy New Year, all.

Charlie took the city to the top of the mountain. Reid did not. Charlie wins best manager/coach.

Almost forgot. Here's wishing everyone a happy, healthy and prosperous New year.

H.N.Y. Everyone.

Everybody loves playing for Charlie,it's true

but he loses alot of games with his in-game decision-making.

He's rightfully placed at the top of Phillies Managers,but I

can't help but wonder what Gene Mauch would've done with this club.

The Phillies will not fire Charlie. His contract is up this year. Will they give him another contrat depends on 2 things how well this season goes and whether they feel Sandberg is ready to take over. Since Sandberg chose to stay here tells you they have promised him Charlies position

Del Unser: He either would've won 120 games or caused a clubhouse rebellion that would've gotten him fired midseason.

He was very tough on his players, but got more out of bad teams than any manager I've ever seen.

For all of Cholly's questionable in-game and roster strategies, a manager probably only really makes a difference in a handful of games each year. Maybe if they push all of the right buttons they add 5 games net to the win column. Probably an outlier.

Given that this this team though looks like it will a stretch to push for 90 wins and is probably somewhere in the mid-high 80s, it really does matter who manages this team. Thought Cholly was the wrong guy to manage this specific team and will be again this year.

Clout - Mauch did indeed seem to get a lot out of bad teams. But his small ball, score the first run at any cost didn't seem to work as well when he had talent. And his abuse of the starting pithing staff may well have cost the Phillies the pennant in '64.

I once saw the guy fight with the opposing first baseman over a foul ball on top of the dugout roof, which was legal in those days. He was punching and slapping the first baseman's glove away until the ball fell and hit the roof for a harmless foul ball. The guy really wanted to win more than any other manager I've ever seen.

As far as knowing the rule book and baseball knowledge, I agree that he was the best. As for in game decisions, Charlie makes some real head scratchers, but just as often as not, they work out. But as far as running the clubhouse, I think Charlie belongs with Lasorda, Leland and Larussa and maybe a handful of others at the top of the class.

MG's old argument that the manager only affects a few games a year. 2013 and some things never change.

Gtown - You realize the Phils under Manual have been one of the best base-running teams in baseball history, right?

aksmith: I agree with everything in your post. Small caveat on the collapse in '64: The rest of his rotation was a wreck at that point. Bennett couldn't lift his arm, Culp's shoulder hurt like hell and Mahaffey had lost his fastball. Wise might've been the solution, but Mauch would never trust a rookie in that situation.

My theory on '64 is that they lost it when Frank Thomas got hurt in early September. His replacement, John Herrnstein, was one of the worst hitting firstbasemen in baseball history. It just killed the offense.

Can we sign Bourn for 1 year, trade Ben Revere to Miami along with anybody else they want for Stanton and win another world series. Miami gets a cf for years, another 1 or 2 major league ready guys and a few prospects. If Bourn leaves after 1 year let's hope Tyson Gillies can play.

For the longest time I’ve had this sense that Stanton is in Rube’s cards. His uncharacteristic lack of a splash in the offseason means that something else might be cooking (Adams aside, which was positive, but still not a Rube-esque offseason marquis move.) It is hard to imagine Rube being okay with entering the season being rated 3rd in the division.

I also just wanted to share my off-season misery. Today Channel 17 had a few clips of the Phils and I almost wept. Spring can’t get her fast enough!! I miss baseball!

Mauch was shortsighted. He could have sacrificed a game or two with Wise or Jenkins on the mound to give Bunning and Short a blow, and perhaps been pleasantly surprised.

TTI - And how much do you think Cholly's decision-making could net the Phils (positively/negatively) in the win column over the course of a season?

I do think Cholly is a below average manager when it comes to filling out & making in-game decisions. He's the worst manager I have seen on a regular basis making in-game pitching decisions since Grady Little.

Health of the talent though is by far and away what is going to dictate the fate of this team next year. Cholly's decision-making and roster management are secondary factors.

Agree that it will be Cholly's last year with the Phils regardless of what happens. I hope the Phils make the playoffs, win at least round or two, and Cholly goes out on a relatively high note by retiring afterwards.

I think he is going to end up retiring at the end of the year regardless of what happens though & despite his insistence this offseason that he wants to continuing managing as long as he can.

MG--excellent G Little comparison: another guy who struggled to reconcile old-school hunching with modern managing.

RR: "Mauch was shortsighted. He could have sacrificed a game or two with Wise or Jenkins on the mound to give Bunning and Short a blow."

Easy to say in hindsight. But in those days putting a 22-year-old with no MLB experience in the final days of a close pennant race was never gonna happen, regardless of who the manager was.

It should also be noted that numerous pitchers in that era were used on 2 days rest late in the season and post-season. Quite often it worked out just fine. Guys like Robin Roberts, Don Newcombe and Bob Gibson was frequently used that way.

Clout--Wise pitched when they needed help earlier in the 1964 season. They needed that help even more later. I just don't believe he handled that situation well, it all happened so quickly and he sort of lost control of the situation. But that's definitely a hindsight call.

It did one thing, though, it meant throwing Bystrom into the mix 16 Septembers later wasn't an issue.

Few men have been as widely heralded for their ability to manage the game as Gene Mauch. Though he had the longest managerial career without a pennant, even his detractors acknowledged that his mind contained a comprehensive understanding of the game. He was one of the game’s leading tinkerers, always looking for that little extra edge on the opponent.

Befitting his reputation, Mauch loved playing inside baseball. His teams bunted constantly, focused on platoon advantage, and had numerous in-game substitutions and pinch hitters.

One aspect of Mauch’s managerial style appears out of place with the overall thrust of his career: he had little interest in the stolen base.

MG: The discussion people are having is where Charlie ranks all time in the organization. Him being coach of this year's team is a separate issue.

Yes- I know, to you Charlie is a bumpkin. Probably has been since the double switch comment that ticked off the WIP crowd.

I agree that a manager can affect games within the context of the game but over the course of a season they set tone, they keep players loose and ready, they try to position guys for wins and winning streaks. Manuel is 727-569 over the course of his managerial career with a WS, 2 NL championships, and 5 straight division titles. You want to argue that he backed his way into 727 wins? Also, from 2006-2011 the team won more games than it did the previous year.

As Eagles close the book on Reid, is general manager Ruben Amaro Jr. next?

If I can find it, I'll post it here, but Bill James showed that the Phillies have had as much access to superior talent during CM's years as any team in MLB, including some of the greatest Phillies players at their positions ever. We can't separate this manager from this core group of players, but who is more responsible for this run? CM's a piece of the puzzle, the winningest Phillies manager, but that still doesn't make him the best Phillies manager ever. He didn't back his way into 727 wins, but he wasn't on the field either.

TTI- you're nuts. The clubhouse would be much more healthy with MG managing, berating Howard for being 'awful' with 2 strikes, telling J-Roll to stop swinging for power because he is a singles hitter, and ordering the trainers to check out Halladay's shoulder every hour on the hour.

Players lay it on the line for a guy like that; not a guy like Cholly who shows confidence in his players through the rough times and stupid stuff like that.


I would love to have Stanton but the Phillies would probably have to give up their top 5 prospects and even that wouldn't be enough. Stanton is a pipe dream

Managing a team to a championship is a combination of decision making and player talent and clutch hitting and pitching.

Bobby Cox is always brought up as a great manager but he won ONE WS just like Charlie and Bobby had far better talent for a lot longer than Charlie will ever see.

I to would love to see the addition of Stanton even though it would clean out the farm system. Stanton appears to be just what the Phillies need in that he is cheap and under control through the window of this pitching staff. I say go for it!

Re: Stanton - not going to happen. Our 5 best guys won't be better than some other team's 5 guys (or whomever). Can't imagine that many teams not interested in his services.

Brett Myers signed a 1 year deal with a vesting option to be in the Cleveland rotation.

How long until he is the long man or another spot in the bullpen?

First people talking trout now Stanton. Come on people get with it. The team on roster now. Is going to be one on opening day.

Yeah, I can't see Stanton landing in Philadelphia. First, the Phillies just don't have the prospects to land him. Secondly, the Marlins would be foolish to deal him within the division.

Spent some time watching the 100 greatest plays of 2012 on MLB. Awesome plays with several Mike Trout catches featured.

But as a complaining Phillies fan, it was tough to watch what seemed like a constant parade of heroics by ex-Phillies for their new team, and plays against Phillies. A catch and a walk off homer by Werth. A catch and a bases clearing hit by Pence with the Giants. Three homers by Ibanez. And for good measure, two Chipper Jones walk off home runs against the Phils.

The only Phillies generated play was the incredible catch by Kratz where he was leveled the instant he caught the ball but held on to it.

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

can_of_corn totally agree with you. Remember the Lee deal! At least with all the noise on Stanton it lets us dream.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories


Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel