Phillies Tell Their Manager To Get The Fuqua Out

"You can stop right there, Charlie.  I know your firing is totally Fuqua-ed up."

Charles Fuqua Manuel is the winningest manager in the 130-plus year history of the Philadelphia Phillies.  The team from the city of Brotherly Love never posted a losing record in any of Manuel's first eight seasons at the helm.  But with a 53-67 record through Thursday's games, Manuel was relieved of his duties by Phillies general manager Ruben Amaro, Jr.  His replacement on an interim basis will be Hall of Famer (and former Phillies draft pick) Ryne Sandberg.

At Studious Metsimus, we find it sacrilegious to defend anyone who is (or was) employed by the team with the most losses in baseball history.  However, we do feel for Manuel for losing his job over something that's not his fault.

Did Charlie Manuel give Ryan Howard a five-year, $125 million contract extension?  Howard has combined to produce 25 homers and 99 RBI in the first two years of his deal.  The first baseman has also struggled to stay healthy since he started collecting the big bucks.

Was Charlie Manuel responsible for signing Roy Halladay to a three-year, $60 million extension?   Halladay's wins have dropped from 19 to 11 to 2 since 2011, while his ERA his risen from 2.35 to 4.49 to 8.65 over the same time period.

What about Cole Hamels' seven-year, $153 million deal?  Did Charlie Manuel have anything to do with giving that contract to a pitcher who is currently leading the league in losses and is posting his highest ERA and WHIP since 2009?

And although Cliff Lee (five years, $120 million), Jonathan Papelbon (four years, $50 million) and Jimmy Rollins (three years, $33 million) have all been reasonably productive, they will all be expected to continue their production at a high rate of pay until they're in their mid-to-late thirties.

Charlie Manuel didn't give these players eight and nine-figure deals.  Ruben Amaro, Jr. did.  It was Amaro who made the trades, free agent signings and re-signings that are now coming back to bite the team.  And it was Amaro who had the dubious distinction of removing the manager, because of course, it was the manager's fault that players past their prime got injured or stopped producing at the same rate they did when they were in their 20s.

As Mets fans, we're quite pleased that the Phillies have gone from the self-proclaimed team to beat in 2007 to a team that gets beaten quite often in 2013.  And if the Phillies continue to expect thirty-somethings to play like twenty-somethings, they're going to remain behind the Mets in the division standings for years to come.

Manuel did a fantastic job with the Phillies, leading them to five division titles, two pennants and a World Series championship.  But he did this with players who were in their prime.  Those players are now past their prime, and the general manager who put and kept the team together has done nothing to make the team any younger.  Oh wait.  He did.  He replaced the winningest manager in franchise history with an interim manager who is fifteen years his junior.  Our bad.

Charles Fuqua Manuel is out as Phillies manager after nearly nine years at the helm.  It's too bad for Philadelphia that the man who should have lost his job for the small fortune he doled out to aging players is still collecting a paycheck of his own.

It's The End of Their World As They Know It (And We Feel Fine)

We interrupt your regularly scheduled day of blog reading to give you breaking news that's already been broken. Omar Minaya has been relieved of his GM duties and Jerry Manuel's option for the 2011 season was not picked up.

Of course, this wasn't even breaking news before it became official. It was a foregone conclusion that the man famous for inserting the words "that being said" into every other sentence and the man known as Dead Manuel Walking were not going to retain their positions after the completion of the 2010 season.

The team had underachieved since the end of the 2006 season. The players were performing below expectations and if there was camaraderie between the players, it wasn't as evident as it should be with winning teams.

It is the general manager's job to put the team together and the manager's job to get them to perform between the white lines.

Omar did his best to put Los Mets together. That being said, that also included offering contracts that were far too long to the ostracized Oliver "El Perez-idente" Perez and Luis "Squeam Queen" Castillo. Other players that were signed for more years than they should have been were Orlando "The Dookie" Hernandez, Pedro "I Left My Fastball In Beantown" Martinez and Carlos Beltran (sorry, we like Don Carlos, so we won't give him a demeaning nickname). He also traded for fan-favorite, but now increasingly fragile Johan Santana.

Jerry Manuel was forced to manage an oft-injured group of ragtag players, a job that most managers would have difficulty doing, although a fellow Manuel (Charlie) had no problem doing that when his star players were dropping faster than Citi Field's paid attendance figures.

Part of Charlie Manuel's success with being able to survive his club's injuries was that his GM, Ruben Amaro Jr., was able to provide him with the right players to fill in the holes left by the disabled players.

When Rip Van Winkle (Jamie Moyer) went down with an injury, Amaro swung a deal with the Astros for Roy Oswalt. All four infielders for the Phillies (Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, Jimmy Rollins, Placido Polanco) were also hurt at some point of the season. Amaro made sure each player had better than adequate replacements in Ross Gload, Ben Francisco and Wilson Valdez. Those three players combined to hit .266 (170-for-640), which was higher than the team's collective batting average (.260). In those 640 at-bats, which are about the same amount an everyday player would collect over a full season, the trio collected 37 doubles, three triples, 16 HR and 85 RBI, while scoring 77 runs and going a perfect 16-for-16 in stolen bases. They also excelled defensively, combining to make a total of four errors in 569 total chances.

While the Phillies didn't miss a beat when one of their star players got hurt, what did Omar Minaya give us? Either not yet ready for prime time players (Ruben Tejada, Jesus Feliciano, Lucas Duda) or the curious case of Joaquin Arias, who, like Benjamin Button, seemed to age backwards as seen by the photos below.



A general manager is the head talent evaluator. His job is to put together the best team possible so that his manager can put the best possible lineup on the field. Unfortunately for Jerry Manuel, the best team possible was never THE BEST TEAM. There were 25 guys, or 23½ as suggested by The Better Half in her recent post for Mets Merized Online, but these guys were never a team. Ruben Amaro has put together a team of guys in Philadelphia, not guys who were part of a team, like Omar Minaya put together in New York.

The new general manager has to realize that teams win games. He has to give the manager not just the best individual players, but the guys who stand the best chance to become a cohesive unit that can all contribute to winning ballgames. Twenty-five individuals don't lead teams to championships, but one team of players can do that.

Omar Minaya and Jerry Manuel had early success with the Mets because they had a team of guys. Over the past few years, that team dissolved into a group of guys whose only common trait was the shirts on their backs. The formula is simple: Have team, will win. If the new general manager can't get the new manager a team of guys to work with, then they stand a good chance of being shown the same door that Omar and Jerry were last seen walking through.

Charlie Manuel Gets No Stars For His All-Star Selections

The National League All-Stars have been named and as always, there are some notable snubs. This happens every year and will not change until Major League Baseball either expands the All-Star Game rosters or eliminates the "every team must be represented" rule.

One such snub was Mets starting pitcher Mike Pelfrey. Coming into tonight's game, Big Pelf had an outstanding 10-2 record and a 2.93 ERA. However, he was not selected by Charlie Manuel (he earned the right to manage the National League All-Star team by leading his team to last year's World Series) to pitch in Anaheim next Tuesday.

Looking at the National League All-Star roster, some players whose names are not familiar to the common fan were selected as their respective team's sole All-Star representative. These players include relief pitcher Evan Meek of the Pittsburgh Pirates and closer Matt Capps of the Washington Nationals.

One might say that because these two pitchers "had to be" selected by Charlie Manuel to fulfill the "every team must be represented" rule, Mike Pelfrey was denied a spot that appeared certain to be his. I claim otherwise.

For example, what's the deal with Charlie Manuel's love of Atlanta Braves players? He took Brian McCann (.265, 10 HR, 34 RBI) to back up Yadier Molina behind the plate. Normally, this wouldn't be a bad choice. Did he fail to notice that Miguel Olivo of the Rockies was doing better in all three categories (.307, 11 HR, 39 RBI)? Olivo also has five triples to McCann's big fat zero. Defensively, Olivo is a monster, throwing out more than half the runners who have attempted to steal against him (20 runners caught stealing in 39 attempts). McCann? Not so much. He has only thrown out 17 runners in 58 attempts.

If McCann's selection doesn't seem odd to you, then what about the selection of his teammate, Omar Infante? The Braves' utility player has only played in 57 games this season. Although he's hitting a healthy .309, his other numbers (23 runs, 22 RBI, eight doubles, one home run) are less than stellar. What about the King of All Snubs, Reds first baseman Joey Votto?

In the month of June alone, Votto hit .314, with 21 runs scored, 8 HR and 22 RBI. That's right. Joey Votto, the non-All-Star, basically did in one month (but with more power) what All-Star Omar Infante has done ALL YEAR!

For the year, Votto is hitting .312, with 19 HR, 57 RBI and 53 runs scored. (Note to fans: Immediately after typing this paragraph, Votto his 20th HR of the year against fellow All-Star snub, Mike Pelfrey.)

Need I say more about Charlie Manuel's questionable All-Star selection strategy? Yes, I do!

St. Louis Cardinals' first baseman Albert Pujols was voted in by the fans to start the All-Star Game for the National League squad. No one should object to that selection.

However, who did the Kool-Aid Man take as Pujols' backup? He took his own first baseman, Ryan Howard.

Howard is having a good year (.293, 15 HR, 59 RBI), but the numbers are far below his standards. So why did Manuel say "oh, yeahhhhh!" to Howard and not to Votto?

According to the Detroit Free Press, Manuel selected Howard over Votto because (and we quote):

"He's my guy, our player, my guy."

So basically, Charlie Manuel is saying that he likes his players and thinks the way to getting home field advantage in the World Series is with the feared bat of Omar Infante.

On the bright side, it appears as if All-Star pitcher Yovani Gallardo will not be pitching in the Midsummer Classic because of an oblique injury. That paves the way for Mike Pelfrey to get the call to Anaheim that he's worked all season to get.

Pelfrey should not have needed any help to earn his first All-Star selection, but if Charlie Manuel wants to correct his oversight, he'll take Pelfrey to replace Gallardo. It wouldn't hurt Big Pelf's chances if he sent Manuel a plate of his delicious sliders.

Even with the Phillies winning three straight division titles, two consecutive National League pennants and a World Series championship two years ago, the Mets remain on their minds, especially the small one inside the head of Charlie Manuel.

A few months ago, Charlie Manuel suggested that the Mets must be stealing signs to gain a home field advantage. Now he's doing a snub-a-dub-dub to Mike Pelfrey (and Joey Votto) in order to take less deserving players and players on his team (which may actually be redundant).

Here's a request from Studious Metsimus to the rest of the National League. Please make sure the Phillies don't make the playoffs this season. We can't have another year of Charlie Manuel going all holier-than-thou with his managerial duties by making these foolish decisions with the National League All-Star roster. The National League and its fans deserve better than this pompous fool calling the shots.

Joey's Soapbox: Why I Hate Charlie Manuel More Than You Do

Phillies manager Charlie Manuel lost about 500 pounds, or half his weight, during the offseason. That weight loss will serve him well, as he'll need to be light on his feet to get away from me when I go after him for saying what he said two nights ago.

Hello, everyone. I'm Joey Beartran and this is my Soapbox.

As I was taking a cake break yesterday, I opened up the New York Post to read about the Mets' three-game sweep of the Phillies. It was the first time since the Miracle year of 1969 that the Mets had held an opponent scoreless for an entire three-game series.

After my fifth slice of cake, I came across an article by Fred Kerber that featured this quote by Charlie Manuel:

"Sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes the bear eats you."

Who's this person eating bears? Does PETA know about this? I was shocked that a major league manager not named Ozzie Guillen could say something so insensitive. I can't speak for all bears, but I know I contribute to his salary when I purchase tickets to games and when I buy chicken nachos.

Shame on Charlie Manuel for suggesting that on occasion, my fellow furry friends should be consumed by him or his cronies. As for the part where he said that sometimes the bear eats you, let's just say I would never eat Charlie Manuel. I'm not a big fan of indigestion.

If Charlie Manuel is having flashbacks to his heavier days, perhaps he should satisfy his hunger by opening his mouth and sticking his foot in it.

Speaking of sticking a foot in one's mouth, the master of said practice, Colbert Hamels, was caught doing it again in the same New York Post article. Towards the end of the article, Hamels talks about the Phillies recent slump by saying:

"It happens every year for us, almost around the same time...I have a job to do. I can't worry about the offense."

Really, Colbert? So this happens to you every year around the same time. Is that your excuse for the Phillies' Phutility at Citi Field this week? Let's look at the Phillies' records for the month of May since Hamels joined the team in 2006, shall we?

2010: 15-10, .600 win pct. (currently 27-20, .574 win pct.)
2009: 17-11, .607 win pct. (finished season 93-69, .574 win pct.)
2008: 17-12, .586 win pct. (finished season 92-70, .568 win pct.)
2007: 15-13, .536 win pct. (finished season 89-73, .549 win pct.)
2006: 17-11, .607 win pct. (finished season 85-77, .525 win pct.)

The Phillies have had winning records every May that Hamels has been on the team. In fact, in four of those five seasons, the team had a better winning percentage in May than they had over the entire season, meaning that May has generally been one of the best months for the Phillies over the past five seasons.

Colbert Hamels is also the same guy who said that he couldn't wait for the season to end after losing Game 3 of last year's World Series. So saying things that make absolutely no sense seems par for the course for him.

Okay, I've said everything I have to say about those blasted Phillies. To summarize, Charlie Manuel might have lost weight, but he still has a big mouth. And Colbert Hamels still doesn't have a clue and looks like a jackass every time he opens his mouth.

I'm Joey Beartran and I'm getting off my soapbox. I can't stay on it all night, you know. After all, it's cake o'clock.

Road Warriors...Come Out To Play-ay!

The Mets have been outstanding this season at home, going 14-8 over their first 22 games at Citi Field. However, when they leave Flushing, they seem to forget to pack their bats and their ability to win ballgames.

After last night's 3-2 defeat to the Atlanta Braves, a loss that dropped the Mets back into last place in the NL East, the Mets found themselves staring at a 5-13 road record for the season. This comes hot on the heels of last year's abysmal 29-52 road record. Since moving into Citi Field, the Mets have gone 55-48 at home (41-40 last year) and 34-65 on the road. Why is there such a stark difference in home and road effectiveness?

For one thing, the team barely hits over the Mendoza line on the road. (Editor's note: The Mendoza line generally refers to a .200 batting average. However, the man for whom the unofficial stat was named after, Mario Mendoza, actually finished his career with a .215 batting average. For the purposes of this and any other Studious Metsimus blog referring to the Mendoza Line, we will use the .215 figure as the aforementioned Line.) Including last night's game, the Mets team batting average on the road is a barely-there .217. Compare this to their .267 mark at Citi Field.

They also score less, run less, walk less and strike out at a higher clip. Here are their home/road splits for your reading torture:

@ Citi Field (22 games):

Batting Average: .267
On-Base Percentage: .352
Slugging Percentage: .418
Runs Scored: 105 (4.8 runs per game)
Stolen Bases: 23 (1.0 steals per game)
Bases On Balls: 90 (4.1 walks per game)
Strikeouts: 147 (6.7 strikeouts per game)


On The Road (18 games):

Batting Average: .217
On-Base Percentage: .281
Slugging Percentage: .339
Runs Scored: 67 (3.7 runs per game)
Stolen Bases: 14 (0.8 steals per game)
Bases On Balls: 52 (2.9 walks per game)
Strikeouts: 142 (7.9 strikeouts per game)

For everyone who thought Citi Field was a pitcher's park, it certainly isn't for Mets hitters, as they score over one extra run per game there than on the road and hit for a much higher average.

The difference in strikeouts and walks per game is astounding. The Mets have been able to cut down on their strikeouts at Citi Field and have been issued almost twice as many walks. Why can't they do the same on the road? Do umpires have bigger strike zones on the road when the Mets come up to bat?

Although the Mets hit better at Citi Field than on the road in 2009, the differences were not as great as they are this year. The 2009 Mets had a slightly higher batting average, on-base percentage and slugging percentage at home than on the road (.274/.341/.408 at home; .266/.330/.381 on the road), while their stolen bases, walks and strikeouts were consistent whether at Citi Field or on the road (59 SB, 260 BB, 458 Ks at home; 63 SB, 266 BB, 470 Ks on the road).

Since the beginning of the 2009 season, only the Baltimore Orioles and the Pittsburgh Pirates have fewer road victories (30 apiece) than the New York Mets (34 road wins). Even the Washington Nationals, who lost a major-league high 103 games last year, have picked up more wins on the road (35) since the beginning of the '09 season.

Speaking of those pesky Nats, the Mets are opening up a series in Washington tonight. Yes, that means they'll be on the road. If the Mets don't want to be lumped into the same category as the lowly Orioles and Pirates, they must show improvement on the road.

Let's face facts. No team is going to win many ballgames when they're constantly getting four hits a night and striking out ten times. But a team with a winning attitude finds a way to score runs even when they're not hitting by making productive outs. Unfortunately, the Mets can't even do that right.

Take the ninth inning of last night's game. Luis Castillo was standing on third base with one out. At the time, Castillo represented the go-ahead run. All the Mets needed was a fly ball by David Wright to take the lead. But alas, that was easier said than done, as David fanned against Billy Wagner, who then struck out Ike Davis to end the Mets' threat and the inning.

David Wright's inability to make a productive out in the top of the ninth inning enabled the Braves to score the winning run in the bottom of the ninth instead of what would have been the tying run. Of course, Wright's throwing error had something to do with that as well.

Phillies' manager Charlie Manuel recently had the audacity to suggest that the Mets were stealing signs at home because of their winning record at Citi Field. Perhaps they should consider doing that on the road. Or better yet, how about if they just stop flailing at every slider out of the strike zone? A few extra walks and a lot less strikeouts never hurt anybody. At the very least, make a productive out here and there. The last time I checked, there was no such thing as a productive strikeout.

There are still 63 games left away from Citi Field this season beginning with tonight's game in Washington. Can the Mets turn things around and become road warriors? They'd better or else the fans won't come out to watch them play-ay.