Charlie Manuel frequently makes poor strategic decisions. The 11-million dollar scoreboard in left field would probably do a similar job. We guarantee a post analyzing Manuel's decisions for every Phillies game. Please click on our aliases below to email us.

Blog Archive

95% Phillies, 4% Eagles/Flyers/Sixers/Big Five, 1% Nonsense .... Contact us: Scott Graham ~ Andy Musser

Saturday, July 5, 2008

How do these people have jobs?

I was just listening to 610 WIP with Rob Charry and Mitch Williams, and I thought I was going to drive off the road. First, some guy calls up to discuss some of the decisions that Charlie Manuel made last night, with Mitch. The one question was, "Why did Charlie let Durbin bat in the top of the 6th? He had already pitched 1 1/3 innings."

I had this same question last night. This was an awful decision by Manuel that turned out to work in the long run. I respect Mitch Williams for what he does (tells things as they are, and isn't afraid of hurting feelings), but this response combined with the one he gave the intelligent caller from last week have almost completely caused me to disregard everything he says.

He responded today with something along the lines of, "at that point in the game with the score tied at 2 (it was not tied at 2), you know Santana will be in the game until the late innings, and you were struggling as it is to get hits, so you want to keep it tied." He repeated many times that "since the score was tied, it was the right thing to do to let Durbin hit. However, if you're down in that situation, you shouldn't let him hit". There are sooooo many things wrong here it's not even funny.

1. The score was not tied 2-2. The Phillies were down 2-0 at the time. This fact was brought to his attention after the call had ended, and he continued to defend the decision even though during the call he had said that "if the Phillies were down, you don't let him bat." AWFUL.
2. Even if the score were tied, upon acknowledging that the Phils were struggling, it is very important to get a HITTER to bat for the PITCHER while one can. Durbin led off the inning, and we all know a pinch hitter has a much better shot at getting on base than a relief pitcher.
3. How can you not know any of this?

About 10 minutes later, Rob Charry comments "I think Ryan Howard should make the All-Star team". Wait, you mean the guy that putting up .223/.314/.473 (BA/OBP/SLG)? Yes, that is who Rob Charry thinks should be an all-star. Why would he think this, you might ask? "Becuase he leads the league in RBIs, and is on a division leading team." OOOOOOOOH. Because those things really matter. He then goes on to bring up that "there aren't 3 first basemen in the NL that deserve it more than Howard. Berkman. Ok, he has 74 runs scored, 22 HRs, and 69 RBIs. He's also hitting .355. He's the hand down MVP. Albert Pujols is hitting .348 with 18 HRs and only 48 RBIs, but he missed some game, so OK." Here's where he losses all credibility. "But Adrian Gonzalez? Yes, he's got 21 HRs and 69 RBIs and is hitting .284, but he's on the Padres, and they're terrible. So this is where Howard belongs."

1. RBIs are HUGELY overrated. Unrealistically overrated. Soooo overrated that they should not be used as a tool for too heavy a comparison. If Ryan Howard has 40 HRs at the all-star break, but only has 40 RBIs because no one gets on base, he shouldn't be an all-star? That's ridiculous. RBIs are largely based on a player's teammates' abilities to get on base before said player bats.
2. A team's standings should never hamper a player from being considered an all-star. Hey Rob Charry, Lance Berkman's team is in last place in the central, should he not be an all-star either? Enough said there.
3. By your criteria, Howard should be starting the all-star game because Berkman's team is in last place and howard has more RBIs, Pujols only has 49 RBIs, and Gonzalez's team is in last place. So absurd. I'm not even sure Howard would be 4th in the all-star game at first place in the NL.

He then went on to ask Mitch Williams if it were between Howard and Burrell, who would Mitch choose? Mitch chose Burrell (Good call by Mitch). Charry's reply? "But Burrell only has 53 RBIs." Don't make me go through all of this again. Burrell bats behind Howard and Utley (as we know, this is stupid) so RBI chances are pretty slim with these guys usually clearing the bases. Burrell leads all NL outfielders in most of the IMPORTANT stats in baseball. I then turned the station off. Possibly forever.

How can people in such a position to influence listeners, know almost nothing about that which they speak? Insanity.

By the way, I do like Ryan Howard, I just don't believe he deserves an all-star spot this year. Pat Burrell, I do believe, deserves an all-star spot. His numbers are absurd. Good chance he won't get it though.

Jenkins started again tonight. What does he have to do to lose his spot?