Acta Man Love

[swerb]

I love Manny Acta as a coach. Love the guy. I don't care if we go 10-21 down the stretch. This was an excellent hire, and I'd be shocked if he's not manging this team for a long time.

Probably a bad sign for Manny, but I just agree with every move he makes … and he runs and in game manages the team just how I like to see a manager do it.

Heard Manoloff talking today on 92.3 about how he is actually out there, with the team, fielding grounders, taking BP, working with the young players individually before games. How the team all likes and respects him personally, yet how Manny is careful not to become too buddy buddy with players.

Just a stand up, good guy. The Tribe has been crippled by adversity and injuries, yet you’d never know it listening to his pre and post game pressers. The team plays loose. They play with heart. They step up in big situations. We’ve had no extended losing streaks. Players on the bench are engrossed in the games. And every time it seems like this team is toast and we want to write em off, they come through with a big win and make us feel bad for wanting to put a fork in ‘em.

After seven years of that god damn idiotic Wedge-bot, and teams that wilted under pressure, played tight, and were constantly put in positions to fail ... what a breath of fresh air.

[motherscratcher]

I could not possibly agree more with that. All of it. I really like Acta and he seems like the perfect fit for this team.

I know there has been some griping from time to time about in game decisions, but you're going to have that with any manager. I doubt there's a manager anywhere that doesn't get second guessed.

But for the most part I like what he does. He manages loose, smart, and with balls.

[motherscratcher]

Taking a step back as we enter the september run and looking at where ihis team is and where we thought it would be, even with a historically unlucky injury run...it's a goddam miracle is what it is.

[skatingtripods]

He really tightened up in June and July and lost that aggressiveness that got them to where they were. I started hating on him for it and it's probably a little unfair because some of the guys on this ballclub really overachieved for the first month and a half.

It's been a tale of two seasons for him, quite frankly. He could do no wrong in April and May and he seemed to crack under some of the pressure in June and July. He definitely has his faults, leaving starters in too long, calling for hit and runs with really slow runners and guys who have a difficult time making constant contact. But, he clearly has a lot of positives, too. Belcher's been huge for this coaching staff, though, and it cannot be understated how important the Manager-Pitching Coach relationship is. They seem to be on the same page.

Overall, he's a contender for AL Manager of the Year, if not the winner of the award. I like the way he's approached social media, I like how outgoing he is in the community, and he seems to be a well-respected manager in the dugout and clubhouse.

I'm still skeptical of him. For the simple fact that he has never managed a winner and therefore hasn't really been tested in a pennant race. If they climb back in this thing, he can answer some of my questions. If they don't, I'll have to wait til next year to see.

[DrPoove]

Liked him when I was in DC and he was managing the Nats and I like him now.

Do I disagree with some of the pinch running and leaving the starter out there too long from time to time, yes, but most of the time I think he has a good "feel" for the team and the players.

Never felt that the players bought into Uncle Eric. How many times did we see this team pack it in in July or August with no where near the amount of injuries they have had this year.

Disagree with the fact his butthole tightened in June and July. Did he have a couple of bad moves, yes, but all managers do. I put more of June and July on the guys on the field. I put the fact that they bounced back after each low (minus one crappy two week stretch, that they still bounced back from) and while may not have went on a April-May run again stayed in it despite a lot of adversity.

(As far as DC goes, that team was set for contraction, traded away ALL of their minor league talent, and has some FA signings that would make one pine for Jason Michaels, David Dellucci or Roberto Hernandez. Those teams had NO talent. The Indians have young talent which makes all the difference when evaluating both situations.)

[skatingtripods]

Disagree with the fact his butthole tightened in June and July. Did he have a couple of bad moves, yes, but all managers do. I put more of June and July on the guys on the field. I put the fact that they bounced back after each low (minus one crappy two week stretch, that they still bounced back from) and while may not have went on a April-May run again stayed in it despite a lot of adversity.

Maybe it just seemed that way to me because of how they were struggling so badly to score runs that I think he could have been more aggressive and put more pressure on the opposition's defense.

Or I'm just slighted because Sal Fasano never got considered for the job.

[statmasta]

I definitely don't agree with everything he does. For example, a couple days ago Alex Gordon was up with men on 1st and 3rd and 1 out. So we need a double play to get out of the inning and keep it tied. And then Acta brings in Tony Sipp? WHAT?! I'm pretty sure Tony Sipp gets fewer ground balls than LeBron James has championships. Meanwhile, our groundball, lefty specialist Rafael Perez is nowhere to be seen as Sipp serves up a 3-run gopher ball. Ugh. Perez was clearly the best option in that situation. WTF ACTA?!

That being said, the importance of in-game decision making is overrated. People who blame the manager everytime a managerial move doesn't work out are misguided, imo. For the most part, it's on the players to perform when the manager calls on them. So I generally try to avoid judging managers on in-game decision making. What's more important is the people management and the tone the manager sets in the clubhouse. And in that regard, I think Acta is fantastic. Excellent hire. I didn't particularly care for the hire at the time, but it's clearly worked out well (so far).

[skatingtripods]

That being said, the importance of in-game decision making is overrated. People who blame the manager everytime a managerial move doesn't work out are misguided, imo. For the most part, it's on the players to perform when the manager calls on them.

But, what you pointed out with the Sipp-Gordon matchup is exactly why it isn't overrated. It's up to the manager to put the players in the best position to succeed. Sipp has induced 1 double play ground ball this year. R. Perez has induced 9.

I find that, at times, Acta doesn't put his guys in a position to succeed. He wants to squeeze every last drop from the starter (see the Masterson game in the first of the SEA doubleheader with the Perez blown save) and often puts his bullpen guys in compromising positions. You can tell me all day that it's their job, but what's the problem with bringing them in to start the inning clean instead of bringing back a starter who allows 1 or 2 baserunners and then going to the pen?

You're setting them up to fail, not to succeed. That's where in-game decisions are crucial.

[statmasta]

That being said, the importance of in-game decision making is overrated. People who blame the manager everytime a managerial move doesn't work out are misguided, imo. For the most part, it's on the players to perform when the manager calls on them.

But, what you pointed out with the Sipp-Gordon matchup is exactly why it isn't overrated. It's up to the manager to put the players in the best position to succeed. Sipp has induced 1 double play ground ball this year. R. Perez has induced 9.

I find that, at times, Acta doesn't put his guys in a position to succeed. He wants to squeeze every last drop from the starter (see the Masterson game in the first of the SEA doubleheader with the Perez blown save) and often puts his bullpen guys in compromising positions. You can tell me all day that it's their job, but what's the problem with bringing them in to start the inning clean instead of bringing back a starter who allows 1 or 2 baserunners and then going to the pen?

You're setting them up to fail, not to succeed. That's where in-game decisions are crucial.

I guess I should have said individual moves generally aren't that important, but if a manager's philosophy leads him to consistently make the wrong decisions (like SippvsRaffy, leaving starters in, etc)...then yeah it becomes a huge problem.

I don't think Acta consistently puts his team in a bad position, though. I didn't think that about Wedge, either.

[WiscTribeFan]

I think every team goes through a period when they press, especially at the dish. Wedge's teams, Acta's teams, etc. The main difference I'm seeing is that Acta seems to be able to get his players out of that zone quicker than Wedge did. Wedge's teams also always seemed to start each season tight, almost as if they were trying too hard to win out of the gate. Wedge never seemed to be a guy to bench a player quickly, so I don't know why they often played as if they were being threatened, but they did.

I don't think Wedge was a horrible manager. I don't think that Acta is a stellar manager. Both seem to play it fairly straight-forward in terms of conventional baseball. Lefty-Lefty, hit-and-run, etc. Wedge, too, was criticized for leaving his starters in too long. Maybe it's a manager trying to show confidence in his horses to push through that last out so that whenever they got in trouble, they wouldn't automatically figure that they'd get pulled. Sometimes a manager has to make his guys dig deep for when the really big games come. Hard to say.

It would be interesting if Wedge were currently the manager during the decent from that 30-15 start, would the opinions around here be as tame as they have been with Acta? If the team doesn't take that next step forward next year, will Acta be given benefit of the doubt as much as he is right now? Let's face it, it's this year's success that gave Antonetti the confidence to trade away his top two pitching prospects. If they sputter next year, there's gonna be some really big decisions to be made with regards to the future. We could be looking at a pseudo rebuild. Again.

[RedDawg53]

If Eric Wedge managed this team for 7 years. Manny might be the next Boby Cox of MLB. Time will tell I guess

[Stu]

.417 win loss %.

and frankly, if wedge were still running the team you guys wouldnt be saying we were losing due to injuries, it would be wedge's fault that they tanked.

[swerb]

.417 win loss %.

and frankly, if wedge were still running the team you guys wouldnt be saying we were losing due to injuries, it would be wedge's fault that they tanked.

Man, we missed you. Same bad takes, just no capitilization anymore.

[Jumbo]

Too much Verlander for the Indians to catch the Tigers down the stretch, but this season has shown that Acta can do a good job with a decent, but imperfect, team. I'm most impressed with how Acta has handled the bullpen. It gives some hope that the Tribe can hope for stability from the most unstable part of the team.

Depending on how they figure out the offense/first base/outfield in the offseason, things are looking pretty good for next year. Given how they're all-in with the Jimenez trade, I expect them to be bold, most likely by trading a reliever (Perez?) for a hitter.

This is my bias talking, I know others will disagree, but I'd rather have a good 1B and Santana at C with only part-time duties at 1B, than Santana at 1B and Marson at C. On the other hand, if their resources only allow them to get one guy, then maybe it would work to focus on an outfielder and then go with the Santana/Marson combo.

Oh yeah, and Chisenhall needs to develop. Then we're in it. Jack has contributed this year, and I want him around, but I don't want to have to wish upon a Hannahan.

[Stu]

Man, we missed you. Same bad takes, just no capitilization anymore.

I missed your ability to ignore statements of fact and only argue with people by insulting them.

[noles1]

You stated no "facts" and it was as mild of an insult as one could have on these boards.

Count me in the pro-Manny camp. I cannot even imagine Wedge is even brought up in the discussion considering the comical job he has pulled off in Seattle this year. They basically forced him against his wishes to play Ackley.

[peeker643]

I do get a kick out of those who haven't been screaming for Manny to get thrown out of a game supporting his players though when they bitched at Wedge about it.

Wedge is in top 5 getting kicked out while Acta is in bottom 5.

No longer critical?

[Stu]

You stated no "facts" and it was as mild of an insult as one could have on these boards.

winning % is a fact

[motherscratcher]

You stated no "facts" and it was as mild of an insult as one could have on these boards.

winning % is a fact

Yeah, I guyess. It's a fact even if meaningless.

But, were you really trying to start some kind of debate with your thoroughly researched and well thought out take of "Acta has a .417 winning percentage"? Because that is profound.

OK, I'll respond to your fact.

Acta has a poor career winning percentage. So fucking what? If you can't figure out why that is, and think that it matters, then I can't help you.

[noles1]

Your Wedge comment was anything but a fact.

And the win loss % comment is exactly what motherscratcher just stated.

I'll debate but I'm not interested in debating with someone unwilling to explore within the realm of reality.

[Commodore Perry]

Acta is a very easy coach to like. But as to his effectiveness, there isn't good data yet.

1st year doesn't count. He inherited a sunken ship and had to bring in a new philosophy. 2nd year doesn't count. Yes a great start, but then a downward trend before this team got hit with Civil War level injuries. Kinda hard to judge a coach with the current lineups he has to field.

I think we're still going to need a few more years to see what we really have, despite the postive signs so far.

[noles1]

Acta is a very easy coach to like. But as to his effectiveness, there isn't good data yet.

1st year doesn't count. He inherited a sunken ship and had to bring in a new philosophy. 2nd year doesn't count. Yes a great start, but then a downward trend before this team got hit with Civil War level injuries. Kinda hard to judge a coach with the current lineups he has to field.

I think we're still going to need a few more years to see what we really have, despite the postive signs so far.

Will certainly give you that. I've had my share of 2nd guesses from time to time but overall I've been a fan of Manny's tenure thus far. Seems to have a lot of respect from the players in that they go out of their way to praise him. Doesn't hurt to have such a likeable team though, sans LaPorta.

Plus anyone who can seamlessly incoroporate the term "civil war level injuries" immediately wins my favor...

[leadpipe]

You stated no "facts" and it was as mild of an insult as one could have on these boards.

winning % is a fact

Correlating it directly on a manager, ignoring about 9,000 other things that effect it much more.....far from a fact.

[OldDawg]

I have enjoyed Manny as a coach as well. In my opinion, before the season I had us battling with KC for the basement... and that was before a million injuries. We have no business being in the hunt for a pennant. And with the play of this young team in this crappy division, our future is much brighter.

The only coaching I don't like is at 3rd base. We have made some of the worse decisions ever at sending/not sending guys home. And many of them.

[Stu]

You stated no "facts" and it was as mild of an insult as one could have on these boards.

winning % is a fact

Correlating it directly on a manager, ignoring about 9,000 other things that effect it much more.....far from a fact.

Those other things are much more subjective and are not clear if they actually help the team win.

But I will let this argument go, and will just wait a year or two when everyone is ripping him because we still aren't winning and the honeymoon phase is over.

[peeker643]

You stated no "facts" and it was as mild of an insult as one could have on these boards.

winning % is a fact

Correlating it directly on a manager, ignoring about 9,000 other things that effect it much more.....far from a fact.

Those other things are much more subjective and are not clear if they actually help the team win.

Subjective like the horseshit talent he managed? I don't think Acta is any better or worse than 95% of the managers in the game. I also am 100% drop-dead sure he'll at some point lose the ear of his current group and be let go or resign under duress.

But I'm 100% sure his winning % in Washington means dick about his ability to manage this team. Just as his winning % with this team would mean dick if he was managing either the Yankees or the Astros.

Right now he has a AAA team believing they can overcome 7,000 injuries to continue to stay on the fringe of contention. That's doing a fantastic job.

[pup]

You stated no "facts" and it was as mild of an insult as one could have on these boards.

winning % is a fact

Correlating it directly on a manager, ignoring about 9,000 other things that effect it much more.....far from a fact.

and will just wait a year or two to post anymore

A guy can dream can't he.

[leadpipe]

You stated no "facts" and it was as mild of an insult as one could have on these boards.

winning % is a fact

Correlating it directly on a manager, ignoring about 9,000 other things that effect it much more.....far from a fact.

Those other things are much more subjective and are not clear if they actually help the team win.

But I will let this argument go, and will just wait a year or two when everyone is ripping him because we still aren't winning and the honeymoon phase is over.

Those "other things" are clearly not more subjective. Unless you'd like to explain to me how GOOD PLAYERS effect a team's won/loss percentage less than a manager does. Or financial situation, or drafting and again, a zillion other things more important than the passer outer of atta boys.

Joe Torre didn't make the Yankees good when he was a "great manager" just like he didn't make the Braves bumbs when he was "Clueless Joe" And history shows this over and over - Casey Stengel was great, than he wasn't., Mike Scoiscia is a genius in handling a bullpen when a journeyman falls into his lap and can't be touched, and a young phenom is rippin' off 92mph sliders....aaaand then Donnally disappears again, K-Rod loses some zip, and all of the sudden he's not the bullpen genius we think he is.

And on and on and on.

To place a winning percentage at the foot of a manager, while ignoring everything that really builds or hinders a winning percentage is so GD ridiculous it isn't even funny.

Thanks for "letting the argument go," and, I gotta tell ya, I'm not looking forward to two years from now when you come back in and add a sniping comment believing you are smarter than everyone else, and are really just adding nothing.

[scrambler]

I think Acta's done a very fine job. Winning 67 last year with the crap going on the field was actually a very good season as well, and surpassing that total before September starts with the magnitude of injuries is another great job (Cabrera/Santana are the only key position players to stay healthy). That said, Wedge did a fine job overall too I think. Had some really good teams here and got to the brink of an AL pennant. Whether you were a fan or not of him, his time had clearly run it's course by the time he left. That will happen with Acta at some point too.

[Dnthateonthepronk]

I like Acta. I think he has done a great job managing his players and has done a pretty good job of in game managing. So at least we know he isn't going to be completely inept. However he is really only going to be as good as his bullpen will allow him to be. A bad bullpen in two important years really helped to start driving the stake through Wedge's heart and it will eventually with Acta too.

Bit like it has been stated before a time will come when his head will be called for even though he will be managing the same way he was when everybody was kissing his ass.

[Rat_Tail]

I do get a kick out of those who haven't been screaming for Manny to get thrown out of a game supporting his players though when they bitched at Wedge about it.

Wedge is in top 5 getting kicked out while Acta is in bottom 5.

No longer critical?

That's the one thing I don't like about Acta. I was at the one game where he actually got thrown out. It did seem to light a fire under the players and we came from behind to beat the Red Sox.

I don't want to see him get thrown out of a bunch of games, but I can't stand when he goes out to argue a call and doesn't really argue at all.

[1Perry]

I was always pretty vanilla on Wedge. I wasn't thrilled with the Acta pick but he's done better than I expected.

[rigs]

I agree with Swerb that Acta was the right hire, mostly because of the way he deals with people and players. However, the Indians won 96 and 93 under Wedge. Next year will be a big one for Manny to get this team to the playoffs. I like his no excuse style, and that we don't have to listen to the same post game presser over and over, day after day, year after year.

[GodHatesClevelandSport]

Please remember that not only has Acta never had a winning season, but this is the first time he's ever had a team over .500 after six games of a season. And there's still no guarantee the Indians finish with a winning record this year.

That said, credit Acta with running a good clubhouse and fitting in the players when so many have gone down with injuries. But as far as contributions to making this a winning team, I think there's an argument to be made that Tim Belcher has more to do with it than Acta. The pitching staff is whey the Tribe is winning.