The Non-Reactionary Case for Firing Manny Acta

The Cleveland Indians have been playing miserable baseball for two months straight. They’re 15-43 since the All-Star Break, and they’ve gone 9-35 since July 26, 5-22 since August 13, and 4-13 since August 25. What looked like a promising season has devolved into a struggle to stay out of last place, and the promised window of opportunity this team was supposed to enjoy over the next several years seems to have closed. The fans want heads to roll, and it looks like the man in the hottest seat is manager Manny Acta.

Rick Osentoski-US PRESSWIRE

The official party line from the front office is that Acta’s job is safe. Chris Antonetti has said it, and he declared this week that he “do[es]n’t feel any differently” even after the team’s abject struggles have continued. Paul Dolan has said it, and he’s affirmed that neither Antonetti nor Mark Shapiro have approached him about dismissing Acta. ”As painful as this has been,” Dolan has said, “I don’t want to get into some knee-jerk reactions.”

Dolan’s sentiment might not be what Cleveland fans want to hear, but it’s a healthy attitude for a team to have. Popular manager evaluations are almost always prone to the fallacy of post hoc, ergo propter hoc (“after it, therefore because of it”). Acta surely played some role in the team’s midsummer slide, but the intangible effect a manager has on his players’ on-field performance is generally overstated. Whatever harm he’s done to this team is far less than the damage caused by poor play from guys like Ubaldo Jimenez and Derek Lowe. And if the Indians were on pace to win 90 games, fans would be calling Acta a genius now—just as they were in the middle of 2011.

But that doesn’t mean Acta’s job should be safe. Though it feels callous to call for a person to be fired, there’s a very good case to be made that his job should be in jeopardy based not on how the season has turned out but what happened along the way. This year has been a story of questionable managerial decisions—not just bad decisions, but ones that are so mind-bogglingly confusing that they cast doubt on whether he is fit to be a Major League manager.

The most frequent example of a baffling Acta move was his great affinity for Jose Lopez. Signed to a minor-league contract this winter, Lopez made the team out of spring training as a utility infielder and posted an unimpressive .249/.272/.366 triple-slash before the Indians designated him for assignment last month. (This was the best batting line Lopez had posted since 2009.)

David Richard-US PRESSWIRE

But somewhere along the way, Lopez found a believer in his manager. He started 47 of the 76 games the Indians played between his being recalled after a trip to the minors and his getting cut, and he appeared in 61 of them. Acta pencilled him in as the cleanup hitter 18 times, and Lopez started a total of 26 games hitting in the heart of the order. Not to mention that Lopez became Acta’s go-to guy whenever he needed a right-handed hitter off the bench despite the fact that he was OBPing well under .300.

We’ve already covered this in greater detail, but it bears repeating: Every single meaningful statistic from this year showed that Shelley Duncan was a better hitter than Jose Lopez. There was nothing to be seen from their track records that suggested otherwise, nor would a scouting-based comparison of the two have yielded any sort of advantage for Lopez. Even Matt LaPorta‘s 2011 performance, the one that cost him his starting job and seems to have ruined his future in the organization (more on that in a moment), blew Lopez’ 2012 numbers out of the water. Yet Acta had no qualms about sticking him in the lineup as frequently as possible.

Everyone evaluates players differently, and I don’t mean to sound as though my opinions of players’ skills are infallible. But this isn’t just a question of seeing things differently. I don’t mind that Acta liked Lopez, but I find it troubling that I can’t think of any possible basis for it. Either Acta is basing his decisions on the wrong information (Lopez did have a higher batting average than Duncan) or his decision-making process in this respect was totally subjective. Either way, a Major League manager should know better than that.

This brings us to another player who has been handled oddly under Acta’s tenure: Matt LaPorta. At the beginning of June, the Indians called LaPorta up from Triple-A Columbus, where he had been raking to the tune of a near-1.000 OPS; with the weak-hitting Casey Kotchman manning first base and the Tribe gearing up for a run at the division title, adding his bat seemed like just what the doctor ordered.

Eric P. Mull-US PRESSWIRE

LaPorta went on to make three appearances, then sat on the bench for a week. Literally. He made his last appearance of that cup of coffee on June 6 and didn’t see another second of game action until after he was sent back to Columbus on June 13. That stretch included five interleague games in National League parks, yet LaPorta didn’t even get a chance to hit for the pitcher.

What possible explanation is there for letting a red-hot player at a position of need who’d just been called up from the minors sit out for a whole week? For that matter, what possible explanation is there for letting a player who’d just been called up from the minors sit out for a whole week? Heck, what possible explanation is there for letting any player sit out for a whole week?

The situation seems to suggest a power struggle between the front office and field manager (i.e., Acta simply refused to play LaPorta), in which case we’ve got a whole different and even worse issue on our hands. But even forgetting about that possibility, the idea of leaving a position player out of game action for an entire week—especially a right-handed hitter with power who played a position where the Indians needed to upgrade—is indefensible.

But the best example of the questionable decision-making process that we’ve seen from Acta this year came on the night of May 5 in a game against the Texas Rangers. It was a 2-2 tie in the top of the 11th inning and Joe Smith was on the mound for his second inning of work. Three batters into the inning, Smith found himself with the go-ahead run on second and two outs as Mitch Moreland stepped up to the plate. (Keep in mind that this was in the extra innings of a game against one of the best teams in baseball, and it took place back when the Indians still thought they could contend this year.)

It was then that Acta called for Smith to intentionally walk Moreland to face Adrian Beltre, who is quite simply a much better hitter. This went about as well as you might expect—Beltre ripped Smith’s 1-0 pitch over the fence for a three-run homer and the Rangers went on to win 5-2. But even before Beltre stepped to the plate, my jaw had fallen to the floor at the idea of giving Mitch Moreland a free pass to face Adrian Beltre.

Eric P. Mull-USPRESSWIRE

Why did Acta prefer to face Mitch Moreland with one runner on than Adrian Beltre with two runners on, you ask? Because Beltre entered the game 0-for-5 lifetime against Smith.

Forget about the fact that past batter/pitcher matchups have no predictive power, which an MLB manager should know. Forget also that Moreland had never faced Smith before, and as long as we’re analyzing matchups at this level it’s generally thought that pitchers have the advantage the first time they face a hitter. Even if you put those out of your mind, we’re talking about only five at-bats.

Anything can happen in five at-bats. Should five at-bats be considered a significant sample size for anything? Let alone for deciding that facing Adrian Beltre with an additional runner on would be better than pitching to Mitch Moreland? Anyone who answers “yes” to that question does not understand the game well enough to manage an MLB team.

The problem here isn’t just that it was a bad decision (the game didn’t end up meaning anything, so it’s not like a Grady Little situation) nor is it that he refused to admit his mistake after the game (“I made the decision. I don’t second-guess myself.”). It’s that the decision was based on misunderstandings about how the game works, and that shouldn’t be the case for any manager in the most prestigious baseball league in the world.

I don’t expect to agree with the manager all the time. I don’t expect all his decisions to work out. I don’t expect him to be immune to human mistakes. But I do expect him to have a sound understanding of how the game works and a knowledge of what information he should use to make his decisions. Those should be basic prerequisites for any Major League manager, and based on instances like these it doesn’t seem like Acta has them.

David Richard-US PRESSWIRE

I feel uncomfortable advocating for a man to lose his job, and unless the Indians really believe their second-half collapse is his fault (only those on the inside can truly assess how much he is to blame) then the Tribe’s disappointing 2012 isn’t a good enough reason to fire Acta. However, en route to this disappointing finish Acta has displayed questionable player evaluation skills, a refusal to use every man on his roster, and some basic understandings about what’s important in a baseball game. After a season full of such bafflers and head-scratchers, perhaps Cleveland would be better off parting ways with Manny Acta.

Should the Indians fire Manny Acta?

  • Yes (73%, 107 Votes)
  • No (27%, 40 Votes)

Total Voters: 147

Loading ... Loading ...

Topics: Cleveland Indians, Jose Lopez, Manny Acta, Matt LaPorta

Want more from Wahoo's on First?  
Subscribe to FanSided Daily for your morning fix. Enter your email and stay in the know.
  • http://twitter.com/MrNegative1 Steve Kinsella

    It is not callous to call for someone to get fired. When someone isn’t doing the job it’s just time to get someone else. Business is business. Celebrating Acta being fired would be callous.
    Great article. There is so much material that Acta gave the Indians over the course of the 2012 season that the poll should be unanimous.
    Manny Acta’s future should follow along the lines of Larry Bowa (another horrible manager) and that is maybe as a bench coach and on to the broadcast booth. Acta can hold any position in baseball that doesn’t allow him to call the shots or play his favorites or put guys that he doesn’t want on the team in a position to fail to prove a point.

  • Steve

    Like most side-arming right-handed pitchers, Joe Smith is more vulnerable to left-handed batters. With first base open and a right-hander on deck, and the extra run less important in extra innings, the decision to walk Moreland was defensible. Reasonable minds could differ, but it hardly merits an entire article or firing the manager. I agree that Acta will probably be fired, but not for that.

    As for Lopez batting in the middle of the order, there wasn’t anybody else who could do the job.
    Forget what LaPorta and Duncan did last year; this year they can barely put the ball in play (over 25% K rate vs. 16% for Lopez). It’s hard to make a 9-man lineup that looks good when you only have 5 major league hitters on your team. I mean, now we have Lillibridge batting 5th and 6th for heaven’s sake. Is it the manager’s fault that those are the players he has to win with? Who on the roster has earned more playing time than he has received other than with meaningless AAA stats?

  • Warclub

    Acta’s odd favoritism with veteran players alone should get him fired. As you said, like him or not, La Porta’s number in ’11 are better than Lopez and Kotchman. He obviously also like Jack Hannahan too.

    Still unless GM Chris Antonetti goes, it really doesn’t make a difference. The skill set this organization seems to favor doesn’t win games. The Tribe has had nine losing seasons in 11 years. That’s not a knee jerk reaction, it’s the cold, hard fact.

    Time to clean house.

  • Corey Insider

    You’re an idiot Lew – first of all, this is totally a reactionary piece; secondly, your strawmen are poorly chosen; third, I love Beltre but Smith vs. Beltre is a more favorable matchup than Smith vs. a lefty with power; fourth, if Shelley Duncan could play infield then yeah maybe you’d have a point re: Jose Lopez, but Lopez is still younger and has demonstrated more power potential than Dunc; fifth, Matt LaPorta can’t field so why cry for him not getting plate appearances in NL parks?!? Look, we’re all frustrated but try to maintain some intellectual honesty bro.

    • SYlvester Conelley

      Completely agree. Low$ teams who cannot afford strikeout pitches absolutely must stress defense, and neither Duncan nor LaPorta can field any position on the field. Otoh 2006 All-Star Jose Lopez was as recently as 2010 the best defensive third baseman in the AL. And at 28 he was worth a look as a possible role player moving forward, as well as being a viable play at third with the ChizKid on the shelf. And about Lopez you say he was the go-to guy off the bench. Well I hate to let facts get in the way of your rant but Lopez only was a PH six times for the Tribe. Twice Duncan was already in the game at the time, one time Duncan was used in a higher-leverage situation later in the game, one of the times Duncan was away from the team with his family, another was in a 12-1 blowout where Hannahan was moved to SS to rest Asdrubal, and the other (June 15) may have been questionable (Lopez PH for ChizKid as DH against a lefty in the 7th inning and with a 2-0 lead). One other point for your consideration, Shelley Duncan is out of baseball and Lopez is headed to the playoffs with the dreaded ChiSox. But let me add that while Snyder might have been correct to call you out for this ridiculous piece, he should not have called you an idiot. It’s just not nice. Go Tribe!

  • Pingback: Should the Cleveland Indians Fire Manny Acta? — Wahoo's on First

  • Pingback: Why Sandy Alomar Jr. Should be the Indians' Next Manager — Wahoo's on First

  • Pingback: Indians Fire Manny Acta; Sandy Alomar Jr. Named Interim Manager — Wahoo's on First

  • Pingback: Terry Francona: Fueling Indians Fans' Dreams — Wahoo's on First

  • Pingback: Matt LaPorta Undergoes Surgery: Is His Indians Career Over? — Wahoo's on First

  • Pingback: The Worst Cleveland Indians Moments of 2012 - Wahoo's on First - A Cleveland Indians Fan Site - News, Blogs, Opinion and More

TEAMFeed More Indians news from the Fansided Network

Hot on the Web From golf.com