Posted: Friday, March 28, 2008, 12:02 PM | 3 comments |
 
options
 

The Wall Street Journal considers Charlie Manuel the fourth-best manager in baseball.Charlie Manuel still has his detractors.

But since the Phillies won the National League East last year, some fans have come around: So he talks funny. So what? The players play hard for him. They've had the best offense in the National League the last two years. And how would I have done having to decide amongst Antonio Alfonseca, Jose Mesa and Geoff Geary every night?

So it's interesting (and more than a little surprising) to read that The Wall Street Journal considers Manuel the fourth-best manager in baseball.

Better than Bobby Cox.

Better than Tony La Russa.

Better than Lou Piniella.

Better than Jim Leyland.

Come again? How come I get the feeling this article might make some heads explode? The newspaper explained its formula: "Assessing managers is difficult, since their win-loss records are closely tied to the team's talent level. Because of that, we used three metrics designed to reveal a manager's acumen — performance in close games, "Pythagorean" win expectations and whether they got the most out of their players — then averaged each manager's ranking in those categories for a final score."

It's at least interesting to talk about. I'm sure the people in St. Louis are up in arms that La Russa, who practically invented the game, is tied for ninth. I'm sure Tigers fans are furious that Leyland is 19th out of the 20 managers ranked. But that's what makes it a good debate. I personally think the manager in baseball is overrated. If you have good players, you win. If you don't, you lose. If the Phillies win 85 games and miss the playoffs this year, it won't be because Manuel made some questionable moves late in the game. It'll be because the pitching failed him. Or there were a rash of injuries. Or something else happened on the field.

But that's just me.

Posted by Todd Zolecki @ 12:02 PM  Permalink | 3 comments
3
Comments   
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:35 PM, 03/28/2008
    I think Charley does a great job in managing the personalities on the team, he's OK on game strategy. Based on who he has had on his pitching staff's, he's done OK maybe not 4th best, but in top 10. LaRussa & Pinella have good PR, I don't think either is John McGraw. And really, it's the WSJ, not the first place anyone goes for sports after reading Zo and Jim Salisbury.
    jimmymack
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:20 PM, 03/28/2008
    Damn! I forgot about Geoff Geary and Jose Mesa already!
    Norma
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 3:00 AM, 11/06/2009
    La Russa is so overrated; always manages teams that have tons of talent but rarely wins it all.
    djmarco


3 comments
About Matt Gelb and Bob Brookover












Bob Brookover and Matt Gelb team up for their third straight season covering the Phillies for the Inquirer and philly.com.

This is Brookover’s second stint writing about the Phillies, having joined the coverage team after seven years as an Eagles beat writer. Brookover was hired by The Inquirer in 2000 as the Phillies beat writer after spending 13 years writing about the team for two suburban newspapers. While on the Eagles beat, Brookover, who had covered just two winning Phillies teams in 15 seasons, saw the Phillies move into a cash-cow new ballpark and begin playing a brand of the game he found unrecognizable. Follow him on Twitter here.

Gelb is in his third season covering the Phillies. He was hired by The Inquirer in August 2009 after graduating from Syracuse University. He has also covered baseball at The Star-Ledger and Cape Cod Times. Born and raised in Bucks County, he attended Central Bucks High School West. Follow him on Twitter here.
To submit a question for Matt Gelb's Phillies mailbag, click here.

Join on Facebook    Follow on Twitter

Latest Phillies Videos