Players: Acta's Approach Respected, But Need for Change Won Out

Posted by Emilie Cole on Jul. 16, 2009 at 7:23 PM
There are 7 comments | Add yours | Retweet This

As the Riggleman Era kicks off, it's cautiously easy to look back on quotes like this one and see some obvious foreshadowing:

"You have to stay positive and keep talking to the guys. We have to keep working, and we are gong to snap out of it."

Then-new manager Manny Acta was facing a 9-24 start to his first season that day in May 2007, and would go on to be quoted along similar lines too many times in his little more than two-year stint at the helm of NatsTown - including throughout the horrible (and injury-ridden) 2008 season and this year's bullpen misery. At the end of it all, players (most notably, Zimmerman) would speak of Manny's firing as a needed public display of change, even if it was a result of their own poor performance. 

Quotes in the past few days indicate players' disappointment in themselves more than anything, but with a "this is how it goes" slant, and looking back over the mostly frustrating history of Nationals baseball, it never seemed to be any other way.

Just a few months into Acta's span, with a record of 40-55 (a "decent" losing record for the half-way mark), World Series champ Ronnie Belliard said Acta was focusing the team to win. "They said we weren't going to win 50 games [this season], and look where we are now. I think all those positive things come from our manager, Manny Acta. He's a winner. He's going to do what it takes to win the ballgame, day in and day out."

Later that 2007 season, as the team blew an 8-3 lead over the Dodgers to lose 10-9 and continue a six-game losing streak, players felt bleak toward the team's performance, but glad about their skipper. Now-defunct firstbaseman Robert Fick remarked, "It all starts with Manny. His attitude has been so good the whole year."

That "whole year" ended up being the "bright spot" in team history by ending 73-89 (the Nats ended fourth in the East and the F.O. was even pushing for Acta to be named the NL Manager of the Year, no doubt a move intended for encouragement more than anything), and players continued to stand by Acta through thick and thin. Yes, he would be questioned for his lack of emotion...but not by his players.

During 2008's terrible showing, many in the media camp were almost amazed at Acta's level of patience and calm. Acta credited his cool head to his time in the minors, where he found that "kicking and screaming doesn't get the best out of people most of the time." He logically explained his Zen-like approach by stating, "If I throw a phone around or turn over the spread, the score is not going to change. I have done a lot of research and have data to prove it's not going to work." And he concluded that the best way to gain player respect was by "treating them fairly and keep showing them that I do have faith in them."

For a team that put players on the DL 30 times (for a combined total of more than one thousand lost games among them) that season, people steered clear of blaming the skipper, with Bowden stating last September, "I believe when Manny Acta gets the horses, Manny Acta will win."

As one of those potential horses going into the '09 season, Lastings Milledge said in October, "I know he takes a lot of heat because we didn't win. He handles the team great and he knows how to handle young guys. The biggest thing is, he knows how to communicate with guys." At the outset of this year, another one, Willie Harris, called him a "player's manager." And the first day of spring training had Adam Dunn praising, "It's hard to get those many guys organized. That's impressive."

So in the end, it seems Acta's players had what they needed from him: Good communication, ability to handle and even discipline younger players, and a positive attitude to boot. The elephant in the...stable...however, became the need to change something - anything. As recently as May, the term had crept into the locker room's regular lexicon. Scott Olsen was quoted in frustration after the team went 7-18 in the first NL East stint, "It definitely has to change. The atmosphere and culture around here -- something has to change."

Still, likes of Ron Villone and Nick Johnson took an equally as candid view as recently as last month, noting that there was only so much Acta could do. "Manny is doing everything he can to put us in the position to win and we are not winning games for him," said Villone. "It's up to us to do the job." Johnson added, "It's on us to play better baseball." Even Zimmerman's recent interview in the Post, while mentioning the need of urgency and "fire," focused more on accountability within.

Now that he's gone, it's easy to see that even during the past two months - and as his tenure came to a close and became distracted by rumors of his firing - Acta did what he's always done. He stayed calm, left fate to the Fates, and focused on staying positive to his ballclub. Said Acta in late May, "I just prepare myself to go out there every single day and give this team the best possible chance to win."

Maybe Acta will get what he wanted in the end, even if he is somewhere else. Change could up the chances for the Nats. Only time will tell, but in the meantime, patience is still a virtue...and one which Riggleman will have to embrace.

     

Nats Fans Are Smart

Posted by Emilie Cole on May. 20, 2009 at 5:06 PM
There are 3 comments | Add yours

I've been addicted to reading the comments on Nats-related sites for a while now; everything from here at NP to the myriad of responses at WaPo and beyond. So if I can - for just a moment - make a sweeping generalization: Nats fans are smart.

I'm not saying they are necessarily smartER than any other types of fans - whether it be of a different sport or of a fellow ball club. (OK, OK, OK. If I HAD to, I'd say...we may be smarter than perhaps some) But I just mean in their own way, Nats fans are a relatively smart bunch.

To give a concrete example, I'll use a Chico post today - "From This Point Forward". In the post, Cheeks asks folks to vote on what they think our win percentage will end up being at the end of this AMAZING baseball season. The comments are superb - everything from "if/then" stat-backed projections to thinking critically about the natural arc which seasons tend to take...to obscure Seinfeld references. And all without any need for people to showcase their smarts other than humbly in the WaPo comments section. It's endearing and makes me proud to be a citizen of NatsTown.

Joebleux: I can see a scenario where the bullpen and hitting both return to a semblance of normality, and we start losing games "normally", like 5-3 instead of our customary 11-8 bullpen blowup special, and finish at something like a .400 pace.

Gengreen17: If we had won even half of our bullpen losses, [then] we'd be in the thick of the division fight.

Section505203: ...Switch to all cotton uniforms courtesy of George Costanza.

I have a few theories about what's behind this more-cerebral fandom (DC is an intellectually ambitious place full of mostly nerds; our team being new equates to folks having a lot of recent knowledge at the ready; etc.). Whatever it is, though, I like it just as much as I like plain-and-simple baseball itself.

Hopefully we're not too smart for our own good - analyzing the team away into emotional irrelevance.

     

"Everybody and Their Cousins"

Posted by Emilie Cole on May. 18, 2009 at 1:48 PM
Be the first to comment on this post

That was the quantifying description Manny Acta gave Boz regarding how many pitchers we've sent to the mound in an attempt to rectify our unbalanced offense-defense situation. One-fifth of the way through our season, let's take a look at the overall family tree -- those 18 [soon to be 19] kin who have pitched for us so far:

Joe Beimel
Active (0-2; 4.61)
Hoping Joe can remember his time with the Dodgers and start showing some of the same stuff.

Jason Bergmann
Optioned to minors 4/29 (3.60)
Three appearances so far, most (unfortunately) notably back on April 25th when he threw three innings for a 4.50 and 2H, 3R. Now he's showing great relief work and should be brought back, as Mike argued last week.

Daniel Cabrera
Active (0-5; 5.95)
Not sure a whole lot is needed here. His lowest game-specific ERA is only 4.42; his lowest season ERA is 4.52.

Jesus Colome
Active (20.25)
Obviously the numbers are skewed since he's only seen one inning this season, and that included the bats of Ibanez & Co. Hoping he can bust out his '07 stuff sometime soon...

Joel Hanrahan
Active (0-1; 5.51)
He's lowered his March/April ERA of 8.00 to 2.45 this month, and has thrown nearly as many strike-outs in May (9) as he did the rest of the season (11).

Mike Hinckley
Designated 5/7 (4.66)
Sent down after he gave up a hit and a bases-loaded walk in the 10-3 Dodgers loss.

John Lannan
Active (2-3; 4.00):
In May he's 2-0 and has dropped his ERA to 3.06. Great job as starter, but...which we know doesn't mean a whole lot right now.

Wil Ledezma
Designated 4/20 (9.53)

Logan Kensing
Designated (0-1; 18.00)
He's thrown two strikeouts in his entire five May appearances (which total a little more than four innings).

Shairon Martis
Active (5-0; 4.10)
To the Giants fans sitting behind me last Wednesday who heckled "Sharon to get a haircut" (I guess it was funny that his name could possibly be mispronounced for that of a girl...?) -- I don't see any of your (albeit terrific) pitching going 5-0, now do I??

Garrett Mock
Active (0-1; 4.97)
He's tamped it down from his pre-May ERA of 7.02 to stand now at 3.52...but in Saturday's outing he gave up double the runs he had the rest of the month.

Scott Olsen
15-Day DL (1-4; 7.24)
Prior to his MRI on Saturday, he was starting to get on my nerves.

Saul Rivera
Optioned to minors 4/20 (0-3; 8.49)
He's back in Syracuse, where he belongs -- hopefully we're not forced into another desperate call-up until he straightens things out.

Steven Shell
Designated 4/20 (5.40)

Julian Tavarez
Active (0-3; 6.32)
Meh.

Ron Villone
Active (1-0; 0.00)
Called up earlier this month for Hinckley; as Jeff noted, "the addition of a veteran like Ron Villone is a reminder that this team is retooling the right way." His first game he relieved Zimmermann and pitched a scoreless seventh to get the win.

Kip Wells
Active (0-1; 6.06)
Wells has been climbing this month, culminating in his loss on Friday. Let's see if he gets back down to the 3/4.00-range sometime soon.

Jordan Zimmermann
Active (2-1; 6.35)
He's not having the best month...and really should be in AAA as Jeff said earlier today. Hopefully we'll have more info to work with after Friday's game.

All in all, we average 4.42 different pitchers a game, with seven games having needed six or more pitchers (last Friday's Phillies game took eight to get the loss.) On a positive note, let's not forget Martis' 9 IP for the win on May 2nd. And welcoming the "irresistible" Mr. Detwiler to the mix in tonight's game.

     

Strasburgian Economics

Posted by Emilie Cole on May. 15, 2009 at 2:33 PM
There are 4 comments | Add yours

OK, so I'm definitely not pulling off a pun like Brian did. But I just read Marchman's article, and it got me thinking: Would we be better off if the rules were different?

All season long - or short - most of us here at NP would be in agreement that our biggest weakness is pitching. From start to finish, pitching. And mostly the 'pen. I don't even have to spend a lot of hyperlinked words explaining this, because we all get it.

There's one role we've been most frustrated with, and that's the closer position. I believe it was the last PrideCast in which the guys spent much time discussing the fact that we've no one around which to build our bullpen. And I'd agree.

So while I like Marchman's analysis of IF we could actually trade Strasburg - or his pick - for lots of other stuff, how could we be better off...But pesky reality says we can't. So that portion is rendered moot. But some of his points, and indeed the general logical reasoning behind deciding whether or not to pick up this whizkid (the idea that he could be peaking now; throwing that hard regularly isn't going to hold up much longer; will he really make a difference once every 5 games; etc.), is valid.

So here's an idea: Strasburg becomes our closer. We've lamented too much about our bullpen blowing it .. and blowing it again and again. That doesn't mean our rotation is in the best shape -- but they're doing an OK job coupled with our hitting, which keeps us in the game and on the scoreboard.

Less than a month away from the June draft, wouldn't Strasburg-as-closer be one of the best ways to maximize his incredible talent?

     

"Let's Talk About Something Important"

Posted by Emilie Cole on May. 13, 2009 at 11:37 AM
There is 1 comment | Add yours

That's the opening line to one of film's most famous monologues, and I just made myself watch it again after last night's last-out meltdown.

I'm not sure which is "worse" - Cabrera's hard time on Monday, or coming back from a 5-1 deficit, taking the lead in a game where one of our stars is on a historical hit-streak...and then losing it in the last out. It's the sixth time this season we haven't been behind going in to the last two innings, yet have still come out with a Curly L.

Here's what Manny said publicly:

"We have tried everybody and their cousins, and we still can't get anybody to put a zero up in the eighth and the ninth innings," said Manager Manny Acta. "And that's really just killing us. It's very discouraging to waste the type of offense that we're displaying out there for a month and a half now."

But here's what I'm hoping he said in the locker room:

"You can't close the leads you're given, you can't close sh*t, you ARE sh*t, hit the bricks pal and beat it 'cause you are going out!"

Not to sound harsh, but going a little Blake on the boys might help our situation right now.

Game 3 in just a few short hours...

     

We need a closer.

Posted by Emilie Cole on May. 13, 2009 at 1:10 AM
There is 1 comment | Add yours

THAT'S ALL.

10:10pm Pacific Daylight Time.

     

A quick lesson in fanship

Posted by Emilie Cole on May. 12, 2009 at 11:10 AM
There is 1 comment | Add yours

Every baseball season I've lived here ('06, '07 and this year), I've gone to each Nats-Giants series to enjoy the combo of DC baseball and what is apparently the country's best ballpark. (While the post last June by Jon was informative, at some point I'll go in to more detail on what the 'baseball experience' is like here in the City by the Bay.) It's just an awesome place to be able to watch a game and it's hard not to have a good time.

But let's go back to last night for one quick sec. I don't know if it was the full moon or what, but the crowd I was near had gone from the usual mix of stat-recorders, cheerers and latte-sippers (yes that's what I said!) to Nats-bashing d-bags. Demonstrating their bully's wit with displays such as yelling at Nick Johnson to "go back to Triple A" (a little confusing since he hasn't been in the minors for a while and his batting average so far is still above .300 -- unlike, say, the Giants' firstbaseman.) So, outside of D-Cab's "pitching," I'd say the most disturbing aspect of the game was, for me, the surrounding people.

Now I don't mean "boo hoo - they were being mean," and this is in no way even specific to Giants fans or the SF population of which I am a part. Nor is this someone pontificating about some high-falutin' notions of this or that sports-as-life philosophy. Thankfully, Gene's got that covered. And I'll be the first to admit that there's a good place in this sport for old-fashioned heckling, especially in divison or historical rivalries. I even look forward to the day when, somewhere down the line, Nationals Park has been broken in, 'NatsTown' has established an actual personality, and certain funny quirks/jeers tossed toward visiting rivals become ingrained in its baseball tradition.

Fun.

But (and again, no thanks to Cabrera), it was hard for even me to have fun last night. From throwing home-run balls back (Anthony covered this one back in April) to simply not actually knowing anything about the visiting team (see above), the majority of crowd behavior was less-than-impressive, and it just so happened to be one of those mental tipping points as to what it even means to be a fan of something.

I look forward to having a better post topic as the series continues!

     

Coming Out on NationalsPride

Posted by Emilie Cole on May. 11, 2009 at 4:47 PM
There are 4 comments | Add yours

NatsPride readers. I have something to tell you that I haven't necessarily been open about. It's not that I'm ashamed of who I am - but, rather, I didn't want it to be a distraction from my merits as a Nats fan and NP blogger. And I know some of you might actually be uncomfortable with this -- that's OK. I understand and respect your point of view. Please know that I would never want to force part of my identity on anyone in any way. But on the other hand, it's gone on way too long, and it's becoming a problem I can no longer ignore.

The vague description of my daily life.

The shame in keeping it from faithful NP readers.

The self-inflicted frustration each night when I lay my head down to rest, because I haven't been clear on a significant part about who I am.

Today it finally struck me that I really can't go on like this, and for pressing reasons, so here it is:

I live. In. San Francisco.

I knowIknowIknow, I should have told you. But I didn't know how. I really didn't. I didn't want you to get mad at me, or to think of me any differently than you now, or anyone else here.  Guys I hope you can still look me in the eye as one of your own. I hope this doesn't change anything.

Now if you'll excuse me, I've got a parade to attend.

     

AT LEAST: not the worst of the worst

Posted by Emilie Cole on Apr. 15, 2009 at 4:53 PM
Be the first to comment on this post

While I'm definitely frustrated at the piss-poor start to our season - yes, I'd like to see that Nats win at least one in their first ten, maybe, hopefully? - I think in this age of Twitter* we really need some historic context, as well as a little good old-fashioned Leibnizian optimism here.

I refuse to hyperlink that last phrase because I want you to go find out more about it for yourself. PLUS, I don't think I can relegate everything that such an important thinker, as well such a witty and intelligent parody novelist, had to say on the matter, to a simple hyperlink.

In any case, we must first understand that while we're technically at the bottom of the barrel, it's not like there aren't other teams coming out of the gates with a terrible showing (Astros, Tribe). And seeing as how the 'Stros are facing the surprising 4-3 Pirates at Pittsburgh, we could technically be tied for worst just one game.

Secondly, we can't theoretically start worrying until we hit 0-21 - and many, many other landmark stats - as the New York Times' Lynn Zinser wrote yesterday. Thank you, Lynn, for reminding us that "no one promised we would be good." Additionally, it would take us winning only 41.17 games to make the list of all-time worst baseball seasons.
So I know it seems like we're at the end of our rope here already, but just think about how those Orioles fans felt back in '88 as April kept going and going with n'ary a single 'W.' We're only at a third of that pain right now. In addition, we're making changes to remedy the situation as best we can.

Which brings me to my final point in concluding this installment of AT LEAST. NatsTown (or whatever we're called right now), we are technically in the best of all possible worlds. So if it helps, just remember that it actually can't be worse than it is now, because what it is now is the only way that it could be anyway, and this is the best version of the world we're going to get. Additionally, without 'losing' there is no such thing as 'winning.'

For these reasons, we are not the worst of the worst, so there's really nothing to worry about.

Yet.

*You can follow NationalsPride on Twitter @NationalsPride for all sorts of exciting Nationals updates (in 140 characters or less)

     

New 'Old' Parks: Should We Have Done It, Too?

Posted by Emilie Cole on Apr. 2, 2009 at 11:19 AM
There is 1 comment | Add yours

An article today in the New York Times by Ken Belson opens with, "History sells. That is what the Mets and the Yankees are banking on as they unveil their new retro ballparks."

The article then goes on to describe the strategy behind both Citi Field ("...ensure the park reflected the quirky parks of the past like so many of the other new-generation stadiums, replete with old-time details") and new Yankee Stadium ("...preserved all the oddities of their old stadium in the new one"), as well as the other parks that took the old-timey brick approach.

On the rough one-year anniversary of our own 2008 Opening Day (I'll still never forget tuning in to a packed Nats Park -- folks sticking it out in crappy weather -- and the walk-off Zimm homer), this article makes me wonder why our still-new stadium ended up being a bland mix of concrete and glass.

There were quirks about RFK that they could've brought over; inside jokes that could have been weaved into the architecture. (I don't mean, however, the sassy clerks selling next-to-nothing in terms of concessions. Well, actually, it would be kind of funny if they had one booth that they literally picked up and moved to Nats Park, crappy hotdogs/service and all). Anywho, the point is that our suffering there was still endearing to us. Our suffering/history was marked by an intermittant baseball presence in general, a weird multi-use stadium with bad views (it would be funny if there was an 'RFK' section in the cheap seats that at least joked about this), and an general odd/not-quite-100%-real baseball experience.

Additionally, DC is a unique place itself with quirks and culture all of its own. The mentality is serious and ambitious, yet folks know that in the end it's all a game we must play. The city is wonderfully Euro but at the same time cynically patriotic. Metro woes, partisan bickering/procrastination, tourism galore and even horrible work fashion are just some of many hilarious things about DC. None of these details were truly meshed into the stadium's culture -- the only way you know it's in the nation's capital is really by the bunting and that slim view of the Capitol's dome in 3% of the park (I still can't believe the best view of the iconic building is from a stairway platform on the 300 level).

To be fair, much more baseball and culture comes out of the Big Apple, giving them much more to work with. But in reading the article this morning, it gave me a familiar sense of unfinished, could-have-been-better frustration...So maybe Nats Park DID end up reflecting everything about the District.